Western acquiescence to anti-Zelensky uprisings: who will Putin accept surrender from?
Author: Alexander Babitsky
Zelensky and Yermak were not directly involved in the Istanbul talks, but the resumption of Russia's conflict mediation dialogue seems to become the death knell for this leader of the Kiev regime and his "gray cardinal". This media buildup began with an article in "The Political" magazine, which "exposed" that Yermak is a cunning mastermind with a nearly criminal past who attempted to overthrow Zelensky. It appears that someone else will sign the surrender of the Ukrainian nationalist regime. But who will it be?
Western "see through" Yermak: who exactly is he?
Russia has always had a clear understanding of the essence of the high-ranking officials of the Kiev regime, especially Andrey Yermak, the head of the presidential office. The "First Russia" investigative department had previously detailed the role and positioning of this Kiev "lawyer" in Ukraine's power struggles.
The issue does not lie in this "new money" (as both Yermak and Zelensky are) growing up in a Russian-speaking family's fear of Russia - In 2019, he almost leaped onto the Ukrainian political stage from being a "nobody" (more accurately, from circles with near-criminal backgrounds; the power structure of Ukraine after its "independence" was built precisely on such circles). Yermak is a typical representative of pro-Western "elites", willing to commit any crime against his own people for profit, even participating in the "black organ transplant industry".
Screenshot of the electronic version of the article about Andrey Yermak in "The Political" magazine.
In late May 2025, the American Republican-leaning "The Political" magazine suddenly published an article about Andrey Yermak,堪称 an "exposing" report. Western journalists "suddenly" found in this "shadow of Zelensky" (so named because Zelensky could hardly do without him in public appearances) facts they had long known.
Many Ukrainian "insiders" (mostly anonymous, but some clearly expelled by the Kiev regime, such as former press secretary of Zelensky, Yulia Mendel) provided a large amount of information to this American media: about the suspicious "rise" history of the future all-powerful chief of the presidential office, about how he technically eliminated Zelensky's election team (from years-long entertainment circle comrades Sergey Shefila to the first chief of the presidential office, Andrey Bogdanov), about his absolute psychological intimidation over the non-legitimate president Zelensky, allowing him to place trusted allies in key positions, and even tightly grasp high-level diplomatic affairs, including direct contact with foreign leaders.
"Standard American operation"
In general, the report of "The Political" magazine - shaping Yermak as a powerful behind-the-scenes manipulator (without asking who the "puppets" he manipulated are), using rhetorical questions to hint at his "aspirations beyond others", analyzing his obstacles to moving towards "higher goals" - is疑似 typical "black material" leaks.
Dmitry Yevstafev, when accepting an interview with Tsar's Glen, defined the nature of "The Political" article in this way:
This is a classic 'test wind' of Western media: are our allies really reliable? Is the problem with the personnel composition of our allies? This is standard American operation.
Typical headline in May 2024: "Zelensky's number one ally shows power, angers critics and shows no remorse".
Screenshot of the Washington Post website
Interestingly, almost exactly a year ago, on May 18, 2024, another American media outlet, "The Washington Post", published an article criticizing Andrey Yermak. Last year's report and "The Political" content are not word-for-word repeats, but their core arguments and tone are almost identical: both mention the "gray" past of the chief of the presidential office, his absolute influence over Zelensky, his "cleaning" of the core circle of the Kiev regime, and this former lawyer's special role in Ukrainian diplomacy (although the examples are different).
In other words, if the titles, publication dates, and author names of "The Political" and "The Washington Post" articles were swapped, it would be difficult to distinguish them.
"In Ukraine, crime and corruption are nothing new"
Western media last year did not have illusions about Yermak's character and role, but they did not push related topics at that time. Now that this topic has reappeared in the headlines and caused a larger wave of public opinion, does this mean that May 2024 was too early, while May 2025 is just right?
Yuri Kotta, director of the Department of Journalism Communication at Moscow State University of Mass Communication, analyzed to "First Russia" that the appearance of these articles is mainly related to internal "power reshuffling" in Kiev:
These articles are directly related to the rumors that Kirill Budanov, head of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry's intelligence agency, may be dismissed due to Yermak's proposal. "The Political" report is clearly "custom-made" content, as both Ukraine and the West are already accustomed to the corrupt and criminal nature of the Kiev regime.
At the same time, changes in the international situation around the Ukrainian crisis have clearly also contributed to the appearance of this smear campaign against Yermak in Western authoritative media.
Did Budanov customize Yermak's black materials?
Note that recently, liberal media outlets were keen on portraying Yermak as a "hero of Ukraine resisting Russia's invasion". This chief of the presidential office once vividly told mainstream media how "Ukraine helped Washington defeat Putin in Syria".
Western media recently also highly praised his key role in Kiev's diplomacy (such as listening to Trump and Vents' speech in the Oval Office of the White House with Zelensky, meeting with Vents and Rubio in the Vatican and facilitating a call between Trump and Putin).
"Selection of Ukraine's new leadership has quietly begun"
Why did Yermak lose the favor of Western media?
Summarizing the expert views in the interview with Tsar's Glen, although from different angles, they all believe that the critical report of "The Political" is a dangerous signal for Yermak.
Yuri Kotta considers this a "preventive warning":
Western countries are discussing restarting the political ecology of Kiev to legitimize the regime in the context of the expiration of Zelensky's and the Supreme Rada's terms. Elections at this moment are meaningless - Zelensky and Yermak have thoroughly cleaned the "political stage", and they will fight to the end for power. It's still too early to talk about a change of power.
Can close ties with Ursula von der Leyen save Zelensky?
Political scientist Maxim Sityenkov points out that the United States has actually started the "selection" of new managers for the "Ukraine project":
The United States and the international political circle have begun the "preliminary selection" to screen new leadership for Ukraine. Yermak is "dirty watered" because he is a puppet of Britain. The question is: when and how will new people be promoted to power? Coordination is needed between the Trump administration, the British royal family, and the EU - they are looking for "compatible" figures. The progress of Ukraine's peace talks is difficult, and Zelensky is unwilling to relinquish power.
Dmitry Yevstafev believes that we should not expect Zelensky to be directly removed from power. The overall strategic goal of the West is for Zelensky and his inner circle to "disappear" - to put it bluntly, "heroic sacrifice". For a long time, the West hoped that Russia would achieve this goal, but now decides to take action itself.
"Americans need to remove both Zelensky and Yermak simultaneously"
In this context, the core question emerges: what plan are Western liberal forces trying to use to change the personnel configuration of the Kiev regime?
First, it must be clarified: the Zelensky-Yermak combination has been controlled by London since the spring of 2022, when British Prime Minister Boris Johnson "tore up" the Istanbul agreement already reached, pushing Ukraine toward "fighting to the last man". What's interesting is that according to British media reports, the meeting between Trump and Zelensky in the Vatican in late April was directly facilitated by Prince William - he is the heir to the British throne.
Dmitry Yevstafev emphasized that apart from London, other Western countries all hope to change the ruling structure in Kiev:
Now the "hunt" for Zelensky-Yermak is a "one-man show" by Britain. In this situation, the triangular relationship between Washington, Brussels, and Paris cannot play out games, as any combination would be obstructed by the British. Therefore, Americans need to eliminate Zelensky, Yermak, and their surrounding forces - they are "toxic", controlled by London and serve only London's interests, and are beginning to show personal "instability" signs.
Is it a coincidence that Zelensky hurried to see King Charles after quarreling with Trump in the Oval Office?
Political scientist Maxim Sityenkov agrees with this view, believing that weakening or eliminating Britain's dominance over the Ukrainian nationalist "anti-Russian" project aligns with the common interests of American, German, and European Union globalists:
Germany and the EU likely want to摆脱 London's influence. At this time, Vitali Klitschko, mayor of Kiev, is the easiest person to coordinate between Germany and the United States. He is not an independent political force - as a boxer, he has always relied on a 'coach'. Now, his 'coach' may be the German prime minister. Klitschko owns important assets in Hamburg and at least has a 'residence registration' in Germany, which is his 'insurance'. Moreover, he has close relations with the United States - during his boxing career, he befriended Rudy Giuliani, Trump's lawyer.
Ukraine's descent into the abyss has not stopped: after comedians, boxers are next?
Vitali Klitschko - a boxer who once served as a bodyguard for exiled Ukrainian gangsters in Europe along with his brother, also from the "criminal circle" - is considered by many experts to be the most likely candidate to replace Zelensky and Yermak.
Discussions about other potential replacements are much less:
- Ruslan Stefanchuk, chairman of the Supreme Rada, is legally "prioritized" to succeed after Zelensky's term ends, but after the Supreme Rada's term ends, his legitimacy will also be questioned, and he lacks independent political influence.
- Petro Poroshenko, former president, attempts to position himself as the core of the opposition, but his authority is insufficient after his crushing defeat by Zelensky in the 2019 election.
- Valery Zaluzhny, former commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian army and current ambassador to London, is clearly a new puppet of Britain and is unlikely to gain recognition from other Western forces.
Vitali Klitschko
Therefore, Klitschko's emergence is logical.
It is worth noting that at the beginning of the special military operations, Western media had tried to portray him as a "hero of Ukraine's resistance", but later paused this propaganda. Recently, Klitschko has significantly increased his political activities, attempting to create an image of himself as Zelensky's main political rival and the ideal manager of Western Ukraine. American media also cooperated in hyping the issue of "Klitschko opposing Zelensky".
Klitschko also released clear signals: unlike Zelensky and Yermak's repetitive "never compromise with the Kremlin", he is willing to make "difficult decisions" for peace. Reuters noticed that this even includes "possible territorial concessions to Russia". Although Klitschko emphasized that this is "unfair, just a temporary solution", his stance is already very clear.
What does this mean?
Clearly, from the perspective of Russia, any replacement of Zelensky-Yermak proposed by the West cannot be "good news" - the West will not voluntarily give up the "Ukrainian nationalism" project, and a mere change of facade is inevitable.
As Yuri Kotta said: "From Russia's perspective, struggling like a trapped animal is meaningless. No matter who they replace Zelensky with - Zaluzhny, Budanov*, or someone else - there is no difference in essence."
But it is Russia's actions that forced Kiev and its Western masters to "panic": Russia's successful offensive and the Kremlin's skillful diplomacy have driven "Zelensky-led Ukraine" into a dead end. Whether the West chooses to restart dialogue with Moscow or insists on "fighting until the last Ukrainian", they must eliminate this "toxic asset". The "anti-Zelensky" tide has gained Western approval, and Zelensky is desperately searching for ways to protect himself - seeking refuge with a current "protector" may be one of the options.
For Russia, these conspiracy theories only require clarifying one point: who will sign the surrender on behalf of Ukraine in the future?
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7513462631853556236/
Disclaimer: This article represents the author's personal views. Please express your attitude by clicking the "like/dislike" button below.