Zelenskyy questioned over casual attire at White House: Who decided suits are essential? – The Times of India
In the arena of diplomacy, fashion can be a powerful tool for conveying messages and projecting one’s identity and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s clothing has been a common topic of discussion during his international visits. While his military apparel is a visible reminder of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and his dedication to his country’s war efforts, whether it is perceived as a symbol of resilience or a breach of diplomatic norms is the new topic of discussion among many.
Once again Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s choice of attire has become the talk of the town, after a recent exchange of words at the Oval Office. During a meeting with US officials, a reporter questioned Zelenskyy about his special style of attire. What he responded to the reporter, instantly went viral on social media. This also saw an unexpected reaction from US Senator JD Vance in the background, that went viral online.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy was questioned by reporter Brian Glenn on the choice of his clothing, “Why don’t you wear a suit? Do you own a suit?” To which Zelenskyy said “I will wear a costume when this war finishes. Maybe something like yours. Maybe something better”, his response was then instantly shared on social media platforms.
Not only this but, while he answered the question to the reporter, U.S. Senator JD Vance was seen laughing in the background, which got numerous mixed reactions from users on social media. Some interpreted Vance’s laughter as mockery, while others saw it as a fun reaction to an unusual question.
Does one’s choice of apparel change their perception on the global stage?
Zelenskyy’s military suits have reopened conversations about how wartime leaders project themselves on the world stage and the power of representation in diplomacy. Historically, world leaders have used their clothing choices as a means of communication for projecting strength, solidarity, or deference depending on the context. Zelenskyy’s refusal to wear formal attire during official meetings is a deliberate choice that redesigns his image as a leader in crisis. But the question persists, Does clothing impact diplomatic effectiveness, or should the focus remain solely on policy and action?
When did the ‘Suit’ become ‘The formal attire’ in diplomacy?
Suits have long been a symbol of power, authority, and professionalism in diplomatic pursuits and the evolution of this wardrobe over the years has played the role of utmost importance in the same. The origins of the modern suit can be traced back to the 17th century when King Charles II of England began a more streamlined and coordinated method of dressing for men.
By the 19th century, the lounge suit became a common replacement for the frock coat, led by fashion trendsetter Beau Brummell, who established the benchmark for men’s business attire. The early 20th century saw the three-piece suit as the standard for business people, with the colour of the fabric tending towards darker shades and pinstripes for a businesslike look.
President Donald Trump, right, meets with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, left, in the Oval Office on Friday, Feb. 28, 2025. (Doug Mills/The New York Times)
In the mid-20th century, the suits had wide lapels and high-waisted pants, as a result of the influence of Hollywood and mass production. World War II led to a scarcity of fabric and resulted in more sleek suits with fewer accessories. As business wear changed in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, it became more relaxed and flexible, with the rising technology industries making business casual fashion trends. Traditional suits are still a mainstay in formal business settings, but most professionals now choose newer, slim-fit, and more comfortable styles designed for flexibility and easy movements.
While all these things are taken into consideration, regardless of differing perspectives, Zelenskyy’s latest choice of costume at the Oval Office proves that attire is more than just a matter of fashion, it is a statement that carries weight in global politics.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, and President Donald Trump ended up in a hard banter at the Oval office
President Donald Trump, right, gestures as he meets with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine in the Oval Office on Friday, Feb. 28, 2025. They are expected to to seal an agreement handing over rare mineral rights to the United States even as the new American administration pursues a separate deal to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. (Doug Mills/The New York Times)
The bitter exchange between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, U.S. Vice President JD Vance, and President Donald Trump in the Oval Office was over Vance accusing Zelensky of going on “propaganda tours” and disrespecting the U.S. administration. Vance was critical of Zelensky for sending conscripts to the front lines and failing to appreciate the US. Zelensky then shot back by asking Vance whether he understood Ukraine’s situation. Trump interjected, saying that Zelensky should be more thankful and warning him about the potential consequences of his actions.
