PROFILE: Volodymyr Zelensky in 2026 — the President Who Turned Drones into War Diplomacy

PROFILE: Volodymyr Zelensky in 2026 — the President Who Turned Drones into War Diplomacy

Introduction: 660 drones in the night over Moscow

June 26, 2026, 2:30 a.m., the skies over Moscow

In the night of June 26, 2026, 660 Ukrainian drones took off toward Russia. Twelve Russian regions were targeted simultaneously. 47 aircraft were intercepted on approach to Moscow, according to Mayor Sergei Sobyanin. Sirens woke the Russian capital in the darkness. Debris fell in several districts. Emergency teams were deployed. Somewhere, in a secure facility in Kyiv, Volodymyr Zelensky had signed an authorization for a "40-day influence operation" aimed at "compelling Russia to end the war." It was not the first time he had struck Moscow. It will not be the last.

The attack of the night of June 26 was, according to Russia's Defense Ministry, one of the largest since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022 — surpassing the record attack of 556 drones on May 17, 2026. The previous week, Ukrainian drones had struck Moscow's largest oil refinery — the Moscow Oil Refinery in the Kapotnya district — for the second time in a week, sending columns of black smoke over the Russian capital. Reuters reported on June 24 that this refinery is "unlikely to resume production this year."

The context: four years, one man, one strategy

Understanding Zelensky in 2026 means understanding how a man — a former comedian, telenovela actor, elected president in 2019 on a promise of peace — became the architect of the most innovative and most destabilizing strategic bombing campaign in modern military history. The drone is no longer merely a weapon in the Zelensky doctrine — it is a diplomatic instrument, an economic message, a political declaration. When Ukraine strikes a refinery at 2,000 kilometers from its border, Zelensky calls it "long-range sanctions." This renaming is not ordinary political communication — it is a redefinition of the very concept of economic warfare.

This profile does not seek to sanctify or condemn Zelensky. It seeks to understand a man in extraordinary circumstances — his calculations, his communications, his strategic vision, his contradictions, and the way he has reshaped international security policy through the sheer force of an obstinate conviction and drone technology.

The man before the war: comedian, actor, surprise candidate

Servant of the People — the character who became reality

Volodymyr Zelensky, born January 25, 1978 in Kryvyi Rih, Soviet Ukraine, had nothing of a warlord in his personal history. The son of a computer science professor and an engineer, he studied law without ever practicing it, gravitating toward comedy, theater, and television production. His production company Kvartal 95 produced sketch comedies, musical films, and above all the television series Servant of the People, in which Zelensky played — with a historical irony that is genuinely staggering — the role of an ordinary history teacher who becomes president of Ukraine after a video of him railing against corruption goes viral.

When Zelensky actually announced his presidential candidacy in January 2019, during the New Year's Eve show on Kvartal 95, many believed it was a publicity stunt. He was elected with 73% of the vote in the second round, defeating incumbent President Petro Poroshenko in a landslide. His platform: peace with Russia, an end to corruption, normalization of Ukraine. He got neither peace with Russia nor an end to corruption — and he became something entirely different from what he had promised.

The night of February 24, 2022: the founding moment

On February 24, 2022, at 5 a.m., Putin launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Many expected to see Zelensky flee to the West — the United States reportedly offered to evacuate him. His response has entered history: "I need ammunition, not a ride." He stayed in Kyiv. He filmed videos from the streets of his capital. He refused evacuation. This choice — without doubt the most important of his political life — defined everything that followed. His physical presence in Kyiv transformed Ukrainian resistance from a territorial defense into something greater: a cause.

Since that night, Zelensky has made more than 2,500 video addresses to governments, parliaments, the United Nations, film festivals, economic conferences. He has spoken in English, French, German, Hebrew, Japanese. He has maintained a public communication cadence that few leaders in peacetime could sustain — and he has done it in wartime, from a country under constant bombardment. This discipline of communication is one of the most misunderstood dimensions of his leadership.

The drone strategy: from reactive defense to strategic offense

The evolution of a capability over four years

At the start of the invasion, Ukraine had no significant long-range strike capability. It had Turkish Bayraktar TB2s, effective for tactical strikes but limited in range. The decision to develop a large-scale domestic drone industry did not happen all at once — it was the product of necessity: the West refused to supply long-range missiles for fear of escalation. If Ukraine could not receive these weapons, it would manufacture them itself. Business Insider reported in June 2026 that a drone campaign that started in early 2024 with a few dozen aircraft per month had become a large-scale operation deploying on average 200 to 300 drones per night against targets on Russian territory.

The Ukrainian company Fire Point is one symbol of this industrial transformation: Zelensky announced on June 21, 2026 that its drones had struck a refinery in the Tyumen region, in western Siberia — more than 2,000 kilometers from the Ukrainian border. He added that Fire Point was developing drones with a range exceeding 3,000 kilometers. Ukraine can now strike anywhere in Russia. This capability, nonexistent in 2022, is the product of four years of war, industrial necessity, and technological creativity.

The impact on Russian refineries: real figures

The drone campaign against Russian energy infrastructure, which has intensified since early 2026, is producing measurable results. According to Missile Matters analyses (April 2026), Russia suffered a reduction in its refining capacity of approximately 17%, or 1.1 million barrels per day. Strikes have targeted refineries in Krasnodar, Tatarstan, Ufa, Yaroslavl, Syzran, Ryazan, Saratov — and now Moscow itself. The Moscow Oil Refinery, struck twice in one week in June 2026, is according to Reuters unlikely to resume production before 2027.

The International Energy Agency had predicted as early as October 2025 that the effects of Ukrainian drone strikes would suppress Russian refinery processing rates at least through mid-2026. Actual results proved worse for Moscow than those forecasts: fuel shortages in several Russian regions, rationing measures, disruption of military supply chains. Zelensky achieved his tactical objective: shocking the Russian army's fuel supply chains to slow its momentum on the front.

Zelensky and communication: the man who speaks to every audience

From parliaments to prize podiums — an unprecedented war rhetoric

One of the most remarkable aspects of Zelensky's leadership since 2022 is his mastery of differentiated communication. He does not have a single speech — he has a speech adapted to every audience, every cultural context, every national memory. Before the British Parliament, he quoted Winston Churchill. Before the French Parliament, he invoked "Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité." Before the Knesset, he spoke of the Shoah and Jewish resistance. Before the U.S. Congress, he evoked Pearl Harbor and September 11. This rhetorical adaptability is not manipulation — it is high-precision public diplomacy.

His training as a comedian and television producer gave him an intuitive understanding of storytelling and image. His daily videos since the start of the war are carefully constructed: the camera angle, the lighting, the background, the sober military clothing. Everything sends a message. In June 2026, his weekly videos on drone strikes — showing columns of smoke over Moscow, citing the concrete results of operations — are instruments of domestic Ukrainian morale as much as international pressure on Putin.

The open letter to Putin and the 40-day operation

In June 2026, Zelensky published an open letter addressed directly to Vladimir Putin. This letter, which referenced the drone strikes on Saint Petersburg on June 3, 2026 — while black smoke hung over the city during the International Economic Forum — was a demonstration of the dual nature of Zelensky's strategy: war as diplomatic argument. "You know very well that this distance is not the limit of our capabilities," he wrote to Putin. He detailed the consequences for ordinary Russians: fuel shortages, rising prices, fear. "They don't like our drones and our missiles."

Then, on June 25, 2026, the day before the largest drone attack of the war, Zelensky announced he had approved a "40-day influence operation" proposed by Ukrainian security services (SBU), aimed at "compelling" Russia to end the war after 12 months of American peace efforts had produced no results. This is simultaneously a rhetorical and operational turning point: Zelensky explicitly says that traditional diplomatic channels are exhausted, and that direct military pressure is the next step.

Strikes on Moscow: from unthinkable to recurring

The Kapotnya refinery — the industrial heart of the capital

The Moscow Oil Refinery, located in the Kapotnya district southeast of the capital, is one of the largest in Europe. It produces more than 12 million tons of oil per year, supplying fuel to Moscow's economy and Russia's military logistics. Striking it means striking both the symbol and the substance of Putin's war economy engine. Zelensky confirmed on June 18, 2026 that this was the second strike in one week against this installation, sending columns of smoke visible from across Moscow.

The Kremlin's response was revealing: Mayor Sobyanin reported that air defenses had shot down more than 190 Ukrainian drones throughout the day of June 18 around Moscow alone — and some still got through. Moscow's prosecutor's office said "several" districts had been hit and that apartment buildings had been damaged. Russia can no longer fully protect its own capital. This is a strategic reality that Moscow is trying to manage rhetorically — and which Zelensky exploits methodically.

The attack of the night of June 26: the largest of the war

The June 26, 2026 attack struck not only Moscow but 12 Russian regions simultaneously — Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, Kaluga, Rostov, Voronezh, Tula, Ryazan, and the Moscow region among them. According to Russian Defense Ministry data, 660 drones were intercepted. In the Tula region, 180 km south of Moscow, one woman was injured. Unconfirmed reports describe a chemical plant and a power station in Novomoskovsk on fire — confirmed by NASA satellite imagery according to the Moscow Times. Ukrainian security services also claimed strikes on Russian military vessels and air defense radars in Crimea on the same night.

The Boston Globe reported that military experts and analysts indicated the intensified campaign uses massive drone deployments to saturate and expose gaps in Russian air defenses. This is a documented strategy: flood the defense system with more aircraft than it can handle simultaneously, forcing windows through which some drones get through. Ukraine is also increasingly targeting Russian air defense systems themselves — progressively reducing Moscow's ability to protect itself for future attacks.

Strikes on Russian vessels and critical infrastructure

The Black Sea fleet campaign

Ukraine's drone campaign is not limited to land-based refineries. Ukrainian security services (SBU) claimed during the night of June 26, 2026, strikes on several Russian naval assets in Crimea. The targets included the reconnaissance and minelaying vessels Volga and Vyatka (Project 15310), one of which experienced "a massive fire on board," as well as the cargo-passenger ferry Petropavlovsk. These strikes are part of a continuing campaign against the Russian Black Sea Fleet that has already forced Moscow to withdraw part of its fleet from Crimea — a peninsula Russia has illegally occupied since 2014.

The strategic significance is considerable: a navy without a fleet cannot protect its supply lines in Crimea. Repeated strikes on vessels, ports, and fuel depots in Crimea have progressively eroded Russia's logistical capacity in the area. Ukraine, which no longer has a significant conventional navy, compensated with a fleet of maritime and aerial drones that have sunk or damaged several dozen Russian vessels since 2022. This is a tactical revolution — the demonstration that naval dominance no longer requires aircraft carriers.

The strike on the Volgograd plant

During the same week of June 2026, Zelensky announced that Ukrainian Flamingo missiles had "successfully struck" a key military facility in Volgograd — a facility manufacturing launchers for the strategic missile systems Yars and Topol-M, as well as launchers for the tactical ballistic missile Iskander-M. This strike is in a different strategic category: it directly targets Russia's production capacity for nuclear missile delivery vehicles. This is not a response to the bombardment of Ukrainian cities — it is a strike on Russia's conventional nuclear arsenal, calculated to maximize pressure on Putin.

The range of this strike — Volgograd is more than 800 kilometers from the Ukrainian border — illustrates the evolution of Ukrainian capabilities. In 2022, such a strike was impossible. In 2026, it is a planned, executed, and publicly claimed operation by Zelensky. Russian territory is no longer a logistical sanctuary. This is the fundamental transformation that four years of war, necessity, and technological innovation have produced.

The 40-day operation: a new economic warfare doctrine

What Zelensky announces — and what it implies

The 40-day influence operation announced on June 25, 2026 by Zelensky deserves specific analysis. This is a deliberately signaled escalation — Zelensky posted on X the authorization of the operation before it began, which is unusual for an announcement of military operations. This signal serves several simultaneous functions: informing the Ukrainian public that its president is acting; communicating to Russia that increased pressure is coming; indicating to Western allies that Kyiv is taking the initiative in the absence of a diplomatic breakthrough; and documenting for history that Ukraine tried everything before escalating.

The formulation "influence operation" is revealing of Zelensky's strategic thinking: the drone war is not presented as a classical military campaign aimed at destroying the adversary — it is presented as an influence campaign aimed at modifying the adversary's behavior. This is the very definition of strategic coercion, the concept by which force is used not to win battles but to influence political decisions. Putin must decide that continuing the war costs more than negotiating. The 40 days of strikes are the argument.

The declared objective: compel, not destroy

Zelensky's communications about the drone campaign always insist on a specific element: they are justified responses to Russian attacks on Ukrainian cities, targeting infrastructure that "supports the Russian war machine." This framing is both strategically honest — refineries do effectively fuel the army — and politically necessary: it keeps Ukraine in the category of legitimate self-defense in the eyes of international law and Western public opinion.

But there is a tension that Zelensky manages carefully: some strikes hit facilities whose civilian use is difficult to distinguish from military use — refineries, power stations, chemical plants. On the night of June 26, a civilian woman was injured in the Tula region. Ukraine's official doctrine targets military infrastructure — but industrial warfare does not always recognize this boundary clearly. Zelensky maintains the rhetorical discipline of the "justified response" while conducting a campaign that already has the contours of a global economic pressure strategy on Russian society.

Prisoner exchanges: the other face of command

160 prisoners of war freed on June 26

On that same day of June 26, 2026 — the day of the 660-drone attack — Ukraine and Russia exchanged 160 prisoners of war on each side. Zelensky declared: "We remember each one who is in captivity." This coexistence — the largest drone attack of the war and a prisoner exchange on the same day — illustrates a reality of war that simplistic frameworks fail to capture: even in moments of maximum escalation, humanitarian channels remain open. These are two distinct functions of Zelensky's command that many peacetime presidents never have to manage simultaneously.

That same week, Zelensky had celebrated Crimean Tatar Flag Day on June 26, declaring: "We remember that justice for Ukraine means justice for the Crimean Tatar people." This declaration, in the same week as a massive attack on Moscow, reveals the complexity of Zelensky's positioning: he is simultaneously wartime commander, head of state, spokesperson for oppressed minorities, and peace negotiator — sometimes on the same day. This is an extraordinary burden for a man who had no military training on the day war began.

The 4-year wartime commander: what the record reveals

More than four and a half years after the start of the full-scale invasion, the record of Zelensky's command is complex. On the success side: Ukraine still exists as a sovereign state — which was not certain in March 2022. It recaptured significant territories during the 2022 counter-offensives. It developed one of the world's most advanced drone industries. It maintained Western support for more than four years despite fatigue. It is now striking targets 2,000 km inside Russian territory. On the challenge side: the Eastern front remains difficult, Ukrainian territories are still occupied, and a negotiated peace remains distant.

The G7 summit, from which Zelensky returned with new support pledges according to his own statements, confirmed that basic Western support holds — despite the vicissitudes of American politics under Trump. "After the G7, I received new pledges of additional support that will help Ukraine intensify its effort to force Putin to the negotiating table," he said, without detailing the commitments received. This restraint on details — unusual for a communicator as transparent as Zelensky — suggests that certain commitments remain confidential for operational reasons.

Zelensky facing Trump: the precarious alliance with an unpredictable ally

The most complex relationship in world geopolitics

The relationship between Zelensky and Trump is one of the most complex and most determinative in world politics in 2026. Trump is an indispensable ally — without American military support, Ukraine cannot resist long-term. Trump is also unpredictable, has expressed admiration for Putin in the past, and considers the war in Ukraine a problem the United States should disengage from rather than a cause to support. Zelensky must simultaneously flatter and reassure Trump — make him believe that a Ukrainian victory is also an American victory — while maintaining his own positions on Ukraine's sovereignty and borders.

The Trumpian description of Trump as a "necessary evil" may be the most honest formula for this relationship. Trump's support for the Iran deal — which includes a de-escalation of Iranian aggressive positions in the region — is indirectly beneficial to Ukraine: a less aggressive Iran is an Iran that delivers fewer drones to Russia. The geopolitics of the 2026 world is a system of interconnections where the decisions of one actor reverberate across all others. Zelensky understands this system better than most.

G7 pledges and future military aid

The G7 Allies, meeting in Évian-les-Bains in June 2026, reiterated their support for Ukraine. Zelensky obtained, according to his own statements, additional support pledges. The details were not disclosed publicly, but context suggests: additional air defense systems (while Ukraine facing daily Russian attacks remains under-capacity), long-range munitions, and perhaps components for Ukraine's drone industry. Europe — notably Germany, France, and the United Kingdom — remains the pillar of this support, with a capacity for long-term engagement possibly more stable than American policy under Trump.

The reality of 2026 is that after four years of war, Western support holds but transforms: less symbolism, more pragmatism. Weapons are no longer sent to "support democracy" — they are sent because every Russian refinery Ukrainian drones burn corresponds to fewer resources for a potential future aggression against the Baltic states, Poland, or other NATO members. Investment in Ukrainian resistance is an investment in collective Western security. This logic, Zelensky has sold and re-sold since day one.

Zelensky and Crimea: the open wound of 2014

The 2022 border or the 2014 border?

One of the thorniest questions in all peace discussions is that of borders: Zelensky has consistently maintained that the restoration of 1991 borders — including Crimea — is the objective of the war. This position is increasingly difficult to maintain militarily: Crimea is heavily defended, its reconquest by force would entail considerable losses, and some Western allies suggest territorial compromises. Zelensky has always refused these compromises. He continues to refuse them in 2026.

The campaign of strikes on Crimea — the vessels in Kerch port, the air defense systems, the fuel depots — is an expression of this conviction: Crimea is Ukrainian, and Ukrainian military operations demonstrate it there. This campaign has moreover produced a remarkable result: the Russian Black Sea Fleet was compelled to withdraw part of its vessels from the peninsula. Zelensky declared on Crimean Tatar Flag Day that "justice for Ukraine means justice for the Crimean Tatar people." This is a promise that commits the future of peace.

The 40-day pressure strategy: breaking the logic of attrition

Putin's war is a war of attrition: applying continuous pressure until the adversary — Ukraine, or its allies — bends. Zelensky's 40-day operation is the mirror response: applying continuous economic and psychological pressure on Russia until Putin's cost-benefit calculation changes. Zelensky's bet is that 40 days of intensified strikes on Russian economic infrastructure can create sufficient internal instability — fuel shortages, anxiety among the Moscow population, political pressure on the Kremlin — to push Putin toward serious negotiations.

This bet may succeed. It may also fail — Putin has demonstrated a remarkable capacity to absorb internal economic pressures since 2014. But the alternative — doing nothing and letting the positional war continue indefinitely — is not a strategy. It is an abdication. Zelensky said it explicitly in his communications: after a year of American diplomatic attempts without results, direct military escalation is the next logical step. There is nothing surprising in this decision. There is everything to observe in how he announced it, justified it, and implemented it.

What the war has done to Zelensky: the man who has changed

From comedian to commander — the visible transformation

Photos of Zelensky before and after February 24, 2022 tell a story without words. The man of 2019, jovial, relaxed, in a casual suit, smiling, is unrecognizable in the commander of 2026 — in olive military dress, a marked face, a gaze that no longer seeks to seduce but to convince. The transformation is not merely cosmetic. People who have worked with him since the start of the war describe a man who sleeps little, who reads operation reports before dawn, who makes decisions with a speed and assurance that contrast with his initial hesitation.

This transformation carries a cost. In June 2026, Zelensky is no longer the populist president of 2019 — he is the wartime leader of a state in permanent conflict, with the constraints that implies on freedom of expression, political contestation, suspended elections. Ukrainian critics, notably General Valery Zaluzhny — ousted in 2024 in a highly publicized break — suggested that Zelensky sometimes centralizes command too tightly. This is the classic tension of democracies at war: between the imperatives of military efficiency and the principles of democratic governance.

The vulnerability he does not hide

What distinguishes Zelensky from other warlords history remembers may be his capacity to express vulnerability without appearing weak. He has publicly said he does not know how long the war will last. He has said he does not always know whether the decisions he makes are the right ones. In a 2024 speech, he admitted that the war had produced more destruction than anyone had anticipated and that he carries the weight of each Ukrainian death personally. These admissions, unusual for a wartime leader, humanize a man who would otherwise be too large to feel real.

In June 2026, after 160 prisoners repatriated, after 660 drones launched, after an open letter to Putin and a 40-day operation approved, Zelensky is still there. Standing. Filming his daily videos. Signing operation authorizations and prisoner exchange certificates. He transformed drones into diplomacy, destruction into argument, resistance into institution. History will say whether it was enough. For now, what history can already say is this: he tried everything that was humanly possible.

Ukraine's supporters: G7, Zelensky, and the coalition that holds

What the G7 delivered — and what remains to be delivered

At the G7 summit in Évian-les-Bains in June 2026, Zelensky obtained according to his own declarations additional support commitments. These commitments, not publicly detailed for operational reasons, fit a trend: Western support for Ukraine holds despite the political and economic fatigue of the preceding four years. France increased its artillery deliveries. The United Kingdom provided long-range Storm Shadow missile systems. Germany delivered additional Patriot air defense systems. Europe, overall, provided in 2025–2026 more military aid to Ukraine than the United States — a historically significant reversal of trend.

This reversal reflects a growing awareness in European capitals that Ukrainian resistance is an investment in their own security. Every month Russia spends trying to conquer Ukraine is a month less dedicated to preparing a future aggression against the Baltic states, Poland, or Moldova. This logic, initially difficult to sell to European public opinion, is now internalized by most European Union governments. Zelensky made this persuasion work over four years — through speeches, visits, communiqués, phone calls, and concrete military results.

Asian partners: Japan, South Korea, Australia

A less visible but growing aspect of support for Ukraine: Asian democracies. Japan, South Korea, and Australia have all provided non-lethal aid, civilian equipment, and in some cases munitions. These commitments serve their own strategic interest: in a world where Russia violates borders by force, the precedent established by Putin's impunity is directly relevant to their own regional tensions with China or North Korea. Ukraine's resistance is a deterrence lesson that Tokyo, Seoul, and Canberra read closely.

Zelensky has cultivated these partnerships carefully. His visit to Japan in 2023, his speech to the Japanese Parliament, and his regular communications with the Japanese Prime Minister transformed peripheral allies into active partners. This geographically expansive diplomacy — treating the Ukrainian conflict not as a European war but as a global international order crisis — is one of Zelensky's most original strategic contributions to his own survival dossier.

Zelensky and Ukrainian civil society: the contract of trust

Ukrainians behind their president — but for how long?

Behind Zelensky's international figure lies a complex domestic reality: the contract of trust with the Ukrainian population. In 2022, his approval rating exceeded 90% — a comprehensible patriotic mobilization in the face of an existential invasion. In 2026, after four years of war, considerable human losses, population displacement, and economic uncertainty, this rating has naturally evolved. Tensions exist around military mobilization, persistent corruption in certain sectors of the administration, and command decisions that have divided military figures and politicians.

Zelensky has maintained the state of emergency and suspended presidential elections — a legally grounded decision in wartime but politically sensitive. Critics, notably from the exile of certain Ukrainian political figures, have argued that this suspension was excessive. Zelensky responds that holding elections under Russian bombardment would be a farce — and that the absolute priority is winning the war before debating the electoral calendar. This argument is understandable. But in a democracy, the suspension of the electoral process must always be justified and time-limited.

Journalists, artists, teachers: the Ukrainian civil society that holds

Beyond presidential decisions, what impresses observers of Ukraine in 2026 is the resilience of Ukrainian civil society in all its diversity. Journalists continue publishing from Kyiv under air raid alarms. Artists exhibit their work in galleries that have evacuation plans. Universities maintain in-person and online courses. Entrepreneurs launch start-ups in a war economy. This civic vitality — often ignored in reporting focused on the front — may be the strongest demonstration of what Ukraine is fighting for: the possibility of a normal life in a sovereign state.

Zelensky understood from the outset that the war is not only military — it is also cultural, economic, educational. Maintaining civilian normalcy as much as possible is an act of political resistance. When Kyiv keeps its cafés, theaters, and concerts open despite daily Russian drones, it is a response to Putin as much as a drone invasion can be. Zelensky said it explicitly: normal Ukrainian life is the proof that Russia failed in its objective of crushing the country's soul.

The interim record: four years of war, one man standing

What history can already retain

Zelensky's record after more than four years of war cannot yet be definitive — the war is not over, and history is judged on its conclusions as much as its processes. But certain things can be said with confidence today. Zelensky prevented the rapid collapse of Ukraine, which everyone — including probably himself — anticipated might be possible in March 2022. He maintained Western support for longer than most analysts predicted. He developed Ukrainian military capabilities — notably in long-range drones — that no one would have anticipated in 2022. And he positioned Ukraine as a credible actor on the international stage, treated as an equal by the major democratic powers.

The counterarguments are equally real: Ukrainian territories remain occupied; human losses are considerable; reconstruction will be colossal; and negotiated peace remains uncertain. None of these facts contradicts the preceding — they complicate it. History will judge Zelensky on the balance of these two realities. For now, in the night of June 26, 2026, while 660 Ukrainian drones crossed the Russian sky and 160 Ukrainian prisoners came home, this record belongs to those who wage the war — not to those who observe it.

What 2026 says about democratic resistance in the world

Zelensky in 2026 has become, despite himself probably, a symbol beyond Ukraine. In a world where authoritarian regimes — Russia, China, Iran, North Korea — seem to be gaining in influence and boldness, Ukrainian resistance embodies something precious: the demonstration that democracies can defend themselves, that political will can compensate for power asymmetries, and that truth — stated clearly, repeated tirelessly, documented with precision — is a real strategic weapon. This is not democratic naivety. It is hard geopolitics, dressed in the language of conviction.

Taiwan watches Ukraine. Georgia watches Ukraine. Moldova watches Ukraine. These fragile democracies, under pressure from authoritarian neighbors, draw from Ukrainian resistance practical lessons and models of political behavior. And that too is Zelensky's legacy — perhaps the most lasting, and the least reported.

The long-term strategy: toward what war ending?

Plausible scenarios for the next 18 months

Three scenarios define the possibilities for the Ukraine war in the next 18 months. Scenario 1: Zelensky's 40-day operation produces enough internal economic pressure in Russia for Putin to accept serious negotiations — on the basis of a ceasefire along current borders with security guarantees, without recognizing Russian annexation of occupied territories. Scenario 2: The drone escalation produces a Russian counter-escalation — massive strikes on Ukrainian cities, use of hypersonic missiles, perhaps pressure on the Baltic states. Scenario 3: The war continues at its current pace — front relatively stable, daily drone war, without resolution but without collapse either.

Zelensky has clearly indicated in recent communications that he rejects Scenario 3 — a war that continues indefinitely weakens Ukraine more than Russia, with its greater strategic depth and larger population. Escalation is his attempt to force a resolution rather than accept exhaustion. This logic is understandable. It nonetheless carries real risks — a cornered Putin is more dangerous than a confident Putin. Managing this risk is the most difficult test of Zelensky's leadership.

Zelensky in 2026 — a provisional assessment, an open question

Zelensky in 2026 is not simply a head of state at war. He has become something rarer: a figure who redefines what resistance can accomplish when supported by technological innovation, political will, and the ability to communicate its cause to the entire democratic world. He transformed drones into diplomacy — making each strike on a Russian refinery a geopolitical declaration. He maintained the unity of his country under pressures that would have fractured others. And he forced the world to look at Ukraine — a country many struggled to locate on a map in 2021 — as a central actor in the global security order.

The question that remains open is not whether Zelensky succeeded in resisting — he resisted. The question is whether resistance will be enough to obtain a peace that preserves Ukrainian sovereignty within acceptable borders. The 40 days now beginning will provide a partial answer to that question. The world is watching. Moscow too.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

Scope and sources of this profile

This profile is based on documented facts from the following primary sources: Kyiv Independent (June 26, 2026) for the drone attack on Moscow; ABC News (June 26, 2026) for the figure of 660 drones; Boston Globe (June 26, 2026) for attack analysis; Business Insider (June 23, 2026) for the drone campaign since 2024; Missile Matters (April 2026) for the impact on Russian refineries; The Guardian (June 21, 2026) for the Tyumen strike; ABC News (June 18, 2026) for the Moscow refinery strikes. All biographical elements about Zelensky come from verified public sources. This profile expresses editorial opinions clearly identified as such, without inventing quotes, scenes, or testimonials.

Editorial positioning

This columnist is pro-Ukraine. He believes that Ukrainian resistance is just, that Ukrainian sovereignty is an inalienable right, and that Western support for this resistance is in the direct interest of the democratic global security order. This positioning is declared and assumed. It does not preclude recognition of the ethical complexities of war — notably regarding strikes on dual-use infrastructure — but it firmly places Zelensky on the side of those defending their country, not the aggressors.

Sources

Primary sources

Kyiv Independent — Ukraine reportedly launches dozens of drones towards Moscow — June 26, 2026

ABC News — Ukraine targets Russia with at least 660 drones overnight — June 26, 2026

Boston Globe — Ukraine attacks Russia with drones — June 26, 2026

The Guardian — Drones strike Russia's Tyumen oil refinery 2,000km away — June 21, 2026

ABC News — Ukraine strikes Moscow oil refinery in large-scale drone attack — June 18, 2026

Secondary sources

Business Insider — Inside Ukraine's secret drone campaign — June 23, 2026

Missile Matters — Ukraine's Deep-Strike Drone Campaign Against Russian Oil — April 2026

LA Times — Ukraine says its drones hit another refinery deep inside Russia — May 21, 2026

Bloomberg — Drones Target Russian City With Three Rosneft Oil Refineries — June 25, 2026

Business Insider — Ukrainian Drones Broke 3 Air Defense Layers, Hit Russian Oil Hub — June 18, 2026