'There can't be neutrality between aggressor & victim. It only means you're with Russia': Zelenskyy

What did you think about the Brics summit in Russia and PM Modi saying he is ready to work for peace in Ukraine at the summit?

First and foremost the Brics summit in Russia failed. It was a total failure. Not everyone was there, even looking at today’s composition of Brics, we couldn’t see many leaders whom Russia was relying upon within Brics besides the guests. Saudi Arabia wasn’t there at the level of the leader and there was no unity within Brics. I think Brics is divided by Putin himself by his policy of war. And I think Putin’s aim for the summit was to polarise the world and he did not achieve this. He will subvert the Brics’ purpose and use the platform for his own policy of war. That’s why he wants to divide the world into so-called West-plus and Brics-plus. But as of today he has failed to do that for many reasons. First, I think everyone understands that he is a murderer and a terrorist. That today Russia is just a cheap energy resource, and some of the states are using that. But even the states that understand that they can help their economy in this manner, don’t want to spoil the process for themselves with Putin. Plus, Putin is not consistent, and even the proposals of Brazil and China, which were more political and not very specific, were not acceptable to Putin from the perspective of territorial integrity. And for China, I would say, this was a slap on the face. For Brazil too, and that’s why Brazil was not present at the summit at the level of the leader. So Brics in effect did not take place.

As for the presence of the UN secretary general, I think that altogether this is a kind of a surrealistic thing. It’s not only about the UN but many other countries. I think that you cannot just say that you are neutral in the war between Russia and Ukraine. You cannot be neutral because it would mean you are on the side of Russia. Neutrality really helps just Russia. And between the aggressor and the victim, there cannot be neutrality. I consider this a hidden support for Russia, and the ones who were present there at the summit and speaking about their neutrality and saying they would like to help to solve the conflict, in my opinion, they look more pro-Russia. And that means it’s not about peace because Russia started this war and continues to wage it. And whether they want it or not, or understand it or not, that is not important. This is the fact: neutrality in this war means support for Russia. After all of the victims, after all of the tortures and deportation of Ukrainian children, this is how it looks.

As for the position of PM Modi, I think that any assertions today should not end with words only. Modi is the PM of a really huge country from the perspective of population, economy, influence and impact. Such a country cannot just say we are interested in the end of the war – we are all interested in that. All of the leaders would tell you that they would like to end the war, even the enemy of peace, Putin, will say that even he wants peace. This is a common thing. Especially for such a huge country like India, PM Modi can influence the end of the war. This is the huge value of him in any conflict. This is a huge value of India. Blocking of Russian economy, blocking of cheap energy resource, blocking of defence-industrial complex of Russian will lead to the decrease in capacity of Moscow to wage wars against us. Then the G20; the G20 is considered the ‘Great 20’ because they are main economies of the world. And the whole world is looking to them. That’s why the 20 great economies can just easily put Putin in his place and end the war. Not just incentivise but the opposite, slow down all of Putin’s desires. And you don’t need to say we would like peace, you need to act. Because the daily war is killing people.

Many would argue that sanctions haven’t stopped Russia and more sanctions would cripple the global economy. So how do you convince more countries to your point of view?

Sanctions are working. Sanctions have led to effect. If the great economies of the world like India, China, Turkiye and others, which did not impose sanctions on Russia, if they would not help Russia survive in the war economically – they actually helped Russia earn money, sometimes even with the understanding that the energy resource they are buying is helping fuel the war – if they re-evaluated their values, then the sanctions would be functioning fully. Now they are working only partially because the world is implementing them partially.


Everyone is looking to the US elections and there is a belief that a ceasefire could be reached after the elections. Do you think that’s a possible?

So many things depend on the policies of US. But it’s not a deep analysis to say everything depends on US. Many things depend, but not everything. In the beginning of war in Ukraine our nation stood together against the enemy, let me remind you, without the support of allies, including US. The unity of people of Ukraine, our population and society, this is what in fact repelled the attack of the Russians, stopped them. But the occupation, of course, we wouldn’t be able to respond to without the support, or at least it would be very hard because of human losses. And that’s why we are very grateful to our allies for their help and support. But still, not everything depends on US elections. US policies change not only because of the leader. We don’t know who will become the US president, but undoubtedly the bipartisan support for Ukraine will stay. And the US Congress, in any case which we are cooperating with and have developed strong connections, will have its personal impact on this war. The US president will definitely shape the foreign policy because it’s his or her constitutional obligation. And undoubtedly if US policy changes and it says we don’t support Ukraine in its sovereign and just protection of its territories, it will be really hard for us. This is if the policy totally changes. Then we will think what we will do with that. Definitely not now, we will think on that only then.

Another argument is that we shouldn’t forget that Europe is a powerful continent on its own. In fact, India and China shouldn’t forget about that in spite of the fact that India and China are great economies, still Europe is five times bigger than Russia by population and dozens of times bigger economically. Hence, Europe is a more attractive market. So we need to understand that US population is half the population of Europe. And we need to understand that Europe as it is, when it is not divided, is powerful. It is important for us to preserve this unity in Europe, and not to change the policy of Europe about this war. This is the second aspect. And the third about the ceasefire, we need to understand that we are against a frozen conflict, we don’t want the third war. Because in 2014, one war started, and our territories were occupied. In 2022, the full-scale war started, though before 2022 we used to have a frozen conflict. There was a ceasefire already. There were Normandy and Minsk processes where there were dozens of negotiations with Russia and other partners in different platforms. And then we had the full-scale war. So if now freeze the conflict without a proper understanding of what will happen tomorrow, which guarantees of security the Ukrainian people will have, our children will have, then I think it is a huge risk, a very high risk. Everything should be done on paper and should be comprehensible. How this war ends, and who and how much will bear responsibility for it? Definitely the aggressor will do that.

‘Modi can influence the end of war’: Zelenskyy

You recently revealed your Victory Plan which includes quick Nato membership for Ukraine. But many countries are divided about your plan. Do you think the plan is practical or is it just a bargaining chip?

The Victory Plan is not a bargaining chip or a topic of negotiations with Russia. Let’s not confuse this. The Victory Plan is not a platform for response for all of the countries of the world. The Victory Plan is the plan for strengthening Ukraine today. Strengthening of Ukraine before heading into those diplomatic formats of negotiations, peace summits, so that Ukraine could be strong. That’s why the Victory Plan is given to countries who are ready to strengthen Ukraine. It’s not about talks with Russia, because Russia is not making us stronger, it’s making us weaker. It’s not a proposal for negotiations. This is a request, very specific one. I shouldn’t ‘ask’ in my Victor Plan . As for the invitation to Nato – I would like that people don’t misunderstand this – the first point is not Nato membership or quick membership of Nato. The first point is invitation to Nato so that in the future nobody can change their opinion. Everything shouldn’t be just in words, but documented in papers, fundamentally and legally. We are talking about invitation, not membership, because during the war we cannot become Nato member obviously. And this point is only for the Nato countries because we would like to be invited to Nato.

The second point of the Victory Plan is strengthening the Ukrainian army with weapons today at the battlefield, not tomorrow. We are not talking with Putin about that or the countries of the Global South who do not strengthen us with weapons today. We speak about this with the Ramstein countries which helped Ukraine with weapons during this conflict. Point three is about the package of deterrence against Russia. It does not mean the use of missiles. However, this would be just because Russia is using missiles against us. But we are saying that it’s not about the use of missiles but deterrence of Russia. This is the package of long-range weapons which Ukraine will not use if Russia stops the war against us. Stops the aggression against us. Stops killing our people. That is why this package of long-range weapons should be in Ukraine. This is the prevention measure of weapons. This is the warning for Russia. Stop killing people. The aggressor needs to stop. And that’s why this point of the plan is not for everyone, not even for all of the countries of Ramstein. This point is only for those countries who have certain types of weapons. Who have and who are ready to give it to Ukraine.

The fourth point, the economic one, is for the ones who are interested in investments in Ukraine, to protect mineral resources of Ukraine, and to create businesses in future together with Ukraine. The fifth point is about just security of the European continent. And that’s why this is the post-war point. It tells us what will happen after the war with the Ukrainian army as part of the security of Europe. And it is exclusively about Europe. So it is not the plan that will end the war where we unite the whole world. This is the plan of victory that leads us to the plan to end the war. This is the plan of strengthening of Ukraine.

hat is the position of the war as of now? Because Russia has been making some gains on the battlefield, and with winter coming many believe you will face a tough few months.

Well, this is the third hard winter for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. Russia is doing the same thing every year of this war. We are studying how to protect ourselves. Russia attacked our energy centres since the very beginning to breed chaos in Ukraine, so that our people would starve, so that our people will be ill without having the opportunity to provide insolation and winterisation of their houses. So that the people would die. We as a state started to oppose that. We restored our energy systems. We are step-by-step strengthening the protection of our energy systems. And we aren’t just allowing Russia to kill our people. Gradually we have begun to cope with their attacks on our energy systems. We know how to retaliate to their strikes, but we do that very cautiously. We never target the people, we never target the schools and universities – which Russia does. So they have felt that Ukraine can respond. And in those operations none of our partners have helped us. This is what we have done alone in our response, unfortunately.

As for the battlefield, you are right, Russia has more people and more weapons. In many directions, technologically, we are better than them already. Many partners agree with that, especially in long-range drones, systems of electronic warfare etc. But it’s not enough because the most important thing is to save the people. So we look at the battlefield from the perspective of how to save our people. We can lose equipment, we can lose technologies, but we should minimise human losses. Sometimes by the price of metres or few kilometres of land. Yes, the human being is more important than the land, though this is our land. But our land will be brought back later, but we will not be able to bring back the human being. And we live according to this law. It is hard to be at war with Russia by this law because they have a different law – if they are not attacking, if their soldiers are not on the offensive, they are shot by the Russians themselves. Russians are killed by Russians. The Russians have killed many of their own mobilised soldiers just because these soldiers were afraid to attack, to perish under the bullets or to be wounded. So they retreated and this is where they were killed by their own army. This is their law of war. They don’t quantify, they don’t calculate the numbers. They have approximately 650,000 victims already who were killed or wounded in Russia. Just imagine, that’s a lot.

And you know what’s really scary? The same is continuing and they don’t even retrieve the bodies. The bodies are just rotting on the battlefield, they don’t take them back. This is the face of today’s Russia, today’s Putin. And what’s more interesting, yes they are having gains in Ukraine’s east because of this strategy, because of this meat-grinder, because they are throwing bodies onto us. But when we came to Kursk region and had a preventive attack against their territory, because they wanted to have a separate operation and occupy our north, we can see that they are attacking their own territory. They are themselves killing their own civilians in Kursk. And our people are giving them food and water because they are civilians not soldiers. Our soldiers are giving away and sharing what they have. And we can see the bodies of Russian civilians, civilians who were shot by Russian artillery. This is the war.


When PM Modi was in Kyiv he along with you visited the Martyrologist Exposition dedicated to the fallen children of this war. Can you detail the overall impact of the war on Ukrainian children?

First of all I thank PM Modi who joined me and commemorated the perished children. You know the real number of Ukrainian children who have been killed in the war is unknown. Nobody knows the real number, unfortunately. We can definitely state that dozens of thousands of children were deported and kidnapped by Russia. But how many of them were killed, we will only get to know after the war. Dozens of thousands of deported children. Thousands with changed names and surnames. They have been forced to speak a different language. Many of them who were teens, they have been forced to the battlefield to fight against their own country. This is just horrible. Their relatives don’t have their children back. And unfortunately, with dozens of thousands having been kidnapped, less than 1,000 have been brought back. That’s why it’s very important that many countries join the coalition to bring back Ukrainian children. We would really like India to help with this. Today, the coalition is working with more than 40 countries. But unfortunately, not many countries have managed to bring back our children.

Besides this, many children have been affected by the war in Ukraine. Schools have been hit, universities have been hit. Many children have been wounded, many have lost their limbs, and many children have been killed. Many children have left Ukraine with their parents. You know that more than 7 million Ukrainians are now abroad. A big number of them are children. Their parents are staying sometimes here. For instance, the men in the family are left here or they are on the frontline of the war. And their children are being deprived of their childhood. Some of those fathers are dying in the war. This is the situation about the children.

What can India do specifically to bring back the forcibly deported Ukrainian children?

You can join the coalition to bring back Ukrainian children. You can support the joint communique of the Peace Summit because the third point was about bringing back the children, you can call Putin and ask him who he is, you can force him to bring the children back, PM Modi can do that because he really has huge influence, he can just say specifically how many Ukrainian children will be given to me so that I could bring them back to Ukraine, just say that directly, just give me 1,000 Ukrainian children who will be brought back to Ukraine. This is the real step. Putin took dozens of thousands. Let PM Modi bring back only 1,000 at least. And if every such influential person as PM Modi is able to bring back 1,000, we will be able to bring back the majority of our children. That’s what is needed to be done. You need to raise this issue at the meeting of G20. India can invite us to this meeting as well together with Brazil. So the G20 can divide the obligations. If 20,000 of Ukrainian children are deported, every leader should take the responsibility to bring back 1,000 children. It’s not just to sit at the table during this summit but to really help the children. The world should be helping.

ICC issued arrest warrants for the forcible deportation of Ukrainian children. But those were not implemented as we saw recently with Mongolia. Do you still have faith in international mechanisms to bring back the children.

We believe just in the international law. We believe in the international influence of the leaders. We believe in the international mechanism. You are right, just one mechanism, just one international criminal court cannot fully correct the situation. It cannot fully influence Putin and his allies. But all of them together, the ICC, the leaders, international law, UN, G20, altogether can definitely end this war. But the results of the ICC are still felt. Putin is not travelling to the majority of world countries. We can see that. The majority of the leaders who acknowledged and approved the Rome Statute, and still acknowledge the verdict of the ICC, the majority of them try not to visit Putin. Remember, this (the deportation of children) is only the first case of war crimes. There will be many more cases for which more evidence will be provided. As for Mongolia, unfortunately it showed that it is not an independent country.

Do you think there’s any possibility that PM Modi can host negotiations between Ukraine and Russia?

As for PM Modi, we have the platform which is the Peace Summit. The second Peace Summit could be conducted in any respected capital and we communicated that it could be held in New Delhi. Undoubtedly it can be in India and PM Modi can really do that if he can organise a certain summit. But for that we need to prepare ourselves in terms of the proposals on which any number of countries could be heard – the proposals of India, EU, the African continent etc. So if Brazil and China would like to see us as well and they have proposals, please by all means, but only according to our format because the war is in our land. So I think that such a summit can be hosted in India.

Thank Mr President for speaking to Times of India.

Thank you and I wish the people of India peace. This is really important.