Zelensky presents ambitious victory plan to skeptical US audience

Zelensky presented the plan to Congress and to the two presidential election candidates in the USA: Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump. He sees the stance of Washington as a significant opportunity for achieving ultimate victory.

The "victory plan" consists of four key points. The first is the demand for Western security guarantees modeled after the collective defense pact within NATO membership. Additionally, there is a desire to continue the Ukrainian operation in the Kursk region to secure territorial "advantages" in negotiations and permission to use Western weaponry on Russian Federation territory, accompanied by a request for specific weapons systems, for which a list is already prepared. The most important non-military demand is for international financial aid to support the Ukrainian economy.

The least likely demand seems to be the one concerning security guarantees, which would equate Ukraine’s status with that of NATO countries. This is particularly challenging because Ukraine is currently at war, which automatically disqualifies it from receiving such guarantees.

“Securing more serious security and military assistance guarantees than those contained in bilateral agreements signed by Ukraine with several countries is rather unlikely," notes Dr. Mariusz Materniak, an expert on Eastern affairs. "Certainly, they cannot be analogous to those provided to NATO countries. This is fantasy, and Volodymyr Zelensky should be aware of this.”

Zelensky’s associates have long claimed that the President of Ukraine is tired and demoralized, and his decisions are often lacking in judgment. While this was mentioned half-heartedly in Kyiv a year ago, Ukrainian officials now openly discuss it. At the same time, Zelensky still seems to misunderstand the military and warfare principles. "Freezing the war means defeat for me" – he often repeats this and continues to demand further strikes on Russians.

“Again, expectations are being raised, which will lead to an unpleasant situation later,” notes Dr. Materniak.

For a long time, Ukrainians have demanded the lifting of restrictions on the use of Western weapons against Russian targets. They argue that it would allow them to halt the Russian advance more effectively. This mainly concerns long-range surface-to-surface and air-to-surface missiles that could strike Russian logistics – bases, fuel and ammunition depots, airfields, or service and industrial centers.

“I wouldn’t count on lifting all restrictions regarding the use of Western weapons in Russia,” notes Dr. Materniak. “The United States is very concerned about escalation. Further arms deliveries will likely continue, but in my opinion, with still limited usage capabilities.”

“Even if Ukraine obtains permission to use Western weapons in attacks on Russian territory and receives new armaments, e.g., AGM-158 or AGM-154 JSOW missiles, Russians will indeed incur costs, but the open question is how much these will influence Russian decisions,” asks Dr. Michał Piekarski, a security specialist from the University of Wroclaw.

“The range of damage that can be inflicted is significant but not decisive, and if anything can be expected, it is the achievement of a ceasefire along the current front lines in Ukraine,” adds Dr. Piekarski.

Such a solution, in turn, is not acceptable in Kyiv, which clearly maintains that a ceasefire while retaining the current occupied positions is not an option. Hence, they are pressuring the West to use long-range weapons against Russian targets. This, however, is unacceptable for Washington.

“In this case, there is another option,” notes Dr. Materniak. “It is enough for the West to help Ukraine develop its own capabilities regarding drones or long-range missiles. This can largely meet Ukrainian needs.”

One of the points in Zelensky’s plan is financial aid for the Ukrainian industry. Not only the defence sector but also the civilian one, which will allow Ukraine to rebuild after wartime destruction.

“Economic and financial aid for Ukraine doesn’t raise much controversy, and in this case, it will probably be easiest to meet the demands,” believes Dr. Materniak.

Officials in Kyiv emphasize that the biggest challenge is ensuring adequate conditions for citizens. Due to the war, about 4 million Ukrainians have completely or partially lost their homes. They highlight that 57 percent of Ukraine’s budget is allocated to security and defense. Social aid is not a priority.

The priority, however, is energy security, and the damage to energy systems is so extensive that, according to UN estimates, it will impact half of Ukraine’s total electricity demand during the winter period. In the summer, 73 percent of thermal power plants were inactive. Experts believe that in the worst case, citizens in some regions of the country will not have access to electricity for 18 hours a day.

Ukrainians also want to obtain the green light for further offensive operations on Russian Federation territory. Zelensky believes that occupied territories can serve as a bargaining chip in peace negotiations with the Kremlin.

“It is unclear what bargaining chip the occupied area near Kursk might be,” ponders Dr. Piekarski. “Perhaps again, the willingness to return it to Russia is an incentive for a ceasefire.”

“Maybe the plan includes provisions such as exchanging all territories, including Crimea and Donbas. We don’t know the plan's details, so it might be a propaganda trick,” the scholar tempers. “But the maximum Ukraine can hope for is to freeze the conflict and achieve a ceasefire along the current front lines, perhaps with minor adjustments. Recovering Crimea or all of Donbas is highly unlikely,” assesses Dr. Piekarski.

Both experts believe that Zelensky’s expectations are too high and largely unrealistic, and the authorities in Kyiv struggle to understand the perspective of Western allies. This only harms their cause and the cause they are fighting for.

“In my opinion, as I pointed out, Ukraine is once again building overly high expectations like before the NATO summit in 2023. There will also be disappointment here, as the West is still far from understanding the threats and perceiving them the way Ukraine or even NATO’s eastern flank does,” concludes Dr. Materniak.