When Volodymyr Zelenskyy became the president of Ukraine in 2019, it made headlines around the world.
That wasn’t because he was a political heavyweight deemed ready to resolve Ukraine’s deep-seated challenges —ranging from an economic crisis to corruption and an entrenched, powerful oligarchy — not to mention the conflict between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russian separatists in the east of the country.
It was just the opposite. Zelenskyy was a political novice whose closest brush with politics was playing the role of Ukrainian president in a well-known domestic TV series, before life imitated art and he decided to launch his own presidential bid on New Year’s Eve in 2018.
When he won the presidential election in a landslide victory in March 2019, no one could have guessed that the erstwhile actor, writer and comedian would become one of the world’s most recognizable and respected politicians after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
But under his leadership, and with the fortitude of Ukraine’s armed forces and resilience of the civilian population, Ukraine has fought back and Zelenskyy has won plaudits (he was just named “Person of the Year” by both Time Magazine and the FT) for the wartime leadership he was thrust into.
“I think Zelenskyy has proven to be a remarkable leader, and a remarkably effective one, both as a military leader and as a public figure — in terms of building support for Ukraine internationally, and also in terms of being able to at least keep some things going domestically despite the war,” Max Hess, fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, told CNBC.
“They have continued to pass legislation in line with previous reform packages for international support. And then, of course, I find the really interesting thing is just how inspirational leader he’s been to almost everybody,” he added.
Hess said though Zelenskyy certainly had his critics when he became president, their misgivings have been disproven.
“There were plenty of people who were very critical of Zelenskyy , both in Ukraine and particularly the Ukrainian diaspora who saw him as too soft or weak or pro Russian, or primarily, potentially beholden to oligarchs … obviously, none of that has proven to be true,” Hess said.
“The reality is, I wish we had politicians like Zelenskyy in the West at this point. But to temper that, does that mean he would be the perfect non-wartime president in Ukraine, if there is peace? That’s not for me to say, that’s obviously for Ukrainians to say. But right now, off the back of the … wartime leadership he’s demonstrated, I certainly think he will have universal support there for a long time.”
‘More responsible than brave’
For his part, Zelenskyy has tried to play down his courageous stance toward Russia, telling the FT that he was “more responsible than brave” and just didn’t want to “to let people down.”
From the start of the war, however, Zelenskyy has been a visible, physically present leader in Ukraine, visiting the front line and war-torn towns and cities. He famously refused an offer from the U.S. to evacuate him and his family from Kyiv, with the Ukrainian embassy in Britain tweeting that he’d responded that he needed ammunition, rather than a ride out of the country.
Moscow was widely believed to have thought it could occupy its pro-Western neighbor without much pushback and it had reason to believe so — tepid sanctions had been imposed on Russia after its annexation of Crimea in 2014, and global business with Russia continued as usual despite Russia’s support for separatists in the Donbas in eastern Ukraine, where a low-level conflict had been ongoing since the annexation.
As such, the seeds of the current war had already been sown by the time Zelenskyy took office but Ukraine’s president seemed reluctant to believe his country could be thrust into war with its powerful, nuclear-weapon-wielding neighbor.
Even in late January 2022, Zelenskyy was playing down the threat of an invasion despite the presence of over 100,000 Russian troops along the border with Ukraine, saying there was no need to “panic.” He was looking to maintain economic stability amid heightened fears in the West that Russia was preparing to invade.
The United States warned in January, however, that there was a “distinct possibility” the invasion could take place in February — a prediction that proved true on Feb. 24.