The first reactions of Ukrainian lawmakers to President Volodymyr Zelensky’s presentation to the parliament of Ukraine’s Victory Plan on Oct. 16 were positive, but they criticized the alleged lack of practical actions.
Some opposition lawmakers criticised it for being vague and relying on international partners too much while omitting internal issues, such as reforms to promote democracy and fight corruption that they said are important for Ukraine’s success and in achieving NATO.
The plan includes five main points: an invitation for NATO membership, a defense component, a nonnuclear deterrence of Russian aggression, economics, and post-war security. Three addenda remain classified, but have been shared among Western partners.
Zelensky presented the plan to leaders in the U.S.A., U.K. Germany, France and Italy to drum up support for the uncertain U.S. Presidential elections. The proposal was kept mostly secret until now.
Roman Lozynskyi wrote on Facebook, a former lawmaker from the opposition Holos party (Voice), that the plan had a “great program,” but the steps to achieve it remain unclear.
“On the one hand, victory plan sounds like fantasy. On the other hand the Patriots and Storm Shadow did, as well as the F-16s. They sank a chunk of (Russian’s) Black Sea Fleet and controlled part of Kursk Oblast.
Lozynskyi said that everything depends now “on the decision of partners and success of our diplomacy”, as well as the unity of the Ukrainian leadership and opposition.
Zelensky, when he presented the plan to the parliament, said that it was “a plan for strengthening our state and position.” To be strong enough for the war to end. “To make sure Ukraine has all of its muscles.”
“This plan can easily be implemented.” It depends on partners. It depends on our partners. Zelensky stated that it does not depend on Russia.
Lozynskyi said that Zelensky had not explained how he planned to implement the various points of the plan, but added that it might not be wise to publicize these steps.
Yaroslav Yurchyshyn, from the Holos Party, highlighted that a victory plan had been agreed with the Ukrainian military and was being coordinated with Western Partners.
“I am sure that many people will have suggestions and ideas on how to improve the site. “For me, the best criticism is to take action.”
Oleksii Honorcharenko, an opposition lawmaker from the European Solidarity Party led by former President Petro Poroshenko criticized the plan because it relied too much on external assistance without requiring any steps from the Ukrainian government.
Where is the clause about fighting corruption and strengthening our democratic institutions? Hocharenko wrote a message on Telegram.
The lawmaker called the plan “empty words,” which are “far from reality.”
Iryna Herashchenko, Honcharenko’s colleague in the party, praised the general goals of the plan but also criticised its focus on international assistance, noting that “partners” was used more than “Ukraine”, “Russia” or “Russia”.
She also pointed out that Ukraine has not done the “homework” it needs to do in order to achieve these goals. For example, anti-corruption measures are necessary for NATO membership.
“I wonder why he has come now to the parliament? “For me, this is an indication of the seriousness and importance of the current situation in the economy and the shifts on the global stage,” said the lawmaker.
“The return to the borders of 1991…is no longer heard…but the fact that certain territory may have had to be liberated by political, diplomatic measures is also not heard.”
Mykola Kniazhytskyi is a third member of the European Solidarity group. He made a less harsh comment.
The Kyiv Independent quoted the lawmaker as saying: “The most important thing that (Zelensky said) was… that Ukrainian soldiers could replace, in particular American troops in Europe and partners’ troops because they have experience.”
Kniazhytskyi believes that Zelensky’s victory plan could play a part in the upcoming U.S. elections.
“The themes expressed by President Zelensky are sure to be used by Democrats during the presidential campaign.” It will be hard for Republicans to object… This means that both parties can use it in the U.S.,” Kniazhytskyi stated.
“I’m (fully supportive of the plan) if this plan is agreed upon with Western allies.” If they’re not ready for it and he’s only talking about it to gain PR, it will be a disappointment.”
The leader of Zelensky’s Servant of People party, unlike some opposition lawmakers praised the plan for being a “very detailed document” offering Kyiv’s partners a “strategies of mutual reinforcement.”
David Arakhamia, a Telegram user, said: “Without our win, without an honest, fair and just peace for Ukraine, there will be no safety in the world.”
“But a stronger, independent, European Ukraine will be capable of contributing to the collective security on the entire continent,” Arakhamia commented. He highlighted Kyiv’s part in the plan.
The top lawmaker of Zelensky’s party revealed that the president met with parliamentary leaders after the presentation. Arakhamia said to the Kyiv independent on October 15 that the classified portions of the plan will be shared with only the parliamentary leadership.
Western partners have mostly kept their mouths shut as Ukrainian lawmakers react to victory plan. The U.S. State Department stated diplomatically that “a number productive steps” were included in the proposal, though some partners reportedly were “unimpressed.”
The Wall Street Journal reported that in September, several Western officials believed it relied too heavily on increased arms supplies and lifting restrictions on their usage and did not bring any new ideas to the table.
Read More @ kyivindependent.com