When Donald Trump called Volodymyr Zelensky a “dictator” for his failure to hold elections, it was a shocking moment. Even by the topsy-turvy standards of the current US administration, this looked like deliberate ignorance of the facts. Ukrainian law and the electoral code state that elections cannot be held while martial law is in place. That leaves aside the practical impossibility of ensuring fair, free and secure elections during war on the scale Russia is inflicting on Ukraine.
In making this dangerous intervention, the US president was simply repeating a well-established trope of Russian propaganda. For some time, the Kremlin has been casting aspersions on the legitimacy of Zelensky. Vladimir Putin has been using this as a pretext to allow him to sidestep any direct contact with the (legitimately elected) Ukrainian president.
It is not the first time that Russia has cited a concern for constitutional propriety in its Ukraine policy. The Kremlin condemned both the orange revolution of 2004 (which forced a rerun of a rigged presidential election) and the Euromaidan protests of 2013-14 (which chased out the Russia-friendly president Viktor Yanukovych) as cases of anti-constitutional mob rule ousting a legitimately elected leader.
