Latest news with #Poroshenko
Mid East Info
21-07-2025
- Business
- Mid East Info
Personal sanctions against ICU: why Europe and Ukraine might make such a decision
By Sergey Lyamets, Ukrainian journalist The well-known Ukrainian financial group ICU disguises its interests through offshore companies and affiliated structures and interferes in international restructurings. The secretary of the new NSDC (National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine), Rustam Umerov, may want to have a quick victory. Then he might find this information interesting. Ties with Russian business have become a ready-made recipe for the effective introduction of sanctions. The harsh reality is that the NSDC may target Ukraine's largest government bond trader, Investment Capital Ukraine (ICU). I wrote about the hidden reason why sanctions may have been imposed on Petro Poroshenko. The reason for this is the unethical behaviour of ICU towards the holders of the so-called LPNs. Even before the invasion, Alfa-Bank's VIP depositors were offered a special investment product – Loan Participation Notes (LPN) issued by the Dutch company EMIS Finance B.V. These are high-yield bonds: Alfa-Bank returned the funds raised to Ukraine and used them to issue new loans and then shared the profits with its VIP clients. The deal was mutually beneficial, and Alfa Club became the most powerful VIP banking system in Ukraine. But with the outbreak of a full-scale war, the bank was nationalised, and the money of Ukrainian depositors was 'suspended'. The former owners of Alfa agreed to return the money but asked to wait. They proposed a restructuring scheme for LPNs that has already been used by influential Ukrainian families. Most of the LPN issues have already been restructured. Now they just have to wait for their money. But there are just a few tranches left, the control of which was once bought up by the ICU group. The holders, who no longer believed in getting their money back, sold their LPNs to the group at a large discount. ICU now owns these securities and has blocked the restructuring. Obviously, they expect special benefits. I doubt that they will succeed – the weight categories are slightly different. But they certainly managed to take other tranche participants hostage. Why is Poroshenko involved [Poroshenko involved] here? Because ICU is still associated with 'The Grey-Haired'. According to my information, this could have been the real motivation for the NSDC's sanctions against the former president. Undoubtedly, there were other reasons. But you'll agree that everything coincided in time. A new episode in this case has recently emerged. ICU decided to finally take control of the other LPN holders. So far, in 'its own' tranches, but it is possible that it will want to expand its success. At first glance, the details are purely technical. ICU has initiated the procedure of changing the trustee and paying agent from BNY Mellon to GLAS (Global Loan Agency Services Ltd). BNY Mellon is a world-renowned financial group with an impeccable reputation. GLAS, on the other hand, specialises in distressed and disputed assets and often acts in the interests of the client rather than the market. The vote for the GLAS appointment will take place at the end of July, and ICU is currently collecting votes in support. Given that they already have a majority of LPNs, the 'choice' is a formality. In fact, they will vote for themselves. This means that the restructuring will fail, and the LPN debts will finally 'hang'. The stakes have gone up. If previously ICU held to ransom its allies in a tranche, now it will take full control of them. Perhaps this will affect other LPN holders. The replacement of the trustee looks like a preparation for a forceful takeover of the restructuring process, in order to dictate terms to the rest [of the holders]. If BNY Mellon is replaced by GLAS, the question will be posed as follows: influential Ukrainian families will only receive their money if ICU receives its own – and on its own terms. Perhaps the group's goal is to buy out other LPNs at a discount. In fact, the group has done this more than once. Their business model is to buy out debts cheaply (20-30%) and then to get their repayment at 100% of the face value. To pull off such an operation, you first need to create an artificial crisis and show that the money will not be returned at all. And then, you 'solve the problem'. At first glance, the conflict over the restructuring of EMIS Finance B.V. bonds seems to be a routine dispute over debts. According to my sources, the LPNs of the former owners of Alfa-Bank are held by influential families in Ukraine and some large companies. Arm-twisting is likely to cause them to react strongly against it. ICU's aggressive actions may well backfire on it, even in the form of harsh sanctions from the EU and Ukraine. In Ukraine, ICU is known as a well-known seller of government bonds, but its real activities are behind the scenes. It concerns the servicing of the funds of two former presidents (Yanukovych and Poroshenko) and close cooperation with Russian business. I wrote here about cooperation with Poroshenko. Let's talk a little bit about ICU's cooperation with Russian business. It is not about innocent purchases of real estate in Crimea, although the NSDC is willing to impose sanctions even for that. We are talking about cooperation with VTB, one of the three largest state-owned banks in Russia. Until 2014, 22.7% of ICU was owned by the wife of VTB's former First Deputy Chairman of the Board, Yuri Solovyov. The OCCRP investigation showed that 22.74% of ICU Holdings Ltd. (BVI) was owned by Cordova Management Ltd., which was controlled by 'Ulyutina G.O.' from Moscow. The initials and surname allude to Galina Olegovna Ulyutina, the wife of Yuri Solovyov. Valeria Gontareva and Solovyov himself were friends. Ulyutina withdrew from ICU's list of shareholders in August 2014. As you know, Gontareva also withdrew from ICU. But contacts were not severed. Already in the Poroshenko era, ICU was actively working with RCB Bank (Cyprus, formerly VTB) through its structures. Of course, to find the evidence, one has to dig through the financial statements. It will be necessary to investigate the controlled entities in the UK and Cayman Islands, the use of GLAS and proxy votes (in particular, through FPP, which will be discussed below). The National Security and Defence Council will probably be interested in studying the cooperation of ICU with Cleary Gottlieb lawyers (who are putting pressure on Ukraine in the case of Yaresko's warrants). The search promises to be fruitful. For example, let's take the British structure FPP Asset Management LLP, which is controlled by ICU, or their actions are closely synchronised. Former ICU managers worked for this company. In FPP's 2018-2019 financial statements, ICU Holdings Ltd. was directly listed as the majority shareholder (>50%). Subsequently, the chain of ownership was concealed through the Cayman-based FPP Global Holdings Ltd. This allowed ICU to get out of the disclosure procedure. However, according to financial market participants, ICU co-owner Makar Paseniuk has repeatedly admitted this: 'FPP is us'. Why is FPP important? Because the company was involved in the EMIS debt restructuring process. It was through this structure that ICU held positions in EMIS bonds and voted against the restructuring. The company posed as an independent holder, although it was the good old ICU. The aim was probably to create the appearance that it was not ICU that was opposed to the restructuring, but an allegedly 'opposition' group of LPN holders. But before that, FPP played a different role. Presumably, through FPP, ICU implemented joint projects with VTB, including the SPAC Emerging Markets Horizon Corp. A SPAC is a shell fund in which everyone can contribute money to invest in promising companies. Emerging Markets Horizon Corp was raising $250 million via Nasdaq to buy assets in Eastern Europe (possibly also in Ukraine). It was jointly managed by representatives of VTB Capital and FPP. The fund failed to raise funds and was liquidated in 2023. Perhaps because of the war. FPP's client structure also included the Cyprus-based Justy Five Fund with assets of up to €100 million, which is backed by Kirill Zimarin, former CEO of RCB Bank (ex-Russian Commercial Bank, which belonged to VTB Group). Zimarin is now the owner of Finstella, which has no formal ties to VTB. But it is quite possible that the connection with Russian business has been preserved. Why is ICU here? According to my sources, the company was previously financed through RCB Bank for hundreds of millions of dollars, including through the BVI CIS Opportunities Fund. This fund should be checked for servicing the accounts of VTB's management (including Andrey Kostin, Yuri Solovyov, Herbert Moos and Natalia Solozhentseva). A separate question is whether the fund's money was invested in ICU products. For example, there is a well-known line of cooperation: the Russian Burger King Russia restaurant chain was jointly controlled by the CIS [Opportunities Fund] (through Xomeric Holdings Ltd) and VTB. ICU owned a 35% stake in the chain, and they officially announced that they had withdrawn from co-ownership only after the full-scale invasion [of Ukraine]. It is logical to assume that cooperation with VTB had been flourishing before, despite the annexation of Crimea and Donbass. However, there is one interesting point: despite the announcement of its withdrawal, ICU continues to own a stake in Burger King Russia. Here is a quote from a BBC article dated 3 October 2023: 'ICU Group, a large Ukrainian investment firm, owns a 35% stake. ICU Group told the BBC it has no control over the joint venture or operations in Russia and other countries covered by the franchise deal. It said the firm was 'at the final stage of exiting' the franchise agreement with terms agreed with a buyer. The company added it had abstained from managing the joint venture and investing in it and had not received any dividends since the war began.' So it appears that there was a statement, but no actual exit . I have only lightly touched on the issue of ICU's ties to Russian business. All indications are that the ties are not just with Russian businesses, but with the leading state-owned Russian business. If an objective investigation confirms these links, what are the consequences? ICU is registered in London. If the links with VTB are confirmed, this could be a violation of the financial market participant's code of ethics. British regulators are tough on violations, as unethical behaviour undermines confidence in the market as a whole. Cooperation with VTB means that ICU could have dealt with assets or persons on the EU sanctions lists. As for ICU's actions to restructure LPNs, they follow the toxic models of the Poroshenko-Gontareva era: offshores, aggressive actions, imitation of an agreed position, circumvention of information disclosure requirements. If it turns out that ICU, through FPP and GLAS, is creating an infrastructure of pressure on the market and its participants, it could cost the group its licence. Such an unfair practice may also alert European regulators (ICU plans to move one of its offices to the EU). The tools used by ICU are an example of toxic behaviour that undermines confidence in markets. Through its affiliates, ICU interferes with restructuring processes, disguises beneficiaries, blocks market decisions and acts against the interests of independent holders. In Ukraine, exposing the facts of cooperation with Russia is a direct path to sanctions. Sanctions may be followed by the loss of licences, nationalisation of the bank and securities trader, and reputational damage. I'm pretty sure that ICU has influential patrons in the Ukrainian government, but each of them has a limit beyond which they simply retreat. I repeat myself: this is just one of the possible scenarios. It could be realised if ICU goes to open war with influential Ukrainian families, and they decide to strike back. I have sent detailed questions to the ICU owners to clarify the stated facts. Two weeks have passed and there is still no response. If any responses are received, I'll let you know. Texts published in the Opinion section do not necessarily reflect the position of the UNIAN editorial board. You can read more about our editorial policy at this link
Russia Today
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Russia Today
Ex-Ukrainian president accuses Zelensky of ‘authoritarianism'
Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has accused his successor, Vladimir Zelensky, of using state power to suppress political rivals, including himself. The warning about Zelensky's 'authoritarianism' was made in an interview published on Tuesday by The Times. Poroshenko, who lost a presidential election to Zelensky in 2019, alleged that the current leader has targeted him as a potential electoral challenger. Zelensky, a comedian-turned-politician, surged in the polls by campaigning against corruption and criticizing the government's failure to resolve the conflict in Donbass. After taking office, he pursued policies that escalated tensions with Russia, before Moscow launched its military operation in 2022. Now a member of parliament, Poroshenko said he would continue to support Zelensky for the duration of the conflict with Russia, despite being personally sanctioned by Zelensky's administration in February, which included a ban on foreign travel and restrictions on media access. Poroshenko told The Times he believes the measures were designed to neutralize political opposition ahead of any potential election that might take place if martial law were lifted. Although polls show Poroshenko trailing behind, with former top general Valery Zaluzhny the likely winner in a hypothetical run, the former president said the measures take against him are part of a broader pattern. 'Today Poroshenko, tomorrow Zaluzhny, [the] day after tomorrow anybody,' he said. 'This is authoritarianism.' The Times disputed Poroshenko's characterization, describing Ukraine's political landscape as 'diverse and rambunctious.' In a 2019 presidential debate, Zelensky declared he was 'a sentence' for Poroshenko, alluding to possible prosecution for corruption and abuse of power. No trial was conducted, but Poroshenko told the British newspaper that Zelensky hates him personally 'on a biological, chemical level.' Following the interview, Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko visited Poroshenko. The official has previously made similar criticisms of Zelensky. Poroshenko remarked that the current leader risks a surge of public dissent unless he listens to opposing voices. The Zelensky administration had shuttered opposition media and launched investigations against several political adversaries even before the 2022 escalation, saying it was suppressing 'pro-Russian' actors. After the conflict escalated, Ukraine's largest opposition bloc in parliament was effectively dismantled, leaving Poroshenko's European Solidarity party as the second-largest faction behind Zelensky's Servant of the People party in the Ukrainian parliament.
Times
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Times
Petro Poroshenko: ‘What Zelensky is doing is no different from Russia'
President Zelensky is seeking to 'remove any competitor from the political landscape' and rule Ukraine with an iron fist, a former president has said. Petro Poroshenko, a political rival to Zelensky, accused him of 'authoritarianism' after the government sanctioned him this year, potentially preventing him from standing in an election. 'Why is he doing this? Because he hates me on a biological, chemical level,' Poroshenko said in an interview with The Times. 'And, frankly speaking, I also do not like Zelensky. But never during the war have I done anything that is hostile towards him. 'I am an elected person. I have the second-biggest faction in parliament. And he thinks that he has the power not to allow me to go to the parliamentary assembly? … You are simply violating the constitution. And there is absolutely no difference [in what he is doing] from Russia.' • Zelensky's rivals plot path to Ukraine presidency Although the Kremlin's autocratic hold over Russian society is a far cry from Ukraine's diverse and rambunctious political system, there are growing concerns about the concentration of power around Zelensky, which his supporters say is a consequence of the situation the country finds itself in. Poroshenko, who was president from 2014 to 2019, insisted that he did not wish to criticise Zelensky but merely to offer him advice. It is difficult, however, to distinguish between the two as the former president enumerates the 'very bad mistakes' made by his successor — the 'catastrophe' of the Oval Office meeting with President Trump in March, for example, or the creeping 'authoritarianism' of Zelensky's rule that he says threatens to undermine democracy. 'Learn from the experience of Bibi,' Poroshenko urged, referring to Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, who successfully persuaded Trump to take part last month in strikes against Iran's nuclear programme. Zelensky, by contrast, has struggled to maintain the mercurial US leader's support in bringing an end to the war with Russia, which Poroshenko believes is down to a lack of clear objectives in Ukraine's negotiations with the White House and its inability to handle Trump's desire for praise. Netanyahu, he suggests, won Trump's support in Iran after only allowing him to take the credit for negotiating a brief ceasefire in Gaza. There is little love lost between the fifth and sixth presidents of Ukraine. A lasting animosity was engendered on the 2019 election campaign trail, during which the pair traded barbs in a series of increasingly irate debates. Zelensky, a man whose political experience had hitherto consisted of playing a fictional president in a television programme, went on to win the election resoundingly. On the morning of February 24, 2022, however, as Russian tanks rumbled across the Ukrainian border, the two foes met in Kyiv and made a truce. Three years on, that alliance has fractured. In February, the government imposed sanctions on Poroshenko, preventing him from accessing his bank accounts, travelling abroad or attending parliamentary sessions. State security services said that the sanctions were based on allegations of threats to national security, which Poroshenko denies. Having largely refrained from criticising the government since the invasion, now he is speaking out to tell Zelensky: 'I am not your enemy.' 'I am shoulder to shoulder with you,' he said. 'Not because I don't have any complaints against you — that [will come] later on, after the end of the war. But now unity is the key factor for our success.' Poroshenko, 59, who is worth $1.8 billion according to Forbes, made a fortune from chocolate before entering politics. Elected in 2014 after the Maidan revolution that ousted his pro-Kremlin predecessor, he is widely credited with rebuilding the Ukrainian armed forces after the annexation of Crimea and onset of the war in Donbas. Hanging on the wall of his office — alongside Ukrainian military regalia and a painting of Putin in handcuffs — is a memento of another of his successes in office: a certificate, signed in 2018 by Mike Pompeo, then Trump's secretary of state, vowing that the US would not recognise Russia's claim to Crimea. It is diplomatic coups such as this, as well as his success in convincing Trump in 2017 to supply Ukraine with lethal weapons, that Poroshenko believes give him some authority in his criticisms of Zelensky's dealings with the American president. There is, he claims, a 'serious communication problem' between the two diplomatic teams, at the heart of which is the Americans' distrust of Andriy Yermak, chief of staff to Zelensky, and Oksana Markarova, the ambassador to Washington, who angered the Republicans before the American election by organising an event to which only Democrats were invited. The result was the disastrous meeting in the Oval Office, when Trump and JD Vance, Trump's vice-president, berated the Ukrainian leader before the world in a meeting that Zelensky had not been adequately prepared for, Poroshenko said. However, Trump said that a meeting with Zelensky at the Nato summit last week 'couldn't have been nicer'. Poroshenko has sought to make connections with Trump's team directly, last visiting Washington in February, when he met US officials and attended the National Prayer Breakfast, at which Trump made a speech. Sanctions now prevent him from travelling abroad, and also hamper his support for the Ukrainian military, to which he says he has donated $200 million in the past three years. According to Poroshenko, the purpose of the sanctions is to prevent him from running in a presidential election, a possibility that has been raised for this year during talks of ceasefire. • Fall guy: Trump's Russia deal is aimed at ousting Zelensky An election had been due last year, but has been delayed under martial law imposed in 2022. Because of the logistics of holding an election in wartime, most people oppose the idea — Poroshenko among them. But he believes that his sanctioning is evidence of the government's preparation for a vote for which it is seeking to clear the field and allow Zelensky to run virtually unopposed — a claim the president's team denies. Even if Poroshenko does stand, his odds of a victory are long. Many Ukrainians are yet to forgive the corruption and economic stagnation that marred his time in office, and polling consistently shows the former president in third place, roughly 20 points behind Zelensky and General Valerii Zaluzhny, the former top military commander who is now serving as ambassador to Britain. The general's war record has won him admiration in Ukraine, but he has shown no interest in standing for election. In any case, Poroshenko says, his sanctioning should be a warning to every potential candidate. 'Today Poroshenko, tomorrow Zaluzhny, [the] day after tomorrow anybody,' he said. 'This is authoritarianism.' For all that Poroshenko wishes to present himself as a figure of unity in a time of national crisis, rising illiberalism is a charge he is willing to give full throat to, citing clampdowns on the freedom of press and of public activists, and pressure on businesses. In this, he runs the risk of playing into the hands of both the Kremlin and US isolationists, who have used the postponement of elections to attack Zelensky. Among those who agree with Poroshenko is Vitali Klitschko, the mayor of Kyiv and a former world champion boxer, whose hulking frame arrived through the door of Poroshenko's office as The Times was leaving. Klitschko, who is said to harbour presidential ambitions of his own, has also criticised Zelensky for a series of recent police raids at his mayoral office and investigations into his staff. 'I said once that it smells of authoritarianism in our country,' he told The Times in May. 'Now it stinks.' Asked whether he and Klitschko were working together in preparation for a presidential campaign, Poroshenko said that they were not but added portentously that more and more people were becoming critical of the president's conduct. 'Zelensky should listen to that, because if you are closed from the people that can have the effect of a steaming pot,' he said. Whether it will boil over remains to be seen.
Yomiuri Shimbun
09-06-2025
- Politics
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Ukraine's Previous President Says He Knows How to Win over Trump
Serhiy Morgunov/For The Washington Post Poroshenko at his party's office in February. KYIV – The walls of the windowless meeting room where former Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko receives his guests are festooned with mementos from his political glory days – particularly those celebrating his past relationship with President Donald Trump. Poroshenko is seeking to leverage that experience to rebuild his political profile as the man who can deal with the mercurial American president, especially since his chief rival and Ukraine's current leader, President Volodymyr Zelensky, has struggled to secure lasting support from Trump. But Poroshenko, a businessman whose candy empire made him a billionaire, will have to clear his name first. Elected amid a wave of pro-Western sentiment in 2014, he later persuaded Trump to become the first U.S. president to arm Ukraine with lethal weapons. In 2019, he lost his reelection bid to Zelensky – a comedian known for playing a president on TV – and a feud has simmered between the two men ever since. Earlier this year, Ukraine slapped sanctions on Poroshenko, who is now opposition leader in parliament and widely believed to be eyeing another presidential run whenever a ceasefire is reached and Ukraine can safely organize elections. He has already been subject to multiple corruption investigations. Ukraine's state security services said the latest sanctions were based on allegations of threats to national security, which Poroshenko denies. The day before the sanctions were announced, Zelensky warned a decision had been made that was about 'protecting our state and restoring justice.' The sanctions have restricted Poroshenko from accessing his bank accounts. He has also been banned from travel, penalties that he says are politically motivated and intended to diminish his influence and that are only harming Ukraine. Poroshenko is now fighting them in court. In the meantime, he insists Ukraine's ongoing negotiations with Russia and its dealings with the United States must include opposition voices like his – or they risk losing legitimacy and key Western support. 'I've worked with President Trump for more than three years and I'm proud I have a legacy of that,' the 59-year-old said in a recent interview, referring to their overlap in office from 2016 to 2019. 'Each meeting with Trump is an opportunity. An opportunity to deliver your position and to find one of joint interest. And that's why I'm demanding to be in the United States – because I want to save Ukraine.' As one of the largest donors to Ukraine's military, Poroshenko said he fears the banking restrictions will slow the war effort by hampering his financial assistance to troops on the front lines, which he said amounts to around $1 million a week. The travel ban means he is unable to lobby for support for Ukraine in Europe and Washington. He also fears that the sanctions against him will be used to discredit Ukraine's democracy at a time when the country urgently needs Western support. 'I hate the idea that the case of Poroshenko can be harmful for Ukraine in Ukrainian-American or Ukrainian-European relations,' he said. Political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko said the sanctions have so far actually helped Poroshenko politically and were 'most likely a political mistake' by the Zelensky administration 'because the electoral rating of Poroshenko and his party increased as a result, and Poroshenko received a lot of media attention.' Still, analysts say that Poroshenko's ratings suggest any presidential bid remains a long shot and that in Zelensky's camp, the fears are more about how the billionaire might use his wealth to back other potential candidates, including those with military backgrounds. Many expect the popular Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, who served as Ukraine's military chief until he was fired in 2024, to also make a run for office – potentially pitting him against Zelensky. He is now Ukraine's ambassador to the United Kingdom. Elections delayed Ukraine was set to have a presidential election in 2024, but the vote was delayed by the martial law imposed after the Russian invasion on Feb. 24, 2022. Organizing elections during a period of martial law would violate Ukraine's constitution. But as speculation looms over future presidential contenders, Russia has seized on Ukraine's lack of elections to try to discredit Zelensky and cast him as illegitimate. Earlier this year, Trump called Zelensky a 'dictator without elections,' stirring fears that Washington was backing Russia's claims and could tie future military support to elections. Despite Poroshenko's own political ambitions and his public feuds with Zelensky, he has publicly supported the position that no vote should be organized before a real ceasefire. 'I'm extremely against any election during the war,' he said. Still, he claims the sanctions – which could ban him from participation – are proof enough that there are those in government already preparing for the possibility of elections in the near future. 'I am the living evidence of that,' he said. Anton Grushetsky, executive director of the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology, said that even while most politicians say publicly that they are against elections, 'actually, secretly, I think all of them are preparing in case … we have a successful ceasefire for Ukraine with some security guarantees.' Zelensky's reelection is by no means assured. In the first year after the 2022 invasion, the country – and its politicians – united behind him as a wartime leader. But a failed military counteroffensive in 2023, analysts said, created an opening for renewed criticism of his approach – including from Poroshenko's camp. Opposition lawmakers have also asserted that they are being excluded from key talks over the country's future. Poroshenko's lawmakers in his European Solidarity party are his main avenue for criticizing Zelensky, Grushetsky said. 'As a party leader, [his] statements are quite nice, quite calm … like a responsible Ukrainian politician,' Grushetsky said. 'A lot of this dirty job is done by other party members, not by Poroshenko.' A former Ukrainian official who worked with Poroshenko and spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal politics said Poroshenko's team increasingly relies on a Trump-style narrative that if he had been in power, the 2022 Russian invasion would not have happened. Their comments amount to: 'You fools all made a mistake back in 2019. You voted for the wrong guy and now you have a war crisis.' 'I think it plays more against the stability in the country,' the former official said. 'It is trying to segregate society, and we don't need things like that.' The Trump factor Divisions between the two camps were on full display earlier this year as relations soured between Trump and Zelensky, culminating in a disastrous Oval Office visit in which Trump berated the Ukrainian president and canceled his meetings with him. Many lawmakers in Ukraine saw the dressing down of Zelensky as a setup intended to discredit him in Washington. Poroshenko, however, said the confrontation – which he described as 'a catastrophe' – was the result of repeated miscalculations by Zelensky and his team in their early dealings with Trump. But Poroshenko's own experience with Trump reveals how difficult it can be to reach any lasting political agreements with the U.S. leader. Sitting at the head of a long table in his meeting room this spring, Poroshenko pointed at a paper framed on the wall behind him. It was the Crimea Declaration, signed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in 2018. Russia illegally annexed and occupied the Ukrainian peninsula in 2014. Pompeo later declared that 'the United States rejects Russia's attempted annexation of Crimea and pledges to maintain this policy until Ukraine's territorial integrity is restored.' 'This is a result of my foreign policy,' Poroshenko said. 'And this is not just some copy. This is original.' But after four years out of office, Trump has returned stronger, more experienced and surrounded by a new posse of advisers. The stakes for Ukraine and the world are even higher than they were in his last term, before the 2022 invasion – and Ukraine's war has become a point of contention in U.S. domestic politics. In April, the Trump administration proposed a peace plan to Ukrainian officials that included U.S. recognition of Crimea as Russian – a direct violation of the declaration that hangs framed on Poroshenko's wall. Still, Poroshenko said that even if some of Trump's policies have changed, his approach hasn't. 'I know Trump. … He makes a decision without any briefing from the State Department or from the Department of Defense. He very much trusts in his intuition,' he said. 'And those who go to the negotiation with him should take that into consideration. Or, if you don't like it, simply don't go.' Poroshenko last visited Washington in February, before he was banned from travel. He met with U.S. officials and attended the National Prayer Breakfast, where Trump made a speech. After Zelensky's disastrous Oval Office visit, Politico reported that Trump officials then reached out to opposition politicians in Ukraine, including senior members of Poroshenko's party. When asked what was discussed in the conversations, Poroshenko paused, then replied: 'No comments.'
Washington Post
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Ukraine's previous president says he knows how to win over Trump
KYIV — The walls of the windowless meeting room where former Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko receives his guests are festooned with mementos from his political glory days — particularly those celebrating his past relationship with President Donald Trump. Poroshenko is seeking to leverage that experience to rebuild his political profile as the man who can deal with the mercurial American president, especially since his chief rival and Ukraine's current leader, President Volodymyr Zelensky, has struggled to secure lasting support from Trump.
