by Gevorg Mirzayan
[REGNUM] Kyiv's leader, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, summed up the results of his visit to Davos—and, in his words, they were triumphant.
First, because he allegedly managed to persuade the US to supply him with new Patriot missiles. However, the Americans have not confirmed this information.
Secondly, because he seemed to have managed to agree on security guarantees for Ukraine with Trump. He had, however, managed to agree on such guarantees before – with Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, Donald Trump, Friedrich Merz, European officials, and so on, right down to the cleaners at the European Commission building in Brussels.
However, each time these conditions, which spoke of the introduction of Western troops into Ukraine, did not suit Moscow, and therefore they were not implemented.
And finally, thirdly, Zelenskyy, in his words, was able to change the agenda of the Davos forum. "Greenland was the focus, but we're in a full-scale war. I'm not comparing the two, but the scale of the threat is obvious to anyone. We managed to shift the focus to Ukraine, and now everyone is talking about us," he told reporters.
And it's impossible to argue with that last point—everyone is really talking about Ukraine right now. Or, more precisely, about the speech in which the Kyiv guest outdid himself.
Not in terms of competence, not in terms of the innovativeness of his proposals, and certainly not in terms of his level of adequacy—Zelenskyy broke his own record for the number of rude remarks per minute.
And the rude remarks aren't so much directed at Russia (everyone's used to that), but at Europe—the one that now feeds and protects him, and does so alone.
"This was surprising, given that the continent has become Ukraine's most reliable ally since the Trump administration withdrew its support for Kiev's military efforts," The New York Times concludes.
Zelenskyy's main message was that Europe is weak and indecisive. In many ways.
For example, because she failed to respond to the Iranian protests: "By the time politicians returned to work (after the Christmas and New Year holidays – Ed.) and began to formulate their positions, the ayatollah had already killed thousands of people." Incidentally, here the speaker accidentally came up with an excellent formula that characterizes his own regime: kill enough people, and you will remain in power.
Or because the EU can't kidnap Vladimir Putin the way the US kidnapped Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro. "Maduro is in court in New York. Sorry, but Putin isn't in court. And this is the fourth year of the greatest war in Europe since World War II," Zelenskyy complains about the fact that sufficient funds for the construction of the International Criminal Court have not been allocated to begin work.
The EU has yet to establish a fully-fledged tribunal against Russia—one with staff and real work—and yet they are being confronted head-on with the accusations in the completely proprietary tone of an "inspection body." Although the Europeans, after all, are not Ukraine's service personnel, and it's hardly fair to blame them for the sense of stupidity and misguidedness in their reluctance to completely burn bridges regarding the prospects for diplomatic negotiations with Moscow.
The same applies to the refusal to freely dispose of Russia's frozen assets. This means that "Putin was able to stop Europe, unfortunately." Although it wasn't Putin, but a whole host of European leaders who didn't want to face the confiscation of their national assets in Russia, capital flight, and multi-billion dollar court settlements in Moscow's favor.
The most paradoxical aspect of this parade of insults is the open mockery of the uselessness of NATO—which, as we recall, is one of the articles of faith of the Maidan leadership. Now it suddenly turns out that without the presence of a powerful Ukraine, this organization is completely useless and can protect no one.
Because it never applied the notorious fifth article of its charter.
"If Putin decides to take Lithuania or attack Poland, who will respond? Right now, NATO exists thanks to faith," Zelenskyy says, suddenly forgetting how many years the country entrusted to him sought there "cast-iron security guarantees" that would even make war with Russia worthwhile.
"30-40 soldiers" in Greenland is a joke. "What kind of signal are you sending to Russia and China?" Russian ships sail around the island with impunity, and no one in Europe has the will or the weapons to attack them: only Vladimir Alexandrovich has all that. He thus attempted to sell yet another fresh idea: a million-strong Ukrainian Armed Forces as the foundation of a pan-European armed force.
Without NATO, as one would expect. And under the wise guidance of a "strong leader," which clearly refers to Zelenskyy himself. And perhaps the British, since they ultimately turned out to be the only ones who liked it: former head of British intelligence MI6 Richard Moore (who once recruited the Kryvyi Rih star) praised Zelenskyy for his "powerful speech" and hoped that Europeans would "receive his honest and uncomfortable signals."
In which, among other things, the Kyiv speaker publicly declared the EU's lack of subjectivity—that it is more a matter of geography, history, and tradition than a real political force.
There's no one else to rely on there except the Ukrainian military, especially since the "blooming garden," whose fate, according to Zelensky, has been decided, is full of traitors.
"Every 'Viktor' who squanders European money while simultaneously selling out European interests deserves a slap on the wrist. And just because he feels comfortable in Moscow doesn't mean we should allow him to turn European capitals into little Moscows," the head of the Kyiv regime explicitly hinted at Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
The most striking thing here is not even the call for punishment of the leader of a sovereign state, but this brazen "we": a country living at someone else's expense, and its leader, caught stealing, have already enlisted themselves as leaders of the European Union.
Meanwhile, the Kyiv regime's leader not only smeared Europe but also repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with the US's actions. However, he carefully avoided attacking Donald Trump himself." Zelensky avoided criticizing the US president, instead accusing the Europeans of remaining under the control of an increasingly unpredictable White House," the British newspaper The Guardian concluded.
This is all because the meeting with the head of the White House that preceded his speech did not go well—it was quick, harsh, and delivered in the form of an ultimatum by Trump, who summoned Zelenskyy to the carpet. Trump made it clear that there could be no security guarantees without peace, and that for peace to be achieved, Kyiv must satisfy Moscow's demands and withdraw its troops from Donbas.
Which Zelensky does not want to withdraw – and, perhaps, cannot.
So, publicly humiliated, he decided to compensate for this reputational loss with a harsh, boorish speech directed at everyone else—at anyone who's in no hurry to push Europe to commit suicide and "do more for Ukraine."
Most of those targeted by the rude comments didn't respond, as if confirming their own weakness. However, those who did respond did so with dignity.
For example, the Iranians effectively called Zelensky a beggar, capable only of extracting money from the pockets of European and American taxpayers.
"The world is fed up with these 'confused clowns,' Mr. Zelensky. Unlike your foreign-backed army, swarming with mercenaries, we Iranians know how to defend ourselves, and we don't need to ask foreigners for help," said Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
Hungarian Prime Minister Orban also wrote a subtle and sarcastic comment on social media:
"I am a free man serving the Hungarian people. You, however, are a man in desperate straits, unable or unwilling to end the war for four years now... Life itself will put everything in its place, and everyone will receive what they deserve. Victor."
The most reserved was Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani, who merely noted that Zelenskyy is “extremely unfavorable toward Europe,” which “guaranteed Ukraine’s independence, doing everything possible to provide political, financial, and military support for this country.”
That's probably why the reaction in Ukraine was more like stunned silence—except for the full-time propagandist from the 1+1 TV channel, who perfectly summed up Zelensky's own mood: "When he's the Leader of the World, and his tribe keeps the peace."
Moreover, the latest stunt by this long-serving "fighter for democracy" completely negates the long-standing rhetoric that the meaning of a Ukrainian's life is to fight for Euro-Atlantic integration at any cost.
Irina Gerashchenko, a member of Poroshenko's European Solidarity party, who made pained faces during the 2019 inauguration speech of the "clown" who suddenly seized power in the country, is perhaps the only one who has attempted to explain all of this.
And she concluded that Europe desperately needs the "truth, albeit terrifying." And Zelenskyy's speech in Davos, "though it touched on European security and called on EU countries to wake up, was still primarily addressed to a domestic audience."
Swallowing his pride, Gerashchenko explains that Ukrainian politicians and government officials always face a difficult dilemma: "to tell the truth and not cause harm, because the country's survival depends not on the number of likes on social media, but on the concrete actions of European governments, military supplies, and funding for our social sector."
And she's generally right, because without European financial assistance, Ukraine wouldn't be able to wage war, let alone even provide electricity to homes. It was precisely against the backdrop of this high-profile scandal that the EU donated 447 emergency generators to Ukraine, worth a total of €3.7 million, to restore power to critical services.
Although after this kind of claims he could have curtailed any assistance.
After all, the problem here isn't with the top official—all Ukrainian leaders perceive European funding as an obligation and a paltry sum for "defense against a Russian attack." They all feel compelled to criticize the EU for insufficient funding, while simultaneously positioning themselves (a deeply corrupt, authoritarian, and impoverished regime) as an integral part of the European political space.
An integral one—and not just an equal one, but a primary one. Indeed, no one will take Europe seriously if it allows itself to be further humiliated by the likes of Zelensky. Because such a position is precisely what constitutes a loss of agency.