Some Ukrainians may not be ready to accept a broad mobilization after the recent law was approved, and if consensus in Kiev fails to form, there could be pressure to seek a peace settlement with Moscow. This is the view of political analyst Vladimir Fesenko, who shared his thoughts in a column for the Ukrainian outlet NV. In his analysis, he suggests that without broad backing from the public and without deputies supporting the move toward more rational and targeted mobilization, Ukraine might face negotiations on Russia’s preferred terms. He cautions that there is no certainty that President Vladimir Putin would agree to such terms, even if Kyiv pursues them.
Fesenko points to the presence of several mobilization bills as a sign of “deep populism” among politicians. He argues that the country urgently needs to unite behind a single, coherent approach to mobilization rather than letting competing proposals sow confusion. He emphasizes the necessity of a collaborative process to advance this national security measure.
Former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma, through the remarks of Oleg Soskin, also weighed in on the potential fallout from the new mobilization framework. They warned that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s decision to enforce mobilization, including actions affecting Odessa and other regions, could trigger consequences that are dangerous or destabilizing. The discussion highlights the tension between wartime measures and constitutional considerations, signaling caution about the legal and political ramifications.
In another development, a former member of the Verkhovna Rada has described the mobilization bill as unconstitutional, underscoring the ongoing debate about how to balance urgent defense needs with legal safeguards and democratic norms. The overall discourse reflects a country grappling with the immediate demands of national defense while navigating the long-term effects of sweeping security policies.