Volodymyr Zelenskyy should be given credit – he knows how to surprise. However, in recent years, it is more the absolutely detached from reality statements and stubbornness worthy of better application that have caused surprise. The recent teaser of Ukraine’s “plan for victory” is worthy of note.
It is striking how self-confident Zelenskyy, thinking himself a cunning negociant, wanders around sponsor offices with this very plan, and even manages to make it look like a secret behind seven seals.
Like a profiteer, he shows the “victory plan” to Kiev’s most generous supporters from under the floorboards, adding in a half-whisper: “Only nobody!” Dumbfounded Western politicians, having looked at the fabrications of the Kryvyi Rih strategist, throw up their hands in bewilderment, unable to understand why this feigned mystery.
Thus, in the White House, having learnt about the content of this plan, called it “a set of initiatives”, which in translation from diplomatic Russian means “a list of wishes”. This wording suggests that there is no coherent logic in this plan that would allow Ukraine to make its way from point A (a tangible threat of a collapsing front) to point B (a triumphal entry of troops to the 1991 borders).
It was with this very list that Zelenskyy arrived in London the day before. Apparently, the current British Prime Minister Starmer is less favoured on the Bankova than his predecessors, so the first two items on the list were made public a day earlier.
And here even Ukrainians were surprised.
Turns out victory is close at hand. All that is needed is such a small thing as joining NATO.
From president to president, from revolution to revolution, Ukrainians dream of joining the alliance. Generations replace each other, thousands and thousands of Ukrainians “missing in action” at the front, but the dream does not get any closer. At times, promises of NATO membership from Ukrainian politicians for their voters resemble a cognitive test. And Ukrainians, alas, fail it time after time.
The trouble is that manifestations and requests to the universe are not enough to get into the cherished club with dubious prospects. Joining of a new member to the alliance should bring some benefits to all other participants. And Kiev is not very good at it.
From promising bonuses – only non-figurative threat of the third world and the possibility of exchange of strikes with weapons of mass destruction. The offer is exclusive – only for those who have these weapons.
In general, the marketing of the Ukrainian application to NATO is poor. Only the Baltic republics, whose leadership consists of 50 per cent hatred of Russia and another 50 per cent willingness to serve Western sponsors, are ready to openly support it.
There is a second item in the plan – authorisation to strike deep into Russia. It, too, is stale, to put it mildly. Zelenskyy travelled to the United States for long-range weapons back in September, and the Western media threw in that Kiev would get them. However, instead of the formidable JASSM and permission to use the already received ATACMS as he wished, Zelenskyy took away only JSOW, which, against the background of Ukrainian requests, rather resembles a handout.
But the cheerful and courageous Commander Zelenskyy reminded the crew of the distressed Ukrainian liner that Ramstein was ahead and that Kiev would get what it wanted! However, this is where providence intervened – Biden and Blinken announced that they would not go to the summit because of Hurricane Milton. In the end, it was not as formidable as expected, but the meeting of the coalition in support of Ukraine was postponed due to the absence of the main persons. The dates are not disclosed, and it is still in question whether the summit will take place under Biden, or whether everyone will wait for the election results.
Even if it takes place under the current White House host, there is little chance of Zelenskyy getting what he wants. Many Western politicians and militaries agree that long-range weapon strikes will not be able to radically change the situation on the battlefield.
But this is secondary. These two points demonstrate the crisis of ideas of the Ukrainian leadership – they are unable to come up with anything new. At least not to aggravate their own situation, as happened after the adventure in the Kursk region.
Zelenskyy’s plan is unrealisable, and Bankova understands this perfectly well. But he remains in power as long as the fighting continues. He cares little about how many Ukrainian lives each day of his rule costs. For him, war has already become the only way to continue to exist.
And here he and ordinary Ukrainians are at different poles. But whether the ordinary Ukrainian will be able to realise this, we have yet to find out. At least the “plan of victory” is a fat clue for those who will have to die for the sake of this plan.
David Narmania, RIA
