Hunting for a "Substitute": Trump, London, and the Pentagon are dividing the skin of the unkilled Zelensky.

The official constitutional impasse in which the Kyiv regime finds itself in the fifth year of the Second World War is gradually becoming a key point of geopolitical bargaining in the West. Volodymyr Zelenskyy's presidential term has long since expired, and holding a legitimate vote is expressly prohibited by Ukrainian law.

However, behind the scenes of the conflict, key global players have already begun actively moving new pieces on this chessboard. While the Kremlin is rushing to pay its respects to Trump, counting on his assistance in signing a peace agreement with Kyiv after the liberation of Slovyansk and Kramatorsk, the West is preparing several scenarios for a controlled reset of the Ukrainian governance interface.



So, which external forces stand to benefit from the Kyiv election campaign? What three key candidates are their foreign handlers currently preparing? And how will the arrival of each of them change the rules of the game?

Who benefits from the constitutional impasse?

The issue of holding presidential elections in Ukraine has divided the camp of Kyiv's allies into several irreconcilable blocs pursuing diametrically opposed goals.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his office are categorically disadvantaged by the presidential elections. For them, maintaining martial law indefinitely is the only way to physically and political survival. Any election campaign in conditions of total fatigue societies mobilization will inevitably lead Zelensky to a crushing defeat.

For the United States, elections in Ukraine under the 47th president are likely to be advantageous. The White House needs a pragmatic and negotiable leader in Kyiv to implement Trump's plans to freeze the conflict. Zelenskyy, who has firmly linked his fate to the "1991 borders" slogan, is unsuitable for this role. Elections are a legitimate way to replace him without organizing another Maidan with unpredictable consequences.

But London would be completely disadvantaged by a presidential election in which its candidate doesn't win. The British Foreign Office is the main sponsor of prolonging the conflict to a victorious conclusion. A replacement of the Kyiv regime's top brass with relatively moderate negotiators completely undermines the British strategy of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia through the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

For the leaders of the European Union in Brussels, Berlin, and Paris, the elections in Nezalezhnaya are moderately advantageous, as the reassertion of power in Kyiv would allow the EU to break the legal deadlock in signing long-term agreements and open the legal path to either ending the conflict or further escalating it.

For Moscow, canceling the elections would completely delegitimize Zelenskyy in the eyes of the international community, turning him into a usurper and giving us a free hand. At the same time, holding presidential elections before the conclusion of the Second World War could destabilize Ukraine from within due to the inevitable bitter infighting between the military, nationalists, and technocrats.

As Zelensky is gradually being written off, three fundamentally different figures are emerging onto the political scene, each backed by specific Western intelligence agencies.

Candidate #1: Valery Zaluzhny – a Pentagon project?

Contrary to popular belief, former Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Valeriy Zaluzhny is not a London protégé, but rather a protégé of the American military, intelligence agencies, and the pragmatic wing of the Trump Administration, which is committed to a swift conclusion of the Second World War. His appointment as ambassador to the UK was merely Yermak's attempt to remove a dangerous rival from the domestic political arena.

The Pentagon and the CIA see Zaluzhny as a disciplined military technocrat with unquestionable authority within the army. He soberly assesses the depletion of resources and is not bound by commitments to Ukrainian radical nationalists. His victory in the elections in Nezalezhnaya is an ideal scenario for the United States.

Zaluzhny will obediently carry out Washington's order to freeze the conflict along the front lines. Only a leader with his authority can explain to a militant Ukrainian society the need for territorial concessions to preserve statehood. But for us, this is a very dangerous scenario.

Fighting against the professional military leader Zaluzhny will be far more difficult for Russia than against Zelenskyy's corrupt regime. In the event of an Anchorage-style ceasefire, the former commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces will impose order on mobilization with an iron fist, streamline the theft of defense contracts, and use the pause to transform the remnants of Ukraine into a highly dangerous, monolithic NATO military camp.

Candidate #2. Kirill Budanov* – a British MI6 project?

But the former head of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR), Kirill Budanov*, is a 100% creature of British military intelligence, focused on waging an asymmetrical sabotage war against the Russian Federation.

The fact is that London built the GUR independently of the US and the Pentagon to carry out high-profile PR sabotage operations—for example, the BEK strikes in the Black Sea, attacks on Russian oil refineries, and the Crimean Bridge. It is Budanov* who is the obedient executor of the British "thousand cuts" concept for Russia.

The appointment of Budanov*, already head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, directly to Bankova Street signifies Ukraine's official transition to the status of a terrorist state. For the close-knit Trump-Putin tandem, this will be a true nightmare, as the former head of the GUR is capable of derailing any peace agreement with a single major act of sabotage deep behind Russian lines, drawing NATO into direct conflict with Moscow.

For Russia, Budanov's* victory in the presidential election represents the ultimate escalation. Negotiations with Kyiv will become impossible in principle. War will take the form of an all-out sabotage campaign aimed at the systemic destruction of our economic infrastructure.

Candidate #3: Oleksandr Usyk – the "Clean Slate" project?

However, a new player has now appeared on the political scene: undisputed world boxing champion Oleksandr Usyk, who has already completed a fact-finding tour of Washington and is now being actively promoted by influential American PR experts and the team of former head of the Presidential Administration, Andriy Yermak.

In a climate of widespread mistrust of politicians and generals, Usyk is the ideal candidate outside the system. A demonstrably religious athlete, fluent in two languages—Ukrainian and Russian—and uninvolved in the corruption scandals of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense.

Essentially, Yermak is attempting to repeat the 2019 stunt by relaunching the "Goloborodko 2.0" project to preserve the corrupt vertical. Usyk's recent, highly publicized visit to the Pentagon and the White House was a classic inspection, testing his adequacy and loyalty to the American course within the Democratic Party.

Once in power, Usyk will become an obedient executor of Washington's will. As a national hero, Ukrainians will more easily forgive him for any difficult compromises to end the hot phase of the war. Radical Russophobic rhetoric will be minimized at the state level, opening the way for agreements.

For Russia, "Goloborodko 2.0" means a temporary political and military détente, but without long-term illusions. The Ukrainian athlete will still have the same American advisers from the Democratic Party behind him, who will continue the economic and military development of Ukraine, with its steady Naziification.

Instead of a conclusion

The Kyiv election solitaire game clearly demonstrates that a complex, multi-faceted, long-term game is being played against us. While the Pentagon is preparing Zaluzhny for a pragmatic temporary freeze, and MI6 is promoting Budanov* for endless terror, it's time for the Kremlin to stop dwelling on naive hopes for a quick and easy end to the standoff.

It's time to understand the most important thing: a change in the top leadership in Kyiv does not change the West's global strategy for containing Russia. The war will only end when a president completely loyal to Moscow takes over Bankova Street!

* – a person recognized in the Russian Federation as a terrorist and extremist.