"Narrative, Combat, and Fealty to a Ruling Ideology--Multi-Tiered Warfare in the Post-Global": Brief Observations on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Address to a Joint Session of the U.S. Congress, 'We stand, we fight and we will win. Because we are united. Ukraine, America and the entire free world'

Pix Credit here

That connection between visual imagery, textual narrative, and its inscription onto flags (objects that serve as a symbolic representation of both) and uniforms, have been powerful semiotic devices in the United States and other great states for a long time. In contemporary societies, drifting from a primary focus on text to imagery and physical performance, the need to leverage text with visual symbols--especially flags and uniforms--has become acute. The power of these  new forms of communication, and their effectiveness as an instrument of irregular warfare, was powerfully evidenced in the United States Congress on 21 December 2022 by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy., when the Ukrainian President delivered remarks--and more--to a joint session of Congress. 

 

The remarks, the text , which were republished on the Ukrainian Presidential website as 'We stand, we fight and we will win. Because we are united. Ukraine America and the entire free world' do not capture the entirety of the event, better understood by watching and hearing rather than by reading (video of remarks as delivered  here), President Zelenskyy, of course, is no stranger to the politics of the leadership class in the United States.  And he has been caught up in its intrigues and narcissistic self-indulgence, a little bit less of which might have produced substantial benefits to the Republic (though not to those in the game).  

Pix Credit HERE

In 2019, a few months after he was elected, Mr. Zelensky became something of a household name in the United States when a phone conversation he had with President Donald J. Trump helped trigger Mr. Trump’s first impeachment. At the time, Mr. Zelensky was seeking a meeting with Mr. Trump, but Mr. Trump wanted something in return. . . .Mr. Zelensky never visited Mr. Trump. Mr. Zelensky visited Mr. Biden at the White House on Sept. 1, 2021, a few months before Russia’s invasion. The visit on Wednesday is Mr. Zelensky’s first to the United States since then. (Zelensky’s entanglement in American politics started with Trump)

Pix credit here

President Zelensky, then, is well aware of the perils and opportunities to come a-beggin' to the Americans.  And he understands that these elites require something of value in return--the American way of empire and the accounting for responsibility beyond the technical territorial borders of the Republic--though the quid pro quo depends on the character of the administration then in power. What appears to serve all administration, however, is not just internal self-interest, but also an interest in the preservation of national leadership over the complex structures of supra national public and private governance that is today shorthanded as the rules based international order founded on liberal democratic principles and driven by private markets.  What stands in his way are the cultures of a narrow and rigid America First agenda by what is left of Mr. Trump's supporters in an alliance of convenience with doctrinaire and increasingly old fashioned libertarians whose view of the world and the US role in it apparently ceased to stay current toward the end of the last century. (e.g., as observed in Zelensky faces an uphill battle with many Republican House members.).

Pix Credit here

These brief observations start from the the text of President Zelenskyy's those remarks. Nonetheless its focus is on the construction and deployment of  sub-text, and of the symbols and performance (the ritual of the flags) that in some ways were more powerfully evocative and potent in both the shaping of the narrative of this war and in aligning the Ukrainian cause with the triggering symbols of the American Revolutionary struggle. These extra-textual mechanism, the deployment of symbols, the signalling through objects (cloths, flags, and the like), are essential elements in the irregular construction of relations between a smaller and dependent state and a large, fickle, and reluctant (new) patron. It also suggests the way that dependent states, faced with an aging leader state that may be losing its way, work hard to ensure that the leader class of leading states continue to serve their function--as the guardians of a system within which they derive the benefits of occupying the pinnacle space.  The Remarks acquired additional importance by reference to its mirror image--the receipt, by the senior leadership of China, of Mr. Putin's representative, Dmitry Medvedev. "Medvedev, now deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council, posted a video on his Telegram channel showing him meeting Xi, smiling for photos and a meeting between Chinese and Russian officials.Medvedev said he and Xi had discussed the two countries' "no limits" strategic partnership, as well as Ukraine" (Russia's Medvedev meets China's Xi in Beijing, says Ukraine conflict discussed)

 

The Observations start with the text and the evocation of the state of warfare in the post-global.  Mr. Zelenskyy invokes a field of battle operating simultaneously on three levels.  The first is at the level of organizing the narrative of the conflict and giving it (and its actors) moral positions.  The second is the field of traditional war and control of territory and those within it. The third is space in which the rules and world view for the ordering of the relations among states and the expectations of conduct within and between them is settled. The Observations then turn to the performative and symbolic elements of the remarks.  These play a critical role is solidifying messages and in building points of emphasis.  Here one works at the level of emotion and alignment with national cues.  The subtle invocations of American military traditions (the early 19th century US Marine Corp battle flag) and  the embrace of individual commitment to a war of liberation (from the US Declaration of Independence) work subliminally to underline key elements of the speech.  Lastly, the Observation considers the politics and burdens of gratitude. The rituals of respect and the development of the performance of state based fealty rituals in the post-global are very much in evidence. None of this is meant as a criticism.  Quite the contrary. More than any other set of leaders, both Mr. Biden and Mr. Zelenskyy appear to be among the most important actors in the reshaping of  the foundations and sensibilities of relations among political collectives and their stakeholders. Mr. Zelenskyy's remarks provide a window of clarity into its mechanics. 

The Observations and text of President Zelenskyy's remarks follow.

 

 

 

"From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli ": Brief Observations on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Address to a Joint Session of the U.S. Congress, 'We stand, we fight and we will win. Because we are united. Ukraine, America and the entire free world' 

1. The Text: The text is structured as a multi-layered battlefield board. To "win" one must succeed at each of the layers; and each of the layers is essential for leveraging power on the others.  But each layer of this battlefield boards has its own rules; and the rules change in the spaces between boards. Mr. Zelanskyy identifies two boards for his friends (and enemies) in the US Congress, and used text to describe the third.  The first is the "battle for the minds of the world." (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra).  The second is the conventional battle for lost territory ("we have to defeat the Kremlin on the battlefield" Ibid.). The third is described in terms the the triumph of a particular world order, ("This struggle will define – in what world our children and grandchildren will live" Ibid), and and of the ordering of political collectives within it ("The restoration of international legal order is our joint task" Ibid.). Let's consider each n turn as text and as meaning object.

A. The Battle for the minds of the world.  President Zelenskyy starts his speech on a high note--what he declares is the great victory for the Ukrainians (and their allies) "it gives me good reason to share with you our first joint victory – we defeated Russia in the battle for minds of the world." (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra).  . This battle has consequences. The obvious one can be dispatched in sort order: the battle for world opinion on the character of the conflict has been decisively moved forward.  The need to ensure that Russia is understood as the aggressor, that the invasion was an act of aggression, and that the tactic s of war violated (and viole) the rules based system for conflict was essential.  Yet that essence was meant meant to capture (necessarily) the entirety of world opinion.  It was directed first to the core of the OECD states, to Ukraine's European neighbors and then outward in more distant circles states farther from the peripheries of conflict and power. Nonetheless, a decisive victory is not a universal one.  And that goes to the issue of courage and fear.  The critical point here--that while the physical war is for the moment confined to Ukrainian territory, the battle for the "minds of the world" exposes those parts of the world with respect to which there is no hope of victory, and whose interests are increasingly opposed  to Ukraine and its friends and benefactors--allies and patrons.

Zelenskyy does not spend time on the obvious, but instead uses the narrative tactic on Congress itself.  He speaks to the fruits of this battle of the minds. The first is the freedom from fear ("We have no fear. Nor should anyone in the world have it" (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra)).  Here the discursive power on Americans ought to have been powerfully resonant with a narrative trope made famous by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his famous Four Freedoms Speech (Annual Message to Congress, 6 January 1941):

Pix credit here

In the future days we will seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms: * * *  The fourth is the freedom from fear--which, translated into world terms, seeks a world wide reduction or armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor--anywhere in the world. (Four Freedoms Speech)

 

It would not be surprising if someone on the Zelenskyy speech writing team was unaware of the Four Freedoms Speech, or more importantly of its commitment to arming friends and opposing their enemies as our own. The spirit of that speech permeates much of the Zelenskyy address to Congress. And the comparison was explicitly drawn: "Standing here today, I recall the words of the President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, which are so good for this moment: 'The American People in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory'."  (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra)). The hoped for resonance suggested a hope for its effect--to shore up the imperial center to its duty, and a reassurance that they ought not to be afraid in undertaking a duty that has been theirs  for almost a century. The outward victory is discursively intended to stiffen the resolve of a skittish ally whose guardianship of the international rules based order  appears to be borne increasingly by the periphery. 

The second is the need for courage ("Ukrainians gained this victory--and it gives us corage, which inspires the world" (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra). Here the courage comes in three levels. For Ukrainians, it speaks to the courage to continue to bleed; for the U.S., the courage to more decisively bear the burdens of its responsibilities "in uniting the global community to protect freedom and international law" (Ibid.); for Europeans  the courage to make something of their strength and independence (ibid.); and for the Russian people, the courage to through off the yoke of the current leadership ("he Russians will stand a chance to be free only when they defeat the Kremlin in their minds" (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra).    

 

B. The battle for territory.  If the battle for minds is, in its primary sense, bloodless, the battle for the territory of Ukraine is not. This is a battle measures in control, and accounted for in the dead, wounded, and traumatized, whose injuries will be carried for a lonmg time after the bloodletting ends. It is a battle that can be undertaken successfully as a function of the conviction of the worthiness of the cause--and thus the connection with the battle of the minds. It is well known that the conviction in the worthiness of a cause, and of the characterization of the actors as positive and negative, substantially increases the tolerance of sacrifice.  In the context of Republics, it has been well known for centuries that citizen armies are most effective (even when professionalized) and from much earlier it has been even better known that causes (religious for example) produces even greater incentive. To this the rituals and imageries of right, and the construction of evil (now terrorism) is essential.  A point at the center of Mr. Zelenskyy's non-textual address discussed below. The the Ukrainian allies, however, there isd reassurance in conviction.  That reassurance is cynical but also necessary (in the way that it might have been necessary to convince Louis XVI to support the American colonials against their sovereign in Parliament). US lives are not at stake--just its treasure and technology. What us requested beyond that is the power to solidify the borders between what is emerging as the territories of rules based international ordering (within which Ukraine has evidenced its fidelity) and opposing systems. 

 

C. The battle for the democratic world order.  Since 2014, and with increasing intensity since the 2022 invasion, President Zelenskyy has made one of the crown jewels of his his "battle for minds" the objective of convincing states that the authority of their rationalization of the world and its ordering is as much at stake in this war as Ukraine's territory. President Zelenskyy attempts here to move from the economics of "foreign war"--that is the supplications of an peripheral state for handouts to defend against the imperial ambitions of another state--with incidental connection to the interests of the donor state. A key point of the speech is the attempt to move the battle from that of discourse (the ordering of legitimacy) and territory (the war on the ground), to a wider war that the Americans cannot escape despite the delusion that they and their interests are insulated somehow. This was echoed in Mrs. Pelosi's invitation to the Ukrainian President: "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in her invitation to Zelenskyy to speak to lawmakers, said “the fight for Ukraine is the fight for democracy itself” and that they were looking forward to “hearing your inspiring message of unity, resilience and determination.” (Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy addresses Congress).  It was amplified by Mr Biden as well:

We understand in our bones that Ukraine’s fight is part of something much bigger," Biden said at a joint news conference after their meeting. Noting that it was the fourth night of Hanukkah, Biden drew on the Jewish holiday's "story of survival and resilience" to say, "Light will always prevail over darkness." (Standing alongside Zelenskyy, Biden pledges to aid Ukraine 'as long as it takes')

 Like Ukraine's need for arms, the "battle cannot be frozen or postponed. It cannot be ignored hoping that the ocean or something else will provide a protection" (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra). And the Ukrainian leader filled in the dotted lines tat connect the Ukrainian invasion to the heart of American interests. "From the United States to China, from Europe to Latin America, and from Africa to Australia – the world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow someone to stay aside – and at the same time – to feel safe when such a battle continues" (ibid).Here the Ukrainian President tied the themes of   freedom from fear and courage together as the weave that shapes the US-Ukraine alliance--not just against Russian aggression, but also for the protection of a liberal democratic and open world order of free peoples.

From the United States to China, from Europe to Latin America, and from Africa to Australia – the world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow someone to stay aside – and at the same time – to feel safe when such a battle continues. Our two nations are Allies in this battle. And next year will be a turning point. The point, when Ukrainian courage and American resolve must guarantee the future of our common freedom. The freedom of people, who stand for their values. (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra)

It is from here that President Zelenskyy makes the leap from text to imagery--and from abstractions to their incarnations in objects representative of the people and evocative of earlier battles with which the President seeks imagery alignment.

 

2. The Object-Symbols-Performance: "Words are not things, but as soon as there is a word, the object designated becomes a sign, which means precisely that it conceals  a hidden context within its manifest identity, that it reserves another face for another view focused on it" (Jean-Françoise Lyotard, Discours figure (Paris, Klincksieck, 1971), p. 41). Yet that face, concealed in text, can be revealed through performance, and through the signalling of acts and objects. In his address a Joint Session of the U.S. Congress, the Ukrainian President sought to combine the traditional power of text in serving to deepen a narrative, with the symbolic representation (and its emotive sub-tones) of a nation at war, one seeking help from a powerful patron and in return pledging a certain degree of fealty (in the feudal sense). That symbolic representation--President Zelenskyy's now signature uniform, and the ritual presentation of a Ukrainian flag signed by those persons who in affixing their names to this symbol of national identity--merit some foregrounding.The visual signalling deftly invoke not just emotive imagery, but a deep alignment with core documents and performances by the apex leaders of the liberal democracies during periods of intense violence.

 

A. The uniform. All officials are uniformed.  The uniform is a powerful signalling device that appears to be impossible to obliterate, even in the most democratically organized society.  Uniforms tell  one much about its wearer--caste, occupation, point of view, sub-collective affinities, dispositions and the like.  But sometimes they can also signal not merely a disciplinary power over its wearer, tools in the shaping of minds, but also instruments for projecting ideas. The wearer, in effect, becomes a billboard, a political statement, a visualization of principles, conviction, or action.  The Hijab in Iran after the murder of Mahsa Amini (Why Iranian women are risking everything by burning their hijabs ). 

 

Pix credit here

The usual uniform of the political figures draws from the sensibilities of conservative business attire with origins in European sensibilities now naturalized among elite castes worldwide. President Zelenskyy has worn his share of suits--along with ties and the other accessories that comfortably embed his body in its role. The suit masks its wearer, and irrespective of gender or gender fluidity, is meant to signal staus. More importantly perhaps, traditional business wear is meant to de materialize its wearer.  The body disappears into the office  and the status signaled by the choice of garment.  The garment of high ranking functionaries in contemporary society mimics to a disconcerting extent the de-corporealization of the renderings of early Byzantine officials.

 

From the start of the invasion, President Zelenskyy signaled the end of business and usual by a change of costume.  He discarded the dress of the international political class for that of the soldier. It signaled more than the move to a war status. 

Pix credit here

As has become something of a trademark for the 44-year-old Ukrainian leader, Zelenskyy wore his green military fatigues with a matching sweatshirt. . . As political historians were quick to note, arriving for a meeting with the president in casual military uniform may look unusually dressed-down, but it's not without precedent.  When British Prime Minister Winston Churchill visited the White House in 1941 — amid World War II — he did so in a one-piece romper suit, meant to be worn in the event of an air raid.  (Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Military Attire at the White House Draws Comparisons to Winston Churchill)

Of course, not all Americans were amused. The same elite crowd that worries about the value of expending American treasure (and providing military hardware and sanctions power) to the Ukrainians were quick to react to the visual messaging, the thrust fo which they at least were able to understand in full measure. Perhaps reflecting his own experience, or the scope of his reading and research,the television commentator Tucker Carlson opined that President Zelenskyy appeared at least to him to be dressed like a strip club owner. A colorful description, to be sure.  But also one meant to counter the imagery with imagery designed to diminsih Mr. Zelenskyy. "Commentator Tucker Carlson led the swipes at Zelensky, using his late night show on Fox News to accuse the Ukrainian leader of dressing like the 'manager of a strip club demanding money' amid the United States' own border woes" ('Show some respect, rent a suit': Tucker Carlson leads critics berating Zelensky for dressing like a STRIP CLUB OWNER during historic Washington DC visit where he made impassioned speech pleading for more funding; reporting as well: "Benny Johnson, a host on right-wing news channel Newsmax, tweeted. . .  'Track suit wearing eastern european con-man mafia. Our leaders fell for it. They have disgraced us all. What an incredible insult,' he said." ibid.). Perhaps it was the underscoring of the subliminal power (a generation ago the masculinity) implied by the costuming (Sculptured Soldiers and the Beauty of Discipline: Herder, Foucault and Masculinity). Effective if successful, but costly if it fails.

B. The Ritual of the Flags. It is a common thing to activate words by affixing a signature. That is the essence of written instruments.  But it is also the stuff of fundamental political acts--reduced to words, and thus reduced, attested and affirmed through the representative signature of the individuals so willing. The US Declaration of Independence is a marvelous example of this activation of words--so that they cease to be text an acquire a plasticity as the representation of the flesh and blood signing.  It represents, in the language of the US Declaration in which the signatories , through the act of signing their names, "mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." (US Declaration of Independence).

 

 

 

Pix credit here

 

 

From the Halls of Montezuma
To the Shores of Tripoli;
We fight our country's battles
In the air, on land and sea;
First to fight for right and freedom
And to keep our honor clean;
We are proud to claim the title
of United States Marine. (The Marine's Hymn; 1st Verse)

Many people recognize the words and music of the Marine's Hymn, one of the oldest service songs in the U.S. The music was taken from an opera by French composer Jacques Offenbach; the first two lines from  text inscribed on the Corps colors predating the Civil War. 

 

"The author of the words to the hymn is unknown. . . . The first two lines of the first verse were taken from words inscribed on the Colors of the Corps. After the war with the Barbary pirates in 1805 the Colors were inscribed with the words “To the Shores of Tripoli.” After Marines participated in the capture of Mexico City and the Castle of Chapultepec (also known as the Halls of Montezuma) in 1847, the words on the Colors were changed to read “From the shores of Tripoli to the Halls of Montezuma.” The unknown author of the first verse of the hymn reversed this order." (Ibid.). Echoes of this practice and its symbolism were hard to ignire in that image of President Zelenskyy presenting the Ukrainian flag to the American Vice President Harris and Speaker of the House of Representatives Pelosi.  And just in case the symbolism was lost, Mr. Zelenskyy supplied its text:

When I was in Bakhmut yesterday, our heroes gave me the flag. The battle flag. The flag of those who defend Ukraine, Europe and the world at the cost of their lives. They asked me to bring this flag to the US Congress – to members of the House of Representatives and Senators, whose decisions can save millions of people. So, let these decisions be taken! Let this flag stay with you, ladies and gentlemen! This flag is a symbol of our victory in this war! (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra)

This Ukrainian battle flag evoked not just a commitment to battle, but also something more profoundly powerful. The flag did not include the names of places recovered or sites of battle, but rather the signatures on the contract that is the flag, in the way that resonated with the signage of the US Declaration of Independence.The power here is evoked by the battle flag (so called by President Zelenskyy in his remarks); but also a declaration not merely of independence but of the willingness of the declarations to put their lives and firtunes to the test in its defense.  An odd thing really--where here Mr. Biden plays the3 role of Louis XVI, and the United States France. And in the process, Mr, Zelenskyy pledged a loyalty not merely to its primary beneficiary, but to the system which that beneficiary has been charged with protecting.

 

3. The performance of respect and the price of gratitude. Respect among states, vertically arranged in power and dignity, produces a mutual set of duties. Gratitude among those bonded by connections of proffered fealty, is a heavy burden indeed.  And it is not made lighter by the whimsy of a fickle and self-absorbed overlord. And, indeed in the complex environment that is US politics, counter imagery was on display among those who sought to use it to dampen enthusiasm for the picture Mr. Zelenskyy sought to paint through texct, performance and image. " Joining the criticism was Donald Trump Jr., son of former president Donald Trump, who called Zelensky a 'welfare queen' on Wednesday morning" (Show some respect, rent a suit', supra).

 

 

 

Pix credit here

A. Bargain or begging? Critical to a discourse of gratitude is the construction of a narrative of giving.  We are back here on the first field of battle described above, but time focused on the relationship between patron state and its dependencies. And like it or not that us the relationship. Indeed to some respect, this visit, and the remarks, constitute an act (now ancient and well integrated  into Western culture) of homage  performed by a ritual act of fealty (Lehnseid).   It's variation took place simultaneously in China where the emissary of the Russian dependency traveled to perform homage--but in that case in the style of Tang dynasty practice. In contrast to Mr. Zelenskyy's remarks, Mr. Medvedev  played the role of the foreign emissary of a Tang dynasty tributary. And tribute--in the post global--is measured by trade terms and access to resources. 

 

Mr. Zelenskyy's remarks, understood as the performance of ritualized fealty, also assumed a different character in the post global. The language was of alignment and loyalty (from the dependent state to its patron) and a promise to protect the vassal. But there was more to it than the simple two way relationship of ancient times (though the rituals remain surprisingly vibrant).  First fealty was performed to his American benefactors, but more importantly a superior pledge of fealty was made to a mutual overlord--to an abstraction--the rules based democratic order to which both the US and Ukraine owe fealty  and whose person (thus homage) both are. Thus the fundamental and polycentric character of post global empire.  The United State may stand at the center of a post global domain constituted of dependencies (states and pathways to production through states). Yet both the United States and its dependencies are equally subject to the overlordship of an idea--the ideal of a liberal democratic space driven by markets and principles of individual sovereignty within collective boundaries. 

 

It is with this in mind that a critical passage in Mr. Zelenskyy's remarks makes greater sense:

Financial assistance is also critically important. And I would like to thank you for both, financial packages you have already provided us with, and the ones you may be willing to decide on. Your money is not charity. It's an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way.  (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra)

Note the narrative of investment.  Charity suggests a simple vertical hierarchy.  Yet Mr. Zelenskyy's three battlefield theory suggests that simplicity ended with the last century. In place of giving, the United States us investing, not just in a vertically structured relationship of dependence, but also for the perpetuation of horizontally crafted order in which both Ukraine and the US share equal risk and responsibility.  Irregular war in the post global has generated irregular and polycentric international relations in which not just states but also the abstractions that may be manifested in the institutions of the rules based international order (even one in which the US presides).  "The restoration of international legal order is our joint task. We need peace. Ukraine has already offered proposals, which I just discussed with President Biden – our Peace Formula" (Zelenskyy Remarks, supra).

B. The paramount obligation  of states is to protect the international order. In this respect President Zelenskyy produces an interaction between the first and third tiers of battle. First he deepens the first tier narrative of Russia as a terrorist state--a better organized ISIS; a state taken over by a criminal gang. That position allows a distinction (an old one) to be made between the Russian people and those in charge.  That has a long pedigree in international law, certainly (respecting recognition at least). And it creates a space where Russian internal politics may run its course.

These observations end where it started--with the consideration of the consequences of the interplay of text, performance, and ritual objects in the construction of identity and the practice of solidarity. Mr. Zelenskyy's team appears well aware of this power--and increasing adept at deploying it--for survival now, and to augment its place in the (liberal democratic and Anglo-European) world order tomorrow.  

Humanity, together or within its multiple and dynamic sub-collectives—then, can be understood both as the bannerman of the individuals who together constitute it, and as the banner—the flag—that itself is the standard that signifies the constitution of humanity. The identity of humanity is itself as much in its banner as it is thereby reflected—the flag is both a performance of collective identity and the means by which the individual can perform such identity; 26 it is swaddling cloth, shield, badge, and shroud. “You might ask mockingly: ‘A flag? What’s that? A stick with a rag on it?’ No sir, a flag is much more. With a flag you lead men, for a flag men live and die.”27 These banners are not merely the stuff of rectangular cloth.28 They are signs that can be trampled; 29 it is an object onto which its colors can be projected. 30
 

A flag—a banner or standard—then, makes meaning in a reflexive way, the way a lawyer translate words from object to symbol invested with a meaning capable of supporting a community of common meaning making. 31 In the process of incarnating abstraction into objects, the identity between the object, its significs and its target produces the closed loop that produces the merger between abstraction and flesh that is the stuff of identity. 32 Individuals, and their collectives, then, are bannermen for the incarnated identities the banner represents; at the same time the banner is itself the intangible space within which individuals may order a world-reality complete in itself with memory, order and progress.33 (Larry Catá Backer, 'Foreword: Bannermen and Heralds: The Identity of Flags; the Ensigns of Identity,' Flags, Color, and the Legal Narrative: Public Memory, Identity, and Critique (Anne Wagner and Sarah Marusek Editors; Springer 2021; p. ix)

 President Zelenskyy performs as the bannerman of Ukraine; but that banner signals fealty to a common overlord. By serving Ukraine, the United States complies with its own obligations to the world order it has created and to which it still retains a leading responsibility. On his return to Ukraine, Mr. Zelenskyy addressed the Ukrainian people in hopeful terms: "We are returning from Washington - we are coming with good results. With something that will really help." (When we say "patriots" in Ukraine and in the United States, we equally mean the protection of the state and people). Only time will tell whether and in what way this hope may be realized--through narrative, through combat, and through the proteciton of the juridico-political construction of the rules based international order.

*      *      *      *      *      *    

We stand, we fight and we will win. Because we are united. Ukraine, America and the entire free world - address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy in a joint meeting of the US Congress

22 December 2022 - 07:39

Dear Americans!

In all states, cities and communities. All those who value freedom and justice. Who cherish it as strongly, as we, Ukrainians, in all our cities, in each and every family. I hope my words of respect and gratitude resonate in each American heart!

Madam Vice President, I thank you for your efforts in helping Ukraine! Madam Speaker, you bravely visited Ukraine during the full-fledged war, thank you very much! It is a great honor, a great privilege to be here!

Dear members of the Congress – representatives of both parties – who also visited Kyiv! Esteemed Congressmen and Senators – from both parties – who will visit Ukraine, I’m sure, in the future! Dear representatives of diaspora – present in this chamber and spread across the country! Dear journalists!

It's a great honor for me to be at the U.S. Congress and speak to you and all Americans!

Against all odds and doom and gloom scenarios, Ukraine did not fall. Ukraine is alive and kicking.

And it gives me good reason to share with you our first joint victory – we defeated Russia in the battle for minds of the world. We have no fear. Nor should anyone in the world have it.

Ukrainians gained this victory – and it gives us courage, which inspires the entire world.

Americans gained this victory – and that's why you have succeeded in uniting the global community to protect freedom and international law.

Europeans gained this victory – and that's why Europe is now stronger and more independent than ever.

The Russian tyranny has lost control over us and it will never influence our minds again.

Yet, we have to do whatever it takes to ensure that countries of the Global South also gain such victory.

I know one more thing – the Russians will stand a chance to be free only when they defeat the Kremlin in their minds.

Yet, the battle continues! And we have to defeat the Kremlin on the battlefield.

This battle is not only for the territory – for this or another part of Europe. This battle is not only for life, freedom and security of Ukrainians or any other nation, which Russia attempts to conquer. This struggle will define – in what world our children and grandchildren will live and then – their children and grandchildren. It will define whether it will be a democracy – for Ukrainians and for Americans – for all.

This battle cannot be frozen or postponed. It cannot be ignored hoping that the ocean or something else will provide a protection.

From the United States to China, from Europe to Latin America, and from Africa to Australia – the world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow someone to stay aside – and at the same time – to feel safe when such a battle continues.

Our two nations are Allies in this battle.

And next year will be a turning point. The point, when Ukrainian courage and American resolve must guarantee the future of our common freedom. The freedom of people, who stand for their values.

Ladies and Gentlemen!

Americans!

Yesterday – before coming here to Washington DC – I was at the frontline, in our Bakhmut. In our stronghold in the East of Ukraine – in the Donbas.

The Russian military and mercenaries have been attacking Bakhmut non-stop since May. They have been attacking it day and night. But Bakhmut stands.

Last year seventy thousand people lived there in Bakhmut and now only few civilians stay.

Every inch of that land is soaked in blood. Roaring guns sound every hour. Trenches in the Donbas change hands several times a day in fierce combat and even hand fighting. But the Ukrainian Donbas stands.

Russians use everything they have against Bakhmut and our other beautiful cities.

The occupiers have a significant advantage in artillery. They have an advantage in ammunition. They have much more missiles and planes than we ever had.

But our Defense Forces stand. And we all are proud of them.

The Russian tactic is primitive. They burn down and destroy everything they see. They sent thugs to the frontlines. They sent convicts to the war...

They threw everything against us – similar to the other tyranny, which in the Battle of the Bulge threw everything it had against the free world. Just like the brave American soldiers, which held their lines and fought back Hitler’s forces during the Christmas of 1944, brave Ukrainian soldiers are doing the same to Putin’s forces this Christmas. Ukraine holds its lines and will never surrender!

So, here is the frontline – the tyranny, which has no lack of cruelty – against the lives of free people.

And your support is crucial – not just to stand in such fights, but to get to the turning point. To win on the battlefield.

We have artillery. Yes. Thank you. Is it enough? Honestly, not really. To ensure Bakhmut is not just a stronghold that holds back the Russian army – but for the Russian army to completely pull out – more cannons and shells are needed.

If so, just like the battle of Saratoga, the fight for Bakhmut will change the trajectory of our war for independence and freedom.

If your «Patriots» stop the Russian terror against our cities, it will let Ukrainian patriots work to the full to defend our freedom.

When Russia cannot reach our cities by its artillery, it tries to destroy them with missile attacks. More than that, Russia found an Ally in its genocidal policy – Iran.

Iranian deadly drones, sent to Russia in hundreds, became a threat to our critical infrastructure. That is how one terrorist has found the other. It is just a matter of time – when they will strike against your other allies, if we do not stop them now. We must do it!

I believe there should be no taboos between us in our alliance. Ukraine never asked the American soldiers to fight on our land instead of us. I assure you that Ukrainian soldiers can perfectly operate American tanks and planes themselves.

Financial assistance is also critically important. And I would like to thank you for both, financial packages you have already provided us with, and the ones you may be willing to decide on. Your money is not charity. It's an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way.  

Russia could stop its aggression if it wanted to, but you can speed up our victory. I know it.

And it will prove to any potential aggressor that no one can succeed in breaking national borders, committing atrocities and reigning over people against their will.

It would be naive to wait for steps towards peace from Russia – which enjoys being a terrorist state. Russians are still poisoned by the Kremlin.

The restoration of international legal order is our joint task. We need peace. Ukraine has already offered proposals, which I just discussed with President Biden – our Peace Formula.

Ten points, which should and must be implemented for our joint security – guaranteed for decades ahead.

And the Summit, which can be held.

I am glad to stress that President Biden supported our peace initiative today. Each of you, ladies and gentlemen, can assist in its implementation – to ensure that America’s leadership remains solid, bicameral and bipartisan.

You can strengthen sanctions to make Russia feel how ruinous its aggression truly is.

It is in your power to help us bring to justice everyone, who started this unprovoked and criminal war. Let's do it!

Let the terrorist state be held responsible for its terror and aggression, and compensate all losses done by this war.

Let the world see that the United States is here!

Ladies and Gentlemen!

Americans!

In two days, we will celebrate Christmas. Maybe, candlelit. Not because it is more romantic. But because there will be no electricity. Millions won't have neither heating nor running water. All of this will be the result of Russian missile and drone attacks on our energy infrastructure. But we do not complain.

We do not judge and compare whose life is easier.

Your well-being is the product of your national security – the result of your struggle for independence and your many victories.

We, Ukrainians, will also go through our war of independence and freedom with dignity and success.

We'll celebrate Christmas – and even if there is no electricity, the light of our faith in ourselves will not be put out. If Russian missiles attack us – we'll do our best to protect ourselves. If they attack us with Iranian drones and our people will have to go to bomb shelters on Christmas eve – Ukrainians will still sit down at a holiday table and cheer up each other. And we don't have to know everyone's wish as we know that all of us, millions of Ukrainians, wish the same – victory. Only victory.

We already built strong Ukraine – with strong people, strong army, and strong institutions. Together with you!

We develop strong security guarantees for our country and for entire Europe and the world. Together with you!

And also – together with you! – we’ll put in place everyone, who will defy freedom.

This will be the basis to protect democracy in Europe and the world over.

Now, on this special Christmas time, I want to thank you. All of you. I thank every American family, which cherishes the warmth of its home and wishes the same warmth to other people.

I thank President Biden and both parties at the Senate and the House – for your invaluable assistance.

I thank your cities and your citizens, who supported Ukraine this year, who hosted our people, who waved our national flags, who acted to help us.

Thank you all! From everyone, who is now at the frontline. From everyone, who is awaiting victory. 

Standing here today, I recall the words of the President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, which are so good for this moment: "The American People in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory".

The Ukrainian People will win, too. Absolutely. I know that everything depends on us. On Ukrainian Armed Forces! Yet, so much depends on the world! So much in the world depends on you!

When I was in Bakhmut yesterday, our heroes gave me the flag. The battle flag. The flag of those who defend Ukraine, Europe and the world at the cost of their lives. They asked me to bring this flag to the US Congress – to members of the House of Representatives and Senators, whose decisions can save millions of people.

So, let these decisions be taken!

Let this flag stay with you, ladies and gentlemen!

This flag is a symbol of our victory in this war!

We stand, we fight and we will win. Because we are united. Ukraine, America and the entire free world.

May God protect our brave troops and citizens! May God forever bless the United States of America!

Merry Christmas and a happy victorious new year!

Слава Україні!