Too little too late

The Russian war has transformed democratically elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr, a former television comic with a modest record as a neophyte political leader, into a resistance

hero, an international force and an arrogant autocrat.

Zelensky won the presidency in April 2019 with a whopping 73 per cent of the vote. By then he had become a household figure due to a television series in which he played his country’s president. Familiarity along with a programme promising reforms, economic growth and tackling corruption were keys to his victory. In his inaugural address, Zelensky dissolved parliament and called for early elections. His bid to change the electoral system from plurality voting to proportional representation and to introduce criminal liability for illegal enrichment were rejected by the outgoing assembly.

Once his party had secured a majority, a bill was passed stripping legislators of immunity from prosecution. When he tried to tame Ukraine’s oligarchs by denying them domination of the press and banning them from participation in privatisation of public companies he was accused of making a power grab. He was criticised for appointing television colleagues to senior positions in his administration. After he switched prime ministers for unknown reasons and attempted to resolve peacefully the dispute with Russia over the Donbas region, which is held by pro-Russian separtists, his approval rating slid to 32 per cent.  

In April 2021, Zelensky responded to Russia’s military deployment on Ukraine’s borders by calling on US President Joe Biden to expedite Ukraine’s application for Nato membership and in November he accused Moscow of seeking to oust him.  As Russia built up its military presence on the border, Zelensky wisely appealed to Ukrainians not to panic due to the Russian threat and told Biden to stop hyping warnings of animminent imvasion. Although Moscow’s spokesmen repeatedly rejected this possibility, the Russian army invaded on February 24th, making Zelensky a war president.

In this role, he has turned himself into a resistance hero and international autocrat by tapping into his experience as an actor. He has made extensive use of video links, zoom, and social media to repeatedly demand US, European, Nato weapons and political and economic backing. Biden and NATO have rejected his main demand to create a “no-fly zone” which would prevent Russian aerial bombing of Ukraine. Biden argues this could mean shooting down Russian planes and attacking Russian airfields, thereby launching World War III.

Nevertheless, Zelensky has relentlessly reiterated this and other demands which could drag Nato into conflict with nuclear-armed Russia. These demands have been put forward in virtual addresses to parliaments in the US, UK, Poland, Australia, Canada, Germany, Israel, Japan, Austria, and more than a dozen other countries. These appearances have been televised, making him a global force to be reckoned with as he has caught the attention and imagination of millions of people who see him as a valliant warrior standing up to mighty Russia. This role could, however, envenom veteran autocrat Russian President Vladimir Putin who could respond by prolonging the war and inflicting increasing devastation on Ukraine.

 In a poll conducted in the US last week, 72 per cent of respondents said they had a lot or some confidence in Zelensky with 33 per cent expressing a lot of confidence. It is significant that  French President Emmanuel Macron was given a confidence rating pf 55 per cent, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz 53 per cent, and Biden only 48 per cent. While for Biden this amounts to a rise of 7-8 per cent since the war began, he is still struggling with majority disapproval rating.

Such rating is likely to increase pressure on Biden to deliver Zelensky’s fiancial and security demands. During last week’s phone call with Zelensky, Biden promised $500 million in budgetary suppport as well as fresh military supplies.   

Zelensky’s international standing has exacerbated his autocratic bent in dealing with his embattled countrymen. Last week he fired the chief of the Main Department of the Security Service (SBU) Naumov Andri Olehpvych and the Kherson SBU head Serhiy Oleksandrovich. He stripped them of their military ranks and dubbed them “anti-heroes” and “traitors” after accusing them of failing to defend Ukraine’s “freedom and independence.”

He stated, “Now I do not have time to deal with all the traitors but gradually they will all be punished” and warned that officers who have “not decided where their homeland is” and have violated their oath of allegiance, will “inevitably be deprived of senior military ranks. Random generals don’t belong here.” Zelensky also recalled his country’s ambassadors from Georgia and Morocco for not garnering the support of their governments for Ukraine in its battle with Russia. “With all due respect, if there won’t be weapons, won’t be sanctions, won’t be restrictions for Russian business, then please look for other work,” Zelenskyy stated. “I am waiting for concrete results in the coming days from the work of our representatives in Latin America, the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Africa.” He said he was also expecting “results” from Ukraine’s military attaches posted in embassies abroad.

Urging an early end to the war, Zelensky has called for Nato “security guaranatees and neutrality, [and] non-nuclear status [for Ukraine]. We are ready to go for it. This is the most important point.” Not so fast, Volodymyr.

On security, he may have taken a step too far by insisting that Nato should give an iron-clad guarantee under Article 5 of its Charter which states that if a Nato member is attacked, every other member will come to its aid. This condition could be rejected by Russia as it would mean that Ukraine would have  the benefit of Nato protection without being a Nato member.

Nato members could be reluctant to offer a guarantee that could, ultimately, involve them in war between Russia and the alliance which was formed with the intention of deterring rather than waging war with Russia.

Moscow demands Ukrainian recognition of the independence of the Russian-majority Donbas region and of Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Putin also seeks Ukrainian suppression of the neo-Nazi Social National Assembly group and the extreme right-wing Azof regiment which was largely responsible for attacks on Donbas over the past eight years. As these groups are loose cannons on the Ukrainian politico-military scene, it would be difficult to assert control over them, particularly in the wake of a devastating Russian war.

If not under control, rightists could do their utmost to scupper suggested compromises on the territorial issue. These could involve Kyiv’s acceptance that Donbas is no longer a part of Ukraine and negotiations over Crimea could take place over the coming 15 years.

Bringing an end to this war will involve more than Zelensky’s pledge not to join Nato. This might have placated Russia years ago but not now.