In recent statements, former U.S. President Donald Trump has made a series of claims about Ukraine and its president, Volodymyr Zelensky. Many of these echo populist far-right narratives that paint Ukraine as the aggressor in its war with Russia, label President Zelensky a “dictator,” or allege that Ukrainians are living under an oppressive regime without elections. These claims have sparked controversy, especially as they closely align with Russian propaganda lines. Below is a comprehensive examination of those assertions, the realities on the ground, and a broader historical comparison—particularly to Britain’s experience during World War II—that helps put Ukraine’s current situation into clearer perspective.
1. Trump’s Key Claims About Ukraine
1.1 “Zelensky is a ‘dictator’ who rules without elections”
- The claim: Trump has repeatedly emphasized that Ukraine has not held elections since 2019, accusing Zelensky of acting like an autocrat by suspending democratic processes.
- The reality:
- Legitimate 2019 election: International observers from the OSCE described the 2019 presidential election as “competitive” and broadly free. Zelensky received 73% of the vote in the second round, a landslide win.
- Why no elections since? Ukraine has been under martial law since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. Ukrainian law—drafted in 2015, years before Zelensky took office—explicitly suspends elections during martial law.
- Practical impossibility: Large areas of Ukraine remain under occupation or constant bombardment. Millions of people are displaced internally or as refugees. Holding elections in such circumstances would be logistically unfeasible and would likely disenfranchise huge segments of voters.
1.2 “Zelensky’s approval rating has plummeted to 4%”
- The claim: Trump provided no evidence for this statistic but insisted that Zelensky’s popularity had collapsed.
- The reality:
- Credible polling: Wartime polling is challenging, yet reputable institutes like the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) show Zelensky’s trust rating at around 57% in early 2025. While this is a drop from the remarkable highs of 90% in 2022, it is nowhere near the single-digit figure Trump cited.
- Why the discrepancy? Some Russian media outlets and pro-Russian Ukrainian figures (themselves facing charges of treason) have published dubious polls claiming very low approval for Zelensky. These lack credible methodology or independent verification.
1.3 “Ukraine started the conflict and should have resolved it sooner”
- The claim: Trump and other far-right commentators have implied that Ukraine provoked Russia, or that Kyiv had ample time to “make a deal” but failed.
- The reality:
- Russia’s aggression in 2014: The conflict traces back to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the support for separatists in eastern Ukraine. Independent international bodies, including the UN and the International Court of Justice, have rejected Russian justifications for these actions.
- Full-scale invasion in 2022: Russia launched an unprovoked, large-scale attack on 24 February 2022. The Kremlin cited unfounded allegations of genocide against Russian speakers and a supposed Nazi influence in Kyiv (despite Zelensky being Jewish and far-right parties scoring poorly in Ukrainian elections).
- Existential threat: Ukrainians widely see the war as a fight for survival rather than a conflict of choice. As such, it is factually incorrect to say that Ukraine “started” this war.
2. Comparison to the UK During World War II
A frequent talking point—both by critics of Ukraine and by those defending the right of nations at war to restrict certain freedoms—is to compare Ukraine’s suspension of elections and banning of pro-Russian parties with Britain’s behavior during World War II. These comparisons contain some instructive parallels but also key differences.
2.1 Elections in Wartime: UK 1945 vs. Ukraine Today
- UK’s 1945 Election
- Held in July 1945, after Germany’s surrender in May 1945. The war in Europe was essentially over, and the imminent threat to British territory had passed.
- Britain had actually postponed elections for nearly a full decade (1935–1945) under wartime emergency measures. This underscores that suspending elections in a war is not uncommon when national survival is on the line.
- Ukraine’s Elections
- In contrast, Ukraine remains under daily threat, with active combat in multiple regions, regular missile and drone strikes, and occupation of significant territory by Russian forces.
- Conducting free and fair elections is even more difficult because millions of citizens are displaced abroad or living under occupation. Under these circumstances, no credible electoral process could be guaranteed.
2.2 Banning Political Parties and Internment of “Collaborators”
- Britain’s WWII Approach
- The government banned the British Union of Fascists (BUF) and interned its leader, Sir Oswald Mosley, along with other suspected Nazi sympathizers, under Defence Regulation 18B.
- This was seen as a necessary measure to protect national security at a moment when invasion by Nazi Germany seemed possible.
- Ukraine’s Wartime Approach
- Ukraine has banned or suspended several political parties alleged to have close ties to Russia. Some leaders, such as oligarch Viktor Medvedchuk, face charges of treason.
- Critics argue such measures may curtail civil liberties. However, the government contends these groups could act as a “fifth column” helping Russian forces to destabilize Ukraine from within.
- Unlike the UK’s mass internment without trial (though under emergency regulations), Ukraine’s arrests have mainly targeted high-profile figures rather than entire ranks of supporters en masse.
2.3 Similarities and Differences
- Similarities
- Both the UK in WWII and Ukraine today faced (or face) an existential threat.
- Public opinion largely supported (or supports) tough measures against those perceived as collaborating with a hostile foreign power.
- In both instances, fundamental civil liberties (e.g., freedom of association) were abridged under emergency powers for national security.
- Differences
- Britain’s election took place after the most significant threat in Europe had subsided, while Ukraine’s conflict remains at its peak.
- While Britain was never fully occupied by a foreign army (aside from the Channel Islands), large portions of Ukraine are under direct Russian control or bombardment.
- Modern international scrutiny and legal frameworks place heightened pressure on Ukraine to demonstrate transparency and respect for human rights even during war.
3. The Far-Right Populist Narrative and Russian Talking Points
Many of Trump’s statements about Ukraine dovetail with common Russian propaganda themes—including claims that Zelensky lacks legitimacy, that Ukraine is an aggressor, or that there is widespread disillusionment within Ukraine’s population. Far-right populist figures have often adopted such narratives, sometimes out of skepticism toward Western interventions or hostility to NATO.
- Undermining Democratic Institutions: By labeling Zelensky a “dictator” and insisting he is unpopular, these narratives attempt to delegitimize Ukraine’s government.
- Shifting Blame: Suggesting Ukraine started or could have prevented the war paints Russia’s invasion as a defensive move, contradicting the overwhelming evidence that Russia escalated tensions since 2014 and launched an unprovoked invasion in 2022.
- Evoking Historical Precedents: References to the UK’s WWII experience are used selectively—criticizing Ukraine for not replicating Britain’s 1945 election while ignoring how Britain likewise postponed elections and suppressed fascist movements under emergency war powers.
4. Conclusion
Donald Trump’s recent remarks—and, more broadly, the far-right populist critique—about Ukraine and Zelensky rely on misrepresentations of fact and cherry-picked historical parallels. They also align suspiciously with Russian state narratives aimed at delegitimizing Ukraine’s government and justifying the ongoing invasion.
- Zelensky was democratically elected in 2019, and international observers deemed that election free and fair.
- Ukraine’s postponement of elections is directly tied to martial law under relentless Russian aggression—mirroring how Britain delayed elections until it was relatively secure in 1945.
- Claims that Zelensky’s approval rating is in the single digits lack credible evidence.
- While Ukraine has outlawed or suppressed pro-Russian parties, Britain likewise banned fascist movements and interned Nazi sympathizers during WWII under emergency regulations.
These contexts make clear that far-right populist accusations of “dictatorship” or “illegitimacy” ignore the stark realities of Ukraine’s predicament, the legal framework around martial law, and the historical precedents of other democratic nations under existential threat. Ultimately, the real story is not one of unbridled authoritarianism in Kyiv, but of a country fighting for survival against a much larger aggressor—just as Britain did decades ago.
Add comment
Comments