Zelensky's G7 Address

I said yesterday that Volodymyr Zelensky is the de facto leader of the free world. Elsewhere I've maintained the point that he makes proposals that at first seem out of bounds -- longer range missiles like HIMARS, for instance -- but are eventually approved, often in unofficial ways, by Western countries. So far in every case, Ukraine has made effective use of them, which gives him more credibility with each subsequent proposal.

I complained yesterday, as I've complained before, that there's been no Roosevelt equivalent who can lead a Western consensus on what a world would look like after the Axis forces, or in this case, the Russian bloc, is defeated, even though the Russo-Ukraine war almost immediately turned into a proxy conflict between Russia and the West, with the effective defeat of Russia as a geopoliical force the inevitable outcome.

I had an instinctive sense that Zelensky might provide a substitute in his address to the emergency meeting of the G7 yesterday. Some excerpts:

Thank you Chancellor Scholz for convening this extraordinary G7 summit and thank you to all the countries that supported this initiative and to all the leaders who are here today.

For the second day now, Ukraine has been suffering from massive Russian missile strikes. And for the 230th day – from the Russian terrorist war.

In other words, thank you, Chancellor Scholz, for convening a meeting that was effectively called at my request, even though Ukraine isn't in the G7. But then we get to a proposed blueprint for transition to a postwar world, something we most definitely haven't had from Biden or any of the others:

I thank you for all the help already provided. It is big, it is significant. But the Russian leader, who is now in the final stage of his reign, still has room for further escalation. This possibility of his is a threat to all of us.

But we can overcome this threat. We have a formula for peace. And now, reacting to Russian terror, sham referenda and the attempt to annex our territory, we can apply the peace formula so that the terrorist state stands no chance.

The first point is defense support. Air shield for Ukraine. This is part of the security guarantees that are an element of our peace formula.

This is nothing new. Zelensky called for a no-fly zone in February, but by mid-March it had been definitively rejected due to the "risk of escalation". But now he renews his call for it, even as Putin now threatens more escalation. What's going on? I'll comment after his second point.

The second point is the territorial integrity of Ukraine. It is also an element of our peace formula. And it is logically combined with the third point - with punishment, which is an integral element of any peace formula.

The one who started the armed aggression is an international criminal. He must be convicted.

The protection of the territorial integrity of Ukraine is the protection of the entire international legal order, starting from the UN Charter. Various potential aggressors in the world are now watching the reaction of democracies to the farce arranged by Russia with sham referenda and attempted annexation.

Here he repeats his reference to a "peace formula". Again, this is something the standard-issue Western leaders aren't putting forward. Then he moves to the Casablanca Conference step, unconditonal surrender as the war aim:

We must also recognize the obvious fact: there can be no dialogue with this leader of Russia, who has no future. He himself rejected the dialogue. Despite all our efforts to negotiate peace over the years! He speaks with ultimata, terror is his attitude to the world, to other people.

After the Russian strikes, all the murders, all the abuse of civilians and international law, your societies will not understand you if you do not cut off any prospects for this leader of terror.

All of us in the world should realize: talks can be either with another head of Russia - who will comply with the UN Charter, the basic principles of humanity and territorial integrity of Ukraine - or in a different configuration, so that the key terrorist does not have the opportunity to influence key decisions through terror. Now one person is blocking peace - and this person is in Moscow.

This is the only realistic approach -- the war ends either with an agreement by Russia to comply with the UN Charter, or with a reconfiguration of Russia involving Putin's removal, plus penalties. Nobody else has mentioned this as a war aim. But then he moves to another key point:

Russia is trying to directly draw Belarus into this war, playing a provocation that we are allegedly preparing an attack on this country. Indirectly it has already involved them. And now it wants to involve them directly.

Ukraine did not plan and does not plan military actions against Belarus. We are only interested in restoring our territorial integrity. But in order to completely remove this provocation, to remove these narratives by Lukashenko, to remove even the assumption of any alleged threat from us, we offer our solution.

A mission of international observers may be stationed on the border of Ukraine and Belarus to monitor the security situation. The format can be worked out by our diplomats. And I ask you at the level of the Group of Seven to support this initiative of ours.

Zelensky's point since February has been in effect to say this problem is bigger than Ukraine. Ukraine is fighting Russia; in fact, it has no dispute with Belarus except insofar as Russia is using it to project its own threats against Ukraine. Thus it's an interational situation that's above Zelensky's paygrade (I would add "cough cough"; Zelensky has been de facto running the show).

I think Zelensky is offering what the rhetorician Richard Weaver calls an "argument from circumstance", which Weaver goes on to say is the most desperate form of argument. It bascially argues that the enemy is surroudning us from three sides, and on the fourth is the sea. If we try to swim away, we'll drown. Thus we have no choice but to stand and fight. Charge!

Zelensky's point boils down to this: Russia is violating international law. Putin does not negotiate, he simply makes threats of escalation. An implicit but unstated part of his argument is that the threats have been idle-- throughout the year, Zelensky has made proposals like a no-fly zone that have been rejected due to fear of escalation, but other proposals, like supply of more powerful weapons, have been approved in spite of the threats, and the escalation hasn't occurred.

Thus it will at some point be incumbent on the West to guarantee Ukraine's borders, to stop further Russian aggreession, and to enforce a postwar regime in Russia that includes the ability to punish war crimes and collect reparations. Zelensky is basically saying we can do this now or do it later, but not doing it isn't an option.