The tragedy of Zelensky
It’s increasingly apparent that his room to maneuver
has been severely circumscribed by the Ukrainian far-right
By JAMES CARDEN MARCH 23, 2022
https://asiatimes.com/2022/03/the-tragedy-of-zelensky/
In 2019, Volodymyr Zelensky, a novice politician and
former television comedian, rose to the Ukrainian presidency on the strength of
a peace platform. But once in power, the peace candidate turned into a hardline
president, refusing to implement the Minsk peace deal; refusing to rethink the
wisdom of joining NATO; refusing to question the wisdom of hosting a US military base in Yaroviv or of
sending Ukrainian paramilitaries to the US for
training.
What explains the change? Informed speculation suggests
Zelensky was captured by the ultras of the Ukrainian far-right: No peace could
be made with the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk if the maximalists
fighting in the east of the country refused to stand down and negotiate, as
required by the Minsk Protocols that were agreed to by Ukraine, Russia, France
and Germany in 2015.
Zelensky’s behavior these past months would seem to
confirm that his room to maneuver at home was severely circumscribed by the
Ukrainian far-right. Worse, he seemed to take Western promises of financial and
military support, such as those enshrined in the November 2021 US-Ukraine Charter on
Strategic Partnership, at face value.
That was his first mistake.
His second was to follow the lead of the US and the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization by refusing to take seriously the terms of
the draft treaty issued
by Russia in mid-December.
His third and perhaps fatal mistake, made shortly
after the US rejected the terms of the Russian démarche, was to travel to the
Munich Security Conference, wherein a fiery, defiant address before the
trans-Atlantic security establishment, Zelensky committed political malpractice
on a grand scale.
As Russia built up its invasion force on Ukraine’s
border, US President Joe Biden’s administration repeatedly warned that the war
was coming. Yet Zelensky publicly and forcefully pushed back on that: On January
28, he complained to
reporters, “There are signals even from respected leaders of states, they just
say that tomorrow there will be war. This is panic – how much does it cost for
our state?”
He was wrong; the war came.
And now the local sitcom star is a global celebrity:
the Lion of Kyiv, a reincarnation of Winston Churchill. The liberal UK magazine
New Statesman has gone gaga over Zelensky. After watching Zelensky’s
sitcom Servant of the People, British journalist Rachel Cooke penned an
embarrassing Valentine to the Ukrainian president, writing:
“Zelensky has one of those irredeemably transparent
faces, one that makes you feel (rightly, or wrongly) that he cannot ever lie;
emotions pass over it like clouds across the sky. While it may be close to
impossible to imagine this man using a gun, suddenly it’s not at all difficult
to understand how, in another life (three words to which we must give their
fullest weight), he has been able so stirringly to rally the
motherland.”
After Zelensky’s address to the US Congress,
state-funded National Public Radio gushed,
“All other addresses to Congress by foreign leaders have paled in comparison to
Churchill’s until Zelenskyy’s this week.”
Churchill? Sorry, no: more like Chauncey Gardner.
Recently, in a series of ahistorical and increasingly
hysterical speeches, Zelensky has implored Western countries to become active
belligerents in the conflict.
Speaking before Congress, Zelensky invoked the Pearl
Harbor attacks of December 7, 1941, which was apt, but not in the way he (or
his audience) seemed to think. And his reference to the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001, in order to bait an auditorium full of credulous US
congressmen smacked of opportunism.
He went even further in a speech to the
German Bundestag, in which he declared that the slogan “never again” would be
rendered meaningless should Germany not support the Ukrainian war effort.
A speech before
the Israeli Knesset landed him in hot water when he repeatedly invoked
comparisons between Ukraine’s war with Russia and Holocaust. Said an
Israeli government spokesman, “The Ukraine war is awful, but the comparison to
the atrocities of the Holocaust and the final solution is an outrage.”
Meanwhile, this erstwhile champion of democratic
values has turned increasingly authoritarian at home, suspending 11
opposition parties from the Rada, including the “Opposition Platform – For
Life,” which holds 43 seats in parliament.
But is this anti-democratic behavior really all that
surprising, given his well-documented ties to
the Ukrainian oligarch Igor Kolomoisky?
Zelensky’s tenure has amounted to one big missed
opportunity, and this will become especially clear if he signs a treaty along
the lines offered by the Russians before the invasion. Future
historians may ask: Was the chance to join NATO someday worth all this
bloodshed?
In the end, Zelensky seemed to believe that he could
ignore, even provoke, the Russians because his amen corner in the US would ride
to the rescue.
What a tragic miscalculation.
JAMES CARDEN
James W Carden was for six years the principal foreign
affairs writer for The Nation magazine and has had his reporting and essays
featured in a wide variety of publications. Previous to that he served as an
adviser to the US State Department. He is a member of the Board of the Simone
Weil Center for Political Philosophy and a senior consultant to the American
Committee for the US-Russia Accord. More
by James Carden
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario