How Language Shapes Power: Lessons from Zelensky’s Meeting with Trump
Language is never just about words.
It is a carrier of culture, a tool of influence, and a marker of power. This reality was on full display in the now-infamous meeting between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and U.S. President Donald Trump, as analyzed by journalist Barbara Serra in her article, Did Speaking English as a Second Language Impact Zelensky in THAT Meeting with Trump? Published on March 2, 2025, Serra’s commentary sheds light on how language fluency, cultural framing, and linguistic privilege shape international diplomacy, and by extension, global business, education, and leadership.
While the meeting has been widely dissected from political angles, one underexplored factor is Zelensky’s role as a second-language speaker navigating an asymmetrical linguistic landscape. His words, though fluent, carried subtle misinterpretations that played a role in the meeting’s breakdown. More importantly, as Serra argues, English, the dominant global language, affords certain speakers more credibility and influence than others, regardless of the depth of their ideas.
What does this mean beyond diplomacy?
For professionals working in multilingual environments, international business, or language education, this case study is a powerful reminder of why linguistic diversity and language bias matter.
Below are three key takeaways from Serra’s analysis that apply directly to multilingual leadership, global workplaces, and inclusive education.
1. Language Is Culture: Why Fluency Is More Than Just Grammar
Serra points out that Zelensky’s choice of words inadvertently shaped the perception of his message. When he said, “Even you, but you have a nice ocean and don’t feel now, but you will feel in the future”, his intent was likely to emphasize that geography provides the U.S. with security, but not absolute protection. However, the phrase “you will feel” can be interpreted as an assertion that the U.S. will suffer, a message that triggered Trump’s defensive reaction.
This moment highlights a fundamental truth in multilingual communication: knowing a language is not the same as fully understanding how it is culturally framed. Different languages carry different ways of structuring logic, emotion, and argumentation.
For professionals and educators in multilingual environments, this underscores the need to go beyond technical fluency and focus on cultural competence. A multilingual professional might speak perfect English but still struggle to align their communication style with native expectations.
I've been researching the topic of multilingualism in business and professional contexts for almost three years now. Let me share some concrete examples of how this challenge frequently plays out in multinational corporations (references below).
For example, a German leader in the automotive industry described the difficulties of aligning communication in an international team: “If you don’t discuss things in detail and to the end, everyone takes home something else. Then you have five people with six different opinions on what our model represents.” This highlights the importance of clear and culturally adaptable communication strategies in global business.
2. Power Dynamics in Language: Who Gets to Set the Standard?
Serra’s article also highlights how Zelensky was held to a different standard simply because English is not his native language. Trump and Vance did not accommodate his status as a second-language speaker, instead, they reacted as though he was making absolute statements, without considering the nuances lost in translation.
This reflects a broader reality in international business and multilingual workplaces: English is the dominant global language, but it is also a privileged one. Native speakers are rarely expected to adjust to non-native counterparts, while the burden of adaptation falls on multilingual professionals.
For example, a Romanian professional in the automotive sector highlighted this challenge: “You are telling some things, you mean them differently, but they are misapprehended. People get them entirely wrong. But you don’t realize that right away. You only find out when it is put into practice.” This illustrates how misinterpretations due to language barriers can lead to costly business mistakes.
In corporate settings, this often manifests as bias against accented speech, assumptions about intelligence based on language proficiency, and unfair expectations of non-native speakers to match the rhetorical dexterity of native speakers.
⚠️ If language determines credibility, who gets heard, promoted, or trusted? ⚠️
For leaders managing diverse teams, Serra’s analysis is a reminder that language bias can create invisible barriers. Companies that foster linguistic inclusivity, through training, awareness, and multilingual leadership development, are better positioned to tap into global talent and diverse perspectives.
3. Accents and Perceptions: The Unspoken Hierarchy of Speech
Serra’s comparison between Zelensky’s treatment and that of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer further reveals how accents shape credibility. Trump, who had previously criticized an Afghan journalist’s accent, complimented Starmer’s English accent, demonstrating a clear preference for certain ways of speaking.
This is a phenomenon that extends far beyond politics. Research consistently shows that certain accents are perceived as more authoritative, while others, especially from non-Western or non-native speakers, face bias.
For professionals who operate in international settings, this means that the way one speaks can determine how seriously they are taken. In educational settings, students with non-native English accents might be assumed to be less competent, even if their ideas are equally strong. In corporate boardrooms, executives with regional or foreign accents might find themselves needing to overcompensate to establish authority.
This bias can even extend to written communication. A Japanese professional in the technology industry described how their thought process affects their emails in English: “When Japanese write in English, they first think in Japanese. If you read an email from a Japanese colleague, you need to think first in Japanese to understand what they want.” This highlights how language structures shape communication styles, requiring extra effort from multinational teams to bridge these gaps.
This is where multilingual leadership matters.
Organizations and institutions must acknowledge and actively counteract language bias. Instead of evaluating competence based on fluency or pronunciation, businesses and schools can implement strategies that recognize linguistic diversity as an asset rather than a disadvantage.
Final Thoughts: A Call for Linguistic Awareness in Leadership
Barbara Serra’s analysis of Zelensky’s meeting with Trump serves as more than just a political commentary, it is a case study on how language influences power, perception, and decision-making. The challenges faced by Zelensky are the same ones experienced by millions of multilingual professionals, educators, and students every day: language shapes credibility, and bias exists in who gets to be heard and respected.
For those working in multilingual business environments, education, or leadership roles, this means recognizing that:
Fluency is more than just correct grammar: it’s about cultural adaptability.
Linguistic privilege means some voices are unfairly elevated over others.
Accent bias affects credibility and leadership opportunities.
By fostering language-inclusive environments, we can begin to dismantle these biases and create spaces where multilingual competence is seen as the strength it truly is.
To read the full original article by Barbara Serra, check out Did Speaking English as a Second Language Impact Zelensky in THAT Meeting with Trump? published on March 2, 2025.
References
Tenzer, H., Pudelko, M., & Harzing, A. W. (2014). The impact of language barriers on trust formation in multinational teams. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(5), 508–528.
Fredriksson, R., Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Piekkari, R. (2006). The multinational corporation as a multilingual organization: The notion of a common corporate language. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 11(4), 406–423.