Trump shifts to backing full Ukrainian territorial recovery after Zelenskyy meeting

Donald Trump has abandoned his long-held position that Ukraine must cede territory to end the war, declaring instead that Kyiv can win back all land seized by Russia since the February 2022 invasion. The reversal came in a Truth Social post published after his meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Tuesday.

A complete reversal of the previous US position

For months Trump had argued that both Kyiv and Moscow would need to surrender territory to reach a settlement. As recently as February he told Zelenskyy in a televised Oval Office exchange that Ukraine "don't have the cards" to achieve a favourable outcome. Now he writes that "with time, patience, and the financial support of Europe and, in particular, NATO, the original Borders from where this War started, is very much an option." The language mirrors the Ukrainian demand for full territorial restoration that Zelenskyy has maintained since the invasion began.

Russia controls nearly 20 percent of internationally recognised Ukrainian territory, including the Crimean peninsula annexed in 2014. Moscow treats Crimea as outside the scope of any negotiation over the 2022 invasion. Trump's new formulation makes no explicit exception for Crimea, though the reference to "original Borders from where this War started" could be read as the pre-2022 line of control.

The Zelenskyy meeting and the security guarantee question

The two leaders met for roughly an hour at UN headquarters. Zelenskyy emerged telling reporters there was "an understanding that President Trump is ready to give Ukraine security guarantees after this war will finish" and that Trump "could be a game-changer for Ukraine." The Ukrainian president thanked Trump for his "personal efforts to stop this war." Trump, for his part, said he had "great respect for the fight that Ukraine is putting up. It's pretty amazing actually."

The security guarantee language is significant. The Trump administration had previously ruled out NATO membership for Kyiv and pressed European capitals to shoulder the bulk of military aid. A US security guarantee short of Article 5 coverage would be a new commitment, though the details, whether bilateral, multilateral, or tied to a future ceasefire, were not spelled out.

Trump turns on Putin after Alaska disappointment

The shift appears rooted in Trump's frustration with Vladimir Putin. Their August summit in Alaska produced no discernible progress toward a ceasefire. Trump now says the Russian leader "has let him down." In the Truth Social post he dismissed Russia as a "paper tiger" and declared that "Putin and Russia are in BIG Economic trouble, and this is the time for Ukraine to act." He added that Russia had been fighting "aimlessly" in a war that a "real military power" would have won in "less than a week."

The rhetoric marks a sharp departure from Trump's campaign promise to end the war within 24 hours of taking office in January. He initially blamed Ukraine for the conflict, then pursued direct diplomacy with Putin. The Alaska meeting was the centrepiece of that approach. Its failure has left Trump signalling a harder line, at least rhetorically.

NATO air defence and the Estonian and Polish incidents

Trump's new posture extends to alliance obligations. Asked whether NATO countries should shoot down Russian aircraft entering their airspace, he replied: "Yes, I do." The question followed a series of incursions. On Friday three Russian MiG-31 fighters spent 12 minutes in Estonian airspace, prompting Tallinn to request a UN Security Council meeting and consultations with allies. Earlier in September Poland reported repeated violations by Russian drones during strikes on Ukraine, calling it an "act of aggression."

NATO's North Atlantic Council condemned the Estonian breach on Tuesday as "a pattern of increasingly irresponsible behaviour" and warned Moscow the alliance would use "all necessary military and non-military tools" to defend itself. Trump's endorsement of active air defence aligns with that language, though the practical rules of engagement for NATO pilots remain governed by existing protocols, not presidential statements.

European surprise and cautious welcome

Diplomats at UN headquarters said the shift caught European foreign ministers off guard. James Bays, reporting for Al Jazeera from New York, described it as "a complete change in the US position" and noted that many European officials "didn't know this change in US policy towards Ukraine was coming, but they have welcomed it." The welcome is qualified: European capitals have spent two years calibrating their support around the assumption that Washington would push for a negotiated settlement involving territorial compromise. A US embrace of maximalist Ukrainian aims alters the strategic calculus for Berlin, Paris and Warsaw.

The European Union has committed over €120 billion in financial, humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine since 2022. If the United States now backs full territorial recovery, the question becomes whether European defence industrial capacity and political cohesion can sustain the required pace of ammunition, air defence and long-range strike deliveries without a corresponding US uplift.

Deadlines, sanctions and the month ahead

Trump has repeatedly set two-week deadlines for decisions on new sanctions against Russia, only to let them lapse. On Tuesday he deflected a question on whether he still trusted Putin: "I'll let you know in about a month from now, OK?" The vague timeline suggests the administration is buying space to assess whether the rhetorical shift can be matched by leverage, secondary sanctions on Russian energy revenue, tighter enforcement of the G7 price cap, or pressure on third countries facilitating sanctions evasion.

The next inflection point may be the NATO summit in The Hague in June 2026, where alliance leaders will debate burden-sharing and the future of Ukraine's path to membership. Trump's statement that NATO should shoot down Russian aircraft over allied airspace will be scrutinised for whether it translates into revised rules of engagement or remains campaign-style rhetoric.