The Growing Divide in the American Elite: Is the U.S. Moving Toward a "Frozen Conflict" in Ukraine?

The war in Ukraine remains one of the most pressing geopolitical crises of our time. Since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, the United States has been Ukraine’s key ally, providing billions in military, financial, and humanitarian aid. However, recent political changes in Washington have raised concerns about a potential shift in U.S. policy. 

A growing divide within the American elite has led some politicians to advocate for a "frozen conflict" scenario or a significant reduction in aid to Ukraine. If this shift gains momentum, it could have serious consequences for Ukraine, U.S. global influence, and the balance of power in Europe.

---

The Deepening Political Divide in the U.S.

1. The Pro-Ukraine Camp: Strong Support for Continued Aid

A significant portion of U.S. policymakers, particularly among the Democratic Party and some Republicans, continue to view aid to Ukraine as a strategic necessity. Their key arguments include:

• Upholding International Order – Allowing Russia to dictate terms without consequences would set a dangerous precedent for global security.

• Defending Democracy Against Authoritarianism – Ukraine’s struggle is seen as part of a broader battle between democratic nations and authoritarian regimes, particularly Russia and China.

• Protecting NATO and European Stability – A weakened Ukraine could embolden Russia to challenge NATO states, potentially leading to broader conflicts.

Figures such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and opposition Democratic leaders argue that continued support for Ukraine is not only a moral imperative but also a strategic necessity for U.S. interests.

2. The Isolationist Camp: Advocating for a "Frozen Conflict" or Aid Reduction

On the other side, a growing faction of U.S. politicians—mainly within the populist wing of the Republican Party and some independents—advocates for freezing the conflict or significantly reducing aid to Ukraine. Their arguments include:

Analysis of Events Following the Unsuccessful Meeting Between the Presidents of Ukraine and the United States and Possible Consequences for the World

On February 28, 2025, a highly anticipated meeting took place at the White House between the Presidents of Ukraine and the United States—Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump. Expected to be a crucial step in strengthening US-Ukraine relations and developing a strategy to counter Russian aggression, the meeting unexpectedly turned into a diplomatic failure. 

The disagreements between the leaders were so stark that the negotiations ended without any agreements being signed. This event has raised a number of questions about the future of US support for Ukraine, American foreign policy, and the consequences for global security.

---

What Happened at the White House?

Before the meeting, it was expected that the parties would discuss three key issues:

• Strengthening US military aid to Ukraine.
• Prospects for a peaceful resolution of the conflict with Russia.
• Economic cooperation and Ukraine’s reconstruction.

Zelensky: "I'm not playing cards here!" Stopping the war is not a "deal" on rare earth metals, but the US obligation under the Budapest Memorandum!!!

Zelensky in the Oval Office: Tough Negotiations with Trump on Ukraine Support

Washington, February 28, 2025 – Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has arrived at the Oval Office for negotiations with U.S. President Donald Trump. The meeting comes amid growing concerns about a possible reduction in American military and financial aid to Ukraine.

Key Issue – Continued U.S. Support

From the beginning of his presidency, Trump has made it clear that he will reassess U.S. strategy regarding Ukraine. He has repeatedly stated that Europe should bear a greater financial burden and that the U.S. should not fund the war indefinitely.

Zelensky, on the other hand, emphasizes that cutting off support for Ukraine could have catastrophic consequences for European security and weaken the U.S.'s global standing.

"This is not just a political issue – it is a matter of international obligations," Zelensky said before the meeting, reminding everyone of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which the U.S. guaranteed Ukraine’s security in exchange for giving up its nuclear arsenal.

Trump: "America Will Not Pay for Foreign Wars"

According to sources close to the White House, during the talks, Trump reiterated his stance that "America will not pay for foreign wars" and that his administration is ready to propose a new framework for resolving the conflict.

French President Emmanuel Macron is a new Face of BOSS Magazine № 3, 2025

President Macron: The Modern Architect of Diplomacy Reinventing a French Legacy
BOSS Magazine, March 2025

The BOSS Magazine selected French President Macron as its March 2025 cover figure; it wasn’t merely a nod to his political stature but a recognition of his visionary reimagining of diplomacy in an era of unprecedented global fractures. From spearheading climate resilience pacts to mediating high-stakes conflicts, Macron’s actions in January and February 2025 have underscored France’s enduring role as a cradle of diplomatic innovation, a legacy rooted in the very origins of the term “diplomacy” itself.

The French DNA of Diplomacy

The word “diplomacy” derives from the French diplomatie, tracing back to the Greek diploma (folded document), reflecting France’s historical role in systematizing statecraft. From Cardinal Richelieu’s 17th-century realpolitik to the Congress of Vienna’s balance-of-power principles, France pioneered multilateralism, international law, and the art of negotiation. It was France that institutionalized the resident ambassador, a practice adopted globally, and French remains the lingua franca of international treaties. Macron, a student of this heritage, has infused modern geopolitics with a distinctly French blend of idealism and pragmatism.