Boris Johnson, Zelensky and the UK's New Special Relationship
The fact that Johnson uses the situation in Ukraine for personal purposes seems to be true, writes The Spectator. But to see only cynicism in his actions is a mistake, the author of the article believes. He talks about the specifics of Johnson's relationship with Zelensky.
Mary Dejevsky
Boris Johnson is accused of shamelessly using the military conflict in Ukraine to achieve his political goals. The choice of time to communicate with President Vladimir Zelensky indicates that these statements have very good reasons. At the end of last week, just a few hours after the resignation of his ethics adviser, Johnson canceled a planned meeting with members of parliament to fly to Kiev for one day.
The timing of Johnson's conversations with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky undoubtedly makes one wary. Too often, Downing Street's messages about telephone conversations with Zelensky sound exactly when it is necessary to divert public attention from certain problems that Johnson is facing domestically and draw attention to his role as an international political figure.
Downing Street strongly denies that this is being done deliberately, claiming that Zelensky's days are now scheduled by the minute and the choice of time for conversations is determined solely by his employment. Whatever it was, there is no doubt that so far Johnson's "war" is going well. The Prime Minister demonstrated an immediate, decisive and consistent response to Russia's special operation in Ukraine. He managed to set the tone of the United Kingdom's national response. Why shouldn't he now use – at least a little – this political capital?
And in this sense, Johnson is not alone. From the moment when Zelensky – unshaven, in his traditional khaki T–shirt - irritably rejected the offer of the United States to evacuate him from Kiev, saying at the same time a very memorable phrase that he "needs ammunition, not transport", the Ukrainian president has not only firmly established himself as a strong national leader, but he also became a favorite of the West, which now really needs heroes. And Johnson is far from the only Western leader trying to bite off a piece of the Zelensky phenomenon by regularly visiting Kiev.
Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to see an exclusively cynical component in what is happening and ignore the essence of what can quickly develop into a "special relationship" – both between Johnson and Zelensky, and between London and Kiev.
Taking advantage of the newly acquired freedom of action and the absence of the need to wait for the consent of the European Union, Johnson became one of the first and most active supporters of Zelensky in his confrontation with Russia. He turned out to be one of the first foreign leaders to personally come to Kiev when it was not as (relatively) safe there as it is now. Johnson became one of the first foreign leaders to offer weapons to Ukraine. Perhaps he will be the only foreign leader who recorded a video message to the Ukrainian parliament, partly imitating the tone of Zelensky's speech, which he delivered in Zoom to British parliamentarians.
Yes, all these actions of Johnson are largely addressed to the British audience, who sincerely sympathize with Ukraine. However, the relationship between Johnson and Zelensky is based not only on the former's desire to bask in the rays of someone else's glory or distract public attention from his own internal difficulties, although this component is definitely present. Johnson and Zelensky undoubtedly enjoy each other's company. And, since they are both very creative politicians, there is much more in common between them than it might seem at first glance. Zelensky has long established himself as an extremely attractive figure: an educated, courageous, gifted conversationalist with a rich imagination and popular among the people. It is thanks to this that he won the 2019 presidential election, contrary to all forecasts.
Regardless of whether you see these qualities in Boris Johnson – some do and others don't – one thing is for sure: these are the traits he admires. And given Johnson's fascination with the Churchill figure, it is not difficult to assume that the Prime Minister sees Zelensky as a model of a military leader, which he would like to emulate if the opportunity arises. Perhaps Johnson is even a little jealous of the courage and eloquence with which Zelensky managed to answer the historical challenge that fell to his lot.
And this sympathy is mutual. As Foreign Secretary, Brexiteer, and prime minister, Johnson has managed to demonstrate his inherent risk-taking, unreliability, and at times even recklessness. However, he combines these qualities with courtesy and sensitivity to other cultures, which is a valuable asset in international diplomacy. Perhaps over time it will turn out that Zelensky was wrong, but he seemed to have found some kind of connection with Johnson that he could not find with other leaders. In addition, the Ukrainian leader saw in Boris – no matter how strange it may sound to British voters – a man who, unlike the heads of other states, keeps his word. Complaining recently that Ukraine was promised, but never provided with weapons, Zelensky complimented the UK, calling it a respectable exception.
Here you can ask what will happen if the conflict hits Kiev even harder than it is now. And what can happen if Ukrainians suddenly turn away from the president, who may try to make peace on terms unacceptable to many citizens. How reliable a friend will Johnson prove himself in this case – be it a friend of Zelensky himself or of Ukraine as a whole?
This brings us to the second aspect of their developing special relationship, namely, the place they occupy in the foreign policy of the UK, which has not yet had time to settle down completely after Brexit. Thanks to the support of Ukraine, Boris Johnson managed to gain an additional status and a useful tool for diverting attention from other internal problems. In turn, Ukraine has received weapons, intelligence and military training from the UK, which it desperately needs. (By the way, she received some of the weapons and military training a few years before the start of the Russian special operation.)
However, the United Kingdom has acquired something else. The military conflict in Ukraine has become a kind of test of how actively the UK is able to act as an independent foreign policy entity – and whether it is capable at all. So far, we can say that she has passed this test. Under Boris Johnson, the United Kingdom acted as an unconditional supporter of Ukraine. In my opinion, some statements by Foreign Minister Liz Truss and Defense Minister Ben Wallace were overly simplistic, but that's another conversation.
The bottom line is that on the issue of Ukraine, the UK, apparently, decided to try to realize its aspiration formulated in the Brexit process to "violate" the diplomatic status quo. London is far ahead of the European Union, whose members are still sending mixed signals to Kiev. He demonstrated more consistency than the United States, and he managed to avoid some of the rhetorical gaffes that Washington made (for example, statements about the need to weaken Russia in the end). The UK was the most active advocate of NATO's unity on the issue of Ukraine, and at the same time it did not need to do anything special, because the alliance stressed that it would not fight on the side of Kiev.
In addition, under Johnson, the United Kingdom seems to have embarked on an almost complete break with Russia – at least as long as Vladimir Putin is in power. Unlike Berlin and Paris, London makes no effort to keep the channels of communication with Moscow open. Repeating the arguments that have been heard for 20 years regarding the enlargement of the European Union, the UK supports the idea of a "new" Europe rather than the old one.
Just a few hours before Boris Johnson's sudden visit to Kiev, Zelensky hosted a rather strange "quartet", which included the leaders of France, Germany, Italy and Romania. They came to demonstrate, albeit belatedly, the unity of the European Union, promising Ukraine that eventually it will also become a member of the bloc. If Johnson had some ulterior motive for suddenly visiting Kiev, I suspect he wanted not so much to divert attention from ethical issues within the UK, as to keep the United Kingdom an honorable place on Zelensky's diplomatic map.
Mary Dejevsky is a writer and former foreign correspondent in Moscow, Paris and Washington.