Zelensky Wants US Troops in Ukraine
He also wants Putin replaced
A friend of mine "translated" Zelensky's UN speech as follows: Force Russia to the Negotiating Table, Return all territory taken by Russia to Ukraine; have a war crimes trial of Putin and his cronies; send more weapons and money to Ukraine.
I think his summary is fair enough. But it is not the real text. Zelensky really thinks he can get NATO (led by the United States) to commit air power and troops to fight in Ukraine. That is why he is campaigning for Kamala Harris in swing states, including Pennsylvania, because he knows that the American troops cannot be dispatched until after Harris wins the election.
How do you force Russia to the negotiating table, you ask? You give Ukraine lots of long range missiles to pummel Russian territory, destroying infrastructure and causing immense civilian casualties. Here, again, there is a subtext. Putin is weak and unpopular, the Russian state is crumbling, and if things get worse he will be ousted from power, opening the way for a more reasonable and chastised Russia.
Zelensky and others in Ukraine, such as Kyrylo Budanov, head of Ukraine's military intelligence, and their friends in the UK, perhaps some at the NSC, promote the idea of an overthrow of Putin supporting the thesis by citing the case of former Wagner leader Yevgeny Prigozhin, who died in a jet plane explosion in August, 2023 and who led a "revolt" against Putin. Prigozhin, a visible leader of the Wagner group, an illicit billionaire, and a "friend" of Putin led a squad of malcontent Wagnerians into an invasion of Russian territory, after Prigozhin claimed that in the battle for Bakhmut the regular army shortchanged him and allowed hundreds of his men to be sacrificed, lacking air cover and artillery support. His forces were welcomed, it seems, in Rostov-on-Don, although coming off a victory in Bakhmut made them national heroes, not exactly revolutionaries. Starting a military drive to Moscow, Putin was prepared to destroy Prigozhin and his forces, but Belarus leader Alexander Lukashenko, brokered a deal. Prigozhin did not stick to the deal and on one of his forays in Moscow, boarded his airplane that apparently exploded in flight, not far from Russia's capital.
The other candidate for overthrowing Putin is the late Alexei Navalny. He represented the left opposition to Putin. He did run for Mayor of Moscow in 2013 and garnered around 27.2% of the vote. He had been out of Russia for medical treatment after being poisoned with Novichok, a Russian-developed nerve agent. Navalny was told not to return to Russia but did so anyway. He was arrested, put on trial and sent to a high security prison where he died. Navalny campaigned on an anti-corruption theme and directly attacked Moscow's leaders as thieves and crooks. Navalny narrated and produced sophisticated presentations trying to destroy Putin and Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian president and deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council.
Navalny certainly had western support, although not much is known about how much help he actually received.
Neither Prigozhin or Navalny were able to take down Putin. At present there is no candidate to do so beyond these two deceased players. In fact this is what is odd about the Zelensky thesis is that it is supported by UK intelligence and top UK leaders. How much real support it has in the CIA and at the NSC is not clear.
The real internal threat in Russia seems to be from assassins and killers, including terror groups who have been able to set off bombs at key industrial, military and infrastructure targets, kill Russian political and military officials and Russia nationalist supporters, and who carried out the brutal attack last March on the Crocus theater complex that killed at least 60. In some cases Russian citizens have been recruited by Ukrainian operatives to carry out terror attacks. In the Crocus attack the shooters were linked to ISIS (from so-called Khorasan province, ISIS-K, in Afghanistan and Pakistan) but the Russians claim that they were backed by Ukraine.
None of the above indicates any threat to the current regime significant enough to force a change in leadership. There is even less certainty or clarity on what group might emerge in charge of Russia if Putin was overthrown or died. When you listen to the rantings of some Russian politicians and TV personalities, you wonder what would happen if they really were in power. Would they use nuclear weapons, blaming Ukraine, the UK and the United States?
Similarly the calls for deep strikes on Russian territory also invites the same sort of risk of resorting to nuclear weapons by Russia. While it is unlikely that Putin would use such armaments, the same can't be said if he is replaced by more extreme leaders.
Zelensky's "dream" of replacing Putin or even putting Putin on trial is just political theater, and not very smart theater. His chance of success is virtually nil.
The idea of sending in NATO and US troops, of course, is even worse as an alternative because Russia would respond by unleashing war on Europe and the United States. Everyone knows that to be the case, but it may happen anyway as Ukraine's army crumbles and no western leader, let alone a new President Harris, would want to accept defeat. Instead of supporting a diplomatic initiative, the Biden-Harris administration is following Zelensky down the rat hole.
"but the Russians claim that they were backed by Ukraine."
Regarding the Moscow attack, Putin and also the head of the FSB said they suspect that the instigators of the bombing are to be found in the West. Here's why:
The instigators used an earlier video from ISIS-K for the claim. So they gave a finger to ISIS-K who took the whole hand to present a real video (the second claim video).
Then there is another fact: the terrorists had themselves arrested alive on their way nto the Ukraine, which is not normal behavior for ISIS members. The norm is to die as a martyr.
As in recent years, Russia has developed very good relations with Islamic countries, so it is unlikely that the latest attack came from that side.
From Zelensky's point of view, what he says is quite reasonable. The issue is why should anyone outside of Ukraine agree with him. And why US military force have to act like a hitman for hire rather than defending the real national interests? Mr. Zelensky is free to want and like whatever he pleases. However, other people should think through the situation before they react.