Zelensky Pushes His 'Victory Plan' in the US — Did the Message Fall Short?
It was billed as a critical moment for Ukraine, with President Volodymyr Zelensky making his case to America’s top politicians during a high-profile visit to the United States. His mission? To promote Ukraine’s ambitious “victory plan” and secure crucial support for his war-torn nation. Yet, despite the bold agenda, it’s unclear if Kyiv made any headway in achieving its key goals.
Zelensky’s visit didn’t go without controversy. He sparked tensions among prominent Republicans, notably former President Donald Trump. In an interview with The New Yorker, Zelensky questioned Trump’s ability to bring an end to the war and labeled his running mate, JD Vance, as “too radical.” According to Mariya Zolkina, a Ukrainian political analyst and researcher at the London School of Economics (LSE), these comments were a “serious miscalculation.”
Zelensky’s journey to the US also included a visit to an ammunition factory in Pennsylvania alongside key Democratic leaders. Some senior Republicans saw this as meddling in the upcoming election. The backlash took Zelensky’s team by surprise, as they are typically known for their polished public relations efforts. The visit, meant to secure further support for Ukraine’s military needs, collided head-on with a fiercely charged US political landscape.
Zelensky did eventually meet with Trump in New York City. However, the encounter was far from smooth. While Trump praised his “great relationship” with both Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, this diplomatic balancing act struck a nerve with Ukrainians. Zelensky subtly interrupted, expressing his hope that Trump’s relationship with him was better than with Putin—a comment Trump dismissed with a chuckle.
At the same time, Trump was rallying support, openly criticizing the Biden administration for sending billions to Ukraine. He also accused Zelensky of refusing to make peace deals, doubling down on his claim that he would “settle” the conflict quickly if elected. This has led many to believe that a Trump presidency might see a reduction in aid to Kyiv and pressure on Ukraine to cede territory to Russia.
Meanwhile, Zelensky found a different tone with Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris. During a joint appearance, Harris rebuked the idea of forcing Ukraine into land concessions for peace, describing it as a path to “surrender.” Zelensky, who spent the week navigating a whirlwind of diplomatic meetings and media engagements—including at the United Nations—appeared eager to secure commitments but was met with mixed results.
Ahead of a crucial meeting with President Joe Biden, it was announced that Ukraine would receive an additional $7.9 billion in military aid. Yet the discussions with Biden were described as cordial but vague, and Zelensky handed over his confidential “victory plan” to end the war. While its exact details remain undisclosed, many believe it includes requests for Western-made long-range missiles to target Russian military assets deep within the country. Ukraine has long sought approval for these weapons, but permission has yet to be granted.
Another key element of the plan is Ukraine’s long-desired invitation to join NATO. While the alliance has expressed support for Ukraine’s eventual membership, it has made clear that joining the alliance during an active war is off the table. Zelensky continues to push for more solid security guarantees, but enthusiasm in Washington seems lukewarm.
Despite setbacks, Zelensky insists on maintaining Ukraine’s ambitious goals, but as Zolkina of the LSE points out, Washington is not yet fully on board. With Biden focusing on his potential successor, some critics argue that the US president is hesitant to make major moves that could impact the next election.
Back in Kyiv, Ukrainians remain resolute in their rejection of ceding land to Russia. They argue that any truce with Putin would only provide him time to regroup and plan further attacks. However, Zolkina believes that if Ukraine received firm security assurances, such as a NATO membership or a robust agreement with a major international power, discussions about a ceasefire might take a different turn. The resistance to a temporary truce, she argues, could soften.
In the end, Zelensky’s determined effort to promote his “victory plan” faced a lukewarm reception. As attention shifts toward other global crises, particularly in the Middle East, Ukraine’s struggle to maintain Washington’s full focus becomes more challenging.
