Zelensky’s Victory Plan Under Scrutiny in Brussels

Having explained his victory plan to the Ukrainian parliament, President Volodymyr Zelensky presented it to the EU Summit and NATO in Brussels on Thursday.

A key point of the plan is Ukraine’s invitation to join NATO very soon.

Almost in passing he mentioned that the only alternative to protection by the Western alliance could be the country having its own nuclear weapons.

Media commentators remain sceptical.

Nato membership remains a bargaining chip

Although Ukraine’s accession to Nato is rather unlikely, its announcement is effective, Slovenia’s Dnevnik contends:

“Western concerns about what this could mean are not Ukraine’s top priority. ... But it is aware of them, and that is why Kyiv interprets Moscow’s sabre-rattling about nuclear weapons as a bluff in view of previous crossings of supposed red lines. The question is whether anyone will take the risk of being wrong this time. The answer to that question will determine what happens with Ukraine’s accession to Nato. Nevertheless, it is highly unlikely that things will go as Zelensky wants them to, whatever the outcome of the US elections. Instead, it may well become a bargaining chip once negotiations begin.”

Moving closer to a compromise with Putin

Contributors analyst Valentin Naumescu of Romania predicts that a ceasefire will be negotiated next year:

“If 40 percent of Ukrainians are already in favour of talks with Russia, then we can imagine how high the percentage of people in Western societies who are willing to compromise with Putin is. ... The coming winter will be the last big test for Zelensky’s Ukraine, and perhaps the most difficult. ... I will never say that Ukraine fought in vain. On the contrary, its heroic and dignified resistance has laid the foundation for the European, free, independent and developed country that will emerge from the war. Even if it is a smaller Ukraine.”

A defeat scenario as an effective plan B

According to Denmark’s Politiken, Ukraine needs a pessimistic alternative:

“The victory plan is largely a wish list based on shaky premises. ... All talk of a military victory for Ukraine is based on the assumption that the US will continue to supply massive amounts of weapons. Let’s face it - a Ukrainian defeat is looming. If Europe’s leaders are serious about changing this prospect, they need to sit down together and draw up a defeat plan so that the consequences of a Ukrainian defeat are obvious to all. This could potentially strengthen defence preparedness and realism.”

Tenacity as a recipe for success

Writing in Ukraine’s NV, political scientist Volodymyr Fessenko explains Zelensky’s negotiation strategy vis-à-vis the West:

“Zelensky is a maximalist. He deliberately keeps raising the bar of our political demands, even though he knows there will be no immediate response. In the two and a half years of war he has grown used to being told ‘no’ at first, then ‘we’ll think about it’ and finally ‘yes’. But his first step is to propose a concrete solution to our partners and then to exert pressure them. This is, broadly speaking, the method we have been using since the start of the full-scale war.”

Talk of nuclear bombs is the wrong approach

Making allusions to its own nuclear weapons will only harm Ukraine, concludes Ukraine’s Unian:

“In the interregnum period which the US is now entering, with the old government getting ready to depart but the new one not taking office until some time later, many countries (especially dictatorships) are obviously beginning to behave more brazenly. Because no matter who wins, there will be a fresh start in relations afterwards. ... Kyiv is doing the right thing by also getting more active and brazen. But the target was not chosen correctly. Perhaps it would be more pragmatic to attack Russian oil terminals in the Black Sea and then apologise to the new US administration instead of making allusions to nuclear weapons which we don’t have and are unlikely to get in the near future?”