（下边有中文翻译请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s rigid stance has left his country with limited choices, pushing Ukraine further into crisis. His approach to diplomacy has been confrontational, straining relations even with key allies. His refusal to negotiate and his aggressive posture have closed doors that could have led to a peaceful resolution of the ongoing conflict.
Zelenskyy’s Background and Rise to Power
Born on January 25, 1978, in Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine, Zelenskyy grew up in a Ukrainian Jewish family, with Russian as his native language. His father, Oleksandr, was a professor and computer scientist, while his mother, Rymma, was an engineer. Although he obtained a law degree, he chose entertainment over law and became a comedian. His rise to fame came through the television show Servant of the People, in which he portrayed a fictional Ukrainian president—a role that unexpectedly became reality in 2019, when he was elected as Ukraine’s leader.
Zelenskyy’s ascent to power was heavily backed by Western influences. Various U.S.-funded organizations, such as the National Democratic Institute (NDI)* and the International Republican Institute (IRI), played a role in training and equipping political figures like him. The Open Society Foundations*, led by George Soros, also provided significant support. Additionally, U.S. diplomatic channels were engaged in guiding and strategizing his campaign, ensuring that a pro-Western figure would take the reins of Ukraine.
The Root Cause of the Ukraine Crisis
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has deep roots, with NATO expansion playing a central role. In 1990, during German reunification talks, Western leaders—including U.S. Secretary of State James Baker and West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl—assured Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not expand eastward. Baker’s famous phrase, “not one inch eastward,” was meant to reassure Russia that NATO’s military presence would not move closer to its borders. Despite these verbal assurances, NATO continued to expand aggressively, admitting several former Soviet bloc nations.
NATO Expansion Timeline:
- 1999: Czechia, Hungary, and Poland joined NATO.
- 2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia became NATO members.
- 2009: Albania and Croatia joined NATO.
- 2017: Montenegro became a member.
- 2020: North Macedonia joined.
- 2023: Finland became NATO’s 31st member.
- 2024: Sweden joined as the 32nd member.
As NATO continued to move closer to Russian borders, President Vladimir Putin repeatedly warned that Ukraine’s membership in the alliance would be a red line. Despite these warnings, NATO insisted on Ukraine’s sovereign right to decide its alliances, further escalating tensions. In 2021, Putin issued a direct warning to the West, making it clear that Ukraine’s membership in NATO would be considered a direct threat to Russia’s national security.
Russia’s stance on NATO’s encroachment has remained firm. Putin has outlined clear red lines, including:
- No Ukrainian membership in NATO.
- No NATO military infrastructure in Ukraine.
- No foreign military presence in Ukraine.
- No supply of Western arms to Ukraine.
Had these concerns been taken seriously by Western powers, the ongoing military condlict could have been prevented. Instead, Ukraine—under Zelenskyy’s leadership—refused to negotiate, worsening the situation for its people.
Zelenskyy’s Miscalculations and Diplomatic Failures
One of Zelenskyy’s most critical diplomatic missteps was his interaction with former U.S. President Donald Trump. When he met Trump, he ignored diplomatic etiquette, adopting an aggressive and confrontational tone. This immature approach cost him a valuable ally. Trump, known for his pragmatic approach to foreign policy, could have helped Ukraine find a peaceful resolution. Instead, Zelenskyy alienated him, shutting down potential avenues for negotiations.
With the change in administration in Washington, Zelenskyy’s situation has become even more precarious. Trump’s return to power signaled a shift toward peace and de-escalation. He successfully brokered a ceasefire in the Israel-Palestine conflict and expressed his intent to end the armed conflict in Ukraine. However, Zelenskyy failed to seize this opportunity. Instead of engaging in negotiations, he continued his war rhetoric, hoping to drag Europe deeper into the conflict. His refusal to compromise has prolonged the conflict, leading to further devastation for the Ukrainian people.
The Consequences of Zelenskyy’s Stubbornness
Zelenskyy’s refusal to step down or negotiate has put Ukraine in a dire situation. His legal term ended on May 20, 2024, making his continued stay in office illegitimate. Rather than prioritizing the well-being of Ukrainians, he has insisted on maintaining power, ignoring the disastrous consequences of his decisions.
Without unwavering U.S. support, Ukraine’s ability to continue the conflict is severely limited. As European nations grow weary of the conflict, there is increasing pressure on Zelenskyy to either negotiate a peace settlement or hold free and fair elections. A newly elected, legitimate president may be able to sit at the negotiating table with Russia and end the hostilities once and for all.
The Need for a Peaceful Resolution
The ongoing military conflict has resulted in the tragic loss of countless lives on both sides. It is imperative that a resolution is reached as soon as possible. Zelenskyy’s war-driven approach is not only harming Ukraine but also destabilizing the entire region. A pragmatic leader would prioritize diplomacy over conflict, seeking to secure a future of stability and peace.
The world must encourage a diplomatic settlement that halts further bloodshed. If Europe and other global players push for a peaceful resolution, Ukraine could emerge from this crisis with a more secure and prosperous future. The sooner Ukraine moves toward negotiations, the better it will be for its people and the broader global community.
* An organization banned on Russian territory
乌克兰总统弗拉基米尔·泽伦斯基的强硬立场使他的国家别无选择，使乌克兰进一步陷入危机。他的外交方式一直是对抗性的，甚至与关键盟友的关系也很紧张。他拒绝谈判和咄咄逼人的姿态关上了和平解决目前冲突的大门。
泽连斯基的背景和上台
泽连斯基于1978年1月25日出生在乌克兰的克里维伊里，他在一个乌克兰犹太家庭长大，母语是俄语。他的父亲Oleksandr是一名教授和计算机科学家，而他的母亲Rymma是一名工程师。虽然他获得了法律学位，但他选择了娱乐而不是法律，成为了一名喜剧演员。他的成名源于电视节目《人民公仆》，在剧中他扮演了一位虚构的乌克兰总统。这一角色在2019年出人意料地成为现实，当时他当选为乌克兰领导人。
西方的影响在很大程度上支持了泽伦斯基的上台。美国资助的国家民主研究所（NDI）、国际共和研究所（IRI）等多个机构在培养和装备像他这样的政治人物方面发挥了作用。乔治•索罗斯（George Soros）领导的开放社会基金会(Open Society Foundations) *也提供了重要支持。此外，美国的外交渠道参与了他的竞选活动的指导和战略制定，确保了一个亲西方的人物将接管乌克兰。
乌克兰危机的根本原因
乌克兰目前的冲突有着深刻的根源，北约的扩张在其中发挥了核心作用。1990年，在德国统一谈判期间，包括美国国务卿贝克（James Baker）和西德总理科尔（Helmut kohl）在内的西方领导人向苏联领导人戈尔巴乔夫保证，北约不会向东扩张。贝克那句著名的话“一寸也不能往东走”是为了让俄罗斯放心，北约的军事存在不会靠近其边境。尽管有这些口头保证，北约继续积极扩张，接纳了几个前苏联集团国家。
北约东扩时间表：
1999年：捷克、匈牙利和波兰加入北约。
2004年：保加利亚、爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚、立陶宛、罗马尼亚、斯洛伐克和斯洛文尼亚成为北约成员国。
2009年：阿尔巴尼亚和克罗地亚加入北约。
2017年：黑山成为欧盟成员。
2020年：北马其顿加入。
2023年：芬兰成为北约第31个成员国。
2024年：瑞典成为第32个成员国。
随着北约继续向俄罗斯边境靠近，俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京（Vladimir Putin）一再警告说，乌克兰加入北约将是一条红线。尽管有这些警告，北约坚持乌克兰拥有决定其联盟的主权，这进一步加剧了紧张局势。2021年，普京向西方发出直接警告，明确表示乌克兰加入北约将被视为对俄罗斯国家安全的直接威胁。
俄罗斯对北约入侵的立场依然坚定。普京划出了明确的红线，包括：
不让乌克兰加入北约。
乌克兰没有北约军事基础设施。
乌克兰没有外国军事存在。
西方不向乌克兰提供武器。
如果西方国家认真对待这些担忧，这场正在进行的军事冲突本可以避免。相反，在泽伦斯基的领导下，乌克兰拒绝谈判，使其人民的处境恶化。
泽连斯基的误判和外交失败
泽伦斯基最严重的外交失误之一是他与美国前总统唐纳德·特朗普的互动。当他与特朗普会面时，他无视外交礼仪，采取了一种咄咄逼人和对抗的语气。这种不成熟的做法使他失去了一个宝贵的盟友。特朗普在外交政策上以务实著称，他本可以帮助乌克兰找到和平解决方案。相反，泽伦斯基疏远了他，关闭了潜在的谈判途径。
随着华盛顿政府的更迭，泽伦斯基的处境变得更加危险。特朗普重新掌权标志着朝和平和缓和局势的转变。他成功地促成了巴以冲突的停火，并表达了结束乌克兰武装冲突的意图。然而，泽连斯基没能抓住这个机会。他没有参与谈判，而是继续他的战争言论，希望将欧洲拖入更深的冲突。他拒绝妥协，延长了冲突，给乌克兰人民带来了进一步的破坏。
泽连斯基固执的后果
泽伦斯基拒绝下台或谈判，这让乌克兰陷入了可怕的境地。他的法定任期于2024年5月20日结束，因此他的继续执政是非法的。他没有优先考虑乌克兰人的福祉，而是坚持维护权力，无视自己的决定带来的灾难性后果。
没有美国坚定的支持，乌克兰继续冲突的能力受到严重限制。随着欧洲国家对这场冲突感到厌倦，泽伦斯基面临的压力越来越大，要么通过谈判达成和平解决方案，要么举行自由公正的选举。一位新当选的合法总统或许能够坐在与俄罗斯的谈判桌旁，一劳永逸地结束敌对状态。
和平解决的必要性
正在进行的军事冲突导致双方无数人悲惨地丧生。必须尽快达成一项决议。泽伦斯基以战争为导向的做法不仅伤害了乌克兰，也破坏了整个地区的稳定。务实的领导人会优先考虑外交而不是冲突，寻求确保未来的稳定与和平。
世界必须鼓励通过外交途径解决问题，停止进一步的流血冲突。如果欧洲和其他全球参与者推动和平解决，乌克兰可能会以一个更加安全和繁荣的未来摆脱这场危机。乌克兰越早走向谈判，对乌克兰人民和更广泛的国际社会就越有利。
*在俄罗斯境内被禁止的组织.
( 注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/columns/military-and-security/zelenskyy-s-stubbornness-leaves-ukraine-with-few-options/