ReadNOW

“Victory,” US president John F. Kennedy once said (paraphrasing the Roman historian Tacitus), “has a hundred fathers, and defeat is an orphan.” To be precise, Kennedy made the comment after a humiliating political and black-ops fiasco, namely the botched attempt to use Cuban exiles to invade and regime-change Fidel Castro’s Cuba, commonly known as the Bay of Pigs disaster.

What Kennedy rediscovered so painfully is a sad truth about human nature, that is, our love of taking credit for success even when it’s not really due and aversion to taking responsibility for failure. Sad but not complicated – unless that is you are dealing with Ukrainian politics under the Zelensky regime. There, success is dubious or, at least, greatly exaggerated; failure is concealed; and you can end up punished for either as if there’s no difference in the first place.

Consider for instance the “turmoil” – so the Financial Times – after the sudden sacking of Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov. After six months in (this) office, Fedorov was dismissed by president-forever Vladimir Zelensky. So far, so unremarkable: Counting Fedorov, Kiev has had five ministers of defense since the escalation of the war in 2022. What makes the case of the 35-year old unusual is that he has functioned as the popular – and much hyped – poster boy for an important information war campaign that is at odds with firing him.

According to that narrative, currently spread with vigor by both the Zelensky regime and the West, Ukraine has recently achieved a major breakthrough in the war against Russia. Indeed, according to some especially eager commentators, Kiev has turned the war around in its favor with its UAV deep strikes on Russian fuel infrastructure, producing, according to the always particularly gung-ho Telegraph a “tectonic shift.” The only slightly less biased Financial Times felt Ukraine was “turning the tables” already at the end of May. In France, the equally mainstream Le Monde caught up with the euphoria a month later.

We could multiply examples, but that would be dull. As so often with Western mainstream narratives, there is a conspicuous monotony, as if we were looking not at diverse publications making independent research and analytical efforts but something more akin to a coordinated media campaign. But perish the thought!

Indeed, if there are outliers, voices that seem to have missed the memo, they come, intriguingly, from Ukrainians, and very nationalist ones at that: The former commander of the Ukrainian military – and eternal Zelensky rival – Valery Zaluzhny has published an op-ed to warn of exaggerated expectations. Ukrainska Pravda, meanwhile, has featured a long article with multiple quotes from frontline officers and soldiers dismissing the air campaign as making no difference to their experience of the war.

In reality, Ukraine’s increased strikes with drones and missiles behind the frontlines (“mid-range”) and far into Russia (“long-range”) have had effects, as the Russian leadership has acknowledged. But their most likely overall result is not Ukraine winning the war but Russia escalating its counterstrikes, a process that has already started, while also continuing its slow but relentless ground campaign.

Fedorov’s role in the information-war hype and hyperbole about the Ukrainian air campaign has been to personify its success, and in particular what is in effect yet another claim to a miracle weapon – remember HIMARS, the Leopard tanks, the F16s? – namely, that Kiev has mobilized the magic of IT and AI to defeat Russia “asymmetrically.”

With photo ops with Palantir’s diabolical CEO Alex Karp and claims to have made Elon Musk shut down Starlink for Russia’s military, Fedorov has been carefully cast as a sort of weaponized start-up redeemer. That image in turn has served as a loadbearing beam to keep up the Potemkin façade of a game-changing leap from “the ground into the heavens,” in Zelensky’s silly phrase.

One person impressed by the new narrative it seems is the American president, Donald Trump. His recent turn to explicit support for Ukraine, a Zelensky adviser surmised, is due to having been persuaded that now Kiev is winning. If that is what has happened, it won’t last, as so many things Trump. Meanwhile, this effect will also make Moscow more determined to assert its escalation ladder dominance, shattering illusions not only in Ukraine but in the US, too.

So much winning – or so the story went – and yet Fedorov had to go. Indeed, his dismissal has been so shocking to many in Ukraine and the West that some now suspect that it was the main purpose of Zelensky’s recent reshuffling of his whole cabinet. The reasons quoted for this surprising turn of events are many: Zelensky and Fedorov themselves make no secret out of the fact that the commander of Ukraine’s military, the deeply unpopular General Aleksandr ‘the Butcher’ Syrsky had a hand in removing the defense minister.

The two are so hostile to each other that further cooperation was impossible. Ironically, shaken by protests in favor of Fedorov, Zelensky has now signaled he might fire Syrsky as well. How unusual: A government that kicks out the defense minister and maybe the top general as well, just after claiming that the war is on the way to being won. It’s almost as if something about that claim is not really adding up.

But this would not be Ukraine if the story wasn’t about corruption, too. The word on the street and in every single expert interview as well is that wunderkind Fedorov also happened to resist corruption, or at least, some old established networks. In addition, the former defense minister had also been unable to resolve the issue of “busification,” that is, what even the Telegraph has learned to recognize as the often brutal “press-ganging” of ordinary Ukrainians for the proxy war meat grinder. In all fairness though, the only solution to that problem would be to end the war.

On the upside, now, after his dismissal, Fedorov is at least admitting that what the Zelensky regime is “selling” are “chaos and lies.” That may have something to do with why so few want to fight for it.

Finally, Fedorov, many plausibly guess, may have been tripped up by his own well-cultivated hype. Zelensky has a way of removing whoever seems to be turning into a potentially dangerous rival. Especially with thickening rumors about elections, he may well have considered Fedorov too popular to stay around.

And again, what a curious sight, if you think about it. Allegedly, Fedorov has been the key person in devising a winning strategy for the war. Yet Zelensky’s personal ambition and need to play dirty to eliminate rivals are more important. How patriotic!

Kennedy knew a thing or two about human vanity and cowardice. But Zelensky-regime Kiev really makes you want to paraphrase Winston Churchill, too: It’s a world where half-truths are wrapped in lies inside propaganda campaigns and bulldogs fight under a shrinking carpet as if there were no tomorrow.