What does Zelinskyy want? When Principles Pierce the Veil of Information.

Confronting aggression and navigating the information storm: finding clarity through fundamental common sense.

Amidst the relentless storm of information surrounding the war in Ukraine, the question inevitably arises: what does Zelenskyy really want? Yet, beyond the political strategies and battlefield reports, fundamental principles must take precedence. As a Romanian citizen and artist – a neighbor of Ukraine, and shaped by a history marked by Russian ideology and aggression – I am writing this personal manifesto. I argue that by applying fundamental common sense, and thus taking a closer look at the storm of information, disinformation, misinformation, and the frequently missed information, the remaining actionable data isn’t actually so rich; and this is precisely why those fundamental principles become even more crucial than sifting through the manipulated or obscured information that inundates us.

The Foundation:
A Leader’s Duty and the Essence of Peace

What does Zelenskyy want, and why do major European countries support him? It’s a question that highlights a fundamental confusion. Any one of us, facing Ukraine’s situation with our family, business, or nation, would likely act the same way if we weren’t already dead, on drugs, or lost in space.

Leaders build, tyrants destroy.

The true leader – be it of a family, enterprise, or nation – understands that their primary duty is to foster a secure, predictable, and enabling environment. Their people must be empowered to grow, to dream, and to fulfill their aspirations, not according to the leader’s will or ideas, but according to their own understanding of what is good. This distinguishes them from the tyrant, the imposter, the aggressor blinded by extremist fantasies.

(You may be interested in Madman Theory, A Psychological Manipulation Strategy and its variant in the information era, an analysis starting from Trump – Zelenskyy live televised meeting in the Oval Office at the White House on February 28, 2025 in the midst of the Russo-Ukrainian War).

Innovation and collaboration, not rockets.

True progress – be it territorial, economic, or spiritual – stems from equitable alliances, research, education and innovation, and mutually beneficial economic exchange. War, and the opportunistic exploitation of the vulnerable, has no place in a peaceful world.

Reacting to Aggression:
A Matter of Survival, Not Negotiation

Aggression breeds reaction.

For any rational human being, the response to aggression is clear: defend, counter-attack, and survive. Anything less is a surrender of our very humanity. I will fight back, seek allies who understand that today’s victim is tomorrow’s target, and drive the aggressor back into the shadows.

To treat aggressors as anything less than criminals is a profound error. Aggressors are, plain and simple, criminals. We pursue criminals, immobilize them, bring them to justice, and imprison them. And if the law is insufficient to condemn their aggression, we must sever all ties, isolating them completely from our lives.

Aggressors don’t get to negotiate their rewards.

Aggressors have forfeited the right to negotiate. What they can discuss are the terms of their restitution—the complete return of stolen goods and lands or a structured repayment plan to settle their debt.

The only deal with aggressors is their unconditional withdrawal.

The Principles at Stake:
Sovereignty, International Law, and Responsibility

The attacker pays the price.

The principles of sovereignty and international law are unambiguous: responsibility lies solely with the aggressor. They must bear the full consequences of their actions, including the wide-ranging devastation they inflict. This burden cannot be shifted, in whole or in part, onto the victim.

The attacking state cannot legitimately claim that the victim somehow provoked the attack or that the victim shares any responsibility for the ensuing damage. International law clearly places the burden on the aggressor.

Signed in San Francisco on June 26, 1945, The Charter of the United Nations – that we may say it is The “Bible“ of Peace, with its resounding slogan “Peace, Dignity, and Equality on a Healthy Planet,” stands as a foundational text in international law. Representing nearly every sovereign state globally (193 member states, including the Russian Federation), it embodies a collective commitment to a more just and peaceful world.:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples.

How can the UN Charter, with its noble ideals and commitments, coexist with the grim reality of ongoing conflicts around the world? Is it a testament to our failures, or the grandest deception in human history? Why does this question even need to be asked?

The victim needs support, not pressure.

Pressuring victims to accept their fate and pay for the aggressors’ and opportunists’ actions and consequences—to normalize being robbed and violated in the name of some manufactured ‘collective good’—is not only morally repugnant, but a sign of societal decay.

Hunt the darkness! Vampires, strigoi, bloodsuckers—no refuge here!

Beyond the initial aggressor lies the opportunist – the scavenger who feeds on the victim’s weakness, fueling the conflict for their own gain. These actors are aggressors in their own right, regardless of their formal alignment with the primary attacker.

This pattern echoes in personal relationships: If a friend is besieged by life’s challenges, exploiting their vulnerability for my own benefit makes me an aggressor. Should they resist, and I attempt to force their hand, I become their enemy.

The attacked bears no blame for any fallout beyond the aggressors. A victim is under no obligation to surrender to conditions better tailored for aggressors.

Equity:
A Cornerstone of Peace, Stability and Prosperity

Equity: the bridge to peace.

Peace is a pipe dream without equity. It’s the keystone of stable collaborations. Without equitable understandings, all we’re left with is agony – a low-grade war simmering beneath the surface.

Don’t blame the victim for fighting back.

The spread of conflict? That’s on the aggressors and opportunists who lit the match, not the „stubborn” victim. It’s not the victim’s job to shield the world from their fire. It’s the job of everyone who doesn’t want their own house to burn down to join forces, put out the fire, and put those bastards in their place. Or stand by and face the consequences.

We’re used to victims who roll over, tails between their legs, obedient and fearful for life. But this victim is fighting back, and doing it on her terms. It’s her life, her choice.

No need to justify self-defense.

So, what does the attacked want? Certainly not a public debate or televised commentary. That expectation—just another form of aggression. The besieged victim lacks the mental, emotional, and physical space to calm the world’s anxiety by explaining their desires. They want their aggressor to go fuck himself, for the ones who share common values to take a stand, and for the watchers and gossipers to shut the fuck up and mind their shit.

The victim’s desire: your absence.

What the victim wants is for you to go fuck yourself, to give back what you stole, pay for the damage you caused, and face justice under the law. She will see in the future, if she ever feels like doing any transaction with your country after you change your leadership. For now, you have fucked up her life and she needs to heal, recover and rejuvenate. That’s what the victim wants.

History is clear: peace and prosperity are impossible when these fundamental principles are ignored. This holds true for families, for relationships, for businesses, and for nations.

Rejecting Agony:
Why „Imperfect Peace” is Unacceptable

„Better an imperfect peace than a war”? A dangerous compromise.

This theory is a slippery slope, a relic of eras gone by. Small evils ignite big fires.

Translated into the Romanian sayings —”better with the devil you know than the one you don’t” or „better with evil than alone” — this idea it’s a pure definition of agony: a purgatory where the small, the vulnerable, and the marginalized are always sacrificed.

It frames a world of injustice, inequality, and a meaningless existence. It’s the life many hand to you when in the name of „good, peace and common good” you don’t fight evil and the shit that’s thrown at you.

Once the organic realization of life’s brevity occurs, the pursuit of unwinnable games becomes an immediate impossibility.

No more mind games.

We’re done with that version of the world. Is it any wonder people gravitate towards more or less extremist leaders? People have lost their ability to tolerate ambiguity. We no longer want crumbs from our own damn bones; we want our bodies, our lives, our rights.

We want our lives to hold value, for our existence on Earth to be purposeful, for our presence to not be irrelevant.

Most of us are ordinary people. We harbor no ambition to rule the world by dismantling the worlds of others; we merely seek to thrive and enjoy life in our own private spaces. Just as in the online world, we seek to make sense of reality and find enjoyment in it.

Common sense, not nonsense!

Don’t awaken the sleeping giant.

And it’s why pushing a victim too far is such a risky bet. Try to trample me, deceive me, control me, harass me, rob me, violate me, manipulate me, slow me down. Assume that one day I’m going to tell you to go fuck yourself. I’ll burn it all down before I sustain your greed, delusions, and abuses.

No profit from suffering. What you sow, you shall reap.

If this war spreads – a fucking tragedy for everyone – remember: that’s on the aggressors and opportunists, not on the victim. Appeasement doesn’t work with a bully; it just emboldens them. As long as there’s a chance for dialogue, pursue it. But when diplomacy fails, neutrality is complicity. You either stand with the victim, or you stand with the criminals. Even those tethered to the criminals must choose, whether they want to or not. Not choosing is a choice – a choice to support the criminals.

That’s exactly like scamming someone and not being sued; if you let someone cause you damages and doesn’t fix the situation, that’s telling the world you’re okay with harm. The world must know that if it tries to attack you or if it makes a mistake and does not correct the mistake, there are consequences. Otherwise, you fuel a world of corruption and criminals, and this is the world you are preparing for your children: constant torment under a weak leader. People will never respect you, will not follow you, will not support you when the shit hits the fan. They will fight with you, and for you, in direct proportion to your loyalty—both to yourself and to them.

A Breath of Fresh Air:
Zelenskyy’s Principled Stance

That’s what I see in Zelenskyy’s positioning – a goddamn breath of fresh air.

Zelenskyy’s position forces clarity.

His stance forces clarity, demanding we take a stand on fundamental principles and values. To have the nerv to make clear choices. It’s not about changing the world; it’s about protecting his world. It’s about upholding one’s principles and standing one’s ground.

If you violate me, beat me to death, humiliate me, profit from my suffering, steal my dowry and fortune, then what is the meaning of existence for us? What kind of life is this?

Fighting evil is a necessity, not a choice.

Fuck it, you don’t get a choice to fight evil or not. What are you gonna do?

If we all want peace, it’s within our grasp. If one actor insists on power and control, we’re doomed to war. So, do we want peace? Yes or no? Yes? Then demand equity. If not, farewell!

Reject subjugation, embrace fairness.

Let it be known, If I am a whore by destiny, then I sell myself at my rate, not at what rate one or another wants. If my fate as to be a whore, let me be one with dignity.

If for my geographical position you make me a whore and treat me like a whore, very well, I’ll take it all in, but I don’t want a pimp, I will be an independent whore. And if you want to rape me, then you better bear the consequences. As I also bear them.

No offense, folks, that’s a truly remarkable attitude.

Get your act together!

P.S. It is not lost on me that this essay, like any expression of opinion, could be co-opted to serve interests beyond my own. If it is just an act on a global show, for reasons beyond those stated, then so be it. The underlying principles still remain valid. So, take it for what it is. Let your own critical thinking, personal values and context be your guides. This is me confronting aggression. What will you do with your data, now?