President Donald J. Trump, in a Truth Social post on Wednesday, blasted Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky as a dictator. He noted that he had abused a martial law statute to stay in office nearly a year past when his country was due to hold elections. Additionally, Trump noted that polls show Zelenksy with low approval among the Ukrainian people, suggesting he wouldn’t be able to win an election even if one were held.

The comments received immediate pushback from Ukraine’s supporters in the United States and Europe. However, few actually looked with seriousness at Trump’s accusation that Zelensky has—essentially—become a dictator. The National Pulse, however, has reviewed Zelensky’s record, and we believe it is safe to say that, yes, Volodymyr Zelensky’s delaying of elections, low approvals, and actions while in office against dissidents and opposition parties are dictatorial behaviors.

A ROMANESQUE DICTATOR. 

Zelensky is now well into the sixth year of what was originally and legally slated to be a five-year term of office. That alone should be a concerning development but is often dismissed by Zelensky’s allies and the most staunch supporters of Ukraine as a necessary development given the ongoing defense against Russia’s invasion. While Ukraine does face extraordinary circumstances, one only needs to look to the example of the Roman Republic to understand that such matters do not preclude dictatorship.

Rome would appoint dictators—in theory under the control of the Republic’s Senate—to handle specific matters seen as too important to be left to democratic politics—often, these were matters of war. When the matter was settled, the dictator was expected to step aside. This practice seems eerily similar to the current situation in Ukraine. The country’s elections were originally scheduled to be held in March or April of 2024, with Zelensky’s first term of office set to end in May 2024.

BANNING OPPOSITION.

Since the Russian invasion began three years ago, Zelensky and his government have removed to ban 11 political parties, alleging they either have ties to or sympathies with Russia. Most international observers consider the practice of prohibiting political opposition and suppressing dissent to be credible evidence of a government’s evolution into a dictatorship. Additionally, in 2023, four members of the country’s parliament had their Ukrainian citizenship revoked over alleged ties to Russia. Again, such moves would—under normal circumstances—be considered the actions of an emergent or established dictatorship.

Even more concerning, Zelesky appears to have abused his office to settle political scores in Ukraine, freezing the assets of former president and opposition member Petro Poroshenko. The latter is banned from withdrawing money in Ukraine for “national security” reasons. Imagine if a U.S. president moved to freeze and place sanctions on the assets of his or her predecessor and how the media and world leaders would react.

Notably, North Korea bans all opposition political movements, and the state approves only two minor parties. Even then, the two minor parties—the Korean Social Democratic Party and the Chondoist Chongu Party—must accept the leadership and direction of Kim Jong Un’s Workers’ Party of Korea.

CONTROLLING RELIGION & MEDIA. 

The signs that Zelensky has become increasingly authoritarian throughout the invasion should be very concerning to even his most reliable boosters. In 2023, Zelensky pushed his government to outlaw the largest church in Ukraine, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate—an Eastern Orthodox church in communion with the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow. Zelensky’s supporters claim the church and its adherents are national security threats, and the priests are spies on behalf of Russia. 

Additionally, Zelensky has cracked down on Ukraine’s free speech and independent journalism. In 2022, he signed legislation that expands the government’s authority to censor and control journalists and media outlets.

The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine slammed the move as “clearly excessive” and a “threat” to free speech. Even more concerning, Zelensky ordered Ukraine’s television programming to be consolidated into a single, state-controlled broadcast, ensuring that all messaging on the Russian invasion would be framed in Zelensky’s desired way.

Lastly, numerous journalists in Ukraine claim they’ve been threatened with conscription or been the subject of government surveillance over their reports—especially if they refuse to back the official government narrative. These are not the actions of a defender of Western democratic norms but the moves of a burgeoning strongman more akin to his enemy, Russian President Vladimir Putin.