THE PREMIERE on February 28th of a new staging of “Macbeth” at the venerable Franko theatre in Kyiv was initially eclipsed by the diplomatic disaster unfolding the same day between Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump in the White House. Since then the production has become the talk of the city’s elite. Ivan Urivsky, the director, says he decided to put on the tragedy after sensing a change in the country’s mood since Mr Trump’s election four months earlier. He had wanted to stage “Midsummer Night’s Dream”, a comedy, he says: “But you can’t do theatre without thinking about politics, war or the people watching.” His viewers are drawing parallels between Shakespeare’s characters and current events. For some, Macbeth resembles the bloodthirsty dictator in Moscow. For others the story of ambition, power and treachery feels closer to home.
In Kyiv, daggers are being sharpened around Mr Zelensky. For months the Ukrainian president has faced intense pressure from abroad: from Vladimir Putin, who questioned his legitimacy without a hint of irony, and from Mr Trump, who has repeated Mr Putin’s talking-points. Both appear to have been irritated by Mr Zelensky’s stubbornness. They pushed him to hold elections in the middle of the war, believing no doubt that Ukrainian voters would do them the favour of unseating him. Two months ago Mr Zelensky was believed to be dead set against holding a vote. But Mr Trump’s disgraceful treatment of him in the first week of March has bolstered his ratings, as captured in a poll commissioned by The Economist, and appears to have changed his calculus. Serious preparations are now underway for Mr Zelensky to go before the electorate for a second time, and quite soon.
Government sources say Mr Zelensky called a meeting last week to task his team with organising a vote after a full ceasefire, which the Americans believe they could impose by late April (Easter Sunday, April 20th, would have a certain resonance). The first confirmation of one may come in the run-up to or on May 5th, the deadline for a parliamentary vote to extend martial law, which expires on May 8th. Cancelling martial law is a necessary first stage to start an election process. The sources differ on the exact timeline, but most say Mr Zelensky is aiming for summer. The law requires at least 60 days for campaigning, so the earliest possibility would be early July. But some sources say the campaign would have to last three months: this is the time election authorities have reportedly told parliament that they require to reconstitute voter lists in the middle of war.
Petro Poroshenko, the leader of the largest opposition party and a sworn foe of Mr Zelensky, predicts elections could come “any time from August to October”. He claims the campaign started, in fact, with Mr Zelensky’s controversial decision to place him under sanctions in February. The move was reportedly linked to his long-running trial for alleged treason, but some believe that Mr Poroshenko’s trip to America in early February—where he met with some of Mr Trump’s people—lit the fuse. The former president says Mr Zelensky’s aides warned him not to go, but ascribed this to their “schizophrenia…and paranoia”. The sanctions were meant to do two things, he continues: rule out his candidacy, and warn off Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s former top general and the one man with a good chance of beating Mr Zelensky should he decide to run. A senior government source privately says Mr Poroshenko “both overestimates and underestimates his importance”. The former president does not represent any serious threat, but Mr Zelensky’s venomous dislike of Mr Poroshenko speeded up the sanctions decision.
That official thinks Mr Zelensky will try to catch rivals off guard with a July election, hoping that a short timetable would let him run unopposed. Such a turn would benefit not only the president, the source argues: “A long campaign would tear the country apart.” In fact, a rushed vote risks worsening the already bitter relations between the powerful, centralised presidential office and the rest of Ukraine’s political world.
Opposition leaders insist that a quick vote is impossible, pointing to a mass of logistical hurdles. Achieving a workable ceasefire in time for May 8th would be difficult enough, says Serhiy Vlasenko, a senior lawmaker with the Batkivshchyna party. Finding a way for millions of voters abroad, in the trenches, or in regions occupied by Russia to cast ballots would be “even harder”. One solution would be to use the government’s well-regarded Diia smartphone app. But that would raise questions of transparency. Any switch would mean changing the constitution, requiring a two-thirds majority in parliament. That would be difficult given that opposition parties are set against voting during wartime. The reasons are not only technical: they say a fair election first needs the dismantling of wartime propaganda and censorship.
The two long shadows cast over Ukrainian life, Messrs Putin and Trump, may not now want a quick election either. Both presumably demanded one believing it would lead to Mr Zelensky’s exit. Given that the calculation has flipped upside-down, they might not sit quiet while he fast-tracks his progress to a second term. Mr Putin holds many of the cards here. His drones and missiles could make cancelling martial law—let alone holding a vote—impossible. But many think elections could help Mr Putin destabilise Ukraine even if Mr Zelensky wins. An intelligence officer predicts internal instability will be a bigger risk to Ukraine in 2025 than battles on the front line. An election campaign would let the Russians turn up their influence campaign: “They will use opinion leaders, soldiers and the opposition to do their bidding.”
Things will not get any easier for Ukraine’s next president, whoever he may be and whenever he is elected. Mr Trump’s rushed diplomacy could lead to a bad peace agreement and resentment. In time, some Ukrainians may call for a tougher, more militaristic government. For all his flaws, Mr Zelensky depends too much on popular approval to ever become a true dictator. Whoever comes after him may be less circumspect. “Whether Caligula or Macbeth, abuse of power is a constant theme in history,” says Mr Urivsky. Theatre lets people “see ourselves in some of the terrible characters. And we hope, as Ukrainians, that we might avoid repeating their mistakes.”■
