Is Zelensky a Trumpist? Column by Paula Siegien (Krytyka Polityczna, Warsaw)

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky wasted no time in congratulating Donald Trump. The morning after election night, he published a post on X, describing the American businessman’s victory as “impressive”. He also made a reference to a meeting with Trump in September, in which they had “discussed in detail the Ukraine-U.S. strategic partnership, the Victory Plan, and ways to put an end to Russian aggression against Ukraine.” Zelensky then lauded Trump for his “peace through strength” stance in the international arena. This was the desired practical approach to achieve peace and justice for Ukraine, he added, before expressing a hope to pursue it alongside the new American president.

On the very same day, Zelensky spoke to Trump on the phone, after which he continued to sing the praises of the president-elect and even compared him to Ronald Reagan.

It has long been known that the Polish President Andrzej Duda is a Trumpist. But is Zelensky one? He may have no other choice. After all, among all the states clinging to the US for dear life, Ukraine is the most dependent. Besides, no one would want to rub an occupant of the Oval Office the wrong way, whoever he may be—no one save for Putin and Kim Jong Un, of course.

Because Ukraine’s very existence hinges on military and political support from across the Atlantic, Zelensky’s flattery must go beyond the diplomatic pleasantries typically exchanged with a major ally. And, notoriously, Trump and his entourage are fantasizing about cutting off Kiev’s American aid and bringing the war to a sudden end.

On Thursday, The Wall Street Journal probed the “Ukraine Peace Plan” announced by Trump and J.D. Vance as part of their campaign. According to the Journal’s sources, this will involve the demarcation of a demilitarized zone with no intention for it to be guarded by peacekeeping forces financed by the US. The architects of the plan have delegated the task to Poland, Germany, the UK and France, or Europe in general, especially the part that is closest to Russia. On top of that, discussions of Ukraine’s NATO membership would be suspended for 20 years.

While the Ukrainian media have been busy breaking down all the eventualities currently up in the air, one need not get too attached: for now, all scenarios are founded on media leaks. Still, it seems inevitable that Trump will turn his attention—and his big ideas—back to the Russian-Ukrainian war after his inauguration in January.

No wonder that Zelensky is attempting to safeguard his interests, looking for an opening and showering the vain president-elect with compliments. Trump’s first presidential term has taught the world that expert analyses and rational reasoning play no role in his decision-making. Instead, America’s returning president acts on his personal likes, dislikes and grudges, guided by his own ego.

But who knows, maybe Volodymyr Zelensky is in fact a bona fide Trumpist. He would be far from the only Ukrainian rooting against Kamala Harris. Physically and mentally drained by the war, the Ukrainian public longs for a turning point. Therefore, many in Ukraine were quietly counting on Trump’s win, as I have gleaned from my conversations with Ukrainian friends who have painted a picture of the prevailing public sentiment. They are hoping that his mixture of unpredictability and indomitable will (a historically charged word, I know—“the triumph of the will” and whatnot) will finally make an actual difference in Ukraine’s situation.

No one who envisioned Kamala Harris’s potential administration expected bold decisions, an increased supply of arms and the approval to use them against targets inside Russia. And in its current situation, with minimal doses of military equipment and support trickling like an IV drip which keeps the patient alive but bedridden and wasting away, Ukraine feels that it is bleeding out. In a war of attrition, all that matters is who bleeds out first. While Russia, with its suicidal economic and demographic policy, stands on feet of clay, it is still a colossus who can endure the war effort longer, if only for its sheer size.

It is tempting to wish that some Ukrainians’ unspoken optimism about Trump’s win would translate into reality. But no one knows what awaits their country in the coming months—perhaps not even Trump himself.

In other news from the east, a two-week political thriller in Moldova cumulated in the victory of Maia Sandu, writes Piotr Oleksy in Polish, summarizing the presidential election and the EU referendum there. Writing in Russian, Evgeny Cheban from the Moldovan outlet Newsmaker.md focuses on the divisions plaguing the country today. However, rather than discussing the split between those who want to join the West and those who prefer to stick with Russia (since the USSR is no longer an option), Cheban compares the successful Moldova—rich, progressive, cosmopolitan—with the Moldova that lives off starvation wages and pensions, barely makes ends meet and sees no improvement after the government’s pro-Western turn. Instead, many hang on to the stories of their parents and grandparents who look back fondly on their life under Soviet rule.

The former Moldova needs no convincing to join the EU—with their Romanian passports, they are already halfway there. But in order to persuade the latter Moldova that, in the EU integration, the juice is worth the squeeze, some of the juice must finally be served to the people. Maia Sandu’s has little time to do this before the parliamentary election next summer.

Meanwhile, in the upcoming election in Belarus, no surprises are anticipated, with the opposition headed by Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya already calling the vote “choiceless” in a statement. In a typical display of humility, current dictator Alexander Lukashenko only revealed his intention to run in late October, at the end of an interview tellingly given to the Russian propagandist Olga Skabeyeva during the 16th BRICS summit in Kazan.

Asked whether he would participate in the election scheduled for January 26, Lukashenko replied: [Aleksandr1] “If my supporters say it’s needed—and certainly they will...” The dictator accentuated the word needed, and several days later, as if on cue, the Belarusian Internet was flooded with videos showing everyday people and collaborationist celebrities alike, pronouncing this one word: “Needed!” (Russian: nado, literally: [it] should [be done]).

Lukashenko smugly claims that the campaign is a spontaneous, grassroots initiative, stressing that “there should be no excess here, lest we are accused of some kind of leaderism.” The word Nado! has become the slogan of Lukashenko’s new if superfluous campaign. Lines are already forming in front of tents inscribed with the minimalist, two-syllable catchphrase that have mushroomed across Belarus. The people—totally spontaneously, of course—seem eager to sign their leader’s ballot petition.

By the way, let me point out that Lukashenko has congratulated Donald Trump on his success, while Vladimir Putin has been holding back. According to Verstka, the Russian president has sent his compliments through unofficial channels—a claim that Kremlin itself denies.

For now, a little more time is, well, needed, to see who is friends with whom.

Paulina Siegień’s “Eastern Newsletter” is published in Polish every week with support from The Foundation for Polish-German Cooperation.

It is one of several newsletters offered by the Krytyka Polityczna daily, available free of charge at www.krytykapolityczna.pl

Subscribe to the newsletter here: https://newsletter.krytykapolityczna.pl/

Published in partnership with n-ost.