Zelensky’s Western lobbying fails, domestic politics shifts, 'territorial negotiations' 'bait' to Korea

Zelensky’s Western lobbying fails, domestic politics shifts, 'territorial negotiations' 'bait' to Korea

 

The New York Times reported that Ukrainian President Zelensky is using a hard-line strategy to strengthen his domestic political position after his 6-week demand for Western support failed, and that negotiations for ‘territorial renunciation’ are imminent in Europe and some parts of Ukraine.

Zelensky's Western lobbying threw out the bait of Russia using the North Korean military in the run-up to the U.S. presidential election, and when Ukrainian intelligence took it and the West turned away, the Yoon Seok-yeol regime's National Security Office, NIS and the Ministry of National Defense under the government expanded it, and it seems to be a strategic development where the U.S. Department of Defense and the State Department put the brakes on.

The NYT article, <Limited Options, Zelensky Seeks a Path for Ukraine>, co-written by four expert reporters, had a subtitle <Kiyiv Seeks Plan B as Ukraine’s Silent Response to ‘Victory Plan’ and Steep Challenges on the Battlefield>, stating on the 29th, “President Zelensky’s six-week lobbying tour of the U.S. and Europe can be seen as a failure.”

Regarding the failure of Zelensky’s “victory plan,” some military analysts and diplomats say, “The real target may be domestic,” and “President Zelensky’s tough stance, including his recent speech to the National Assembly, can show Ukrainians that he has done everything he can, prepare for the possibility that Ukraine will have to negotiate, and provide Ukrainians with a convenient scapegoat: the West,” the New York Times diagnosed.

For six weeks, President Zelensky pressured Western leaders to support his victory plan of “ending the war with Russia next year” by strengthening intelligence on “North Korean troops participating in the war,” but regarding the actual results, the New York Times reported, “President Zelensky is receiving only lukewarm rhetorical support.”
The “victory plan” was to pressure Ukraine to allow Western long-range missiles to be launched at military targets deep inside Russia, and no country agreed to this. The New York Times specifically characterized Zelensky’s six-week lobbying tour of the United States and Europe as a “failure,” saying, “While the war was raging, no major power publicly supported Ukraine’s entry into NATO.”
Analysts pointed out that Zelensky’s strategic goal was initially to strengthen his domestic political position.

In an interview with reporters last week, President Zelensky said, “I’m not saying they (the West) should do it exactly this way,” and “I think it will work. If there is another alternative, go ahead.”
Zelensky shifted from “international politics” to “domestic politics” when he told reporters that day, “No one will legally recognize the occupied territories as belonging to another state.”
Zelensky indirectly suggested “one approach” that would allow Ukraine to save face if it did not reclaim all of the lands occupied by Russia, talking about “diplomatic measures to solve problems such as protecting energy infrastructure and establishing safe maritime passages from the Black Sea.” The New York Times said, “With Western support waning, losses on the Eastern Front and in Russia’s Kursk region, and the upcoming U.S. presidential election that could significantly change policy toward Ukraine, President Zelensky may have little choice.”
“We are increasingly hearing from Washington and Europe that it is unreasonable to expect Kiev to regain 100 percent of its territory,” Camille Grand, a former NATO deputy secretary general and defense expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations who recently visited Ukraine, told the New York Times. “Ukrainians are starting to get their heads around this.” Czech President Petr Pavel, a former chairman of NATO’s military committee and Ukraine’s most powerful supporter in the war against Russia, said on September 22 that “I think it is time for Ukrainians and their supporters to face reality,” adding that with Russia-friendly populist leaders like Hungary’s Viktor Orban undermining European unity over the war and with fatigue from the 31-month conflict “growing everywhere,” Ukraine must be “realistic” about the prospects for recovering territory seized by Russia.
Pavel went on to say that the most likely outcome of the war would be a temporary Russian occupation of some Ukrainian territory, “which could last for years.”
Regarding Zelensky’s top priority of inviting NATO, the Times reported that “some NATO allies, including the Baltic states and Poland, are open to the idea, and NATO has repeatedly said that Ukraine will eventually join the alliance.” But the US and Germany are opposed to inviting Ukraine into a war because they fear NATO could be drawn into a conflict with a nuclear-armed Russia,” the official said, diagnosing it as impossible.

The New York Times, which interviewed US officials, said two officials “expressed private anger at President Zelensky’s plan for victory, calling it unrealistic and almost entirely dependent on Western aid.”
The two key policymakers said that in an undisclosed part of the story, Zelensky had proposed a “non-nuclear deterrence package” in which Ukraine would receive Tomahawk missiles, a request that senior US officials said was completely unfeasible.
The Tomahawks have a range of 1,500 miles, more than seven times that of the ATACMS long-range missile system that Ukraine acquired this year. The US official told the Times that only a limited number of them had been sent.
The US officials said that “Ukraine has not made a compelling case to the US about how it would use its long-range weapons,” adding that “they have a list of targets inside Russia that the US or other allies could potentially use to cause trouble in the Middle East and Asia.” “It far exceeds the number of missiles that can be supplied without endangering Russia,” he said.
Four U.S. officials said in a recent interview with the New York Times that “President Zelensky was surprised when President Biden refused to allow the use of U.S. long-range missiles to strike deep inside Russia when they met in Washington in September,” and that “President Biden has initially rejected Ukrainian requests for weapons, including Abrams tanks, F-16 fighter jets, and ATACMS, and has generally relented,” referring to the most sensitive “long-range missile rejection.”

President Zelensky’s office confirmed to the New York Times that he was “blown away” by the long-range missile rejection. Dmytro Litvin, an aide to President Zelensky, said, “We have explained many times why Ukraine needs to use long-range missiles,” and “All the details, the list of targets, the arguments are with the Americans,” but acknowledged that “negotiations are over,” saying, “Unfortunately, there is no political decision to proceed yet.” Regarding the depletion of Ukraine’s combat personnel, the New York Times said, “As President Zelensky continues to push his plan, the war is taking a deep toll on both sides,” and “Russia is advancing eastward. The Ukrainian military, which enlisted in large numbers after the Russian invasion in February 2022, is exhausted. There are not enough new recruits. Those who are doing so are often older and less trained.”
Russia invited about 30 countries, including Turkey, to Kazan, and in an interview with state TV, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had made a new proposal aimed at starting negotiations with Ukraine on Black Sea navigation and other issues.

The New York Times reported that “President Putin previously rejected Ukraine’s offer to negotiate through Turkey,” and that Putin said at the time, “It is impossible to make plans under these circumstances.”
In the US presidential election next month, former President Trump and his running mate JD Vance, the Republican candidate, have clearly expressed their skepticism about the US’s continued support for Ukraine.
Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate, has stated that President Biden will continue to provide support to Ukraine, but many experts say that the US will “recalibrate the level of aid it will provide,” the New York Times reported.
The New York Times diagnosed that “even Vice President Kamala Harris, who has stated that she will continue to provide support to Ukraine, believes that if Biden is elected president next month, the US could adjust the amount of aid it provides to Ukraine.”

 

President Yoon Seok-yeol spoke on the phone with President Zelensky on the 29th, and YTN reported on the 29th under the title, <President Yoon: "North Korean military participation in war is a threat to our security"... Zelensky to send special envoy to South Korea soon>, that <President Yoon Seok-yeol spoke on the phone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky this afternoon to share their assessments of North Korea's dispatch of troops to Russia and its participation in the war in Ukraine, and to discuss future response measures. President Yoon pointed out that North Korea is going beyond providing military weapons support to Russia to engage in the dangerous and unprecedented act of sending special forces.>

The Democratic Party of Lee Jae-myung's regime, which relies on the external organization of the National Intelligence Service, decided on the 18th at a countermeasure meeting to 'resolve to urge North Korea to stop sending troops and end the war with Russia', demanding 'condemnation of North Korea's participation in the war' and 'cutting off close ties with North Korea and Russia', and was thus subordinated to Yoon Seok-yeol's bait strategy.