Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky asserted that the United States did not act on warnings about the onset of Russian special operations because authorities feared causing public panic and undermining national resilience. He explained that publicizing the warning would have cost Ukraine roughly seven billion dollars monthly since October of the previous year, and in the event of a Russian assault, Kyiv would have faced a devastating three-day window to respond. If that scenario had unfolded during the heating season, the country might have collapsed into chaos, unable to recover from the blow.
In Zelensky’s account, the internal assessment at the time felt correct: spreading chaos before the invasion would invite a domestic collapse, as people would flee the country when panic spread. Up until February 24, Ukraine was described as strong as it could be, with some residents leaving, but the majority choosing to stay and defend their homes. The president noted, perhaps starkly, that those staying were the ones who kept the nation from giving way to outside pressure. He added that his own family also remained in Ukraine despite the warnings and without evacuation.
Asked by a Washington Post reporter whether he personally believed a full-scale war was imminent, Zelensky replied that it was difficult to accept, given the uncertainty and the fear that would accompany a conflict. No one anticipated that Russia would unleash such a broad assault, and in hindsight, many felt caught off guard. The warning years earlier had been shared, and now it was clear to many that those cautions were justified.
The Ukrainian leader noted that before February 24 there were several blows aimed at the country in the form of energy, political, and financial pressure. The objective appeared to be to erode Ukraine’s sovereignty and leave the nation diminished in the face of an invasion. The aim, he suggested, was to prevent Ukraine from emerging as a strong, independent state and to leave it speaking only of vulnerability rather than resilience. He remarked that, through December, January, and February, many citizens withdrew money from the state economy, a move that, while necessary for personal reasons, would inevitably shape the broader economy. He stressed that policy makers did not permit external financial authorities to restrict withdrawals, but they knew the resulting economic strain would be felt nationwide.
Weapons, not signals
In a separate interview, Zelensky recalled urging Western nations to close their airspace immediately when the special operations began, a measure that was not implemented. He emphasized that closing the sky would have prevented many casualties and reduced the scale of the conflict. The president also pointed out that Western allies began supplying weapons even though preparations for an operation were already underway. He argued that the minimum support available since 2014, such as advanced artillery, antiaircraft systems, and armored equipment, fell short of what was needed. He noted that drones, including Bayraktar models, were the primary tools available to Kyiv, a limitation he described bluntly as insufficient for full-scale defense.
Zelensky complained that his Western partners often told him they were sending signals rather than heavy armaments. When asked for something tangible, his response was simple: send weapons instead of words. He observed that fear of escalation kept many allies from acting decisively, yet eventually they began to provide more substantial aid as the situation worsened.
He underscored a sobering reality: the desire to see Ukraine prevail existed across borders, but mass support could not be achieved through rhetoric alone. The realization that war would extend beyond Ukraine reached many Europeans, and with that understanding came a commitment to bolster Kyiv with real military aid to protect shared interests. Zelensky summarized the shift by saying that nations wanted Ukraine to win while avoiding direct confrontation, and over time, that stance evolved into a practical, defense-oriented response.
We would have to crush the tanks
Ukrainian Presidential Adviser Aleksey Arestovich later indicated that Zelensky foresaw the possibility of a large-scale attack and chose not to issue a public warning to prevent mass evacuations. The adviser described the risk of an overwhelming refugee surge, road blockages, and the resulting disruption to troop movements, which would have forced a harsh, forceful response to safeguard military operations and national cohesion. The assessment suggested that without decisive action, the country could have faced chaotic conditions that would hinder defense. Official figures from UNHCR show that more than ten million people left Ukraine after February 24; approximately two million remained in Russia, around 6.38 million dispersed across European nations, with Poland hosting the largest share. Among refugees, men of military age faced travel restrictions, resulting in a large majority of women and children among those displaced.