Zelensky's ambitious 'victory plan' faces skeptical reception in US

Zelensky presented the plan to the U.S. Congress and two presidential candidates: Democrat Kamala Harris and Republican Donald Trump. He sees a chance for ultimate victory in Washington's stance.

The "victory plan" includes four key points. The first is a demand from the West for security guarantees similar to those in a mutual defence pact within NATO membership. Next, there is a desire to continue the Ukrainian operation in the Kursk region to gain territorial "advantages" in negotiations, along with permission to use Western weapons on Federation territory. This is connected to a request for specific weapon systems, a list of which has already been prepared. The most important non-military point is obtaining international financial aid for the Ukrainian economy.

The least realistic point seems to be the demand for security guarantees that would equal Ukraine's status with NATO countries. This is particularly difficult as Ukraine is currently in a state of war, which automatically means it cannot receive such guarantees.

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

Zelensky's associates have long claimed that the President of Ukraine is tired and discouraged, and his decisions often lack sensitivity. While a year ago, this was mentioned half-heartedly in Kyiv, now Ukrainian officials speak about it openly. Nevertheless, Zelensky still does not fully understand the military and the principles by which war operates. "Freezing the war means defeat for me," he often repeats and continues to demand new strikes on Russians.

"He will again build up expectations, and then there will be an unpleasant situation," notes Dr. Materniak.

Ukrainians have long demanded the lifting of restrictions on the use of Western weapons against Russian targets. They claim it would more effectively counter the Russian advance. This mainly concerns long-range ground-to-ground and air-to-ground missiles, which could strike Russian logistics — bases, fuel and ammunition depots, airports, and service and industrial centres.

"I would not count on lifting all restrictions on using Western weapons in Russia," notes Dr. Materniak. "The United States fears escalation too much. Further arms deliveries are likely, but in my opinion, still with limited possibilities for their use."

"Even if Ukraine obtains permission to use Western weapons in attacks on Russian territory and receives new armaments such as AGM-158 or AGM-154 JSOW missiles, the Russians will incur costs, but the open question is how much they will affect Russian decisions," asks Dr. Michał Piekarski, a security specialist from the University of Wrocław.

"The scope of damage that can be inflicted is large but not decisive, and if anything can be expected, it is a ceasefire on the current front lines in Ukraine," adds Dr. Piekarski.

This solution is, in turn, unacceptable to Kyiv, which clearly stands on the position that a truce with the current occupied positions is out of the question. Therefore, they press the West for the use of long-range weapons against targets in Russia. This, in turn, is unacceptable to Washington.

"In this case, there is another loophole," notes Dr. Materniak. "It is enough for the West to help Ukraine develop its capabilities regarding drones or long-range missiles. This can largely address Ukraine's needs."

One of Zelensky's plan points is financial aid for the Ukrainian industry. This includes the defence industry and the civilian sector, which will allow Ukraine to rebuild after the war's destruction.

"Economic and financial aid for Ukraine does not raise significant controversy and in this case, it will probably be the easiest to fulfil the demands," believes Dr. Materniak.

In Kyiv, officials emphasize that the biggest problem is providing adequate conditions for citizens. As a result of the war, about 4 million Ukrainians have already completely or partially lost their homes. They point out that as much as 57 percent of Ukraine's budget is allocated to security and defence. Social assistance is not a priority.

Energy security is the priority, 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 winter. In the summer, 73 percent of thermal power plants were not operational. Experts believe that in the worst case, in some regions of the country, citizens will not have access to electricity for 18 hours a day.

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

"It is not clear what kind of bargaining chip the occupied area near Kursk could be," wonders Dr. Piekarski. "Perhaps the willingness to return it to Russia is an incentive for a truce."

"Perhaps the plan includes provisions such as the return of all territories, including Crimea and Donbas. We do not know the details of the plan, so it may turn out to be a propaganda trick," tempers the scientist. "But the maximum that Ukraine can hope for is the freezing of actions and a ceasefire on the current front line, possibly with minor adjustments. Recovering Crimea or the entire Donbas is very unlikely," assesses Dr. Piekarski.

Both experts believe that Zelensky's expectations are too high and largely unrealistic, and the authorities in Kyiv have difficulty understanding the position of Western allies. This only harms themselves and the cause they are fighting for.

"In my opinion, as I already pointed out, in Ukraine, there is unnecessarily building up such high expectations again, as before the NATO summit in 2023. There will also be disappointment here, as the West still does not fully understand the threats and perceive them as Ukraine or even the eastern flank of NATO does," concludes Dr. Materniak.