ALEXANDER TEMERKO: As a Ukrainian, it is with a heavy heart that I say Zelensky’s leadership has now become a liability…

Forgive me if I do not share in the general air of jubilation. Yes, Volodymyr Zelensky has belatedly accepted President Trump’s blueprint for a peace deal.

And yes, the citizens of Ukraine will breathe a collective sigh of relief amid hopes that US military aid is likely to be restored and the ‘roadmap to peace’ is back on track.

But my countrymen are still left with a president whose behaviour over the past week and beyond has shown that he simply does not have the qualities necessary to lead his nation when it is under threat from the evil and rapacious marauder Vladimir Putin.

When Zelensky travelled to Washington last week, he went with my best wishes. Like every other patriotic Ukrainian, I hoped that he would make a success of his visit. And so I watched what unfolded during that now notorious meeting in the Oval Office with mounting horror.

Most European commentators have concentrated their fire on Donald Trump and his vice-president JD Vance, with many describing their approach as an ‘ambush’. But, for me, the villain of the piece was Zelensky.

The first rule of great power diplomacy is to make sure your personal demeanour doesn’t get in the way of achieving your goals.

With his display of truculence and intransigence, Zelensky sabotaged a rare-earth minerals deal that promised to bring peace to his homeland and lay the foundations for post-war reconstruction.

He failed to understand that Trump is a businessman – and what Zelensky perceived to be cynical extortion was in fact clever leadership and canny negotiation. Zelensky of all people should realise how delicate and difficult it is to force a brutal dictator like Putin to talk peace.

Zelensky initially rejected the White House’s deal largely on the basis that it did not come with any security guarantees attached.

But while the Americans were not offering F35s to police the air nor Marines to patrol the ground, they were proposing something that could be almost equally effective.

By putting US contractors in the region, Trump was effectively saying to Putin: ‘Hands off Ukraine; it’s my business partner now, and worth nearly your entire GDP.’ The idea that the Kremlin might ever authorise attacks on American civilians working in Ukraine is absurd.

Nor was the deal a bad one for Kyiv economically. As US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued, the minerals plan was a ‘win-win’ ‘We make money if the Ukrainian people make money,’ he said on Sunday.

Now that Zelensky has come to his senses, Ukraine can look forward to the future with renewed confidence. Without US military backing or a minerals deal, Ukraine’s fate would have been left in the hands of European allies hopelessly ill-equipped to maintain its security.

As things stand, 55 per cent of Ukraine’s military hardware is produced in-country, 25 per cent comes from Europe and other nations, and 20 per cent from the US.

But the US equipment is considered to be by far the the most lethal and cutting-edge.

In the absence of American weaponry such as GPS-guided missiles, Himars shoot-and-scoot multiple rocket launchers and air defence ordnance, the country would have been fatally compromised.

It would have taken at least three years to develop Europe’s defence industry to the point that it might be in a position to support Ukraine without American assistance. In that time the Russians might well have captured huge swathes of territory.

So, yes, my country may have been saved at the 11th hour. But following his latest display of bad judgment, I believe Zelensky’s leadership has become a liability.

The atmosphere of mutual goodwill that once cloaked Ukraine’s dealings with America has now given way to one of distrust and resentment.

I say this with a heavy heart – but it’s time for him to go.

His latest blunder is only the most recent mistake in what has become an error-strewn presidency.

In February last year, he fired Ukraine’s commander-in-chief General Valerii Zaluzhnyi after a long-running clash about political interference in his military operations.

Zaluzhnyi built a world-class, Nato-level general staff and military, able to stop the Russian army in its tracks. Even today, the Ukrainian army, though outnumbered, outclasses the Russians in terms of skill and valour at every turn. But arguments between the military and and the government came to a head as political appointees increasingly exploited their positions to profiteer from procurement contracts – a running sore in the Trump White House.

Zelensky also undermined his legitimacy by cancelling the presidential election that was due to be held in the spring of last year.

Many people argue that it is inappropriate to hold an election in wartime, often citing Britain’s decision not to hold a General Election until the Nazis had been defeated in the Second World War.

But that was then and this is now. In the digital era, it cannot be beyond the wit of man to stage an election that could even take in the millions of Ukrainian refugees scattered around the world.

There are many issues to be addressed, of course. The national voter registry will have to be updated. Decisions will have to be taken over who will represent disenfranchised voters living in the occupied territories. Arrangements will have to be made for absentee voting.

But these are bureaucratic challenges and should not be insurmountable if the political will is there.

This is Donald Trump’s position, too: After the mineral deal, he wants an immediate ceasefire lasting at least a year to allow for elections in Ukraine.

I would like to see Zelensky step down to make way for a government of national unity.

This would take in representatives of all the major parties and major political figures, from ex-President Petro Poroshenko and Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko to former Parliament Chair Dmytro Razumkov and ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko — but not including any pro-Russian parties for obvious reasons.

It should also include senior members of the military, as – apart from the fact they have vital knowledge of the situation on the ground – they are the one element of Ukrainian society that is beyond reproach.

Indeed, if I had my way, the post of president would go to a former soldier: General Valerii Zaluzhnyi.

Despite his sacking by Zelensky over political interference, he remains a national hero and, as he is now Ukraine’s ambassador to London, I am fortunate enough to meet him regularly.

I am not blind to Zelensky’s talent and accomplishments. He showed exemplary bravery at the outset of the war when he memorably turned down the offer of an evacuation flight with the rousing slogan: ‘I need ammunition, not a ride.’

And don’t get me wrong: I’m no friend of Putin. I was forced to flee Russia in 2004, when I was vice chairman of Russia’s biggest oil and gas company Yukos, after he ordered the arrest of the company’s chairman, my friend Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

Mikhail went on to spend 10 years behind bars, much of it served in a Soviet-era labour camp in eastern Siberia, 3,000 miles east of Moscow.

Putin was so determined to imprison me, too, that in 2005 he sought to have me extradited from the UK – my new home – but failed after a judge ruled that the action was ‘politically motivated’.

Since then I have worked in the energy business in Britain and, after Russia made its first incursion into Ukraine in 2014, I have done my best to foster British and European support for the land of my birth.

The silver lining of Zelensky’s mishandling of Trump is that it brought Europe’s big beasts together for the first time since Brexit, and galvanised Europe to rearm in the face of the Russian threat. But, with Ukraine’s future at a crossroads, I can only hope that he has the good sense to realise that it is time to make way for a new leader.

– Alexander Temerko is a Ukrainian-born British businessman and a member of the advisory council of the Institute of Economic Affairs.