Davos Discourse 2: Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine--Searching for Europe and Ukraine Within it

Pix credit New York Times

 

Europe deserves to be more than just a bystander, with its leaders reduced to posting on X after an agreement has already been made. Europe needs to shape the terms of those deals. (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,)

The World Economic Forum held annually at Davos, provides a stage on which those who manage the world in the name of whatever forms of democratic solidarity they embrace (or not) may perform for each other, and in that way signal principle, narrative, and objectives-based intentions. But it is also a lace where those performances serve to layer the ruling narratives through which the mechanisms of controlling apparatus may be framed, and those subject to them managed. 

In 2024, the Davos performances were particularly useful as the last full throated expression of the fractures and points of converge between what had then emerged as the ruling ideologies for global governance, and with it the management of the masses as instruments thereof before the start of hat might be significant transformations heralded by the start of Mr. Trump's 2nd term in the US Presidency, which, at the time, and certainly among this crowd, was thought improbable in January 2024. I chose three speeches to focus on: Mr. Milei of Argentina as the projection of the markets driven vision; Ms. Von der Leyen of the European Union for the emerging vision of tightly integrated managerial techno-bureaucracy directed toward the realization of public policy; and Mr. Li Qiang  of China for an elegant exposition of the Marxist-Leninist  vision for vanguard based hierarchically managed global systems. As such, and in retrospect, it marked a very nice historical moment capturing a time and a sensibility on the eve of its irrelevance. All three focused on trust but in three distinct forms: (1) Chinese Premier Li Qiang  offered trust in a vanguard state representing global leading forces dedicated to the realization of normatively identifiable objectives;  (2) EU Commission President Ursula von de Leyen offered trust in a techno-bureaucracy guiding a rationalized process embedding normatively infused values; and (3) Argentine President Milei offered an oracle of distrust in the form of a warning: trust no collective other than the capitalist collective. 

In 2025 the narrative performances in and as Davos has taken a much more interesting turn. Where, in retrospect, Davos 2024 crystalized a moment in timer that may be passing, Davos 2025 is that cold water splash that jolts one to seeing things differently, or that recalls and tries to hold on to dreams of the past. Mr. Trump's address provided a glimpse of a future that appears to offer a convergence of Chinese hub-spoke statist model and the leading role of a state-private capitalist collective all grounded in narratives of state integrity, rationalized order and win-win deal making (here). 

But where does that leave those States that are not either at the core of state leadership and involved in conflict with aggressive formerly imperial powers with an old school territory grounded expansionist agenda. Perhaps it was to that question--likely unconsciously on the mind--that Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine offered some thoughts. Ukraine represents the unhappy middle of an emerging order--too big to fail nicely within streams of post-global imperial production, value and supply chains (with control benefits for the center--either U.S, Chinese, or E.U. style). At the same time it is too small  to (not yet anyway) play a role as a middle power. That may come, but not with Russian and North Korean (plus only security services know who else) troops siting on largish chunks of Ukrainian territory and a host a greater powers incapable even of making good on promises consigned to a piece of paper of 1991 that have been devalued substantially since. 

The Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine follows below with some brief comments here:

 

1. The image that was used on the WEF forum for Mr. Zelenskyy's speech, above, perhaps best captured the moment of the remarks. To some large measure, Mr. Zelenskyy was speaking to himself. There was something of a closed loop--the person of Mr. Zelenskyy seeking to connect with the vanguard audience of patrons and potential patrons, while hovering to the side and overhead the virtual image of Mr. Zelenskyy capturing the nightmare of the president speaking to himself. That does not make the remarks any less necessary--but from a semiotic perspective it might suggest that the value of the remarks were in its performance rather than in its text. The the audience Mr. Zelenskyy's presence was a necessary as are, for example, the presence of colorfully dressed traditionally marginalized peoples and others at human rights related forums in Geneva. A necessary prop that, semiotically at least, serves as a decorative object adorning the audience, the signification of which is more closely aligned with the construction of their self-cognition than anything else. And so too the deals and positions (The Office of the President Held a Videoconference on Implementing Agreements Reached During Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Meetings in Davos) with respect to which their object must do as they can. It s not for nothing that traditionally leaders of territories about to be carved up by others are invited to out facing theatrical events and tend to be left in the waiting rooms when leading actors then meet to strike a deal. But who knows, may this time it is different.

Pix credit here

2. Still, the discursive elements of the address ought not to be undervalued.  Text tends to linger long after images corrode. And text tends to be a malleable commodity, the interpretation and application of which can be adjusted to suit the times. In this case, text, too, can be used to project onto other actors, not in the room, who might matter to those who are. And in that context, Mr. Zelenskyy tried to aim for the center of  what he might hope to be the center of the target of the question of Europe (and therefor of Ukraine's role in it--whatever it winds up being). 

I want to talk about the future of Europe with you – which basically means the future of most people here. Right now, all eyes are on Washington. But who’s actually watching Europe at the moment? That’s the key question for Europe. And it’s not just about ideas. It’s about people, first of all. It’s about how they’ll live in a world that’s constantly changing. * * * Most of the world’s now thinking – so, what’s going happen to their relationship with America? What will happen to alliances? To support? To trade? How does President Trump plan to end wars? But no-one is asking these kinds of questions about Europe. And we need to be honest about that. ( Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,)

That weak underbelly of being European had two potential benefits--the first is to prod Europe into some sort of autonomy and the second is to manage that autonomous thinking in ways that might benefit Ukraine.  Strategically it had a greater value--by situating his rhetoric on Europe he was able to continue his discursive campaign to embed Ukraine in and as Europe; on the European frontier certainly, but within Europe.  Reminding Europe that Ukraine is an internal European problem, then created th structures within which Ukraine can further its goals of political, social, and military integration in Europe. .

3. And then the challenge--how or should Europe adjust to a role as a second or third order subaltern in the emerging post-global bi-polar imperial system?

Ladies and gentlemen, Europe can’t afford to be second or third in line for its allies. If that happens, the world will start moving forward without Europe, and that’s a world that will not be comfortable or beneficial for all Europeans. Europe needs to compete for the top spot in priorities, alliances and technological development. ( Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,)

On the one hand, he targets European self-conceptions and pride. On the other hand he also olds up a mirror to an aggregation of States that collectively recall their past and may not understand their role in the future. To that end he speaks, though quite subtly, to Europe as a middle power--one facing another middle power which, like Europe, once defined and enforced a territorially based imperial order.  And then an appeal to ego--is collective Europe no higher on the hierarchy than Russia, or ought it to be and act as an amalgam at a higher rung. Put differently, Mr. Zelenskyy suggests that collective Europe might think of itself and act as something greater than the middle level powers that Russia, Iran, Brazil, South Africa and the Member States of the European Union represent. 

Even though Russia’s overall economic potential is way smaller than Europe’s, it produces several times more ammo and military equipment than all of Europe combined. * * *  Putin signed the new strategic deal with Iran. He already has the comprehensive treaty with North Korea. Whom do they make such deals against? Against you, against all of us. Against Europe, against America. We must not forget about it. It is not by chance. These are their strategic priorities, and our priorities must match the challenge – in politics, and in defence, and in economy. Such threats can only be countered together. ( Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,)

Pix credit here

4.  It is then that Mr. Zelenskyy drives home the point--a Europe that is augmented with Ukraine, and the source of a victory over what,consequently will be understood to be a lesser power, will open the doors (or keep them open) to participation at the highest levels of post-global political management of subalterns. "Next, right now, it’s not clear whether Europe will even have a seat at the table when the war against our country ends. We see how much influence China has on Russia and we are deeply grateful to Europe for all the support it’s given our country during this war. But will President Trump listen to Europe, or will he negotiate with Russia and China without Europe? Europe needs to learn how to fully take care of itself, so that the world can’t afford to ignore it." (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,). The point is actually quite interesting, if only for the intertwining, discursively, of the vision of a European trajectory toward middle tier power, and the suggestion that this trajectory can be softened if not reversed with the integration of Ukraine in Europe and the defeat of the challenge posed by Russia--to Europe. The point is emphasized through repetition later in the address: "Europe must have a seat at the table when deals about war and peace are made. And I’m not just talking about Ukraine here. This should be the standard." (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,).

5. To do that, Mr. Zelenskyy makes the same point that U.S. Presidents have mader since the Presidency of John F. Kennedy--that Europe can no longer afford to free ride on the Americans if it means to retain its place as a power in its own right. There is irony ere; and likely few interested in the point.  But there it is: "If it takes 5% of GDP to cover defence, then so be it, 5% it is. And there is no need to play with people’s emotions that defence should be compensated at the expense of medicine or pensions or something else – that is really not fair.We’ve already set-up models of cooperation for Ukraine’s defence that can make all of Europe stronger." (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,). But of course there is more to it than that.  One thought leaps out--third order states have very little wiggle room; as most of them have come to understand, one must be prepared to manage patron relations to survive.  The United States is now in play as it concerns Ukraine. In its place Europe provides an alternative--but that leaves open the question--what sort of compelling narrative is available to make that happen.  A strong Europe, and Ukraine within it, is as much protection for Ukraine as Ukraine suggests it is for Europe.

Pix credit here

6. Mr. Zelenskyy criticizes, and not subtly, the subaltern behaviors of leaders of certain smaller European States. "For example, the Prime Minister of Slovakia is not seeking access to the US gas but does not lose hope to enjoy US security umbrella." (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,). But Mr. Zelenskyy also criticizes the current European regulatory model, which he suggests, like Mr. Trump, will contribute to the comprehensive regulatory supremacy of the State bit at the cost of leadership status--a view quite hostile to the deeply held guiding premises of European elites. "Europe is often more focused on regulation than on freedom, but when smart regulation is needed, Brussels hesitates. We should ensure maximum tech development in Europe and together make all significant decisions – for the whole Europe." (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,). One hears echoes here of the much reviled European challenges to the emerging regulatory model--but at the same times its echoes in recently leaked positions of France and Germany with respect to the EU Omnibus (reported on here) and the Report by Mario Draghi on "The future of European competitiveness,"mentioned positively by the EU Commission President van de Leyen in her own Davos Remarks as an important signpost on the road to European regulatory efficiency.

7. And that brings Mr. Zelenskyy back to the principal point: "Europe deserves to be strong. And for this, Europe needs the EU and NATO. Is this possible without Ukraine and without a just end to Russia’s war against Ukraine? I’m certain the answer is ‘no’." (Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy,). There is no Europe, or at least any Europe worth worrying about without Ukraine, and there is no Ukraine without Europe. The path to that Union requires not just immediate European action on the Russian threat, but much longer term rethinking about Europe's sense of itself. That path is quite clear in its objectives but ambiguous in its fulfillment. "Europe must shape history for itself and its allies to remain not just relevant, but alive and great." Even if the intended audience listened, it is not clear what they heard.  There is another Europe possible (among many), and that one may neither include Ukraine and remind one more of Italy or Germany in the 15th century--an idea in search of itself. Or it may become the bright light of post-global administrative managerialism in the service of public policy at least within its sphere of influence. The question of Ukrainian relevance to the European project remains very much in play. 

 

Pix credit here

Davos 2025: Special Address by Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine

Jan 21, 2025

 

Ladies and gentlemen,

I want to talk about the future of Europe with you – which basically means the future of most people here.

Right now, all eyes are on Washington. But who’s actually watching Europe at the moment?

That’s the key question for Europe. And it’s not just about ideas. It’s about people, first of all. It’s about how they’ll live in a world that’s constantly changing.

Twenty hours ago, President Trump’s inauguration took place in Washington. And now everyone is waiting to see what he’ll do next. His first executive orders have already shown clear priorities.

Most of the world’s now thinking – so, what’s going happen to their relationship with America? What will happen to alliances? To support? To trade? How does President Trump plan to end wars?

But no-one is asking these kinds of questions about Europe. And we need to be honest about that.

 When we in Europe look at the United States as our ally, it’s clear – they are an indispensable ally.

In times of war, everyone worries will the United States stay with them? Every ally worries about that. But does anyone in the United States worry that Europe might abandon them someday – might stop being their ally? The answer is ‘no’.

Washington does not believe Europe can bring them something that is really substantial.

I remember last year’s Asia Security Summit in Singapore – the Shangri-La Dialogue. There, representatives of the United States delegation openly said their top security priority is the Indo-Pacific region, the second is the Middle East and the Gulf, and only the third is Europe – and that was under the previous administration.

Will President Trump even notice Europe? Does he see NATO as necessary? And will he respect EU institutions?

Ladies and gentlemen, Europe can’t afford to be second or third in line for its allies. If that happens, the world will start moving forward without Europe, and that’s a world that will not be comfortable or beneficial for all Europeans.

Europe needs to compete for the top spot in priorities, alliances and technological development.

We’re at yet another turning point, which some see as a problem for Europe, but others call a chance. Europe must establish itself as a strong global player; as an indispensable player.

Let’s not forget – there’s no ocean separating European countries from Russia. And European leaders should remember this – battles involving North Korean soldiers are now happening in places geographically closer to Davos than to Pyongyang.

 

Russia is turning into a version of North Korea – a country where human life means nothing, but they have nuclear weapons and a burning desire to make their neighbours’ lives miserable.

Even though Russia’s overall economic potential is way smaller than Europe’s, it produces several times more ammo and military equipment than all of Europe combined. That’s exactly the path of wars Moscow chooses to take.

Putin signed the new strategic deal with Iran. He already has the comprehensive treaty with North Korea. Whom do they make such deals against? Against you, against all of us. Against Europe, against America.

We must not forget about it. It is not by chance. These are their strategic priorities, and our priorities must match the challenge – in politics, and in defence, and in economy.

Such threats can only be countered together. Even when it comes to army size. Russia can field about 1.3-1.5 million troops. We’ve got more than 800,000 in our military. Second after us comes France, with over 200,000; then Germany, Italy and the UK. Everyone else has less. This isn’t a situation where one country can secure itself alone. It’s about all of us standing together to mean something.

 

For now, thankfully, the influence of Iran’s regime is weakening. This gives hope for Syria and Lebanon. And they should too become examples of how life can recover after war.

Ukraine’s already stepping in to support the new Syria. Our ministers have been to Damascus and we’ve launched a food aid programme for Syria called Food from Ukraine. And we’re getting our partners involved to invest in these deliveries and in building food production facilities. Europe could totally step in as a security donor for Syria – time to stop getting headaches from that direction.

And Europe together with America should put paid to the Iranian threat.

Next, right now, it’s not clear whether Europe will even have a seat at the table when the war against our country ends.

We see how much influence China has on Russia and we are deeply grateful to Europe for all the support it’s given our country during this war. But will President Trump listen to Europe, or will he negotiate with Russia and China without Europe?

Europe needs to learn how to fully take care of itself, so that the world can’t afford to ignore it.

It’s vital to maintain unity in Europe, because the world doesn’t care about just Budapest or Brussels – it cares about Europe as a whole.

We need a united European security and defence policy, and all European countries must be willing, willing to spend as much on security as is truly needed – not just as much as they’ve gotten used to during years of neglect.

If it takes 5% of GDP to cover defence, then so be it, 5% it is. And there is no need to play with people’s emotions that defence should be compensated at the expense of medicine or pensions or something else – that is really not fair.

We’ve already set-up models of cooperation for Ukraine’s defence that can make all of Europe stronger. We’re building drones together – including some totally unique ones that no-one else in the world has. We’re producing artillery together – and in Ukraine, it’s much cheaper and faster than in any other country in the world.

And investing now in Ukrainian drones’ production is investing not only in security of Europe but the ability of Europe to be a security guarantor for other vital regions.

And we need to start building air defence systems together – ones that can actually handle all types of cruise and ballistic missiles. Europe needs its own version of the Iron Dome, something that can deal with any kind of threat. 

 

We can’t rely on goodwill from a few capitals when it comes to Europe’s security whether it’s Washington, Berlin, Paris, London, Rome, or – after Putin kicks the bucket – some imaginary democrat in Moscow some day.

And we need to make sure no European country is dependent on a single energy supplier – especially not Russia. Right now, things are on our side – President Trump is going to export more energy.

But Europe needs to step up and do more long-term work to secure real energy independence. You can’t keep buying gas from Moscow while also expecting security guarantees, help, and backup from the Americans. That’s just wrong.

For example, the Prime Minister of Slovakia is not seeking access to the US gas but does not lose hope to enjoy US security umbrella.

Europe must have a seat at the table when deals about war and peace are made. And I’m not just talking about Ukraine here. This should be the standard.

Europe deserves to be more than just a bystander, with its leaders reduced to posting on X after an agreement has already been made. Europe needs to shape the terms of those deals.

Next, we need a completely new, bolder approach to tech companies and technological development. If we waste time, Europe will lose this century.

Now, Europe is falling behind in the development of artificial intelligence.

Already, TikTok’s algorithms are more powerful than some governments. Already, the fate of small countries depends more on the owners of tech companies than on their laws.

Already, Europe is not leading in the global tech race, falling behind both America and China. This isn’t some minor issue – it’s about weakness, first technological and economic, then political.

Europe is often more focused on regulation than on freedom, but when smart regulation is needed, Brussels hesitates. We should ensure maximum tech development in Europe and together make all significant decisions – for the whole Europe.

From weapons production to tech development – Europe must lead.

Europe must become the most attractive market in the world – and that’s achievable.

And finally, Europe must be able to guarantee peace and security for everybody – for itself and for others, for those in the world who matter to Europe.

Europe deserves to be strong. And for this, Europe needs the EU and NATO.

Is this possible without Ukraine and without a just end to Russia’s war against Ukraine? I’m certain the answer is ‘no’.

Only real security guarantees for us will serve as real security guarantees for everyone in Europe. And we must ensure that America also sees us as essential. For that to happen, America’s focus must shift to Europe. So that one day, in Washington, they will say – all eyes on Europe. And not because of war, but because of the opportunities in Europe.

Europe needs to know how to defend itself.

Hundreds of millions of people visit Europe to see its landmarks, to learn from its cultural heritage. Millions in the world dream of living like the Europeans do. Will we be able to keep it and pass it to our children? If we in Europe can answer positively, America will need Europe as well as other global players.

Europe must shape history for itself and its allies to remain not just relevant, but alive and great.

Thank you.

Slava Ukraini!