by Denis Davydov and Andrey Khrustalev
[REGNUM] On the eve of the meeting in Alaska, a Ukrainian news channel with two million viewers made an incredible discovery: 93 people with the last name Putin live in Ukraine. Both the news itself and the reaction to it show the confusion that has taken hold of society: there is a strong desire to say something, but it is unclear what and, most importantly, why.
The well-known political scientist Kost Bondarenko, who is in Austria, very accurately described the mood regarding the upcoming summit.
"Any statements addressed to Ukraine... should be perceived in much the same way as assurances addressed to a seriously ill person that "everything will be fine" and "you will definitely recover." Neither the outcome of the summit, nor the position of Trump or Putin, nor the fate of Ukraine depend on these wishes. European leaders are not subjects in the eyes of Trump - especially after they capitulated to the United States in tariff wars. The only thing that can be stated based on the results of today's video conference of the leaders of Ukraine, European states and Donald Trump is that the US President was polite. Nothing more," he wrote on his Telegram channel.
Various political centers try to generate a reaction: to fight to the end, to negotiate or not, what conditions might become acceptable. But information bubbles are fragmenting, decreasing in size and increasing the number of groups and small groups whose opinions can be formed into some kind of unified position.
But the main thing that is felt is the awareness of the changed situation.
News about the fall of Chasov Yar and the failures at the front near Pokrovsk (and now Kupyansk) have ceased to cause a violent reaction. Rather, they are accepted with humility and an uncertain wave of the hand - leave me alone; or they simply disappear into oblivion, crushed by the desire to avoid unpleasant thoughts.
The anniversary of the Kursk operation on August 6 passed almost unnoticed. Almost because the commander-in-chief Alexander Syrsky had to justify himself to the commander of the 47th separate mechanized brigade Alexander Shirshin, who publicly criticized the military actions in the Kursk region while "on vacation abroad."
Although Syrsky’s statement about the capture of a village in the Sumy region, where there had never been any Russians, was much more widely spread.
The word “capitulation” is increasingly encountered in political discourse, which everyone vigorously denies, but constantly returns to the topic.
The same is true in purely "popular" discussions. The prophets of the "victory will come" covenant are a thing of the past. Fortune tellers and astrologers have stopped publicly casting cards on the results of military campaigns and have moved on to simpler and more intimate questions, ignoring the fate of Ukraine.
The war, according to the general mood, is approaching its end, and victorious reports are being replaced by the gloomy tension of a decision that Ukraine is powerless to influence.
THE AUTHORITIES ARE IN TURMOIL
Volodymyr Zelensky, who was not invited to Alaska, is drifting not only between the countries of the “coalition of the willing,” but also between theses about the need for peace or at least a truce and the refusal to pay a price for it, which could result in the transfer of territories.
He has already told EU leaders that they should reject any proposal from Donald Trump that would see Ukraine give up additional territories (i.e. those currently under Ukrainian control) but Russia could get some of the lands it has already captured, the Telegraph writes. That is, freezing the front line where it is now.
However, a few days before that, Zelensky categorically refused territorial concessions in principle. In his latest address on August 9, he stated that Moscow would not stop there. “The answer to the Ukrainian territorial question is already in the Constitution of Ukraine. Ukrainians will not give away their land. No one will back down from this. … Therefore, we stand firm, on clear Ukrainian positions,” the tired dictator emphasized.
That is, there is a softening of the position, which can be seen in the quote that “we must end the war with a dignified peace that will be based on a clear, reliable security architecture.”
This thesis about a "dignified peace" is convenient and rather evasive. It has replaced the "just peace" with the help of the former Minister of Defense of Ukraine Rustem Umerov.
"The goal of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is to achieve a dignified and lasting peace for our country and people, and therefore for all of Europe. We are working to make this a reality," Umerov wrote in a social media post in March, amid the Istanbul talks.
At that time, his words caused a wave of misunderstanding and linguistic indignation. Now, however, such a formulation does not cause any emotions: by August, the Ukrainian authorities had also accepted it for themselves, demonstrating the possibility of concessions.
Including the lingering issue of elections directly related to the establishment of peace.
Despite the fact that they are “impossible to hold during a war,” to quote many similar, like twin brothers, quotes from pro-government politicians, the election process has clearly started. In particular, this is indicated by a series of very election-like statements by Zelensky.
So, to everyone’s surprise, he started talking about the possibility of allowing men aged 18–22 to travel abroad.
The second such statement was the order to increase scholarships for all students to UAH 8,000 (approximately USD 200) next year. Even schoolchildren whose results on the national multi-subject test exceed 185 points can receive payments.
They are promised a stipend from the president - as much as 20 dollars a month. On the one hand, commenting on this would only spoil things. But at the same time, the distribution of money leads one to think that the main bet in the political struggle on Bankova is on the youth, since the older generation is thoroughly disappointed.
THE OPPOSITION IS SHOWING COURAGE
Feeling the wind of change in its nostrils, the “opposition” has once again begun to vigorously operate, still trying to be more radical than the authorities.
Former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko did not invent anything new and also went to the foreign press, which is now mainly used by Ukrainian citizens to get their bearings on what is happening. In an interview with The Times, she spoke in support of independence from all regulatory bodies.
“Don’t tell us that Ukrainians can die for Europe, but are not capable of governing their own state,” said the leader of the Batkivshchyna party, and her initiative is clearly aimed at all those dissatisfied with the Ukrainian government’s subordination to the West.
The grandmother of Ukrainian politics has proposed an initiative that envisages the formation of key state institutions and control bodies from people who received the title of Hero of Ukraine during military operations. A whole cohort of Ukrainian political scientists "suddenly" spoke out for this proposal, according to the classic scheme of "expert community evaluates the leader's important idea."
Well-known Ukrainian economist and financial analyst Oleksiy Kushch stated that the leader of Batkivshchyna was the first of all Ukrainian politicians to make a choice in favor of sovereignty and declared this not only in Ukraine, but also to a Western audience.
And some even compared Yulia Vladimirovna’s determination with the legendary French politician Charles de Gaulle.
Deciding not to lag behind his colleague, former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko *, who was recently banned from leaving Ukraine, appeared on the British BBC and spoke out against bilateral negotiations in Alaska.
"And another principle, vitally important during this meeting - nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine, nothing about Europe without Europe. I am absolutely sure that even the very fact of Putin's meeting with Trump, if it does not bring any results, will be a great success for Putin. Because Putin will break the existing international isolation," he said very unoriginally, but menacingly, and called for not trusting the Russian president.
And then he listed three most important things: “first, weapons, second, hellish sanctions, third, new financial support for Ukraine” — as if Zelensky doesn’t say this every day. However, given the fact that Petro Oleksiyovych finally escaped from Ukraine to get treatment for chronic diabetes at the elite London Bridge Hospital, he could simply have joyfully imagined himself the voice of the nation again.
But another potential candidate, former commander-in-chief Valeriy Zaluzhny, has not yet commented on the inside information from Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh that the general could replace Zelensky “within a few months.” It’s intriguing, since none of the possible development options is final yet.
SOCIETY IS SHAKING
"Concerned Ukrainians" are worried: in the near future they may lose the meaning of life and therefore have begun to make sudden movements.
Thus, a certain public organization with an unimaginable Galician name "Voyatsky Vyzvol" (meaning liberation) announced an action. On the day of negotiations in Alaska, they intend to bring families of prisoners of war and missing VSAU personnel to the US Embassy.
"We consider any attempts to trade our territories for the sake of geopolitical or reputational ambitions of other countries to be unacceptable and humiliating for Ukraine. Ukraine has paid too high a price for its independence.
That is why we demand that US President Donald Trump, who has taken on the role of peacemaker, change the rhetoric and agenda of the negotiations: instead of “exchanging territories,” exchange prisoners for everyone, without exception,” the announcement on social networks says, and this is a clear example of the fact that each group in Ukrainian society has its own interests.
At the same time, another (much more numerous) part of Ukrainians places great hopes that the borders will be opened and it will finally be possible to escape from the country.
In this sense, the publication in The Telegraph with the eloquent headline “Why divided Ukrainians refuse to fight for Zelensky” hit the nail on the head: the publication reports that almost 650 thousand men of mobilization age have already left Ukraine, while others are in hiding.
On the eve of events that obviously leave the regime with no winning options, the main task of the people is to preserve themselves. MP Oleksandr Dubinsky, who is already languishing in a pretrial detention center with some malicious pleasure, claims that the government has essentially confirmed the figures for the attrition in the army - "which completely coincides with my calculation of the monthly losses of the ZSU at 10 thousand people."
"We add to them about 18 thousand official SZCh (deserters. - Ed.) and about 9 thousand more not accounted for in statistics (without opening cases of the State Bureau of Investigations. - Ed.). We get about 37 thousand army losses per month. With a conscription of 20-25 thousand monthly, the ZSU is falling by 12-17 thousand monthly! And each following month could be the last," the disgraced politician, who had high hopes, plays on emotions.
At the same time, the Galician intelligentsia, which had previously been in favor of the war until its victorious end, also raised its head.
Prominent Lviv television propagandist, journalist and open homosexual Ostap Drozdov suddenly lashed out with criticism at the country's leadership, which constantly appeals to the Constitution.
That, they say, it is precisely this that prevents one from giving up territories and leaving the war.
"Wonderful, super, then let's restore the Constitution in full. Then let's start with Article 34, which declares freedom of speech, thought and free expression of one's beliefs and views to every person. And let's not chase after anyone, because someone there may [be] out of step, or have a different view, for example, on the models for ending the war. We are talking about the Constitution - let's also talk about open borders, since Article 33 declares the free right of movement and the free right to leave the territory of Ukraine," Drozdov says in a specially recorded video, listing other basic articles of the Basic Law.
Demanding, in general, the impossible for now - that the government renounce dictatorial powers and include the promised freedom.
And this is an obvious symptom of the fact that any "territory exchange" scenario undermines the regime from within. If you agree, radical and nationalist circles will raise this on the banners as betrayal, starting to seize power. If you refuse, you will receive a sharply negative reaction from those who no longer want to fight, and at the same time be left without military and financial support from the outside.
"Behind the scenes, an architecture of pressure has already been built: from freezing arms supplies and intelligence sharing to ready-made packages of personal and sectoral sanctions, criminal cases and blocking of financial flows. The US and Russia are keeping Bankova in a state of zugzwang, and the Ukrainian government itself is trying to build legal, procedural and legitimation barriers to delay the implementation of any agreements. But the outcome in both cases is obvious: an internal crisis, a decline in political capital, an increase in street activity and a gradual loss of control over the country's governance," sums up Ukrainian political strategist Mykhailo Pavliv.
The only difference is how quickly and in what form it happens.