Volodymyr Zelensky: "If Marine Le Pen comes to Ukraine, I think she will change her position"

In his first interview with L'Express in August 2022, Volodymyr Zelensky reflected on the lessons of six months of war, vowing to "restore Ukraine's borders." Who could have imagined that more than four years later, a Ukrainian president still at war would speak in our columns once again? A head of state filled with gravity, at a time when Donald Trump's United States is once again siding with the aggressor, Vladimir Putin, and authorizing the import of millions of tons of Russian diesel. "The war could stop if the United States' attitude toward Putin ceased to be accommodating," he insists, imploring his American counterpart to "change tactics" if he intends to bring an end to the Russian offensive in this manner.

Beyond a potential abandonment by the United States, another dark cloud looms on the horizon: the potential election in France next May of Marine Le Pen, who has promised to halt financial aid to Ukraine six months after arriving at the Élysée. Faced with what would pose an immense danger to our continent's security, Volodymyr Zelensky explains why "Europe needs Ukraine," which notably assists the French defense industry in refining its capabilities. Exclusive interview.

L'Express: On October 19, Donald Trump said: "Russia has behaved well toward Ukraine. They haven't done much." A week later, it was revealed that the first tankers of Russian diesel are on their way to the United States. How do you respond to this sequence of events?

Volodymyr Zelensky: If massive strikes targeting our citizens, civilian deaths, and strikes on energy infrastructure constitute "good behavior" in the view of the United States, then so be it… But above all, Russia is an occupier. It has been trying to invade us since 2014, first through creeping occupation, and then through a full-scale war. Consequently, you can understand that I found this statement about "good behavior" very strange.

Regarding the diesel [Editor's note: Donald Trump suspended sanctions on Russian diesel, allowing its importation into the United States], I will say two things: this diesel does not travel through the air; it passes through the territorial waters of other nations. If everyone accepts that diesel flows from Russia to the United States, if this suits other partners, what can we say, what can we do? Our answer is very simple: the Russians strike our energy infrastructure, and we respond because we believe it is just. We cannot support this diesel deal, which will allow Russia to make money that will be used to strengthen itself and manufacture weapons. We are grateful to the United States for its bipartisan support from both chambers and both parties. I have met President Trump several times, and it was constructive. But this Russian-American deal weakens us; it weakens Ukraine and therefore all of Europe, and it will certainly not strengthen the United States.

Will Ukrainians and Europeans be able to talk sense into Donald Trump once again, or has he taken an irreversible step toward Putin?

More than four years after our first interview, we are still talking about this war and how to end it. This full-scale war is a tragedy. Unquestionably, the war could end if the United States' attitude toward Putin ceased to be accommodating. Furthermore, other countries maintain close relations with Russia, which does not help stop Moscow.

What can stop the Kremlin's aggression is strength, and when I say "strength," I do not only mean military action. Strength can take different forms: the provision of weapons, financial sanctions, legislation designed to prevent sanction evasion, or diplomatic actions aimed at politically isolating Russia—by not inviting it to prestigious summits, for example. This serves to remind Russia of its place as an aggressor nation. If Russia stops its war, I am convinced that the entire world will seek ways to restore relations with it. But establishing economic ties with Russia today, while it illegally occupies Ukrainian territory, seems very strange to me. It is equivalent to endorsing this occupation. Therefore, we would very much like the President of the United States to understand that mere kind words will not be enough to bring Putin to the negotiating table or end his aggression.

How do you explain why Donald Trump makes concessions to Vladimir Putin so often?

It sometimes seems to me that it is a tactic: the American president is trying to halt Putin's aggression through friendly relations. From the outset, President Trump displayed a certain indulgence toward Putin. But after a year and a half in office, it must be acknowledged that this conciliatory attitude has not stopped the war. I do not wish to pass judgment on President Trump's tactic. That being said, if this warm attitude is not genuine sentiment, but rather a tactic, I would very much like the president to change it. On the other hand, if Donald Trump has a unique, truly personal and historic relationship with Putin, then I would like him to use it to push Putin to halt the escalation of his aggression. Let him stop strikes on energy infrastructure; let him cease blockading the Black Sea; and let him grant African and Asian nations access to Ukrainian grain, which is currently blocked.

How do you explain Vladimir Putin's obsession with conquering and destroying Ukraine?

Putin's goal is to restore the influence of the USSR. Yet without Ukraine, he cannot do so. Without Ukraine, it is impossible for him to restore the empire and exert his influence over Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan. His priority is Ukraine, followed by Belarus and Kazakhstan. These are the key countries. Which were the most influential republics during the Soviet era? Where were the manufacturing hubs and the engineers who constituted the talent pool for Soviet leadership? Where did future diplomats come from? [Editor's note: As the technological and scientific heart of the USSR, Ukraine also produced numerous political cadres]. That is why Putin acts so threateningly toward NATO. Some former socialist republics are now part of the EU and NATO. To bring them back into his orbit, Putin wants to re-establish the security architecture that once existed and restore the influence of what would be a modern Soviet Union.

Has his obsession with Ukraine changed since the start of the war?

No. His goal remains the restoration of the empire, even if those words may sound grandiose. Pay attention to what he says: for him, the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century is not World War II, nor is it Nazism as the personification of evil, but rather the collapse of the Soviet Union. In other words, this obsession has driven him for a long time. However, he could not say it publicly [Editor's note: in the early 2000s when he became president] because he lacked sufficient influence at the time and was attempting to present Russia as a pseudo-democracy. But after twenty-five years in power, with experience and influence; after twenty-five years of total control over information, the population, manufacturing, and law enforcement; and after constructing this vertical of power, he is now attempting to realize his objective: the total occupation of Ukraine, the destruction of our identity, and Russian dominance over our entire territory, all while contemplating the occupation of other former USSR republics that are independent countries today.

To what extent does the desire to conduct business with Russia factor into Trump's calculus?

Russia is not waging war solely against us. It initiated a hybrid war against Europe long ago: influencing voters, manipulating public expression, launching information warfare, cyberattacks, and disinformation campaigns… Russia is also active in Latin American and African countries. Everywhere, it projects its influence through weapons and information. But commerce is likewise a major lever for war. The more business there is, the more influence there is. Can we accept conducting business with an aggressor state? No. None should be conducted, because it is dangerous. The aggressor earns revenue and channels that revenue into the war. A war against Ukraine and, I reiterate, an information war against Europe.

Are you still receiving American weapons purchased by the Europeans? What would happen if the United States halted its shipments?

Thank you for that question. Today, we benefit from the Purl program [Editor's note: a mechanism established in July 2025 between the United States and NATO to accelerate weapons deliveries], which allows us to finance armaments originating from Europe and other countries. For air defense, this involves Patriot PAC-2 and PAC-3 anti-ballistic missiles, purchased primarily from the United States (as they do not exist in sufficient quantities in Europe). The Purl program allows us to purchase from the United States what is lacking in Europe, but with European funding. We are grateful to Europe for its financial support. However, we receive nothing free of charge from the United States. We also rely on our own domestic weapons production. Our military technology production—Miltech—has experienced substantial growth.

What do you expect from Europeans? Do you fear they might abandon you?

We are at war, and we count on every form of assistance. But in times of war, there must be an anchor of stability. For us, that is Europe, which overwhelmingly supports Ukraine. We rely heavily on it. But I also believe that Europe needs Ukraine. We share our battlefield experience. While our troops were trained in Europe at the onset of the conflict, today it is we who conduct the training, sharing and disseminating our expertise in electronic warfare, ground robotic systems, drones, missiles, and counter-ballistic defense. We also share our experience in energy decentralization with Europe, allowing it to benefit from our know-how without being directly engaged in this war. That, too, is exceptional.

What can Ukrainians teach Europeans, and the French in particular?

We can teach them how to maximize the utility of French Mirages based on our real-world battlefield experience; how to deploy French air defense systems (SAMP/T); how your light tanks perform against Russian drones and other weaponry under various conditions of modern warfare; or how Caesar howitzers and 155mm artillery systems operate. All of these armaments were present on the battlefield early in the war and were enhanced thanks to our operational feedback. Notably, this equipment gained immense global visibility, much like the Caesars or the Mirages, whose performance we openly praise. As a result, these systems are now in high demand, and order books are full. And that is only fair: you helped us, and we advertised French products! Today, we are discussing the Rafale [Editor's note: Kyiv plans to acquire 16 Rafale fighters], which encourages many other nations to seek them as well. To my knowledge, there is a twenty-year waitlist to acquire Rafales. That is outstanding for French industry; it means jobs and tax revenues for France. And it is entirely fair.

Russia threatens all of Europe. If a politician fails to understand that, it is unfortunate

How can this war end? Is that possible while Vladimir Putin remains in power?

Ukraine currently desires de-escalation of any kind. Both parties must demonstrate their willingness to end the war. The war could end tomorrow, and I say this with complete sincerity: tomorrow, if both sides agree to a ceasefire. Ending the war hinges entirely on this: a concrete military order issued by the commander-in-chief of each army to their troops. Such an order leaves no room for interpretation: cease fire, cease fighting. Admittedly, this would not be the definitive end of the war, but compared to previous years, it would signal to the entire world that we are approaching peace. A ceasefire would signify moving to the next stage, namely diplomacy. If accompanied by security guarantees, it will also serve as a signal to the business community: they will be able to return to Ukraine and invest in its reconstruction. But that comes in a second phase.

Marine Le Pen stated that she would cease financial aid to Ukraine if she became president. If you were face-to-face with her, what would you say?

Without aid, Ukraine will have less chance of holding out. If Ukraine falls, Russia will move closer to the EU, and therefore closer to France. That is a risk. Do you see the range a Russian drone can cover? And a Russian missile? Look: they are already in Leipzig, they crash in Germany, they violate the airspace of Poland, Romania, and elsewhere. I believe there are no exceptions for Russia. Moscow deliberately intimidates European nations; it is psychological pressure meant to force Europe to scale back its aid to Ukraine.

And if Russia starts demanding that Europe provide less aid to Ukraine, the consequence will be a stronger Russia. And Europe will be in even greater danger. I have had all sorts of discussions with the United States. Early in his tenure, President Trump and his Vice President J.D. Vance repeatedly argued that a way had to be found to end the war—and provide less aid to Ukraine. But that is not how things work with the Russians. See for yourself: the United States—who are our partners, and we are grateful to them—reduced their aid to Ukraine. Did that stop Putin? No, quite the opposite. I previously told our American partners that one cannot know how to stop the Russians if one has never set foot in Ukraine. At the time, I invited the Americans. Recently, I heard Madame Le Pen say that she would be willing to visit. So yes, let her come, let her see our people, let her walk the streets, let her speak with those she encounters, see how people live, and hear what they think of Putin. I believe she will change her position.

Did you just invite Marine Le Pen to Ukraine?

I believe I just did.

More broadly, does the rise of the far right in France and Europe concern you?

The choice of any given leader belongs exclusively to your people. On a personal level, I can say that I maintain good relations with leaders worldwide, on both the left and the right. Regarding the issue of Ukraine, everyone strives to be pro-Ukrainian. Within a single country, diverse political forces, whether in power or in opposition, converge on the Ukrainian question because it is a matter of security. It does not matter whether one is on the left or the right, conservative or liberal: Russia is a threat to everyone. Its missiles do not choose whom to strike. They kill people on the left just as they do on the right. That is why I would like the Ukrainian issue not to be divisive along party lines or political opinions, but rather for everyone to focus on the reality that human life is irreplaceable.

And to Jean-Luc Mélenchon, what would you say?

I do not know. I have never met him; I have never spoken with him. I am unfamiliar with his true viewpoints. His rhetoric toward us is clearly not positive, but that is political and public rhetoric. Yet look: Russia threatens all of Europe. If a politician fails to understand that, it is unfortunate. Why? Because elections are fleeting, while a threat can last a lifetime. Everyone thought the war would be short. Some gave us three days before being occupied. And as for us, we all believed the entire world would help us stop Putin! And now the war has lasted five years. I think every French politician needs to understand that.

Do you have a message for Europeans, and for the French in particular, just months ahead of crucial elections?

We wish you peace; above all, we want the choice of the French people to truly be their own. I believe vigilance is needed to ensure Russia does not meddle in your elections, that Russia cannot influence your political leaders, and that the French people can distinguish independent political representatives from those beholden to someone or something. It is crucial to remember that Russian influence is not merely political; it is technological, operating through bots, information channels, and crafted narratives. The essential thing is for France to make its choice completely independent of Russia.

What reasons for hope remain for Ukraine after nearly five years of war?

What keeps optimism alive? The fact that we are not alone. That we have Europe, the Americans, and other nations around the world standing with us and truly supporting us. Optimism is sustained by faith in the truth. Those who stand for the truth will always prevail in the end. We are entirely certain of our truth; we are certain that Russia is an aggressor state, and I hope that Ukraine, with the world's assistance, will bring stability to the European continent for years to come. I wish France stability, calm, and peace. May God protect you.