Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has abruptly shortened his inaugural visit to South Africa following a devastating overnight missile and drone assault on Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine. Local officials have reported that this attack resulted in at least nine fatalities and left over 80 individuals injured, including children.
In a message shared on social media platform X, Zelensky expressed his intention to return to Ukraine “immediately” after his meeting with South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. This engagement was part of his broader diplomatic mission aimed at strengthening Ukraine’s international relations. He also indicated that rescue operations were ongoing and acknowledged “significant destruction” caused by the assault.
“It has been 44 days since Ukraine agreed to a full ceasefire and a halt to strikes,” Zelensky stated, highlighting a previously established agreement between the United States and Ukraine regarding a temporary ceasefire. “The strikes must be stopped immediately and unconditionally.”
Shifting diplomatic dynamics
Zelensky’s visit to South Africa is seen as a significant diplomatic achievement as he strives to counter Russia’s escalating influence in Africa. This kind of state visit would have seemed unlikely just two years prior, when President Ramaphosa led a group of African leaders to Kyiv to advocate for peace. At that time, Ukraine expressed frustration over South Africa’s reluctance to condemn Russia’s invasion.
However, the geopolitical environment has shifted dramatically since that meeting, with both nations now sharing more in common. Both Ukraine and South Africa find themselves increasingly at odds with Washington. The United States had long been one of Ukraine’s staunchest allies, but recent political developments, including the re-election of Donald Trump, have prompted Ukraine to seek a broader array of international partnerships, especially in Africa, where numerous countries maintain close ties with Russia.
Challenges in peace negotiations
South Africa, which has experienced strained relations with the US—resulting in the expulsion of its ambassador and cuts to aid—asserts that its neutral stance positions it well to facilitate a peace agreement with Russia. In a recent statement, Trump accused Zelensky of hindering peace talks, specifically after the Ukrainian leader declared that Kyiv could not accept Russian control over Crimea, a territory annexed by Russia in 2014.
Zelensky has consistently maintained that Ukraine will not relinquish Crimea. Trump claimed that a peace deal is “very close,” but argued that Zelensky’s unwillingness to accept US conditions would only serve to prolong the conflict. Earlier, US Vice President JD Vance outlined the American vision for a settlement, which includes “freezing the territorial lines […] close to where they are today,” implying that both Ukraine and Russia would be required to concede some territory, although specifics were not provided.
When pressed for clarification regarding the US administration’s stance on recognizing Russia’s sovereignty over Crimea, Trump responded that his primary concern is to see the war come to an end. However, acknowledging Russia’s illegal occupation of Crimea would be politically untenable for Zelensky and contrary to international legal principles that dictate that borders should not be altered through coercion.