US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday (Feb 28) engaged in what could be defined as a history-making moment in the relations between both countries.
But Trump's hostility towards Zelensky and Ukraine is not a newfound issue and can be traced back to his first term in the White House.
In 2019, Trump faced impeachment over allegations that he withheld nearly $400 million in US security aid to Ukraine in an attempt to pressure Kyiv into investigating Joe Biden, then the former vice president, and his son, Hunter Biden, ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
Trump claimed that Biden had influenced Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma, an energy company where Hunter Biden sat on the board. However, no concrete evidence of wrongdoing by either Biden ever surfaced.
A transcript of a phone call between Trump and Zelensky, dated 25 July 2019, revealed that Trump had urged the Ukrainian leader to work with his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and US Attorney General William Barr on the matter.
“There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me,” Trump stated, according to the document.
Beyond the Bidens, Trump also wanted Ukraine to investigate whether it had played a role in hacking the Democratic National Committee in 2016, a claim that contradicted US intelligence findings, which pointed to Russian involvement.
For Zelensky, the situation was complicated. Ukraine depended heavily on American military aid, and any delay or withdrawal of support could have had serious consequences. During the call, Zelensky appeared to comply with Trump’s request.
“Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate,” Zelensky said.
He continued, “He or she will look into the situation specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case.”
However, just days before Zelensky was expected to announce the investigation on CNN, a political firestorm erupted in Washington over the Trump administration’s threat to withhold aid. The decision to freeze the funds was swiftly reversed, the money was sent, and Zelensky ultimately cancelled the interview, according to The New York Times.
Trump repeatedly denied pressuring Zelensky, insisting, “there was no quid pro quo.” Yet, multiple US officials later testified that they had been informed the aid would only be released if Ukraine launched an investigation into the Bidens.
Also read: ‘What does Putin have on him?’ Key witness accuses Trump of betraying Zelensky as both leaders meet
Gordon Sondland, the then-US ambassador to the European Union, stated that the push for an inquiry into the Bidens came at Trump’s “express direction.” He also testified that an invitation for Zelensky to visit the White House had been tied to the launch of the investigation.
Two weeks after Trump approved the aid, the two leaders appeared together at a press conference during the United Nations General Assembly. When asked whether he had been pressured, Zelensky gave a diplomatic response that may not have entirely reassured Trump.
“We had, I think, a good phone call … It was normal. We spoke about many things. I think you read that nobody pushed me,” Zelensky stated.
Trump, standing beside him, added, “In other words, no pressure.”
During the impeachment hearings, Kurt Volker, who served as US special envoy to Ukraine, testified that Trump had described Ukraine as “a corrupt country, full of terrible people.”
Though the US Senate acquitted Trump in 2020, the ordeal left a lasting impact as it happened just months before his failed re-election bid. Many believe the controversy may have influenced some undecided voters.
(With inputs from agencies)