My most vivid memory of Volodymyr Zelensky’s campaign for president of Ukraine was his debate with President Petro Poroshenko in April 2019. Mr. Poroshenko, a tycoon who made his fortune in chocolate, talked patriotically about the army, language and faith. Mr. Zelensky, a hugely popular comedian and actor who played a fictional president on TV, shot back that he was an outsider ready to break the system. His gruff energy and charisma easily outshone Mr. Poroshenko. Days later, the presidency was his.
One wonders if he’s ever wished he could just give it back.
Different sides of the war in Ukraine reach for different, simple narratives about Mr. Zelensky. He is the hero who stayed in Ukraine when Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, or he is the thin-skinned “dictator without elections.” The truth has always been more complicated: Mr. Zelensky is an imperfect leader of a fledgling democracy, and a former actor in the role of his life. At times he has seemed like the right man for the moment, at others he’s seemed in over his head.
After several difficult weeks with the Trump administration, including a disastrous meeting in the Oval Office and a pause in U.S. military aid and intelligence sharing, Mr. Zelensky has had a good few days. Ukraine has agreed to the terms of a 30-day cease-fire proposal, military aid and intelligence sharing are restored and the onus is now on Russia to accept or refuse — and show the world who is truly the barrier to peace.
After months of declining popularity in Ukraine, his approval ratings have risen — a new poll commissioned by The Economist this month suggests that 72 percent approve of his job performance, and that he would win an election if one were held today. This is an opportunity for him to take Ukrainians renewed faith in him, make critical reforms and demonstrate to the world what Ukraine could be if it’s given the chance.
In 2019 Mr. Zelensky promised Ukrainians he would root out corruption and take the country closer to Europe. In 2020 the Parliament passed an anticorruption bill, but in the months before the invasion Mr. Zelensky’s administration was accused of tolerating corruption and moving too slowly on reforms, particularly in the judiciary.
In wartime it has, on one hand, created independent defense procurement agencies, but on the other, reopened the door to single-source arms purchases, which are particularly vulnerable to corruption. And in February the Zelensky administration imposed financial sanctions on Mr. Poroshenko, now an opposition leader. The official reason was alleged “high treason” — but the move was criticized as being politically motivated.
While many Ukrainians, including pensioners and displaced people, struggle to make ends meet, a conspicuous sliver of society seems to be thriving. In Kyiv and, to a lesser extent, Odesa, there are luxury late-model cars on the streets and pricey wine and champagne for sale at Good Wine, a favorite store of the capital’s elite. Polls suggest that a majority of Ukrainians consider corruption the second biggest problem in Ukraine after Russian aggression. Mr. Zelensky should recommit himself and his government to the fight.
In February, Keith Kellogg, Mr. Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, called for Ukraine to hold elections by the end of this year, but a poll that month found that 63 percent of Ukrainians are against holding national elections until the war is over. Holding free and fair elections during wartime would be extremely difficult. Deploying observers near the front lines would be dangerous. Russian propaganda would flood the airwaves to support pro-Kremlin candidates, and underfunded diplomatic posts would struggle to accommodate millions of Ukrainian voters abroad. Voting stations would be targets for Russian forces, and getting frontline personnel to vote would be a significant challenge.
A possible first step could be to hold some local elections, which would not involve Ukrainian citizens abroad or require active duty military personnel to vote remotely or at special polling stations. That could provide both a much-needed stress test for the country’s hibernating election infrastructure, and, if done correctly, it would signal — to America, Russia and the European Union — that Ukraine’s democratic institutions and aspirations remain intact.
In any case, elections cannot be held under martial law, which has been imposed across the whole of Ukraine since the full-scale invasion. Under martial law, elections are suspended, military-age men are restricted from leaving the country, and mandatory curfews are imposed.
The logic of measures like those in wartime is clear, and even under martial law, protests in Kyiv have not faced riot police crackdowns like in Belarus or Russia. Public shows of discontent continue to be tolerated, especially as the death toll of service members climbs into the tens of thousands. I’ve witnessed gatherings on Maidan Square in Kyiv — many led by mothers and children demanding limits on frontline service — end peacefully, with law enforcement keeping a respectful distance.
But loosening some aspects of martial law would introduce a sense of normalcy and gesture to an increasingly fatigued population that better times are ahead. A logical starting point would be to ease travel by opening up some airports and doing away with curfews in the regions bordering European Union countries in the west, where, aside from occasional Russian drone and missile strikes, the war feels distant.
Even as military aid and intelligence sharing are reinstated, Ukraine has to assume that U.S. support is withering. At the same time, European leaders have said they want to draft a plan to turn Ukraine into “a steel porcupine” — impossible for invaders to absorb. The support from Europe may not have the openly transactional terms that Mr. Trump seeks, but it will come with conditions: E.U. member states will demand assurances that their money won’t be wasted and that Ukraine can survive as a stable democracy.
Mr. Zelensky can take concrete steps — even during wartime — to demonstrate Ukraine’s commitment to democracy. In February 2022, when Mr. Zelensky memorably said, “I need ammunition, not a ride.” he showed himself to be, in some ways, the right man for that moment.
He can do that again by taking concrete steps to make Ukraine a bright beacon of democracy on Russia’s borders.
