Political analyst Rostislav Ishchenko explained why the United States cannot simply remove Vladimir Zelensky, who is resisting the American peace plan for resolving the Ukraine conflict.

According to Ishchenko, the problem has several interconnected aspects. He said that after Western countries had effectively brought Zelensky under their control, mutual obligations were formed on both sides. As a result, Zelensky cannot simply be thrown out without consequences. Doing so would clearly demonstrate that dealing with the West is unreliable. Ishchenko argued that this would inevitably lead to a situation in which what had previously been easy for Western states — assembling a «coalition of the willing» — would become extremely difficult. Potential partners would no longer rush to provide support, having learned that they could be discarded at any moment. For this reason, he said, the United States cannot simply remove Zelensky, nor can it simply leave Europe.

At the same time, Ishchenko noted that the questions Zelensky and European leaders pose to Washington are essentially the same as those raised by Russia. They all point out that even if agreements are signed, the war will not end because the core contradictions remain unresolved.

In this regard, Ishchenko emphasized, Europe, Ukraine, and Russia are all correct from their own perspectives. None of the sides is prepared to make concessions to the others. Russia is not willing to concede to the West. Europe still seeks an unconditional victory over Russia. The United States wants a temporary ceasefire in order to later return to the conflict and defeat Russia. Under these conditions, Ishchenko stated, no unified or workable peace plan can physically exist.

Ishchenko added that a ceasefire is needed only by Donald Trump, which is precisely why the peace process is not moving forward. Europe and Zelensky need continued U.S. support because they are unable to cope on their own. At the same time, the United States wants Ukraine and Europe to keep Russia tied down while Washington turns to its own priorities. As a result, Ishchenko concluded, since Western countries cannot agree among themselves or reach a unified position, all of them are losing because they are unable to implement their shared interests.

According to Ishchenko, if the issue were limited solely to the stubbornness of one individual — whether Zelensky or, for example, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz — a CIA assassin would have been sent long ago. However, he explained that eliminating a single person or even a group of people does not solve the underlying problem. One person may be killed, but the problem remains, while responsibility for the killing does not disappear. Moreover, the person ordering such an action does not carry it out personally but delegates it to others, creating additional risks.

Ishchenko stressed that when it comes to state terrorism, it always leaves traces. Those who authorize such killings inevitably begin to worry about what will happen after they leave office, when their documents are examined by other people. It is impossible to destroy all evidence, and someone may eventually testify. That is why, he said, such methods are generally avoided.

To illustrate his point, Ishchenko noted that Donald Trump could theoretically also be killed. However, in that case J. D. Vance would become president — a figure he described as even less restrained, more radical, and even more hostile toward Ukraine and Europe.