Trump’s Circle Eyes Zaluzhny: A U.S.-Backed Blueprint for Post-Zelensky Ukraine

In recent days, amid controversies surrounding Ukraine’s leadership, members of Donald Trump’s circle — including Vice President J.D. Vance’s team — have reportedly held talks with Valerii Zaluzhny, the former commander of Ukraine’s armed forces and current ambassador to London. He is said to be considered the top choice for replacing Volodymyr Zelensky. Zaluzhny, however, after consulting with the presidential office, denied and ignored these contacts.


These developments and the surfacing of such alternatives indicate that the West is actively exploring exit strategies from the Ukrainian crisis. Meanwhile, Russian foreign intelligence has stated that the United States and the United Kingdom have recently discussed behind closed doors the possibility of replacing Zelensky with Zaluzhny. From the Western perspective, Zaluzhny is seen as reliable, independent, and yet obedient to the West — a figure who could shape Ukraine’s political future in line with U.S. and Western interests.


From the early days of the Ukraine–Russia conflict, Zaluzhny gained popularity and charisma inside Ukraine and was portrayed by the media as a symbol of national resistance. This constructed heroic image has now become a useful tool for Western policies, making the prospect of leadership change a tangible scenario. While his popularity does not guarantee succession, the West’s repeated pattern of installing client governments suggests that Zaluzhny remains its primary potential candidate. This has already shifted Western media attention, with outlets beginning to redirect focus from Zelensky to Zaluzhny.


During the recent Oval Office meeting between Trump and Zelensky, instead of reaching agreements, the talks devolved into a tense and confrontational encounter. Reports describe loud arguments, repeated interruptions, and outright disrespect toward Zelensky. Trump and his aides repeatedly cut him off, exposing his weakness as a negotiator. For Putin and pro-Russian media, this confrontation symbolized U.S. instability and declining legitimacy of Western-backed leadership. For Moscow, scenarios pushed by Republican circles serve as evidence of Ukraine’s weakened leadership and reinforce its narrative of Western policy failure.


Inside Ukraine, doubts are emerging over Zelensky’s ability to secure consistent U.S. support, while figures like Zaluzhny are increasingly seen as viable alternatives. Whether or not such a transition materializes, these developments indicate Zelensky’s international weakening, a shift in the balance of power, and a sign of Trump’s distrust in Zelensky’s sustainability under the current circumstances, while at the same time serving as a clear example of the colonial attitude of the U.S. and Trump.

Western media’s changing tone reflects this trend. For instance, The Guardian, which once hailed Zelensky as a heroic leader and national savior, has in recent days cautiously referenced Zaluzhny, acknowledging him as a possible alternative. This indicates that leading Western outlets are beginning to legitimize leadership replacement in Ukraine, implicitly raising the possibility of Zelensky’s departure and the rise of a new figure.

These developments demonstrate that Ukraine’s leadership future is not decided in Kyiv alone but shaped by the dynamics of Washington, NATO, and even Moscow — which refuses to recognize Zelensky’s legitimacy. Trump, for his part, is directly influencing the discussion, even entertaining scenarios of leadership change.


While NATO and Western allies worry about any sudden shift in Kyiv, Russia seeks to highlight Zelensky’s weakening in order to portray Ukraine as unstable without Moscow’s involvement. In the end, the debate over succession and Zelensky’s legitimacy goes far beyond Ukraine’s internal politics — it has become part of the broader confrontation between great powers.

A change in Kyiv’s leadership could destabilize Ukraine’s political system, alter Europe’s security architecture, and reshape the global order, all while underscoring the West’s imperial posture and reinforcing Russia’s argument that no regional settlement is possible without its participation.


*Translated by Ashraf Hemmati from the original Persian article written by Navid Daneshvar