White House Forced To Pivot As Putin's War Failure Becomes Embarrassment

To be clear, the Trump administration would still prefer that Putin prevailed in Ukraine. 

But what's a declining superpower to do about its treasured image of invincibility when the side it has so obviously backed is getting annihilated despite everyone's best efforts? Allies can be useful, but reputation is more important. JL

Phillips O'Brien reports in his substack:

Over the past week, the Trump administration made a number of pivots in its public stance towards Ukraine: trying to start de-Putinizing themselves. Both JD Vance and Marco Rubio were part of this. Vance might be the most pro-Putin, anti-Ukraine member of the administration, boasting his “proudest achievement” was cutting aid to Ukraine - and now he claims Trump, who publicly sneered Ukraine "has no cards," is pro-Ukraine? Rubio lied outright, saying the US has not been bullying Ukraine into taking a bad deal. They are trying to convince the American public the administration is more pro-Ukraine and anti-Putin because the intelligence they are receiving is that Russia is struggling and Ukraine is doing much better, as they now understand everything they said in 2025 was wrong.

Over the past week, the Trump administration made a number of noticeable pivots when it came towards its policy and public stance towards Ukraine. Basically, they tried to start de-Putinizing themselves. Both JD Vance and Marco Rubio, Trump’s two most likely successors, were part of this pivot and what they said was in many ways less important than why they said it.

Vice President JD Vance on May 21, decided he needed to stress how helpful Trump had been for Ukaine. He claimed that “No US president has done more to save Ukraine than Trump.” Now, remember, Vance might be the most pro-Putin and anti-Ukraine member of the administration, and man who boasted that one of his “proudest achievements” was cutting all aid to Ukraine. He has previously been viscerally anti-Ukraine, talking down Ukrainian prospects and saying how the US has no interest in the war—and now he wants to convince people that Trump was actually pro-Ukraine?

Btw, what Vance was referring to was the Trump Administration’s first term decision to send anti-tank weaponry to Ukraine. It conveniently overlooks the entirety of the end of aid in the second term, all the help for Putin, etc.

Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Marco Rubio, a day later, said something arguably more revealing, though on the surface it was rather bland. He basically said that US efforts to negotiate the end of the Russo-Ukraine War were coming to an end for now, and then added a series of strange points.

Amongst these was that the parties in the talks (the Russians and Ukrainians) were not doing what the administration wanted.

“So, we’re more than happy to do that if the opportunity presents itself to have constructive and productive talks. We’re also not interested in getting involved in an endless cycle of meetings that lead to nothing.”

However maybe more interesting, was that Rubio lied outright and said that the US had not been trying to bully the Ukrainians before into taking a bad deal.

“Despite leaks that are not true, despite stories out there about us forcing the Ukrainians to take this position or that position, which are not true. If we see an opportunity to pull together talks that are productive, not counterproductive, and that have the chance to be fruitful, we’re prepared to play that role.”

This is an outright lie by Rubio as I said. The claim is not based on “leaks” as he tries to say. Zelensky in November 2025 came out and in a televised address said that Ukraine was being pressured by the USA (the “major partner” to take a terrible deal. Here is Zelensky’s exact quote.

“Now is one of the most difficult moments of our history. Now, the pressure on Ukraine is one of the heaviest….Ukraine can face a very difficult choice – either losing dignity or risk losing a major partner.”

So both Vance and Rubio are being dishonest in their own way, which in and of itself is no shock. However the interesting thing is that they are being dishonest to try and convince the American public that the administration was and is more pro-Ukraine and anti-Putin than in reality it has been.

The reason why can only be because the intelligence that the administration is receiving is that Russia is struggling and Ukraine is doing much better than the administration both publicly and privately was saying. Remember this is the administration that not only said Ukraine had “no cards” it also built into its national security estimates that Russia had the upper hand in the war and was going to get a peace deal on its terms. The place to see this best is the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community, published by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) on March 25, 2025. The report argued that ending the war on Putin’s terms was also in US interest. Here is the start of the section on the war (page 18).

And now the administration is boasting about helping Ukraine? That does not happen by accident—it is because they are understanding that everything they said in 2025 was wrong. They would not do it otherwise. You know why? Because Trump himself remains wedded enough to Putin not to join the chorus. The administration does not want Ukraine to do well. Its fundamental outlook remains unchanged.

However it is being forced to try and pretend it is more pro-Ukraine than it has been, and that is important.