Zelensky, the weary hero entering his fourth year of war

Introduction: a president forged by fire

The comedian is gone for good

Four years ago, the world discovered a former actor who had become president almost by historical accident. Today, on the eve of the NATO summit taking place in Turkey in early July, an entirely different man is preparing to meet Donald Trump and allied leaders. Volodymyr Zelensky has been described as being in good spirits by observers close to the summit preparations, a confidence fed by months of concrete battlefield results rather than by reassuring words alone.

This transformation owes nothing to chance. It is the product of more than four years of full-scale war since the Russian invasion of February 2022, a conflict now entering its fifth year. The Ukrainian president arriving at the summit is no longer the hesitant figure of the invasion's early days: he is a wartime leader who has learned to negotiate with the world's greatest powers without ever losing sight of the ultimate goal — his country's survival.

Confidence forged by facts, not by words

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte himself acknowledged, on July 6, that Ukraine has been doing considerably better in recent months, citing successful Ukrainian strikes on Russian supply lines and increased financial support from the European Union. That is an admission carrying real weight coming from a man not prone to diplomatic exaggeration.

That improvement translates concretely into Ukrainian missile and drone strikes against Russian supply routes far behind the front, as well as against energy infrastructure and defense-industrial capacity in occupied Crimea. Rutte in fact praised Ukraine's ability to strike deep into Russian territory while preventing Moscow's forces from making major advances along the front line.

The July 4th calls: sandwich diplomacy

Trump, Zelensky, Putin: a sequence that shifts the tone

The weekend before the summit, a phone call took place between Trump and Zelensky on July 4, American Independence Day, followed by a separate exchange with Vladimir Putin the next day. This three-part diplomatic sequence illustrates a method we now know well from Trump: talk to Kyiv, talk to Moscow, keep every option open while projecting an image of control.

Trump himself said on July 6 that Putin "wants to end it," adding that Zelensky also wants to end the war now, and that the subject would be raised at the NATO summit. An optimistic statement, but one that deserves the usual caution reserved for American presidential pronouncements on this file.

The bitter memory of the Oval Office still lingers

From public humiliation to a steadier relationship

This calmer climate contrasts sharply with the 2025 clash in the Oval Office, where Trump told Zelensky he "didn't have the cards." That memory, still fresh in the Western collective mind, measures the distance traveled: from a public humiliation to a steadier working relationship, even if it remains fundamentally transactional on the American side.

The contrast is equally striking with the 2025 summit in The Hague, where Trump left Zelensky uncertain until the last moment about a possible bilateral meeting. This time, the meeting appears settled, a sign that the American administration now sees clear strategic value in publicly showing support for the Ukrainian president in front of the world's cameras.

A trust built over time

It would be naive to believe this relationship is now permanently at ease. The recent history of this diplomatic pairing is full of abrupt reversals, and nothing guarantees the next disagreement won't reawaken last year's tensions. But for now, the signal being sent is one of steadier mutual recognition.

This relative stability benefits Kyiv directly, which needs predictability in its relationship with its main arms supplier in order to plan its military operations over the medium term, rather than living at the mercy of American presidential moods.

The price of resistance: a battered but standing nation

The coldest winter since the invasion

It must never be forgotten, behind the summits and phone calls, the human price paid by Ukrainians. Russian strikes on energy infrastructure cut heating and electricity to millions of people during the coldest winter since the February 2022 invasion. In November, Zelensky had called the situation one of the most difficult moments in his country's history, as the United States threatened to cut off support if Kyiv did not accept a 28-point peace plan forcing it to cede territory to Russia.

Ukraine and its European allies rejected that plan, a decision that required considerable political courage in the face of American pressure. It is precisely in these moments of extreme vulnerability that a leader's true character reveals itself, and Zelensky, once again, chose to refuse capitulation dressed up as compromise.

European aid that arrived late, but arrived nonetheless

The crucial 90 billion euros promised by the European Union was delayed for months by internal political disputes in Europe, a delay that directly weighed on Ukraine's ability to hold out during the most critical months. Those billions have finally begun reaching Kyiv, giving some breathing room to a war economy running on fumes.

This gap between battlefield urgency and European bureaucratic slowness illustrates a structural tension the West must resolve if it wants to remain credible in the eyes of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, all of whom are closely watching the consistency, or inconsistency, of Western democracies.

Kyiv's diplomatic red line

No territorial concession imposed from outside

Despite mounting fatigue, Zelensky has maintained a consistent position since the war began: no territorial concession imposed from the outside. Facing the 28-point peace plan raised in November, he held firm, refusing to turn an act of aggression into a territorial precedent acceptable to Moscow, Beijing, or Tehran.

This firmness is not gratuitous stubbornness. It is a lucid strategic reading: yielding on this principle would send a catastrophic signal to every authoritarian regime tempted by territorial expansionism, from Taiwan to the Baltic states. The outcome of this file sets a precedent the entire world is watching.

An open letter to Putin, left without a serious reply

Zelensky sent an open letter in June calling for direct peace talks, which Putin rejected. The Ukrainian president responded with a touch of biting irony, retorting that Putin apparently hadn't read the first version, a reply that reflects both his exasperation and his ability to keep his composure in the face of Kremlin provocations.

On June 25, he also asked his security service to run a 40-day influence operation aimed at convincing Putin to end the war, proof that he continues to mobilize every available lever, even the most subtle ones, to advance the cause of peace without ever sacrificing Ukrainian sovereignty.

A relentless international campaign

Ireland, one stop among many

On July 1, visiting Ireland, which then held the rotating six-month presidency of the European Union, Zelensky restated a truth too often overlooked by certain war-weary Western circles: without Ukrainian experience and its security expertise, tested in modern warfare, it is simply impossible today to guarantee Europe's collective security.

That line, delivered far from the spotlight of major summits, sums up Zelensky's communication strategy over the past four years: turning every trip, even the most low-key, into an opportunity to reposition Ukraine not as a country to be rescued, but as an indispensable security partner for all of Europe.

The story of a Ukraine that strikes back, not one that merely endures

A former British military attaché aptly summed up this shift, noting that the mood has changed since winter, and that the story of a Ukraine that survives, strikes back, and carries the fight to the Russians, all the way to Crimea, is not lost on NATO's leaders.

That is precisely the narrative Zelensky intends to carry to Ankara: that of a country no longer content to survive, but one inflicting real costs on the Russian aggressor, on its own territory, all the way into occupied Crimea.

The Russian gauge starts to wobble

Putin, a popularity that is eroding

While Zelensky regains international credibility, on the Russian side signs of fatigue are piling up. A poll by the Russian institute VTsIOM from July 3 showed a 3.4-point drop in trust toward Putin, now at 73.3 percent. The independent Levada Center measured a 5-point drop in his approval rating, down to 74 percent, the lowest level since February 2022.

Only 52 percent of Russians now believe their country is headed in the right direction, down from 61 percent previously. Numbers that, even filtered through an authoritarian regime with little appetite for statistical transparency, reveal a real erosion of popular support for the war.

The fuel that's missing, the anger that's rising

A Russian analyst summed up the situation with clarity, noting that this erosion has absolutely no direct effect on Putin, while acknowledging that fatigue is rising and could turn into lasting resentment. A researcher specializing in the subject added that fuel shortages, caused notably by Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries, affect segments of the population different from those hit by mobile network outages, creating an entirely new pool of discontent.

Russia, moreover, spent more than 2.7 billion dollars propping up its refineries in June alone, a direct economic cost of the Ukrainian campaign of strikes against Russian energy infrastructure.

The drone file: between strategy and caution

A signature that keeps waiting

According to a person familiar with the matter, Zelensky is deliberately delaying the signing of a cooperation agreement with the United States on drone production, seeking better terms and a fairer recognition of the deal's value from senior American officials. His spokesperson denied that version, insisting no deliberate delay was involved.

Whether or not that account is accurate, the episode illustrates an essential reality: Ukraine no longer signs whatever agreements are put in front of it without hard bargaining over the terms, a major shift from the war's early years, when Kyiv found itself in a near-permanent position of supplicant.

Production diplomacy extended across Europe

Alongside the American file, Zelensky has proposed a drone agreement to the European Union as well as bilateral agreements with numerous European states for joint defense production. This strategy of diversifying industrial partnerships reduces Ukraine's dependence on any single supplier, however powerful.

It is a strategic lessonZelensky appears to have fully absorbed: never depend on a single ally, however generous it may be one day and however unpredictable it might become the next, as the American drone file under the Trump administration has shown.

The front line, theater of a war of attrition

Donetsk, an advance that costs Moscow dearly

On the ground, Russian troops continue advancing in the fortified Donetsk region, but at a considerable cost. This slow, expensive progress illustrates the failure of Russia's original blitzkrieg strategy, replaced long ago by a war of attrition where every kilometer gained is paid for in Russian lives.

Under this pressure, Russian attacks on Kyiv show the urgent need to reinforce Ukrainian air defenses, as the shortage of American Patriot interceptors grows more acute. Overnight strikes between July 5 and 6 killed at least 14 people, a brutal reminder that high-level diplomacy never stops the missiles.

Striking Russia, the new strategic reality

At the same time, Ukraine now strikes deep into Russian territory, targeting energy infrastructure and critical defense-industrial capacity. This offensive capability, unthinkable in the conflict's early months, gives Zelensky, according to several European allies, a stronger negotiating hand with both his American and Russian counterparts.

A Ukrainian lawmaker confidently summed up this dynamic, saying that at the NATO summit, Zelensky will have concrete results from Ukraine's armed forces to present, and that Ukraine can certainly surprise its allies again.

What the West still has to prove in Ankara

Deliveries, not just handshakes

For Kyiv, the value of the Ankara summit will never be measured by official photographs but by the actual delivery of air defense systems and munitions. After four years of war, Ukrainian officials have learned to distinguish spectacular announcements from commitments truly honored, a bitter but necessary lesson.

Zelensky therefore arrives at this summit with a calculated blend of confidence and vigilance: confidence because recent military results speak in his favor, vigilance because the history of this war is littered with Western promises that took months, even years, to materialize on the ground.

The ultimate test of Western credibility

A precedent for every threatened democracy

The outcome of this meeting extends far beyond the bilateral Ukraine-U.S. framework alone. It sets a precedent for any democracy facing territorial aggression, from Taiwan against China to the Baltic states against any future Russian escalation. A West capable of sustaining its support for Ukraine over time sends a credible message of deterrence to every authoritarian regime tempted by expansionism.

This may be the heaviest responsibility now resting on Zelensky's shoulders at this stage of the war: he is no longer defending only his country — he embodies a test of character for the entire free world.

Western vigilance remains the only watchword

Every summit that produces concrete commitments sends a signal to the authoritarian axis formed by Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang: the Western fatigue predicted for years by Kremlin propagandists has not materialized. That is a message Zelensky wants translated into concrete action, not just reassuring speeches.

The credibility of the entire free world is now at stake as much in Ankara as on Ukraine's front lines, a reality too many Western commentators continue to underestimate.

Lessons from a man forged by adversity

From comedian to commander-in-chief

It's easy to forget, having grown used to seeing him in fatigues during his international trips, that Zelensky had no military experience before this war. His journey from actor to president, then to wartime leader, remains one of this century's most singular political trajectories, forged not by personal ambition but by the sheer necessity of national survival.

This forced transformation partly explains why he continues to command near-unanimous respect across Western chancelleries, even among those who, like some American officials, don't always share his approach to negotiating with Moscow.

A model of resilience on a national scale

Beyond his own person, Zelensky has become the symbol of a national resilience few would have believed possible in February 2022. That resilience, built from the daily sacrifices of millions of anonymous Ukrainians, deserves to be remembered every time the president's name alone gets invoked.

It is this collective dimension of Ukrainian resistance that Zelensky carries with him into every summit, every phone call, every negotiation, aware that he represents far more than his presidential office alone.

What next winter could still demand

Constant vigilance over energy

As Ukraine approaches the NATO summit with renewed confidence, Ukrainian officials know next winter will once again be a critical period for the country's energy infrastructure. Russian strikes on the power grid have never stopped, and nothing guarantees they will end after this summit.

That is why deliveries of air defense systems remain, for Zelensky, the absolute priority of the discussions ahead, far more than symbolic declarations of support that, however comforting, protect no civilian from the bombs.

A military equation that remains precarious

Despite recent tactical successes, the overall military equation remains precarious. Russia still holds considerable human and material resources, even if eroded, and no local Ukrainian victory guarantees a swift end to the conflict as a whole.

Zelensky knows this better than anyone, having learned never to overinterpret a single success as a definitive turning point in the war.

Conclusion: the man the war has shaped

Neither actor nor saint, but a clear-eyed wartime leader

The Zelensky arriving at the NATO summit this summer of 2026 bears no resemblance to the caricature some attached to him at the start of his term. Four years of war, exhausting negotiations, and national mourning have transformed him into a strategist capable of standing his ground with both Moscow and Washington without ever abandoning the fundamental goal: preserving his country's sovereignty.

Fatigue is not defeat

Yes, he is tired. How could he not be, after carrying the weight of a nation at war on his shoulders for more than four years. But that fatigue has never dented his determination, and it is precisely this rare combination — physical and moral exhaustion paired with unbroken will — that makes him a figure History will remember long after this conflict's final outcome.

What this column ultimately holds onto

A symbol that has become indispensable

At the end of this analysis, one conviction remains: Zelensky is no longer merely the president of a country at war — he has become a living symbol of democratic resistance against authoritarianism, a role he neither sought nor anticipated back in 2019 when he was elected.

That role, however heavy to carry, he continues to shoulder with a steadiness that commands respect, even from those who sometimes question certain tactical choices made by his government.

The final question that remains open

One question remains that no one, not even Zelensky, can answer with certainty: how much longer this war will last, and how many summits like the one in Ankara will be needed before a genuine ceasefire finally takes hold.

While waiting for that answer, one thing remains certain: the man arriving at this summit is no longer who he was four years ago, and that transformation alone deserves to be told.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist

Columnist's transparency note

Who I am and my declared biases

I sign this analysis as an engaged columnist, not as a neutral journalist. My bias is clear: I support Ukrainian resistance, I regard Volodymyr Zelensky as a figure of rare political courage, and I believe the West must remain the strategic center of gravity of the free world against the axis formed by Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. On Donald Trump, my treatment varies by issue: I credit his posture when it strengthens Western military deterrence, and I criticize it when he treats the war as a mere lever for personal negotiation.

What I don't know, and my method

I do not claim to know the outcome of negotiations between Washington and Kyiv over the drone agreement, nor the exact content of the calls between Trump, Zelensky, and Putin. This analysis relies exclusively on verifiable, cited, and dated journalistic sources, with no invention and no fabricated testimony. Wherever uncertainty remains, I flag it explicitly rather than presenting speculation as established fact.

Sources

Primary sources

Ministry of Defence of Ukraine — official communications, July 2026

Office of the President of Ukraine — speeches and official statements, July 2026

Armyinform — Ukrainian armed forces news, July 2026

Secondary sources

The Straits Times — It's a different, more confident Ukraine President Zelensky coming to NATO this year, July 7, 2026

Foreign Policy — geopolitical analysis, July 2026

The Guardian International — coverage of the Ukrainian conflict, July 2026