One Week On: Was Zelensky’s Washington Visit Really a Success?

One week ago, President Volodymyr Zelensky returned to Washington for a markedly warmer meeting with US President Donald Trump than the Oval Office encounter in February 2025, when Trump and Vice President JD Vance publicly clashed with the Ukrainian leader. The visit was initially presented as a success, reflecting a considerable thaw in relations between Zelensky and Trump. Since then, however, mixed signals have emerged.JOIN US ON TELEGRAMFollow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official. Most significantly, Trump claimed that he had not definitively agreed to allow Ukraine to produce Patriot interceptors – despite previously appearing to make that commitment. He also declined Zelensky’s request for an emergency package of 300 Patriot missiles, according to The Atlantic. The question is increasingly urgent. Russia continues to attack Ukraine almost daily, with Kyiv bearing a particularly heavy toll. On July 31, Russia launched 35 missiles – including 27 ballistic missiles – and 185 drones at Ukraine. However, only one ballistic missile was intercepted, while 10 people were killed in Kyiv. Kyiv Post examines what the Washington visit achieved – and what remains unresolved. A different White House meeting Zelensky traveled to Washington primarily to attend the funeral of Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who died unexpectedly on July 11. Graham had been one of Ukraine’s most influential supporters in Congress and one of Trump’s closest foreign-policy allies. He had visited Ukraine many times since Russia launched its full-scale invasion, including a final visit to Kyiv one day before his death. Other Topics of Interest Zelensky Says Ukraine Will Push to End Russia’s War Before Winter Zelensky said Ukraine will intensify diplomatic, military and sanctions pressure this autumn, while warning that Putin is preparing new mobilization and attacks. The funeral allowed Zelensky to return to Washington at a moment when his relationship with Trump was already improving. That shift has also been visible within the MAGA movement. Influential conservative commentator Laura Loomer visited Kyiv shortly before Zelensky’s trip, interviewed him and publicly reversed much of her previous criticism of Ukraine. Unlike the leaders’ earlier public confrontations, their July 28 meeting took place privately and ended without recriminations. According to the Ukrainian Presidential Office, the talks focused on air defense, sanctions and efforts to revive diplomacy with Russia. “Any time President Zelensky travels to the United States is a good time as long as he doesn’t get thrown out of the Oval Office,” a senior Capitol Hill figure told Kyiv Post on condition of anonymity, adding: “He still has plenty of friends on Capitol Hill. Meeting with them alone makes the visit worthwhile.” Lockheed Martin and Ukraine’s new pitch During the visit, Zelensky also met representatives of Lockheed Martin, which manufactures PAC-3 Patriot interceptors and produces ATACMS missiles, HIMARS systems and F-16 aircraft. According to the Presidential Office, the two sides discussed joint production, technology transfers, Patriot capabilities, and other defense systems. Their teams were said to be working on specific proposals intended to begin co-production as quickly as possible. However, no contracts, financing arrangements, production sites or timetables were announced. The meeting nevertheless reflected an important shift in Ukraine’s approach to Washington. Kyiv is increasingly presenting itself not only as a recipient of American weapons but also as a potential defense-industrial partner. Ukraine possesses extensive battlefield experience in drone and electronic warfare, as well as in adapting Western systems to a rapidly changing conflict. It has also agreed to export drones to the US for participation in the Pentagon’s Drone Dominance program as part of broader defense cooperation between the two countries. The Pentagon has acknowledged that the US remains years away from matching Ukraine’s wartime drone output. Ukraine is expected to produce between 6-7 million small FPV drones in 2026, while the US will have ordered fewer than 200,000 by February. Congress delivered the stronger signal The visit’s most tangible political result came from the Senate. Zelensky met more than 60 senators before watching the chamber vote 86-12 to advance the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act. The legislation would authorize sanctions against Russian officials and allow Trump to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major purchasers of Russian energy. It would also target countries helping Moscow evade existing restrictions and extend sanctions against Iran. The vote represented one of the strongest bipartisan demonstrations of support for Ukraine since Trump returned to office. It was, however, only procedural. The bill must clear further Senate votes before moving to the House of Representatives, which is not expected to consider it before returning in September. The bill’s prospects have also become more uncertain since Zelensky’s visit. Democrats and some Republicans have raised concerns that its tariff provisions would grant Trump excessive authority and could ultimately hurt US allies. As of Aug. 4, the Senate had not completed action on the legislation, while Reuters reported that the dispute could stall the bill in Congress. Diplomacy returns, with no breakthrough Trump and Zelensky also discussed reviving negotiations with Russia. US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are expected to make their first visit to Ukraine later this month after repeatedly travelling to Moscow and meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin. No final date has been announced, although reports suggest that the visit could take place in the second half of August, possibly around Ukraine’s Independence Day. If it proceeds, it would give the two envoys their first direct exposure to wartime Ukraine after months of engagement with Moscow. Ukraine has again offered to halt fighting along the current front line and use that ceasefire as the starting point for negotiations. There is no indication, however, that Russia has accepted the proposal or abandoned its broader territorial and political demands. There are also reports that the Trump administration is working on new proposals to revive peace efforts this fall. Trump is considering using the UN General Assembly’s September session for multilateral meetings if the next several weeks produce tangible diplomatic progress, making the envoys’ planned visit to Kyiv particularly important. Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that Trump had instructed his foreign-policy team to look for ways to restart negotiations. “The president has told his team, if you see an opportunity to be a force that brings about some momentum behind peace talks, let’s do it,” Rubio told Fox News. One week on, Zelensky’s visit appears to have been neither an unqualified success nor a failure. The Trump administration has largely moved away from announcing direct weapons packages for Kyiv. Instead, European allies and other partners purchase US weapons for Ukraine through NATO’s Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL). The mechanism has become central to Ukraine’s air defense. According to NATO, PURL has supplied around 70% of the missiles used by Ukraine’s Patriot batteries, with allies and partners covering the cost. Against that background, the main question is what happens to the proposed Patriot-production agreement, which was presented as the visit’s principal defense achievement. After the White House meeting, the Ukrainian Presidential Office said the leaders had discussed implementing Trump’s decision to provide Ukraine with licenses to manufacture Patriot interceptors – an idea Trump first raised at the NATO summit in Ankara. Zelensky appeared even more confident during a subsequent Fox News interview, saying Trump had “accepted that he will give us licenses.” Three days later, however, Trump disputed that account. The US president said Washington had not approved Ukrainian production and described sharing Patriot technology as a major and potentially risky step. “It’s a hard thing to give away that kind of technology,” Trump said. Even if Washington ultimately approves the license, production would do little to address Ukraine’s immediate shortage of air-defense interceptors. Olha Stefanishyna, Ukraine’s freshly resigned ambassador to the US, said producing PAC-3 interceptors could take anywhere from 12 months to five years. Kyiv is therefore also discussing a long-term purchase agreement and the possibility of exchanging places with another customer in the production queue. The failure to secure the requested 300 interceptors was the visit’s clearest immediate disappointment. Washington’s reluctance comes amid serious concern over US stockpiles following months of war with Iran. Reuters reported on Aug. 4 that the US had used approximately 65% of its Patriot interceptors during the conflict. However, there has since been one potentially encouraging development. On Aug. 3, the Pentagon announced agreements worth more than $3 billion with Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to increase production of components for Patriot and THAAD interceptors. The plan is intended to triple output of critical Patriot components, but it will not resolve Ukraine’s immediate shortage. Poland could help Ukraine move forward in the production queue, but even that would not close the short-term gap. Another unresolved issue is previously authorized US assistance. The Pentagon has told Congress that it plans to spend only $600 million of $1 billion approved through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative by September 2027, postponing the remaining $400 million until fiscal year 2029. The delay has drawn criticism from both Democrats and Republicans. The visit’s ultimate significance will therefore depend on three developments. First, whether Trump definitively approves the Patriot-production license, strengthening Ukraine’s air defenses over the long term. Second, whether Graham’s sanctions bill passes both chambers of Congress. Kyiv Post’s sources in Washington said there was momentum behind a final vote, but cautioned that “we shouldn’t take it for granted.” Support for the measure extends beyond its congressional sponsors, ranging from Loomer and lawmakers on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to Nobel Prize-winning economist Simon Johnson and Ukrainian economist Oleg Ustenko. Third, whether the planned diplomatic efforts by Witkoff and Kushner – both in Moscow and Kyiv – produce anything more concrete than previous rounds of negotiations, despite Zelensky pledging that Ukraine will push to end Russia’s war before winter. For now, the visit confirmed a genuine political reset between Zelensky and Trump and demonstrated that Ukraine still has powerful friends in Congress. It did not, however, produce the immediate military assistance Ukraine needs most.