• Share

The Rise of Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the Suffering of the Ukrainian People

By Som Mishra

4th May, 2025

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, before entering politics, was one of Ukraine’s most recognizable entertainers—a comedian, actor, and producer. He rose to fame as the star of the satirical television series "Servant of the People" (Sluga Narodu), which aired from 2015 to 2019. In the show, Zelenskyy played a humble high school history teacher who unexpectedly becomes president after a viral video captures his passionate rant against government corruption. The series struck a chord with millions of Ukrainians who were frustrated by decades of political inefficiency and elite corruption. Riding on this wave of public sentiment, Zelenskyy transformed his fictional persona into a real-life political movement. In 2018, he and his team launched a presidential campaign under the same name as the TV show—"Servant of the People." With no prior political experience, Zelenskyy appealed to voters with bold, simple promises: to clean up corruption, reform the judiciary, and bring peace to eastern Ukraine. His campaign speeches often highlighted the disconnect between ordinary Ukrainians and the political elite, famously saying, “I’m not a politician. I’m just a simple person who has come to break the system.” In the 2019 presidential election, Zelenskyy won in a landslide, securing 73.2% of the vote in the second round against incumbent Petro Poroshenko—a clear signal of how deeply the public yearned for change.

Zelenskyy's message resonated with the public, and he won the presidency in 2019. However, after his rise to power, many critics argue that he increasingly aligned with the political agendas of the United States and the European Union. His decisions, especially regarding NATO and relations with Russia, led to growing tensions with Ukraine's powerful neighbor.

On February 24, 2022, Russia launched a full-scale Inhumanitarian & Cruel invasion of Ukraine. At the beginning of the war, Zelenskyy received strong support from the West. The United States and the European Union supplied Ukraine with military aid, weapons, financial support, and humanitarian assistance. NATO countries also shared intelligence and diplomatic backing to support Ukraine’s sovereignty.

As a leader with a background in media and arts, Zelenskyy chose to stay in Ukraine during the war and often visited the frontlines to boost morale. While this inspired many, some critics argue that he focused more on dramatic gestures than on pursuing peaceful negotiations that might have reduced civilian suffering.

Over time, the situation worsened. Many Western countries have reduced or delayed military aid. The U.S. has also reportedly begun discussions about Ukraine using its natural resources and mining rights as collateral or repayment for past military support. The European Union, while still supportive, appears less vocal and may have its own undisclosed interests in the region. Now the scenario has been changed. Both the US & European Union have stopped funding for Ukraine's war in Ukraine prolongs, growing concerns have emerged over how the United States and the European Union are beginning to claim stakes in Ukraine’s natural resources as a form of repayment for their extensive military and financial aid. Reports suggest that American companies are showing increasing interest in Ukraine's rich deposits of lithium, coal, and rare earth metals—critical resources for modern industries. There are also concerns that some Western entities are negotiating behind closed doors for long-term access to Ukraine’s agricultural lands and energy infrastructure, especially in exchange for continued financial support. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian government faces rising pressure to repay mounting debts and fulfill wartime agreements, which many believe were signed under duress. Critics argue that these developments represent a new form of economic control, where military assistance is being indirectly refunded not through cash, but through control over Ukraine's future wealth. This raises questions about the true cost of foreign aid and whether Ukraine’s sovereignty is slowly being compromised in the name of recovery and defense.

Today, Ukraine is facing a devastating humanitarian crisis. Russian attacks have destroyed power plants, leading to severe electricity shortages. The ongoing war has inflicted catastrophic losses on Ukraine—both in human lives and economic damage. As of early 2024, over 10,000 civilians have been confirmed killed, including more than 500 children, according to the United Nations. Military casualties are far higher, with some estimates indicating that more than 70,000 Ukrainian soldiers have died since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022. The economic toll is equally staggering. According to the World Bank, Ukraine’s economy shrank by about 29% in 2022 alone, representing the largest decline since its independence. Critical infrastructure has been decimated: nearly 50% of the country’s energy system has been damaged or destroyed, and over 3,000 educational institutions have been attacked. The Kyiv School of Economics estimates that the direct physical damage from the war has exceeded $150 billion, including roads, bridges, factories, schools, and hospitals. In addition, millions of Ukrainians have been displaced internally or forced to flee abroad, leading to a demographic crisis that will take generations to recover from. These figures paint a grim picture of a nation under siege—economically, socially, and demographically. Schools, hospitals, roads, and other public infrastructure have been heavily damaged. The youth of the country has been hit the hardest, with tens of thousands killed in the war. Many young people now fear joining the military, knowing it could mean death.

While the war has forced millions of Ukrainians to flee their homeland, this displacement has also opened unexpected doors. Many young people who resettled in countries across Europe, North America, and beyond have gained access to new education systems, skill development programs, and employment opportunities. They are learning new languages, adapting to different work cultures, and in many cases, contributing to the economies of their host countries while also supporting families back home. This evolving diaspora may eventually serve as a bridge between Ukraine and the global community, bringing back knowledge, innovation, and investment if and when they return. Though born from tragedy, this wave of migration could become a long-term asset for Ukraine’s recovery, global integration, and cultural exchange..

In response to dwindling military numbers, the Ukrainian government has launched aggressive military recruitment campaigns. Some reports suggest that young men are being forcibly recruited—allegedly through home raids where recruiters take individuals for one-month military training before sending them to the frontlines. There are even disturbing accounts of youth injuring themselves—sometimes breaking their own legs—to avoid conscription. Another deeply concerning issue emerging from within Ukraine is what many locals have come to call the "Meat Grinder." This term reflects the widespread sentiment among citizens, particularly the youth, who feel they are being forcefully conscripted into military service without their consent. As the war prolongs and casualties rise, the Zelensky administration has been increasingly accused of conducting aggressive military recruitment raids, pulling young people—often with no prior combat experience—into the front lines. For many, this term captures the grim reality of being thrown into a brutal and unforgiving war machine, where survival is uncertain and personal will is disregarded. The phrase "Meat Grinder" is more than just a metaphor; it is a cry of despair from a population that feels trapped between geopolitical conflict and state-imposed sacrifice. This aspect of Ukraine’s internal turmoil adds a human dimension to the broader strategic and economic narratives, and underscores the societal costs of prolonged warfare.

In addition to the human and infrastructural losses, allegations of increasing corruption under Zelenskyy's leadership have further fueled public anger. Reports have surfaced suggesting that close associates and even family members of Zelenskyy have recently acquired luxury items—such as expensive properties and high-end vehicles like Tesla cars—raising questions about the source of their wealth during a time of national crisis. Transparency in government procurement, especially concerning war-related materials and foreign aid, has been severely lacking. Many Ukrainians and independent media outlets have begun to suspect that funds intended for defense and humanitarian efforts may be misused or siphoned off. These suspicions have led to growing criticism that Zelenskyy may be prolonging the war not solely for national sovereignty, but to continue benefiting from war-time resources and international funding. This perception has further deepened mistrust in his leadership and cast a shadow over his initial reformist promises.

According to Russian state media there was a dead bodies exchange type of event on 28th March, 2025 where Ukraine returned 43 Russian soldiers’ bodies, while Russia handed over 909 Ukrainian soldiers’ remains. This staggering difference illustrates the disproportionate human cost Ukraine is paying in the war. With no end in sight and martial law still in effect, there is little room for elections or leadership changes in Ukraine. Zelenskyy remains in power, and there is no clear successor within his party. Many people are afraid to criticize him openly due to his unpredictable responses and strong media influence. Some fear he might even use the war machinery and weapons—originally meant for defending against Russia—to suppress internal dissent.

Opposition parties are also hesitant to step in, as the country’s economy, infrastructure, and governance systems are in ruins. Many citizens initially believed that electing a popular figure like Zelenskyy—someone outside traditional politics—would bring positive change. But for many, those hopes have turned into deep disappointment.

A growing concern in the ongoing Ukraine crisis is the erosion of the nation's sovereignty. With nearly one-third of its territory either occupied or contested due to the war with Russia, Ukraine faces the harsh reality that—if the conflict were to end today—significant portions of its land would be permanently lost. Beyond territorial losses, there is an increasing perception that Ukraine’s political independence is also being compromised. Powerful nations have begun treating Ukraine less as a sovereign partner and more as a strategic chess piece in global geopolitics. International discussions about ceasefire and peace negotiations are often held without Ukrainian leadership even being present—highlighting the alarming extent to which the country's agency in determining its own future is being sidelined. One vivid example of this was the highly criticized meeting between President Zelensky and U.S. President Donald Trump, where global observers noted a stark imbalance in the dialogue. Zelensky appeared pressured and subordinate, underscoring a dynamic where external powers exert overwhelming influence over Ukraine’s internal decisions. Such developments have drawn criticism from diplomats and international relations experts worldwide, who see them as blatant violations of Ukraine’s national dignity and independence.

Today, Ukraine is caught in a deadly stalemate. Each day, hundreds of Ukrainian lives are lost. Despite Zelenskyy’s claims that this war is for sovereignty and independence, many question how sovereign Ukraine truly is when its key resources are being controlled or claimed by foreign powers. Before the war with Russia, Ukraine was often referred to as “the Breadbasket of Europe”—a popular metaphor that reflected the country's vast agricultural potential and its crucial role in feeding not only Europe but parts of the Middle East and Africa. With its fertile black soil (chernozem), Ukraine was one of the world’s largest exporters of wheat, corn, sunflower oil, and barley. The agricultural sector contributed significantly to the national GDP and employed millions, making it a backbone of Ukraine’s economy and global identity. In the years leading up to the war, Ukraine had also begun to show signs of economic resilience and modernization. Foreign investment was increasing, tourism was on the rise, and Ukraine had established promising trade relations with both Eastern and Western partners. Despite political instability and corruption challenges, the country was seen as a growing regional power with untapped potential. The war has since reversed many of these gains, devastating farmlands, crippling exports, and leaving a lasting scar on what was once a symbol of abundance and hope.

Recently, a significant agreement has been signed between Ukraine and the United States aimed at enhancing cooperation in the exploration, production, and trade of rare earth elements (REE) and other valuable minerals. This agreement is expected to boost Ukraine’s war-stricken economy and help the United States reduce its heavy dependence on China for critical mineral supplies. Ukraine is rich in valuable minerals such as lithium, titanium, cobalt, nickel, and potentially others like konbal and nikemium. These minerals are vital components in manufacturing electric vehicles, solar panels, and various digital technologies, making them indispensable for the global green economy. At present, China controls around 80% of the global rare earth mineral market, posing a strategic risk for other nations. By partnering with Ukraine, the United States and its allies in Europe aim to diversify their sources and reduce reliance on Chinese supplies. Beyond strategic considerations, this agreement brings economic hope to Ukraine. The country’s economy has been severely damaged by ongoing war, and investment from the United States in its mining sector could play a crucial role in its post-war reconstruction. This collaboration not only strengthens Ukraine’s economic stability but also deepens military-economic ties between the two nations, paving the way for broader geopolitical cooperation.

The rise of Volodymyr Zelenskyy, once seen as a beacon of hope, has now become a symbol of the deep suffering endured by the Ukrainian people. The transition from social media popularity to national leadership has left Ukraine in a state of crisis—with a war-torn society, a lost generation, and an uncertain future.

In conclusion, it is important to understand that every individual excels in their own field. Being an expert in one area—such as acting, journalism, or entertainment—does not automatically qualify someone to lead a nation or manage complex political and economic systems. Unfortunately, in today’s world, especially in many developing countries, people are increasingly making leadership choices based on social media popularity—likes, followers, and viral moments—rather than proven political competence. Charismatic public figures with powerful speeches and memorable dialogues may inspire emotion, but that alone does not translate into effective governance. The role of an artist is to influence culture, not necessarily to manage national crises. As the saying goes, not every measurement expert can be a good manager—because measurement and management are two very different things. Entrusting national leadership to individuals based solely on fame or performance talent can have grave consequences, as decisions made without political wisdom or long-term vision often lead to suffering, instability, and irreversible loss for the people.