“I Need Ammunition, Not a Ride”: How Volodymyr Zelenskyy Defied Assassination, Outlasted Political Storms, and Became Ukraine’s Unbreakable Wartime Leader
When Russian forces launched their full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, many analysts predicted that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy would not last more than a few days. Western intelligence agencies reportedly warned of assassination plots. Russian units advanced toward Kyiv. Sabotage groups were believed to be operating in the capital. The assumption in many global capitals was simple: Zelenskyy would either be killed or flee.
Instead, he did the opposite.
Within days of the invasion, Zelenskyy posted a now-famous selfie video filmed on Bankova Street in central Kyiv, near the Presidential Office. Standing alongside senior officials, he declared: “We are here.” The message was clear — Ukraine’s leadership had not fled. The state had not collapsed. The president remained in the capital.
According to multiple international reports, Russian operatives had indeed targeted him. Intelligence sources indicated that removing Zelenskyy — either by assassination or capture — was a central objective in Moscow’s early war strategy. The calculation was that eliminating the head of state would trigger panic, create a power vacuum, and accelerate Ukraine’s collapse.
But the image of Zelenskyy calmly filming himself in Kyiv shattered that narrative in real time.
The Line That Changed the War
When the United States reportedly offered evacuation assistance, Zelenskyy delivered the sentence that would define his presidency and become one of the most quoted lines of the 21st century:
“I need ammunition, not a ride.”
The statement symbolized defiance. It reframed the war from a story of imminent defeat to one of resistance. Within days, his domestic approval ratings skyrocketed — jumping from around 37% before the invasion to nearly 90% in the early weeks of the war, according to Ukrainian polling organizations.
Zelenskyy had been expected to disappear. Instead, he became the embodiment of Ukrainian resistance.
From Comedian to Commander-in-Chief
Zelenskyy’s rise to power was already extraordinary. Before entering politics, he was best known as a comedian and actor. In the television series Servant of the People, he played a schoolteacher who unexpectedly becomes president after an anti-corruption rant goes viral.
Life imitated art. In 2019, Zelenskyy ran for president under the banner of anti-corruption reform and political renewal. He won in a landslide, securing approximately 73% of the vote in the runoff election against incumbent Petro Poroshenko.
Critics initially dismissed him as inexperienced — a performer stepping into geopolitics. Supporters argued that his media savvy, outsider status, and communication skills were precisely what Ukraine needed.
Show business had taught him how to operate within complex power structures and dominate on camera. Those skills would prove crucial in wartime.
Surviving Assassination — Facing Political Turbulence
Reports suggest Zelenskyy survived multiple assassination attempts during the first months of the invasion. Ukrainian officials later stated that more than a dozen plots had been thwarted. Special forces, intelligence services, and even foreign assistance reportedly played roles in neutralizing threats.
Yet physical danger was not his only challenge.
As the war continued, political problems emerged. Corruption scandals affected members of his inner circle. Senior officials were dismissed. Allegations of misuse of funds sparked public outrage. In July of a later wartime year, protests erupted over attempts to weaken anti-corruption institutions — a sensitive issue in a country where reform has long been central to public expectations and European Union aspirations.
The backlash forced a reversal. Even in wartime, Ukrainians demonstrated they would not abandon demands for accountability.
Zelenskyy’s political strength has always rested less on rigid ideology and more on communication. His daily video addresses, often filmed in simple military-style clothing, created a direct connection with citizens. He bypassed traditional political filters, speaking straight to the public — both at home and abroad.
The War Years: Survival, Liberation, and Stalemate
Strategically, 2022 was about survival.
Russian forces advanced rapidly but failed to capture Kyiv. Cities such as Sumy and Chernihiv resisted early offensives. Mykolaiv and Zaporizhzhia held defensive lines. Later that year, Ukrainian counteroffensives successfully liberated large parts of Kharkiv region and the city of Kherson — significant morale victories that reshaped global perceptions of the war.
However, the years that followed were more difficult.
The much-anticipated counteroffensive of 2023 struggled against entrenched Russian defensive lines. By 2024, internal tensions surfaced within Ukraine’s military leadership, culminating in the dismissal of General Valerii Zaluzhnyi as commander-in-chief — a move that sparked debate domestically and internationally.
An incursion into Russia’s Kursk region briefly boosted morale and demonstrated Ukraine’s continued operational capability. But Russia resumed a grinding war of attrition across a front line stretching roughly 1,200 kilometers. The conflict shifted from dramatic territorial swings to slow, costly battles.
Confrontation as Strategy
Zelenskyy’s political instinct is confrontation when he believes Ukraine’s survival is at stake.
He publicly pressured Germany to supply advanced weapons, appealing not only to leaders but directly to European citizens. His advisers noted that he understood modern politics as a public arena. By speaking to voters abroad, he increased pressure on governments to act.
This strategy proved effective across much of Europe.
However, it did not yield the same results in every diplomatic encounter. A widely publicized clash in the Oval Office with former U.S. President Donald Trump generated global headlines. Trump accused Zelenskyy of insufficient gratitude for American support. The exchange was broadcast worldwide.
European diplomats had reportedly advised Zelenskyy to avoid confrontation in Washington. He chose to proceed anyway. Some observers described him as stubborn, convinced that direct engagement — even risky engagement — was preferable to silence.
Ironically, criticism abroad strengthened his position at home. After the diplomatic controversy, his approval rating rose again, reportedly climbing into the mid-70% range before stabilizing above 58%. Many Ukrainians viewed him as defending national dignity.
Senior officials echoed this sentiment. Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko publicly stated that Zelenskyy defended the Ukrainian people’s position. Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha described him as someone who “knows how to take a punch.”
The Image Transformation
The war reshaped Zelenskyy’s public persona.
The clean-shaven entertainer in tailored suits evolved into a fatigued wartime figure, often appearing unshaven and dressed in olive green military-style attire. His daily schedule reportedly includes late-night and early-morning briefings. Associates have described years without a full night’s uninterrupted sleep.
His wife, Olena Zelenska, has spoken publicly about the emotional toll. She once remarked that there had not been a single moment of complete happiness since the invasion began.
The transformation reinforced his symbolic role. He was no longer merely a political leader; he had become a living representation of national endurance.
Corruption: The Enduring Vulnerability
Despite wartime unity, corruption remains Zelenskyy’s greatest political vulnerability.
Scandals affecting officials close to him — including long-time ally Andriy Yermak — raised serious questions. Critics argued that Ukraine’s credibility in the eyes of Western partners depends heavily on maintaining strong anti-corruption frameworks.
The July protests over weakening anti-corruption bodies demonstrated that public tolerance has limits. Zelenskyy ultimately reversed controversial measures, signaling responsiveness but also revealing political fragility.
Some analysts predicted that these crises might end his presidency. They did not.
Public Trust and the Question of Elections
Four years after the invasion began, Zelenskyy remains exhausted but central to events. Polling suggests that around 61% of Ukrainians continue to trust him — a remarkable figure under prolonged wartime strain.
However, only about half express support for a second presidential term. Ukrainian law prohibits elections during martial law, and most citizens oppose holding national elections while the country remains under invasion.
This creates a paradox: Zelenskyy remains broadly trusted, yet the long-term political future remains uncertain.
The Unexpected Wartime Leader
Zelenskyy was not supposed to become a wartime icon. He was not a career soldier, not a seasoned diplomat, not a traditional strongman.
He was a comedian who played president on television — and then won one of the largest electoral mandates in Ukrainian history.
When Russian forces closed in on Kyiv, the expectation was disappearance. Instead, he stayed.
When offered evacuation, he asked for ammunition.
When criticized abroad, he confronted.
When faced with domestic protests, he reversed course.
His leadership has not been flawless. The war has not been linear. The political storms have been real. Yet the central prediction — that he would vanish within days — proved wrong.
Rather than disappearing, Volodymyr Zelenskyy became a symbol of resistance, a communication-driven leader whose image and approval were forged in crisis.
He was supposed to be a brief chapter in Ukraine’s history.
Instead, he became an unbreakable wall in the war.
0 Comments