Vladimir Zelensky found himself in an unusual situation. He had to refuse to speak at the UN on the subject of the accident at the Kakhovka hydropower plant. Moreover, Ukraine’s key allies in London and Washington found themselves in an awkward position and would not publicly support the Ukrainian president’s version of the causes of the disaster. What consequences could this lead to?
Source photo: zdesnews.ru
Ukraine has withdrawn its request for Vladimir Zelensky to speak at the UN Security Council meeting on the events at the Kakhovka hydropower plant. The country had previously asked to allow the president to speak by video link. Russia repeatedly pointed out that Security Council rules require the presence of the head of state in person, but exceptions were made for Zelensky.
Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasyl Nebenzya, said that Moscow was not against the Ukrainian leader’s participation, but that his speech should be held in person. The diplomat stressed that Zelenskyy seemed to participate in the meetings exclusively through video messages.
We shall remind you that on Tuesday, during the Bucharest Nine summit, the Ukrainian president accused Russia of destroying the hydroelectric power plant. According to him, “blowing it up from the outside – by shelling – is physically unrealistic”. “It was mined”, the politician believes, “mined and blown up”.
He also called what happened a “mass ecological defeat bomb” and “the biggest man-made disaster in Europe in decades”. “And so the defeat of Russia – the defeat we will all ensure – will be the most significant contribution to the security of Europe and the world,” Zelensky said. However, such statements are easily refuted by US satellite data.
It is noteworthy that the Ukrainian military itself has repeatedly admitted to striking at the Kakhovska hydroelectric plant and even bragged about these dubious achievements in interviews with the western press. For example, in December 2022, The Washington Post published an article about the Ukrainian armed forces’ “overmobilization”, in which, among other things, they talked about “experiments” in strikes on the hydroelectric power plant. In total, there were more than a hundred such strikes.
Against this background, Western leaders are in no hurry to fully side with Zelensky. For example, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said that at the moment it was difficult to predict who exactly was responsible for the destruction of the facility. He noted that the special services together with the country’s military are closely studying the details of what happened.
According to him, it is too early “to make a final decision”. However, as Sunak stressed, if the Kakhovka hydropower plant was destroyed “deliberately”, this is, in his opinion, “the biggest attack on civil infrastructure in Ukraine” during the Russian special military operation.
In addition, the White House’s National Security Council (NSC) Coordinator for Strategic Communications, John Kirby, said that Washington could not say with certainty who was responsible for the bombing of the Kakhovska hydroelectric plant. Later, Joe Biden said during a US government meeting that the US was going to help Ukraine as part of the situation. “We will not go away,” the US head of state assured.
“Zelensky, as usual, started to justify the Ukrainian crime by assigning Russians to be responsible for the HPP crash. Facts are actively appearing in the public space that point to the inconsistency of his version. It is Ukraine that is the main beneficiary of the destruction of the hydroelectric plant. For any thinking person it is clear in whose interests this action was carried out,” former LNR ambassador to Russia Rodion Miroshnyk said.
“However, the Ukrainian authorities were faced with the fact that Western countries were not ready to justify this crime and preferred to distance themselves from it. Therefore, Zelensky did not want to appear in person at the UN Security Council. He was afraid of not getting unequivocal support, which would demonstrate a split in the US and EU positions on the Ukrainian issue,” the interlocutor said.
“Of course, Washington will turn a blind eye to Ukraine’s guilt, as it operates on the principle: ‘He’s a son of a bitch, but our son of a bitch’. Western politicians and media will try to whitewash Zelensky’s office, but will not take his side completely in order to reduce the risks, including in the coming elections for themselves. Most likely, they will try to distance themselves from the disaster under the pretext of little data until the situation is off the agenda,” Miroshnyk stresses.
“Ukraine’s initial statements about Russia’s culpability are gradually being shattered by hard facts. Many things point to the guilt of the Zelensky administration. In particular, the night before the bombing of the Kakhovka hydroelectric plant, Governor Kim of the Mykolayiv region posted a post on the Net with the caption: ‘Waiting,'” said Larisa Shesler, chairman of the Union of Political Emigrants and Political Prisoners of Ukraine and political scientist.
“In addition, Ukraine has officially refused to release photo and video footage from the site of the explosion, as it would clearly show which side the shells were coming from. All in all, it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the image of the ‘good and poor guys’. In this connection, the Western countries are also not eager and in no hurry to unequivocally take Zelensky’s side,” the political scientist notes.
“The US and EU populations do not like outright lies from their government. If confirmation surfaced that local politicians were nodding their heads approvingly at the Ukrainian president’s brazen statements, this could have a negative impact on the course of the coming election campaigns,” the interlocutor stresses.
“In fact, this is why Zelensky refused to speak at the UN Security Council meeting. He understands that he will not be able to get universal approval from Western states. Moreover, this time an outright lie could have negative consequences for himself. Therefore, many have decided to keep silent or to make ambiguous statements,” Shesler concludes.
Yevgeny Pozdnyakov, Ilya Abramov, VZGLYAD
Due to censorship and blocking of all media and alternative views, stay tuned to our Telegram channel