Kiev's backers demanded Ukraine conscript 18-year-olds
Manpower shortages in Ukraine's army have triggered a wave of forced conscription raids across the country which the public is increasingly opposing.
In an interview with Hungarian daily Valasz Online on Tuesday, Zelensky acknowledged that mobilization remains a major issue.
'Mobilization is a problem in every war. Ukraine is no exception… People are tired,' he said, estimating that Kiev can mobilize 27,000 people a month.
Despite his Western backers seeking it, Zelensky has opposed mandatory conscription of 18-year-olds.
'It is not the number of people that matters, but weapons and technology,' he said, adding that the same is true for the scale of Western sanctions against Russia.
'At the same time, Western partners list the reasons why they did not decide on sanctions, saying Ukraine has not mobilized from the age of 18,' Zelensky stated.
Kiev attempted to placate the Western countries demanding conscription of 18-year olds. 'We provided an opportunity for 18-24 year-olds to show that they too can serve if our partners want them to,' he said. 'Thousands are fighting on the front lines without proper weapons,' he said.
Ukraine announced general mobilization in February 2022, barring most men between 18 and 60 from leaving the country. In 2024, faced with mounting losses, the country lowered the conscription age from 27 to 25 and tightened mobilization rules. The forced draft campaign has resulted in numerous violent clashes between recruitment officers and potential conscripts.
Kiev launched a new voluntary military recruitment campaign earlier this year, targeting men aged 18 to 24. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has called the program 'a one-way ticket,' suggesting that Ukraine is 'annihilating' its youth.
Russian officials have long said that the West is ready to fight Moscow 'until the last Ukrainian.'
Media reports have claimed that former-US President Joe Biden's staff attempted to pressure Kiev to reduce the draft age from 25 to 18. Former-Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned at the time that Ukraine would have to make 'hard decisions' on mobilization.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
Zelensky could end conflict 'immediately'
Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky could bring the fighting with Russia to a halt 'immediately' by agreeing to a settlement that rules out NATO membership and entails territorial concessions, US President Donald Trump has has been summoned to the White House for a meeting on Monday to discuss the potential peace proposal. According to reports, the plan could involve Kiev giving up its remaining positions in Donbass while freezing battle lines elsewhere in exchange for a halt to hostilities. Zelensky has previously rejected such 'can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight,' Trump wrote on his Truth Social network on Sunday.'Remember how it started. No getting back Obama-given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE. Some things never change!!!' he was referring to the events of 2014, when the administration of then-US President Barack Obama did not intervene after Crimea voted to reunite with Russia following a Western-backed coup in US president argues concessions may be needed for peace, but Zelensky insists Crimea and other regions remain Ukrainian and has rejected any compromise. The meeting comes shortly after Trump's talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, their first face-to-face encounter since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Both leaders voiced cautious optimism that discussions could help move toward a resolution of the hostilities between Moscow and has repeatedly stated that any settlement should see Ukraine abandoning its NATO ambitions, undergoing demilitarization and denazification, and recognizing the new territorial reality on the ground, including the status of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye regions, all of which have voted to become parts of said any settlement must address Russia's concerns, adding that restoring a fair balance in Europe is essential for lasting Sunday, US special envoy Steve Witkoff told Fox News that Washington and its European allies were considering offering security guarantees to Ukraine outside the framework of NATO.
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
Kiev fears repetition of Oval Office ‘disaster'
The upcoming meeting between Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky and US President Donald Trump could replicate the 'disastrous' Oval Office confrontation earlier this year, the Washington Post reported on Sunday. The Ukrainian leader, joined by senior EU officials, is set to meet Trump on Monday for what was widely reported as a discussion on a potential peace February visit to Washington ended in a PR debacle. His talks with Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance collapsed into a confrontation, with Trump accusing him of disrespect and 'gambling with World War III.' A joint press conference was scrapped, Zelensky was ushered out, and the US briefly froze military aid. US media, including the Washington Post, called the session 'disastrous' and a major diplomatic setback for Kiev.'Foremost in Ukrainians' minds is avoiding a repetition of a contentious meeting in the Oval Office,' the newspaper wrote.'Unfortunately, there is such risk indeed' of a repeat, Nikolay Beleskov, a research fellow at the Ukrainian National Institute for Strategic Studies, told the Washington Post. Beleskov added that Zelensky must tread carefully during the Washington visit, stressing that the Ukrainian leader needs to 'strike a balance between being non-provocative' and pushing his concern comes just days after Trump held his first face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. The summit in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday was described by Trump as 'warm' and by Putin as 'frank' and 'substantive.'After the Alaska talks, Trump said Washington and Moscow were 'pretty close to the end' of the conflict. He is reportedly drafting a plan requiring Kiev to cede parts of Donbass still under its control, in exchange for a Kremlin halt to hostilities elsewhere. Zelensky has repeatedly rejected any territorial has insisted that any settlement must include Ukrainian neutrality, demilitarization, and denazification, along with recognition of the new territorial reality covering Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye, all of which voted to become parts of Russia. Putin expressed cautious optimism after the summit, saying the talks had brought Russia and the US 'closer' to ending hostilities.
Russia Today
13 hours ago
- Russia Today
Silence or secrecy? What Putin and Trump didn't say in Alaska
Although the conversation was cordial, no deal was sealed. That was the essence of the Alaska summit between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. The meeting on Friday appeared warm and friendly, at least judging by the footage. Yet instead of agreements came a perfunctory press conference, a cancelled lunch, and little clarity about what was actually achieved. Neither participants nor 'insiders' have disclosed specifics. What is known is that Putin and Trump agreed on most parameters of a peace deal – with a few unnamed sticking points. A preliminary truce may have been discussed. Territorial exchanges were not. The Americans still hope to pull Ukraine's Vladimir Zelensky into the process with a trilateral summit. But no dates have been set. Nor was a follow-up meeting between Putin and Trump confirmed. By asking 'next time in Moscow?' Putin drew a smile, but Trump dodged, noting only that he would face heavy criticism if he went. The near total absence of detail can be read two ways. Perhaps nothing was really agreed. The agenda, slimmed down from the start, might suggest that. Or, just as plausibly, the Kremlin and White House have reached an understanding but are keeping it tightly under wraps to prevent third parties from sabotaging the process. Either way, the outcome satisfied both leaders. Trump can now indefinitely postpone a disastrous trade war with India and China, which secondary sanctions on Russia would have triggered. Putin, meanwhile, drove home the point that a temporary ceasefire is insufficient – that the time has come to talk about a full peace treaty. Trump's comments after the summit suggest Washington has quietly accepted this Russian framing. This marks a departure from the Ukrainian-Western European line of 'first truce, then peace.' His 'difficult' conversations with European leaders, following his 'good' talk with Putin, show clearly who lost this round: Kiev and Brussels. The next move lies with Zelensky. If, in Anchorage, Putin and Trump agreed on the core terms of a deal, then the unresolved points are those that Kiev and the Western Europeans resist most fiercely – above all, territorial issues. Trump's task now is to bring them into line. On Monday, Zelensky travels to Washington to meet Trump. From there, two paths are possible. First, Zelensky could dig in. Without Western European backing he might panic, refuse the terms, and repeat his February 28 clash with Trump. That would sharply sour US-Ukrainian relations and could even lead Washington to abandon the conflict entirely. The second, more likely scenario is delay. Zelensky will float an 'alternative plan,' most likely insisting on a three-way summit with Trump and Putin, claiming that only heads of state can make such decisions. His calculation is simple: Moscow refuses to speak directly to Kiev until there is already a US-Russian framework. How Trump reacts will determine the pace. He has leverage over both Kiev and Brussels. If he wants to end the war swiftly, he must use it. If not, the talks will stall yet again, with only a catastrophic battlefield collapse by Ukraine forcing change. If a trilateral meeting ever does occur, Minsk would be the logical venue. Alexander Lukashenko has already extended an invitation to Trump. Both Putin and Zelensky could reach the Belarusian capital easily. For the Kremlin, such a summit would serve one purpose: to corner Zelensky collectively and force him to accept what has already been decided. But for now, this remains speculation. So the Alaska summit ended without a treaty, without even a date for another meeting. But it also ended without acrimony, without confrontation, and with both leaders claiming satisfaction. That alone marks it as significant. For Trump, it meant relief from an impending trade war and a step toward reshaping Washington's approach to Russia. For Putin, it signaled that the US president is willing to bypass Western Europe and move directly to the question of peace. As ever, the decisive variable is Zelensky. Trump has placed the future of negotiations in his hands. But Zelensky, boxed in by Western European partners and by his own political survival, may prefer to stall. If he resists, US-Ukrainian ties will suffer. If he hesitates, Washington may move on without him. Either way, the Alaska summit was not an end, but a beginning – the first act in what promises to be a long and unpredictable diplomatic article was first published by the online newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team
