What motivates Putin to disseminate false information about Zelensky?

Why is Putin disseminating misinformation regarding Zelensky?

The Russian leader publicly queries who Russia can negotiate with in Ukraine as the president's term is ending. Putin is spewing falsehoods for a reason.

For months, the Ukrainian military intelligence agency HUR has cautioned that Russia will launch another offensive after May 20th: that President Volodymyr Zelensky should no longer be considered a legitimate leader of Ukraine after this date. The term of the Ukrainian president is five years; Zelensky assumed office on May 20, 2019.

Not only Kremlin propagandists and the Russian foreign intelligence service SVR have embraced this narrative. Putin, who is himself facing doubts about his legitimacy at the start of his fifth term, has repeatedly brought up the idea of the supposed end of Zelensky's authority as president.

This is vital for Russia, according to Putin, as Moscow needs to know who it can negotiate with in the event of talks, with whom it might potentially sign agreements in the future. "With whom should we negotiate?" he asked during a trip to Belarus. The "legitimacy of the incumbent head of state" is finished. On Tuesday, the Russian leader repeated this claim and cited Article 111 of the Ukrainian Constitution, asserting that the presidential powers should be transferred to the chair of the parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, after the expiration of the five-year term.

The Myth of the "Coup"

Following the Maidan Revolution 2013/2014, the Kremlin's perception of the purported legitimacy of the Ukrainian presidents shifted based on political circumstances. Following the flight of former President Viktor Yanukovych to Russia, Moscow initially claimed that the Ukrainian constitution did not accommodate a president fleeing to another nation. According to the constitution, the president could only be removed if they had not shown up at their work for a month. However, Ukraine could not afford these conditions under the chaotic circumstances. The Kremlin leveraged this as the basis for the popular myth of the "coup" in Kiev.

Later presidents Petro Poroshenko and Volodymyr Zelensky, who clearly won their elections, were seen as legitimate by Moscow but not congratulated on their triumphs. Putin has spoken on the phone with both and met them within the framework of the so-called Normandy Format, where the then German Chancellor and the French head of state were also involved. In each escalation of relations between the two countries, Russia maintained that Poroshenko or Zelensky had come to power through an "ultranationalist coup" in 2014. "This regime is wholly and completely an outcome of the 2014 coup," Putin said in his lengthy Ukraine speech on February 21, 2022, where he did not yet declare the Russian invasion of the neighboring country, but already justified it. Since then, Russia only refers to the "Kiev regime."

This narrative has no correlation with reality: Firstly, Poroshenko won in May 2014 in free and fair elections in the first round - and in the runoff, which was needed five years later, Zelensky defeated him with nearly 73%. However, does it have anything to do with Putin's assertions? The question of whether Ukraine can and should hold elections during martial law has been a topic of discussion in Ukraine for the past year. Outside pressure has been minimal, while internal pressure has been greater. Only the Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg and the Republican US Senator Lindsey Graham attended the election.

What Putin claims about Article 111 is untrue. The claims that Zelensky's powers would expire primarily stem from two constitutional articles. Article 83 states that in the event of martial law, parliament's powers are extended - and Article 103 defines the five-year term of the Ukrainian president. (For comparison, the German Basic Law expressly permits the postponement of elections in the event of war.) The long-standing martial law law and the election law both stipulate that all elections are postponed during martial law. Finally, there isn't anything in the mentioned Article 111 of the Ukrainian Constitution that states that after the expiration of the five-year term under martial law, the president's powers would be transferred to the parliamentary speaker.

Articles 108 to 112 of the Ukrainian Constitution establish the principle of power continuity. For example, Article 108 states that the president of Ukraine wields power until the inauguration of the newly elected president. In reality, no Ukrainian president has served exactly five years - all have been in office for a brief period longer. There are only four reasons to terminate a president's power prematurely: resignation, serious illness, impeachment, and death. In these situations, the parliamentary speaker serves as an interim president with limited powers. None of these factors apply to the current situation.

Even though it's not unexpected, Putin's Russian misinformation tactics are still in play. Zelensky's public approval isn't as extraordinary as it was during the initial Russian invasion. People in Ukraine still support him, using him not only as a symbol of Ukrainian resistance but also as a unifying figure in the fight against Russia. Moscow benefits from any questioning of the legality of Zelensky's leadership. Hence, the apprehension of two high-ranking members from the Ukrainian Security Service, SBU, who allegedly worked for the Russian domestic spy agency FSB, is critical. One of the main responsibilities of SBU is to provide protection for Zelensky, and this arrest hints that the Russian plan to take out the Ukrainian president remains a possibility.

Putin aims to undermine Ukrainian society by casting doubts on Zelensky's right to lead. Despite this, it's unlikely that Moscow will garner much support in the West with this false narrative, as there are few who would accept blatant lies. However, the Kremlin has been heavily disappointed since mid-June regarding the upcoming peace talks in Switzerland, where Zelensky's peace initiative will be the focus. The Kremlin is trying to prevent as many countries from the so-called Global South from attending as possible.

This long-term plan is aimed at destabilizing Ukrainian society. At a glance, this strategy seems to have no chance of success. Yet, it's worth noting that around 20% of the Ukrainian population refuses to support Zelensky. And within this anti-Zelensky group, some individuals, without Russian influence, have suggested that his term expires on May 20.

In addition, the current mood in Ukraine is not particularly hopeful when it comes to the state of this war. The fighting remains intense, military conscription continues to affect more citizens, and a tax hike in the coming months appears imminent - all while the end of the war still seems distant. This doesn't mean that the Kremlin's plan can't bring results. Kiev must remain vigilant and give it the attention it deserves.