On February 28, 2025, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy left the White House, embarking on a controversial journey to Pennsylvania that has sparked much debate about possible ‘election interference’. Zelenskyy’s Pennsylvania trip was made on September 22, 2024, where he toured a Scranton ammunition plant to ostensibly show gratitude towards its workers, accompanying him was Democratic Governor Josh Shapiro.
Shapiro is known to have acted as a surrogate for Vice President Kamala Harris during her run as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee. Some argue, however, that this connection bore potential implications of ‘foreign election interference’ – a term typically applied to covert, fraudulent, or deceptive acts linked with foreign involvement.
Zelenskyy’s ceremony in Pennsylvania lacked any obvious campaign elements for Harris or Shapiro, however, critics, such as the failed Republican candidate for the 2023 Florida House race, Scotty Moore, saw the event as problematic, labeling Zelenskyy as an ungrateful international figure meddling in US election dynamics. The critics allege that Zelenskyy essentially campaigned for Harris during his visit to Pennsylvania.
Inordinately, during the September 2024 visit, Zelenskyy made a stop at the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant where he expressed his gratitude to the workforce there for their part in manufacturing munitions for Ukraine. Shapiro was present during this event in an official capacity, and notably, VP Harris was not part of this meeting in Scranton.
During this time, Pennsylvania’s politicians, Senator Bob Casey, and Representative Matt Cartwright who were both Democrats fighting for their political survival, attended this controversial event. These appearances led to allegations from House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, of one-sided political representation.
An extensively detailed nine-minute video captured the event, showing Zelenskyy’s various interactions with the workers. In his brief speech to the workers, he emphasized his intention of visiting the site to thank the 400 involved in the project, stating how they were indirectly responsible for saving millions of lives in Ukraine.
Interestingly, President Zelenskyy had separate meetings with both Harris and the then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, occurring during the same week. These meetings were additional to the numerous interactions Zelenskyy had with other US governors in the same year. For example, Zelenskyy had a meeting with Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox, a Republican, to sign an understanding memorandum to work collaboratively in various domains at the National Governors Association event in July 2024.
While some argue that such occurrences with foreign participants could indirectly sway an election’s outcome, there are well-defined forms of ‘election interference’, like trying to stop voters from casting their votes. However, some critics have stretched this term’s definition to label opponents without cast-iron evidence of any criminal activities.
Ari Mittleman, executive director of a non-partisan civic education outfit ‘Keep Our Republic,’ described foreign election interference as cyber-attacks on electoral procedures or deceptive info campaigns that often hide their foreign origin. Their goal, according to Mittleman, is engendering distrust among fellow Americans to undermine the backbone of democratic processes.
Nevertheless, multiple experts specializing in election interference made it clear that Zelenskyy’s acts did not qualify as foreign election interference. U.S. Code 2708 defines foreign election interference as ‘fraudulent, deceptive or covert’ activities by foreign personalities intended to manipulate voters’ choices or destabilize public confidence in the election process.
The accusations against Zelenskyy for his Scranton visit fell short because the visit was public knowledge, not a covert operation. As election law professor Michael Morley points out, the phrase ‘foreign election interference’ can be used loosely and broadly, but does not directly translate into a legally pursuable offense.
To put things in perspective, U.S. federal authorities filed charges against Iranian intelligence personnel for a ‘hack-and-leak’ act against the 2024 Trump campaign. Unlike Zelenskyy’s visit, these operations, which involved fraud and theft, were a blatant spurning of election boundaries.
Noted expert Dov H. Levin of the University of Hong Kong, specializing in foreign election interference, stated none of Zelenskyy’s actions during the Pennsylvania trip could be reasonably defined as ‘covert, fraudulent, deceptive, and unlawful’. Levin went on to emphasize that visits from foreign heads of state are too commonplace to spark undue reactions, even in an election year.
Despite Zelenskyy’s actions failing to meet any authoritative definition of foreign election interference, some critics continue to echo such unfounded claims. The futile accusations do little more than generate baseless hearsay and serve as meaningless distractions from important election issues.
The post Ukrainian President Favors Democrats by Questionable Pennsylvania Trip appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
