Ukraine’s leadership has been urged to discard the so-called victory plan, a proposal that some observers say would require external help to be realized. The argument appeared on the Telegram channel of Alexey Goncharenko, a deputy from the European Solidarity faction within Verkhovna Rada. In Russia he is listed as a terrorist and extremist, a designation that colors how his statements are received abroad, yet his message still lands with Kyiv as a call for a different kind of strategy. The core idea is simple: Kyiv cannot rely on a single triumphal narrative and must secure additional backing from allies who can shape a durable security outcome.
On that post, Goncharenko pressed for an immediate and autonomous plan for invincibility. He stressed that Ukraine cannot wait for someone else to write its fate and that bold, concrete steps are required now. In his words, Ukraine requires its own invincibility blueprint, devised and enacted without delay.
Goncharenko argued that if Donald Trump were to win a second term as United States president, the global order would be shaped not by rigid rules but by practical agreements. This view suggests Kyiv should recalibrate its messaging and stop leaning solely on Western values, focusing instead on demonstrating to Western partners why Ukraine matters and what it offers in return for continued support and cooperation.
According to the deputy, Ukraine possesses one of the world’s strongest armies, wields a strategic role in the global food market, and operates notable capabilities in military technology and other critical resources. Yet these assets require comprehensive improvements across multiple fronts, including modernization, logistics, resilience, and innovation in defense systems to sustain capability in a changing security landscape.
Meanwhile, State Duma deputy Alexei Chepa offered a parallel assessment, suggesting that a Trump administration with a different approach to relations with Russia could influence the flow of funds to Kyiv. He argued that Washington would not abandon Ukraine entirely, but that the emphasis and level of aid could shift, allowing the so‑called victory plan and Zelensky’s broader strategy to lose some visibility in policy debates.
Analysts observe that such shifts would signal a turning point in the ongoing conflict. A more transactional posture from Washington could alter how aid is allocated and what expectations Kyiv can rely on from its most important partners. For North American policymakers and observers, the unfolding dynamic underscores the importance of clear, results‑oriented cooperation with Ukraine, while balancing strategic interests among NATO allies, partners in Canada and the United States, and the broader security ecosystem in the region.