KYIV 

By Vitaly Portnikov

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s news conference to mark two years in office practically coincided with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s letter to Congress.

It was in that letter that the Secretary of State announced a decision not to include on the list of sanctions against Russia the nearly finished Russian-built natural gas pipeline “Nord Stream-2” – which runs under the Baltic Sea to Germany – as well as its top official Matthias Varnig, Vladimir Putin’s longstanding partner.

The decision was clearly an unpleasant surprise for Zelensky – who even said the continued construction of Nord Stream 2 would come to be seen as a setback for U.S. President Joe Biden.

Why Kyiv thought that it was possible that the pipeline, which is 95 percent complete, could be stopped at such a late stage is unclear.

But what the decision also showed was that the level of mutual understanding between Zelensky and the new U.S. administration is far from ideal.

The U.S. State Department explained the altered policy as being “in the national interest”. And it was clear that by national interest the administration meant, above all, the “return” of the United States to the European continent – and to do that, first and foremost, relations had to be improved with Germany as one of the driving forces of the European Union.

Donald Trump’s relationship with Angela Merkel was far from straightforward – for Biden, she is a reliable partner.

Could Biden feel the same about Volodymyr Zelensky? That is a matter for discussion. And Zelensky apparently failed to note the American signals made clear by Secretary of State Antony Blinken during his visit to Kyiv this month – concerning the president’s former business partner, oligarch Ihor Kolomoisky, and also his refusal in practice to proceed with reforms of corporate governance.

All the more so as Zelensky used his news conference to defend the dismissal of the chief executive of state-run Naftogaz oil and gas company – by cabinet order bypassing all corporate norms – despite Blinken’s clearly expressed concern.

In any case, when it came time to verify the scales between improving ties with Germany and the danger to Ukraine of completing Nord Stream 2, Germany’s interests clearly took precedence.

Ukraine’s leaders should probably draw the appropriate conclusions – but Zelensky decided to talk instead about Biden’s defeat and what he said was weakening support for Kyiv from Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron.

Perhaps Zelensky believes that he will win the West’s sympathy by declaring an outright fight against oligarchs – as shown by slapping sanctions on Viktor Medvedchuk – leader of the Russia-friendly opposition party, the Opposition Platform for Life.

Medvedchuk now faces treason charges – though the allegations are far more concerned with his relations with Moscow than with his business dealings. It, therefore, remains unclear on what basis the Ukrainian leadership will formally determine who is an oligarch and who is not.

The president earlier said that a new “law on oligarchs” would concern named individuals, but now he has pledged only to set down those criteria on just who is an oligarch.

And analysts have expressed doubt that any such bill might receive approval in parliament – or be endorsed by the Constitutional Court or by the Venice Commission, an EU body set up to help eastern European countries deal with constitutional issues.

Opposition parties expressed concern that any such “law on oligarchs” could swiftly turn into a “law on Poroshenko” – the former president and confectionery magnate defeated by Zelensky in the 2019 election and still the president’s main political rival.

Zelensky offered nothing new in dismissive comments about Poroshenko.

And he remained cautious about Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin. Unlike Biden, Zelensky has refused to be drawn on the notion whether Putin is a “killer” on grounds that taking a stand could result in the deaths of people on the “line of separation” between Ukrainian troops and Russian proxies who hold large swathes of territory in eastern Ukraine.

Most importantly, the president still insists on holding talks with Putin.

Zelensky has made several initiatives – offering to meet in Donbas, where the conflict is seething, and then suggesting the Vatican as the most suitable place for talks.

Putin has not ruled out a meeting, but insists on Zelensky coming to Moscow with the Donbass unrest off the agenda – though that is the most important point of discussion. And he keeps telling Zelensky to meet the leaders of those running the two separatist “people’s republic” in the east – long unacceptable to any leader in Kyiv.

Any notion of a face-to-face meeting is deadlocked.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was exceedingly difficult to organise a meeting without an agenda or a proposed time or venue.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said a meeting with Putin could only take place if Donbass was clearly part of the discussions.

Zelensky may be hoping for more explicit U.S. support, but no new format for talks to resolve the Ukrainian crisis is likely before Biden meets Putin.

And Zelensky’s standing in any such meeting will largely depend on the extent of popular support for his policies. The president’s popularity ratings have sunk dramatically from the 73 percent support he received in the 2019 election, but he remains Ukraine’s most popular politician and polls give him an easy victory if an election were held now.

But the president has clearly had some serious setbacks – chief among them the slow-moving drive to vaccinate Ukrainians against COVID-19.

Zelensky has tried to shift responsibility for the vaccination debacle – but the on the eve of his anniversary news conference, Health Minister Andriy Stepanov was dismissed.

Stepanov is widely seen as the reason for the delay in the vaccination campaign as nearby countries record ever-higher numbers of vaccinated citizens. Many observers point to the government fanfare in proceeding with the construction of roads rather than on health matters.

And now authorities are anticipating that countries that have largely vaccinated their people will step in to help Kyiv. And criticism is growing louder, not only of the minister’s inaction but also of those around him.

And now Zelensky, who in his election campaign promised to stay in office for only a single term, is now suggesting he could run for re-election if that is what public opinion wants. That, of course, does not mean a complete change of plan. But it is a signal that Zelensky is clearly thinking of his election chances.

Only one of Ukraine’s six presidents since independence in 1991 has secured a second term.

And to win that second term Zelensky will not only have to stop his decline in popular support, but achieve an improvement of Ukrainians’ living standards — in real terms.

And he will have to – in real terms — limit the influence of oligarchs and come up with concrete achievements in securing peace and winning back Ukraine’s lost territories.