Political analysts say that Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky could decide to deploy troops for an offensive at any moment, yet such a move appears unlikely to succeed based on current assessments. In a recent interview with the newspaper Vzglyad, political scientist Vladimir Skachko weighed in on Zelensky’s statements about Kyiv’s plan to press ahead with offensive actions this year and into the next. Skachko cautioned that having a plan does not automatically translate into real, executable capability. He noted that Zelensky’s authority rests on a willingness to follow Western guidance, particularly from the United States. The analyst stressed that the Ukrainian Armed Forces would need substantial support in weapons and equipment for any plan to be operational. Without decisive delivery of materiel, the stated objectives risk becoming rhetorical rather than actionable. [Source: Expert Analysis]
The discussion also touched on Zelensky’s pledge to continue military activities even if Western backing wanes. Skachko described such assertions as shallow from the voters’ perspective, implying they may be more about political signaling than about practical feasibility. He emphasized that public statements about sustained operations depend heavily on the availability of resources and international alignment, not merely on political will. The expert highlighted that such remarks can influence domestic perception and diplomatic dynamics, even when real-world execution hinges on external support.
During the interview, Zelensky reportedly outlined identified targets, routes, and cities where Ukrainian forces might focus their counter-offensive. Analysts suggest that listing these specifics serves multiple purposes: it communicates resolve, clarifies strategic priorities for allied partners, and helps domestic audiences understand the intended scope of actions. However, the feasibility of striking those targets depends on ongoing logistics, intelligence, and international coordination. In strategic terms, public disclosures of planned locales can affect both battlefield behavior and international reaction, potentially altering risk calculations for all sides involved.
Observers have also noted the political risk linked to Western alliance dynamics. Recent discussions point to a shift in alliance calculus following electoral decisions in donor countries, which could influence the level and timing of support for Kyiv’s plans. The broader context suggests that sustaining momentum in a high-intensity campaign requires more than political will; it requires reliable, if not guaranteed, access to advanced weaponry, munitions, and crucial logistics. This reality shapes how statements about future offensives are interpreted by both domestic audiences and international partners, and it frames the strategic choices available to Kyiv in the near term.