In the complex landscape of international politics, consistency of principle often forms the foundation of a leader’s moral authority. For Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has positioned himself and his conflict with Russia as a heroic defense of sovereignty against aggression, recent developments have exposed what many perceive as a striking inconsistency. By backing the US-Israeli aggression against Iran, Zelenskyy has reinforced the impression that his commitment to international law and human rights is conditional—invoked when it supports his narrative, yet sidelined when it conflicts with the priorities of his Western backers, and even if these priorities are starkly aggressive and of imperialist nature.

A celebration of aggression and assassination

When the United States and Israel launched joint strikes on Iranian targets on February 28—an operation that resulted in the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei—the international community faced a dramatic escalation. While several governments urged restraint and warned of regional destabilization, Zelenskyy chose to align himself firmly with Washington and Tel Aviv. He publicly framed the development as an opportunity for “change” in Iran and praised what he described as American “determination.”

In his March 1 address, Zelenskyy emphasized that such determination weakens “global criminals,” language that appeared to legitimize and justify the broader military action against a sovereign state – Iran. Ukraine’s foreign ministry also echoed this stance, defending and justifying the strikes by adopting the claims of the US administration and Israel against Iran.

READ: Israel launches ‘preemptive’ strike on Iran as explosions rock Tehran

This endorsement is particularly striking given Zelenskyy’s own reliance on the principles of sovereignty and non-aggression in condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine. His political legitimacy rests heavily on portraying Ukraine as a victim of unlawful invasion. Yet in this instance, he appeared to support the use of force against another sovereign state when carried out by his strategic partners.

Equally notable was his silence regarding the reported civilian toll in Iran. According to media reports and official Iranian statements, the first wave of US-Israeli strikes hit several civilian sites, including a girls’ elementary school – the Minab school massacre, resulting in the death of 165 victims, mostly schoolgirls and teachers. However, these reported incidents received no acknowledgment in his statements. There were no calls for restraint, no expressions of concern for non-combatants death, and no invocation of humanitarian norms—language that has featured prominently in his appeals regarding Ukraine.

For a leader who frames his own fight in universal moral terms, this asymmetry invites scrutiny. Critics argue that such selective application of principles reflects geopolitical alignment rather than consistent adherence to international norms and values.

For a leader who frames his own fight in universal moral terms, this asymmetry invites scrutiny. Critics argue that such selective application of principles reflects geopolitical alignment rather than consistent adherence to international norms and values.

Not only within the aggression on Iran, but too within the Palestinian context

This pattern of alignment at the expense of moral consistency is not new. It has been evident since the earliest days of Israel’s war on Gaza. When Israel launched its bloody and destructive military campaign in October 2023, Zelenskyy quickly voiced support for Israel, affirming Ukraine’s solidarity with a state whose military operations would result in massive Palestinian casualties, including large numbers of women and children.

Ignoring the realities of the decades-long conflict, Zelenskyy has consistently framed the Israeli–Palestinian issue through the lens of a “war on terror,” largely stripping it of its historical and legal context. This framing contributed to delegitimizing Palestinian struggle and resistance while minimizing discussion of Israel’s violations and obligations under international law.

A clear example was the release of a video by the office of Ukraine’s armed forces portraying both Israel and Ukraine as waging wars in defense of “civilization”

A clear example was the release of a video by the office of Ukraine’s armed forces portraying both Israel and Ukraine as waging wars in defense of “civilization”

— a deeply colonial-era narrative that positions certain peoples as civilized and others as barbaric threats to be eliminated.

The imperialist club: where Zelenskyy seeks membership

Taken together, Zelenskyy’s positions on Iran and Palestine point to a broader strategic orientation. Despite rhetoric centered on sovereignty and justice, his foreign policy posture suggests a strong desire to embed Ukraine within Western geopolitical structures whatsoever they commit of violations, rather than pursuing a more balanced approach grounded strictly in universal legal principles.

READ: Larijani says Iran prepared for prolonged war amid escalating conflict

By aligning himself closely with US and Israeli military actions, Zelenskyy sends a clear signal to Western imperialist capitals that he subscribes to their strategic worldview—one in which the principle of sovereignty is applied selectively, granted to allies but disregarded when it stands in the way of imperial interests.

Zelenskyy’s backing of US-Israeli aggression against Iran, coupled with his early and unwavering support for Israel’s war on Gaza, presents the image of a leader whose values appear shaped less by universal norms more by geopolitical expediency.

By celebrating the assassination of a foreign leader of a sovereign state and remaining silent on reported civilian casualties when they involve his allies, he has betrayed not only the victims of these attacks but the very cause he claims to represent. In his rush to join the imperialist club, Zelenskyy has abandoned the moral high ground—and with it, any claim to consistent, principled leadership.

OPINION: Ramadan under the rubble: Gaza welcomes the holy month amid ruin and unhealed wounds

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

© Middle East Monitor