Indian philosopher Swami Vivekananda said that truth can be stated in a thousand different ways, yet each one can be true and five weeks towards the end of the tight race for US Presidency, in an interview Ukrainian President Zelensky chose to say that Trump "doesn’t really know how to stop the war even if he might think he knows how.". 

Later this week Zelensky targeted Trump’s running mate, JD Vance and called him “too radical” and suggested that he should study WWII. Vance recently described his peace plan on the ongoing war in Ukraine very concisely “What it probably looks like is the current line of demarcation between Russia and Ukraine, that becomes like a demilitarised zone,”. With these few words he condemned Ukraine to cede 27% of its territory to Russia. That makes 7,700 km2 per word he used to describe his peace plan, Ukrainians are lucky that he did not elaborate it more.

Zelensky may be right but his words committed him to the side of Kamala Harris. First reaction came from Donald Trump Jr. sharply criticising the Ukrainian President about his remarks on Republican presidential candidates as "disgraceful."

Donald Trump Sr. went to the defence of his running mate attacking Zelensky as ‘the greatest salesman in history’ because each time Zelensky visits the US gets $100 billion. Then accused him of favouring Democrats in the Presidential elections. 

That followed Republican politicians claiming that Zelensky’s earlier visit to an arms factory in Biden's hometown with several top Democrats was politically motivated as a campaign effort for Democrats and was "election interference". At the latest, Republicans are demanding an investigation into Zelensky’s visit and dismissal of Ukraine’s envoy to the US.

Zelensky’s decision to take sides in elections may be unwise. First in the case of his re-election even if there was a slim chance that Trump would continue to support Ukraine now it reduced to zero. Although the former US President continued to brag how he would end the war in one day, he was evasive about his intentions on the support of Ukraine, seemingly trying to keep his options open. Moreover during his debate with Harris, Trump also implied that if he wanted he could create problems for Putin. 

If Zelensky aimed to create a drift in the Republican front between the politicians like Nikki Haley that support Ukraine, it is highly unlikely that Republicans would quit their candidates with so little time left until the election. Moreover the latest assassination attempt is still remembered. In contrast it is quite possible that Zelensky may have given further reasons to the US citizens to distance them from Ukraine and credibility to Trump’s anti establishment rhetoric.

On the other hand, in the event of Trump being re-elected it is highly likely that the resolution of the West to support Ukraine will dissolve quicker than many predict. Actually it is quite likely that 2025 will be the last year of the war. During the UN General Assembly Zelensky pitches his victory plan to his strongest and the most willing supporter - the USA. There are two ears to hear what he came to sell. Either he would play safe and keep the two candidates at equal distance that would mean he would have the small hope to reach Trump. Or he would make a pragmatic decision by taking a high risk to provide a small boost to the campaign of the candidate that will most probably continue to support Ukraine in the fateful year 2025. 

The US elections run on the razor's edge and the smallest advantage may give victory to the competitors. It is possible that Zelensky gave this advantage to Kamala Harris by demonstrating the cynicism of the Republican candidates or to the opposite side by victimising them. In any case  Zelensky is the candidate for the title of the king maker of 2024.

‍