Ucraina: quando le ambiguità di LFI abbinano pericolosamente il discorso del Cremlino (LFI: festa di sinistra francese di Jean-Luc Mélenchon) (traduzione nei commenti)

**English translation:**

**Ukraine: When LFI’s Ambiguities Dangerously Match the Kremlin’s Discourse**

Anti-imperialism has its limits. Notably the one of pushing Ukraine toward political destabilization at a time when its future is increasingly uncertain, following the meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on Friday in Alaska. At this crucial moment, several statements from La France Insoumise have been, to say the least, surprising.

Guest of France Info this Monday, August 18, LFI MP and program coordinator Manuel Bompard first called for “France and the European Union to play a leading role in opening these negotiations. Today, we are dependent on the initiatives of others,” he criticized, before calling for a referendum on the potential change of territories, with Russia demanding the annexation of Ukraine.

“The position of La France Insoumise on the issue of territories has always been the same: there can be no territorial changes without consulting the populations affected by these possible changes,” he declared, hoping that such a proposal would be made “under the aegis of international authorities.” The journalist on the set did not hesitate to remind him that the region is currently largely under Russian control, particularly in Luhansk (93% of the territory), making it impossible to hold a referendum at this time.

**”Mr. Putin no longer wants to deal with Mr. Zelensky.”**

Moreover, Donbass is currently a predominantly Russian-speaking region. Manuel Bompard said he wanted to “stop fostering the illusion of a favorable military solution to this conflict.” “We must create the conditions for negotiations; France and the European Union must play a major role,” he added. A few days earlier, another proposal by Aurélien Taché, an LFI MP and LFI coordinator of the Foreign Affairs Committee, had caused a stir.

A guest on the same channel, he attacked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. “We must move forward through peace; there will be no perfect agreement,” he first stated. “Mr. Putin no longer wants to deal with Mr. Zelensky; he believes he will not be the right person to talk to in the years to come. It must be remembered that Mr. Zelensky is holding onto power in an exceptional situation of war, after a mandate that has expired.”

“The democratic situation in Ukraine is completely frozen,” he continued. “The man of war is rarely the man of peace. There will probably have to be a thought to ask whether it is not time to hand over the reins so that peace and a truly lasting agreement can be found. Otherwise, in this country where trade unions are now banned, opposition parties are banned, where there have been no elections for years, where an anti-corruption law has been highly contested… It is certainly time to open a new democratic page so that peace can move forward.”

**”Zelensky’s departure is a condition of the agreement”**

Certainly, the anti-corruption law enacted by Volodymyr Zelensky has sparked fierce protests in Ukraine. But such a statement from the LFI MP presents the weakening of Ukraine as solely the fault of the Ukrainian president, completely omitting the invasion provoked by Vladimir Putin. Above all, it echoes the narrative of the Russian president, who has long sought to get rid of Volodymyr Zelensky and considers him illegitimate, given that the 2024 Ukrainian presidential election has been postponed.

As a reminder, this suspension is enshrined in the Ukrainian Constitution, which does indeed provide for the suspension of elections during martial law. Without it, he would have completed his term on May 20, 2024.

Finally, Jean-Luc Mélenchon himself issued a controversial opinion on his blog on August 14. For the leader of the left-wing party, “everything contributes to the collapse.”

“Banning unions and opposition parties, keeping Zelensky in office after his presidential term is over, trying to save the corrupt people who are plundering the war effort, and the mass desertions—all of this has broken the bond between the Zelensky system and its people at war,” he added.

He also stated: “Zelensky’s departure is the condition of the agreement. Quite simply because his term is over, and I don’t believe Russia is capable of signing anything with someone who will soon be replaced by someone who could jeopardize everything.” According to the Kyiv Institute of Sociology, the Ukrainian president’s popularity rating was 58% between July and August 2025. This is far from a supposedly broken bond. What do these rather surprising proposals conceal?

*Original french article by Thomas Graindorge, published in “Le Point”, 18/08/2025*

I don’t know where these pro Russian leftists come out of how their world-view works but it seems like a giant contradiction.

I can’t say i disagree with some of what he said in the article. Peace deal should be reached with as minimal losses to Ukraine as possible, but at this point the losses would still be significant, because i cant see a way that Ukraine could strengthen its negotiating position or conquer back territory. Also the elections should happen as soon as possible, because without knowing if the new leaders of the country agree with the resolution of the war, the peace deal would likely be quite weak.

Since the french revolution, far left wing has a taste for blood, nothing new.

It’s hilarious how all other political parties love to make them look like the demon.

Probably due to the fact they would be the less likely people to accept bribes and gifts from the various massive lobbys from industrials.

Also they don’t have billionnaires friends that own several newspaper and other medias. bolloré, niel and similar billionnaire filth are without a doubt trying very hard to make sure they have “proper people to talk to”, aka people that will bend the knees to them.

When will he finally retire …

In France, we have either the Far-right or the left (like LFI) who have pro-putin positions, the difference being that the Rassemblement National of Le Pen have been actively financed by Russia. Well have to chose one of the two in 2027.

the power of russian propaganda