Flagging Support: Zelenskyy Loses Favour in Washington
Things did not go so well this time around. When the worn Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy turned up banging on the doors of Washington’s powerful on September 21, he found fewer open hearts and an increasingly large number of closed wallets. The old ogre of national self-interest seemed to be presiding and was in no mood to look upon the desperate leader with sweet acceptance.
Last December, Zelensky and Ukrainian officials did not have to go far in hearing endorsements and encouragement in their efforts battling Moscow’s armies. The visit of the Ukrainian president, as White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stated at the time, “will underscore the United States’ steadfast commitment to supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes, including through provision of economic, humanitarian and military assistance.”
Republican Senator from Utah, Mitt Romney, was bubbly with enthusiasm for the Ukrainian leader. “He’s a national and global hero – I’m delighted to be able to hear from him.” Media pack members such as the Associated Press scrambled for stretched parallels in history’s record, noting another mendicant who had previously appeared in Washington to seek backing. “The moment was Dec. 22, 1941, as British Prime Minister Winston Churchill landed near Washington to meet President Franklin D. Roosevelt just weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor.”
Then House Speaker, the California Democrat Nancy Pelosi, also drew on the Churchillian theme with a fetishist’s relish. “Eighty-one years later this week, it is particularly poignant for me to be present when another heroic leader addresses the Congress in time of war – and with Democracy itself on the line,” she wrote colleagues in a letter.
Zelenskyy, not wishing to state the obvious, suggested a different approach to the question of aiding Ukraine. While not necessarily an attentive student of US history, any briefings given to him should have been mindful of a strand in US politics sympathetic to isolationism and suspicious of foreign leaders demanding largesse and aid in fighting wars.
How, then, to get around this problem? Focus on clumsy, if clear metaphors of free enterprise. “Your money is not charity,” he stated at the time, cleverly using the sort of corporate language that would find an audience among military-minded shareholders. “It’s an investment in global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way.” Certainly, Ukrainian aid has been a mighty boon for the US military-industrial complex, whose puppeteering strings continue to work their black magic on the Hill.
Despite such a show, the number of those believing in the wisdom of such an investment is shrinking. “In a US capital that has undergone an ideological shift since he was last here just before Christmas 2022,” remarked Stephen Collinson of CNN, “it now takes more than quoting President Franklin Roosevelt and drawing allusions to 9/11, to woo lawmakers.”
Among the investors, Republicans are shrinking more rapidly than the Democrats. An August CNN poll found a majority in the country – 55% – firmly against further funding for Ukraine. Along party lines, 71% of Republicans are steadfastly opposed, while 62% of Democrats would be satisfied with additional funding.
Kentucky Republican and Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell continues to claim that funding Ukraine is a sensibly bloody strategy that preserves American lives while harming Russian interests. “Helping Ukraine retake its territory means weakening – weakening – one of America’s biggest strategic adversaries without firing a shot.”
The same cannot be said about the likes of Kentucky’s Republican Senator Rand Paul. While Zelenskyy was trying to make a good impression on the Hill, the senator was having none of it. “I will oppose any effort to hold the federal government hostage for Ukraine funding. I will not consent to expedited passage of any spending measure that provides any more US aid to Ukraine.”
I will oppose any effort to hold the federal government hostage for Ukraine funding. I will not consent to expedited passage of any spending measure that provides any more US aid to Ukraine. https://t.co/lwmmOObO81
— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) September 21, 2023
In The American Conservative, Paul warned that, “With no end in sight, it looks increasingly likely that Ukraine will be yet another endless quagmire funded by the American taxpayer.” President Joe Biden’s administration had “failed to articulate a clear strategy or objective in this war, and Ukraine’s long-awaited counter-offensive has failed to make meaningful gains in the east.”
Such a quagmire was also proving jittering in its dangers. There was the prospect of miscalculation and bungling that could pit US forces directly against the Russian army. There were also no “effective oversight mechanisms” regarding the funding that has found its way into Kyiv’s pockets. “Unfortunately, corruption runs deep in Ukraine, and there’s plenty of evidence that it has run rampant since Russia’s invasion.” The Zelenskyy government, he also noted in a separate post, had “banned the political parties, they’ve invaded churches, they’ve arrested priests, so no, it isn’t a democracy, it’s a corrupt regime.”
Republicans such as Missouri Senator Josh Hawley are of the view that the US should be slaying different monsters of a more threatening variety. (Every imperium needs its formidable adversaries.) The administration, he argued, should “take the lead on China” and reassure its “European allies” that Washington would be providing “the nuclear umbrella in Europe.”
On September 30, with yet another government shutdown looming in Washington, the US House approved a bill for funding till mid-November by a 335-91 vote. But the measure did not include additional military or humanitarian aid to Ukraine. In August, the Biden administration had requested a $24 billion package for Ukraine but was met with a significantly skimmed total of $6.1 billion. Of that amount $1.5 billion is earmarked for the Ukrainian Security Assistance Initiative, a measure that continues to delight US arms manufacturers by enabling the Pentagon to place contracts on their behalf to build weapons for Kyiv.
The limited funding measure proved a source of extreme agitation to the clarion callers who have linked battering the Russian bear, if only through a flawed surrogate, with the cause of US freedom. “I am deeply disappointed that this continuing resolution did not include further aid for our ally, Ukraine,” huffed Maryland Democrat Rep. Steny Hoyer. “In September, the House held seven votes to approve that vital funding to Ukraine. Each time, more than 300 House Members voted in favor. This ought to be a nonpartisan issue and ought to have been addressed in the continuing resolution today.”
As Hoyer and those on his pro-war wing of politics are starting to realise, Ukraine, as an issue, is becoming problematically partisan and ripe. The filling in Zelenskyy’s cap is inexorably thinning and lightening.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
31 comments
Login here Register here-
Phil Pryor -
Douglas Pritchard -
Andrew Smith -
RomeoCharlie -
Clakka -
Douglas Pritchard -
A Commentator -
Roswell -
Douglas Pritchard -
A Commentator -
Douglas Pritchard -
Canguro -
Clakka -
Douglas Pritchard -
Steve Davis -
leefe -
Steve Davis -
A Commentator -
Douglas Pritchard -
Steve Davis -
Steve Davis -
A Commentator -
Steve Davis -
A Commentator -
Roswell -
GL -
Steve Davis -
Andrew Smith -
Steve Davis -
Fred -
Steve Davis
Return to home pageRand Paul, an object of suspicion and even delusion, has pointed out some areas for immediate analysis, resolution and debate. USA agencies and office holders have no strategy on this matter, and attitudes of unlimited bombast, unconditional surrender, total defeat and annihilation, are not any basis for what is desperately needed now, Peace, through negotiation, diplomacy, compromise, hard talking and fair dealing. People and or borders must be moved.. All who declare a need for security now and forever must be accommodated, if that is vaguely possible. An article by Chas. Freeman, in a recent Pearls and Irritations site, is essential base material no matter what or how or if you think about this, for Ukraine is being drained and wasted for no good, except that USA schemers long ago dreamed of getting a USA dominated naval base at Sevastopol, through NATO expansion…, but that is only one available assertion or position to consider. The article is not fixed or prescriptive but offers a rare useful and relevant set of facts for weighing. Freeman “quotes” Mark Twain in dark humourless flat tones…” The researches of many commentators have already thrown much darkness on this subject, and it is probable that, if they coninue, we shall soon know nothing about it.” I still hope for peace for all, soon.
Our friends, the yanks, can prove unreliable at times.
When we have learned the value of war. We get behind the sanctions, and force up the world prices of wheat, and energy, and other stuff that we export.
Our farmers gain, and some of our domestically owned energy stocks benefit from War.
OK so lots of profit flows back to USA interests in oil and gas, but we do gain from this conflict.
Our Bushmasters are being field tested, and we are told they hold up well.
We should get some sales out of the Ukrainian Arms fair.
Prospects are good for us to be selling nuclear subs, and maybe other advanced war toys on the global market soon.
With it all going so well for us, why, in heavens name, is Washington going soft on the whole idea?
Think you’ll find that much has changed in the US Congress, with now threatened McCarthy speaker of the House as opposed to previous Nancy Pelosi?
Further, one will find that the Freedom Caucus inc. Rand Paul are linked to fossil fueled Koch Network e.g. locally IPA.
Misses the fact that Ukraine is being used as ‘wedge’ by some nefarious RW GOP types and RW media to support Putin, while the rest and majority of Democrats with the left support Ukraine; on the latter in Europe at least, but too many ‘tankies’ on the ageing Anglo left following cold war prisms.
‘
I read many different views on the Ukraine War, including ConsortiumNews a US site which supports the Russian view that the invasion was a legitimate response to US-backed NATO expansionism and generally supporting all of Putin’s claims regarding Ukraine being a former part of the USSR. But I always come back to the view that the invasion was an internationally illegal act of aggression and I cannot get over the wilful destruction being visited on a people who appear, at least to me, to have chosen democracy over totalitarianism. Whatever can be said if Zelenskyy, he didn’t crumble in the face of Putin’s aggression and while ( as most commentators seem to agree) the much-hyped counter-offensive has not been a glorious success it has to be conceded that Ukraine, while suffering untold and barbaric attacks on its citizenry, has blunted what Putin believed would be an easy victory. He has copped a smack in the eye and deservedly so. Despite the lack of an opposition, and a strangled media, the people of Russia must be starting to wonder about the returning body bags and asking themselves, albeit privately, whether this war is worth the cost. Peace must mean a return to the pre-invasion borders and an end to Russian aggression. The sequestered riches of the oligarchs must be used to rebuild Ukraine and the United Nations must be reformed to remove the right of veto. The US, Australia and the other nations of the west need to be strong on this.
What a bloody farce. The cupidity of the Rep hold-outs is no surprise. It’s only surpassed by their stupidity, and wilful xenophobia.
Things are going from simmer to boil to the south and the east of the theatre; Hungary, Slovakia and Azerbaijan (What will Ergodan have to say about the Armenians? He’s rabid with fury about the EU right now). And there’s the India v Canada snarls. No wonder Biden’s been dashing hither and yon mooting an east-west ‘yellow brick road’ south of the Caucuses and Himalayas, and dangling tempters to Iran.
The last thing I’d want to witness, is Uncle Sam invoking its ’emergency powers’. Seems there’s plenty of drongos there that haven’t a clue whether they’re ‘Dave’ or the ‘Loaded Dog”
As RomeoCharlie says, “The US, Australia and the other nations of the west need to be strong on this.”
Clakka,
“The US, Australia and the other nations of the west need to be strong on this.
Old men sending young men to an early grave, again.
Consider some of the options. I like the one which says roll over, let them have Taiwan.
We can pay our taxes in Yuan, or whatever BRITS currency.
All walk about with the same clothing and drive a peoples car.
They will build a high speed rail link from Perth, to Kununura and we could enjoy cheap weekend seniors discount fares.
Possibly a more palatable solution that going up in a US engineered puff of smoke before our time should be up?
My pay scale does not allow me to benefit from War, so I`m thinking outside the box.
It’s a weird world when we see many left types reflect an orientation that is the same the most extreme elements of the Republican Party.
Those that seek to undermine support for Ukraine are exclusively right wing extremists, weird conspiracy theorists and old fashioned communists that yearn for the return of the Soviet Union. They’re all known by the company they keep.
What A Commentator said. ✅
AC,
There is a world out there which is not victim to the divide and rule philosophy.
Left versus right.
Red versus blue.
Republicans versus Democrats.(Two buzzards fighting over a corpse).
Hopefully the youth of today will not be pressured into dying in “Some foreign ditch”, because they think this will bring peace to the planet.
Put the war profiteers on the front line, and the “Reds under the beds” propagandists back in their box.
Exactly who is proposing that youth die in “some foreign ditch”?
As far as I can see, absolutely no one is proposing to send foreign troops to Ukraine.
The issue is whether to continue to support Ukraine’s resistance to Russia’s invasion – financially and with equipment.
This aid is opposed by extremists in the Republican Party, conspiracy theorists and the group often labelled “useful idiots”
I think characterising supporting Ukrainian resistance – as sending youth to die is “some foreign ditch” is a typical distraction and exaggeration.
AC,
Maybe you could help me here?
I have been looking for evidence of lines of enthusiastic lines of recruits to go to the front line (with all the western aid), and stay there until such time as all the Russians have left the country, the borders are secured, Crimea is back in Ukraine, and the enemy is making steps to repair any damage it may have caused over the past 2 years.
Because this is a just world, Ukraine will make repairs to NS 1&2 pipelines.
Rather than volunteers being sent forward taking advantage of armaments donated from various sources, I have heard stories that suggest coercive practices in recruitment.
Are we a party to encouraging “youngsters dying in a foreign ditch”? But, of course NIMBY.
DP, maybe you could help me out here…
Why would Ukraine feel any obligation to make repairs to the Nord Stream pipelines, given that they were destroyed by the United States, as well-documented by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh?
DP,
Regarding yr comment to me. For context, I’m sure you recognise that my RomeoCharlie (RC) ref., “The US, Australia and the other nations of the west need to be strong on this.”, to which you referred, was in RC’s comment, proceeded by “The sequestered riches of the oligarchs must be used to rebuild Ukraine and the United Nations must be reformed to remove the right of veto.”
In that regard, what you have advised me to consider, appears to be a non-sequitur. Albeit, I’m not verse to your thoughts there. But we are just a couple of yabberers, having desires and hope that peace will break out, and that folks will be left to exist freely and with wellbeing in a culture of their own choosing. But it’s not looking particularly good on that front at the moment.
After all that is known of, say, 1000 years of history, and in modernity the strains to establish a workable detente, it appears to take little circumstance for despotic-leaning malcontents to take opportunity to tilt the balance, foment hatred and seek to bend others to their will ballistically to facilitate theft of their freedom and goods. For some, so inclined, it appears to be the latest craze.
It’s easy, like pissing in one’s wetsuit, to think outside the box, but what to do whilst those ballistics wreak their devastation?
Canguro,
Now, I am forced to admit a very poor understanding of events in Ukraine.
I thought it was a civil war when Zilensky wanted to stamp out Russia in all its forms, but there were a lot of Russians culturally.
A lot of Ukrainians sympathetic to Russia died, at the hand of the Urainian forces.
But USA was showing an interest in the potential energy business, and it was not enough to being a party to stealing gas when it was being transported through the country.
They knew of this evil plan .to bypass Ukraine with NS pipelines, and they were not happy.
Ukraine was not happy because they would miss out on the revenues. Two countries with a common goal.
Biden said NS 2 ( the big new one) would never be commissioned, and as you say, it wasnt.
But USA has always declared its interest is simply in keeping the conflict going, very much a back seat driver.
So, Canguro, I would love to be more definite on who should pay for repair, but I cant work out whether its Ukraine, or USA that will sit at the table when eventually this thing draws to a close.
Anyone taking a hard and fast stand on the rights and wrongs of the Ukraine conflict should stand back and cast their net wider.
Jacques Baud is a former member of Swiss strategic intelligence, a specialist in Eastern European countries. He was trained in the American and British intelligence services. He was the head of doctrine for United Nations peace operations. A United Nations expert for the rule of law and security institutions, he designed and led the first multidimensional United Nations intelligence service in Sudan. He worked for the African Union and was responsible for the fight against the proliferation of small arms at NATO for 5 years. He was engaged in talks with top Russian military and intelligence officials right after the fall of the USSR. Within NATO, he followed the Ukrainian crisis of 2014, then participated in programs of assistance to Ukraine. He is the author of several books on intelligence, war and terrorism.
Baud says that Ukraine deliberately triggered war with Russia in order to gain entry into NATO and ultimately the EU. The rationale for that is that NATO entry is conditional on an absence of military conflict. The civil war in the Donbass was therefore preventing entry, so by provoking a war with Russia that Western “experts” said would be brief, and would end the civil war, Ukraine assumed that NATO entry was assured.
Here’s some excerpts from an interview Baud gave for Postil Magazine.
“ I started my book in October 2021, after a show on French state TV about Vladimir Putin. I am definitely not an admirer of Vladimir Putin, nor of any Western leader, by the way. But the so-called experts had so little understanding of Russia, international security and even of simple plain facts, that I decided to write a book. Later, as the situation around Ukraine developed, I adjusted my approach to cover this mounting conflict.
The idea was definitely not to relay Russian propaganda. In fact, my book is based exclusively on western sources, official reports, declassified intelligence reports, Ukrainian official media, and reports provided by the Russian opposition. The approach was to demonstrate that we can have a sound and factual alternative understanding of the situation just with accessible information and without relying on what we call “Russian propaganda.”
“The underlying thinking is that we can only achieve peace if we have a more balanced view of the situation. To achieve this, we have to go back to the facts. Now, these facts exist and are abundantly available and accessible. The problem is that some individuals make every effort to prevent this and tend to hide the facts that disturb them. This is exemplified by some so-called journalist who dubbed me “The spy who loved Putin!” This is the kind of “journalists” who live from stirring tensions and extremism. All figures and data provided by our media about the conflict come from Ukraine, and those coming from Russia are automatically dismissed as propaganda. My view is that both are propaganda. But as soon as you come up with western data that do not fit into the mainstream narrative, you have extremists claiming you “love Putin.”
On Zelensky; “As he acknowledges in an interview with CNN, he was obviously lured into believing that Ukraine would enter NATO more easily after an open conflict with Russia, as Oleksey Arestovich, his adviser, confirmed in 2019.”
On Russia; “First, most people, including politicians and journalists, still confuse Russia and the USSR. For instance, they don’t understand why the communist party is the main opposition party in Russia… It is also interesting to see that in France, some of the most influential so-called “experts” on Russia are in fact working for the British MI-6’s “Integrity Initiative”…Western historians ignore superbly that Crimea was separated from Ukraine by referendum in January 1991, six months before Ukrainian independence and under Soviet rule.”
Also available on you-tube, a different interview with Jacques Baud. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELyWmB8NU88
Is Baud’s account of the conflict the full story? That would be most unlikely. So take the advice he gave at the end of the Postil interview — “At the end of the day, the advice I would give is a fundamental one of intelligence work — Be curious!”
Steve:
Riiiiiiiiiight. The Ukraine government wanted to be invaded, it wanted its citizens killed, its infrastructure destroyed, its economy disrupted; all to get into NATO. And that has worked so well, hasn’t it?
What a load of specious cobblers.
“And that has worked so well, hasn’t it?”
Exactly leefe.
Unintentionally, you’ve summed the situation up nicely.
Has the penny not dropped yet? Do you not heed NEC’s constant warnings about friendship with the US? Or the same from Kissinger who said “To be an enemy of the US is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal.”
I’ve noticed that there is an expert, usually a paid commentator, who will be able to be quoted to reflect every possible orientation or opinion regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Generally they are looking to carve out a following with a perspective.
Those that rely on specific experts are using cognitive reinforcement. They seek out information to reinforce their pre-existing opinion.
Regarding Ukraine, there is little evidence that Ukraine sought anything other than peaceful relationships with neighbours.
The evidence is that Putin specifically ridiculed Zelensky during pre war negotiations, indicating he underestimated Zelensky’s capacity and leadership.
The only cause of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is hubris and the deliberate decision of the Putin regime.
Thanks Steve Davis for your analysis and comment.
They are always valid and well documented, and fit the evidence of the situation.
As a society we can be so easily led astray as we saw recently in the Canadian parliament when they heaped praise on a Nazi war criminal.
The anti Russian hype can go overboard at times.
Too true Douglas, too true!
How does AC manage to get so many distractions into one short comment?
“I’ve noticed that there is an expert, usually a paid commentator, who will be able to be quoted to reflect every possible orientation or opinion regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”
Given Jacques Baud’s high level experience in intelligence matters and in Ukraine in particular, I doubt that there’s a more credentialed commentator on the planet. Does that mean he’s infallible? Not at all.
“Those that rely on specific experts are using cognitive reinforcement. They seek out information to reinforce their pre-existing opinion.” Projection? Perish the thought!
“Regarding Ukraine, there is little evidence that Ukraine sought anything other than peaceful relationships with neighbours.” Apart from expressing the wish to acquire nuclear weapons days before the invasion.
“The evidence is that Putin specifically ridiculed Zelensky during pre war negotiations, indicating he underestimated Zelensky’s capacity and leadership.”
Yes, Z was so incensed at being called a beauty that 12 days after the invasion he was willing to negotiate according to Foreign Policy. And it was such a hurtful insult coming from one who has only been referred to in the most respectful terms, such as thug and dictator.
“The only cause of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, is hubris and the deliberate decision of the Putin regime.” Hubris ??? After years of trying to get a diplomatic solution to the issue of security for all of Europe, that’s the thanks he gets?
Steve Davis – I seem to recall that you’ve also used Douglas MacGregor as an expert.
Cognitive reinforcement.
Link please.
Oh, it was some time ago. Do you deny using Douglas MacGregor as an expert? Or Scott Ritter?
I might go to the trouble of looking through various posts if you do.
Sorry for the diversion …
A Commentator, I never went ahead with that post using your words – which I thank you for – because someone put up a post with the very same topics.
Scott Ritter: Zero credibility and paedophile. Paid up Russian mouthpiece. Can be completely ignored.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter
“Oh, it was some time ago.”
AC, I think you should start looking.
Or, in order to not bore readers to death, refute some of the points made by Jacques Baud. Even better still, refute some of the points made by Dr Kampmark.
If you want to check any Anglo ‘tankies’ of the left &/or right, Finnish social media researcher Pekka Kallioniemi has Vatnik Soup reference list of tankies and entities running agitprop for Putin et al. via Twitter vs. Ukraine, including those cited above i.e. Seymour Hersh, Scott Ritter, Douglas MacGregor et al. and several locals who are platformed by another, nominally left, indie outlet.
https://vatniksoup.com/
No sense of irony how anti-US anti-NATO etc. grifters and tankies masquerading as geopolitical experts then rely upon US based conspiracy theories etc. and income via e.g. Patreon?
Best explanation and rant came from Counter Punches Eric Draitser soon after invasion, on ‘fake anti-imperialist sh*theads of the left’ (and right) in ‘(3/28/22) Exposing Fake Anti-Imperialism on Ukraine’ https://youtu.be/Y2JntuQpD4M?si=fZQ3yUwcpY_yB3K-
On the right, there are potentially many compromised Anglo elites around Koch linked fossil fueled anti-EU think tanks, Tories, GOP & LNP; conservative ‘peace’ events and Murdoch etc media outlets e.g. FoxNews; outside the Anglosphere and in US/UK indie media many questions being asked, but ignored…..
Judging from the contributions made to this discussion by Andrew Smith and AC, it’s clear that they have a knowledge of global affairs in general, and of the Ukraine debacle in particular, that is both wide-ranging and profound.
So, given their knowledge and wisdom, and given that they have not taken issue with any of the points raised by Dr Kampmark, we can have faith in the good doctor’s view that “Ukrainian aid has been a mighty boon for the US military-industrial complex, whose puppeteering strings continue to work their black magic on the Hill.”
We can have faith also, given their silence, that they agree with Rand Paul that Biden has failed to articulate a clear strategy or objective in this war, that Ukraine’s long-awaited counter-offensive has failed to make meaningful gains in the east, that corruption runs deep in Ukraine, that Ukraine has banned political parties, invaded churches, arrested priests, and that it’s a corrupt regime.
The pendulum is sometimes slow to swing, but swing it always does.
SD: So… do you side with Jacques Baud, as per the links provided, i.e. do you agree that Zelensky is being kept in the war by pressure from the Right? If so, who are the power base that would unseat Zelensky?
While Jacques is well educated and has been close to the situation, a good proportion of what he has to say elicits the “Oh really” response, i.e. like saying that joining the EU is done via being part of NATO first. (It’s much like Rudolph Giuliani and co. – those that may have been smart once but lost it, by continually wanting to be noticed and do so by being controversial). He does have books to sell.
G’day Fred, thanks for the comment.
You’ve hit me with a tough question, but I can’t complain as I’ve said more than once that we should question everything.
My guess is that there are factions in Ukraine that want the war to continue, just as there would be factions wanting a cease-fire, but it’s more likely that the greatest pressure is coming from the US, for two reasons. US arms dealers are making a killing, literally and figuratively, and an influential group of US strategists see the war as an opportunity to weaken a rival power.
In regard to joining the EU and NATO, there’s a long list of conditions for EU membership, many of which I think would would exclude Ukraine. For example, suppression of political opposition, which began long before the current war.
One of the conditions for joining NATO is non-involvement in military disputes, internal and external, both of which are now a problem for Ukraine. But ultimately these decisions are made on political grounds, and the political landscape can change overnight, as we’ve seen in recent days.
Your question as to who could unseat Zelensky reminded me of the question put to Harold Macmillan after he retired as to what had been his greatest challenge as PM. He replied “Events, dear boy, events.” My guess is that Z will be unseated, the circumstances will be unexpected, and the pundits will say how it was so obvious all along that this would happen.