On Ukraine’s Independence Day, Zelensky announced the mass production of ‘Flamingo’ missiles, the refusal to give up Donbas, and increased pressure on Russia.

In his address on the 35th anniversary of independence, Volodymyr Zelensky linked the fates of specific Ukrainians with the production of long-range weapons and the refusal to give up Donbas. His words about ‘Flamingo’ missiles, possible Russian mobilization, and Putin’s mortality require separating the political signal from the confirmed fact.

Zelensky announced mass production of ‘Flamingo’ and the refusal to give up Donbas

Victoria Katsman

Kyiv, Ukraine — August 24, 2026. In the morning address on the occasion of the 35th anniversary of independence, Volodymyr Zelensky spoke not only about the front and armaments. In 21 minutes, he connected in one speech those freed from captivity, teachers, athletes, military personnel, Ukrainian missiles, strikes on Russian targets, and the demand for partners to stop waiting for the war to end on its own.

The address was delivered on the 1643rd day of the full-scale Russian invasion. This number is important not as a calendar formality: independence, which in 1991 was perceived as an accomplished political fact, is now confirmed daily by people, weapons production, the work of cities, and the decision not to agree to an imposed division of the country.

It is easy to extract three loud quotes from the speech — about ‘Flamingo’, Donbas, and Putin’s mortality. But then its internal structure disappears. Zelensky first showed the people for whom the state exists, then listed the tools of resistance, and only after that moved on to warnings to Russia and the outside world.

The teacher who went for the wounded

One of the central heroes of the address was 29-year-old Vladyslav Polishchuk, call sign ‘Teacher’, commander of the assault company of the 475th separate assault regiment CODE 9.2. Before the full-scale war, he taught in Zaporizhzhia, and in 2022 he voluntarily went to serve.

During one of the operations, two Ukrainian soldiers were wounded. Initially, they tried to evacuate them using an NRC — a ground robotic complex, that is, an unmanned platform capable of delivering ammunition or evacuating people. The robot was attacked by a Russian FPV drone — a small device controlled by the operator via video signal almost from the first person.

Then Polishchuk got into a pickup truck and went to the wounded himself. According to his story, in some sections, the car accelerated to about 160 kilometers per hour, and the entire operation took about 30–40 minutes. He believed that another 10–15 minutes of waiting could have cost the soldiers their lives.

On August 19, 2026, Vladyslav Polishchuk was awarded the title of Hero of Ukraine. Zelensky included this episode in the festive address not for military romance. The story shows that behind technological terms — robots, FPV drones, and evacuation means — there is still a person who has to make a decision after the equipment has stopped working.

Next to the military man in the speech appeared 18-year-old gymnast Taisia Onofriychuk. At the 2026 World Championship, she scored 30.700 points for her hoop exercise, ahead of Italian Sofia Raffaeli by two-tenths. For Ukraine, this became the first individual gold in the world championship in rhythmic gymnastics since Anna Rizatdinova’s victory in 2013.

The teacher behind the wheel of a pickup and the gymnast on the podium exist in completely different realities. But Zelensky deliberately put them in the same row: the state, according to his logic, is preserved not only by the front line. It continues to live when a person returns the wounded, when an athlete performs under the Ukrainian flag, and when a family meets a freed captive in their own yard.

What does the promise of mass ‘Flamingos’ mean

The most notable military part of the address was the statement about the FP-5 ‘Flamingo’ missile. Zelensky made it clear that it should no longer be about individual tests or rare applications, but about mass production and regular use of Ukrainian long-range weapons.

The FP-5 is described by the developer Fire Point as a Ukrainian ground-launched cruise missile with a declared range of up to 3000 kilometers. In open publications, its warhead mass is estimated at about one — 1.15 tons. These are characteristics declared by the manufacturer and presented in open materials; they do not yet mean that every parameter and every supposed combat application is independently confirmed.

A cruise missile flies most of its route in the atmosphere along a controlled trajectory. It differs from a ballistic one in the nature of the flight: a ballistic missile, after acceleration, travels a significant part of the way along a high arc and approaches the target at high speed, leaving the missile defense system very little time to react.

The speech mentioned Moscow, Tuapse, Tula, Ryazan, Omsk, and Olenya airbase. This list cannot be read as a statement that all the named targets have already been hit specifically by ‘Flamingo’ missiles. Zelensky was talking about the geography of Ukrainian strikes in general and that the new complex should expand the country’s capabilities.

He also divided strikes of medium depth and so-called deep strikes — operations on targets far beyond the front line. The first are primarily aimed at warehouses, headquarters, airfields, and logistics directly supporting Russian troops. The second allows impacting oil refineries, military industry, strategic aviation bases, and other targets deep in Russia.

In August, several Russian regions indeed reported queues at gas stations and restrictions on fuel sales. But it would be wrong to explain the entire deficit solely by Ukrainian attacks. The market was simultaneously influenced by damage and shutdowns of refineries, planned repairs, seasonal demand, transportation problems, and state price regulation.

This is where the line between a political statement and verifiable reality lies. Zelensky seeks to show that the war is returning to those who expected to watch it on TV. How massive the FP-5s will become and how sustainable their effectiveness will be will depend on serial production, components, navigation, the ability to overcome Russian air defenses, and the quality of intelligence data.

Why Donbas was again at the center of the speech

Zelensky once again ruled out the transfer of Donbas as a price for a ceasefire. For the Ukrainian authorities, this is not only a matter of territory. Agreeing to a forcible change of borders would mean recognizing the principle that a state with greater military resources can gain captured land in exchange for a temporary pause.

For the Israeli reader, it is important not to mechanically transfer the Ukrainian situation to the Middle East. Geography, conflict history, international agreements, and military capabilities differ. However, the very dispute about what happens after rewarding aggression is well known to a society that constantly evaluates the cost of deterrence and the consequences of an unfinished war.

Zelensky did not present a new peace plan or name a date for the end of hostilities. His position was already: Ukraine should not agree to conditions that would allow Russia to restore its forces, consolidate the occupation, and return to war later.

Search queries ‘what did Zelensky say on August 24, 2026’, ‘what is the ‘Flamingo’ missile’, and ‘will Russia announce a new mobilization’ often appear together, although they require different answers. The first is confirmed by the full text of the address, the second by open technical data with a mandatory caveat about their origin, and the third remains a forecast by the Ukrainian president, not a published decision by the Russian authorities.

‘Russia wants mobilization’ — an assessment, not an announced decree

Zelensky stated that Russia is not striving for real peace and is preparing for further mobilization. In this form, it is an assessment by the Ukrainian side, based on the ongoing recruitment of military personnel, losses of the Russian army, and the absence of signs of the Kremlin abandoning maximalist goals.

At the time of the address, there was no official announcement of a new general mobilization in Russia. Therefore, the wording cannot be turned into an already accomplished fact. The political meaning of the statement is different: Kyiv warns partners that a pause without guarantees and pressure can be used by Russia to replenish units and launch a new offensive.

The phrase ‘Putin is mortal’ is also not a message about the health of the Russian president and does not contain a prediction of his death. It is a political metaphor: rulers and the regimes they create are not eternal, while the state and society must count on a longer historical distance.

This argument is addressed simultaneously to Ukrainians, the Kremlin, and Western capitals. Ukrainians are offered to evaluate resistance not only by the position of the front in a particular week. Partners are reminded that trying to adapt the entire European security system to the desires of one Russian leader cannot be a long-term solution.

Controversial line about Dnipropetrovsk region

In some early textual transcripts of the address, there was a phrase about the complete liberation of the Dnipropetrovsk region. In the current official text of the speech, this line is absent. Therefore, it cannot be asserted that it is part of the final version of the presidential speech.

Two days before Independence Day, Zelensky said that about ten square kilometers and three small settlements remained under Russian control in the region. Even this assessment needs careful reading: the line of combat contact changes, and the concepts of ‘cleared’, ‘liberated’, and ‘under stable control’ do not always describe the same military situation.

For a journalistic text, this is not a minor editorial detail. Between ‘almost liberated’ and ‘completely liberated’ lies the fate of specific villages, the positions of units, and the safety of people who may remain near the fighting. That is why the later official version of the document is more important than the most striking early quote.

‘Shaheds’, interceptors, and a debate familiar to Israel about the cost of protection

Zelensky separately spoke about the development of Ukrainian interceptor drones. He cited a figure of more than 90% of ‘Shaheds’ destroyed, but it should be perceived as the president’s declared assessment, not as the unchanging effectiveness of Ukrainian air defense in all attacks and in all directions.

‘Shaheds’ in Ukraine refer to Iranian-developed strike drones, the Russian localized versions of which received the designation ‘Geran’. Russia changes their design, communication channels, altitude, and tactics of use. Simultaneously, reactive strike devices and complexes like the S8000 ‘Banderol’ appear, while ballistic missiles remain a separate, significantly more complex threat.

For readers of NANews — News of Israel, this part of the address is especially understandable. Israel also faces combined attacks, where cheap drones can be launched together with cruise and ballistic missiles, forcing the defense to simultaneously track targets with different speeds and trajectories.

The main problem here is not reduced to the interception percentage. If the attacking side can massively launch relatively cheap devices, and the defender is forced to respond with expensive missiles, an economic war of attrition arises. Therefore, Ukraine is developing cheaper interceptor drones, mobile fire groups, electronic warfare means, and its own long-range systems.

The Ukrainian and Israeli experiences cannot be declared identical, but there is a real technological connection between the theaters of war. Iran transferred the original Shahed platform to Russia, the Russian army refined it under conditions of large-scale use, and the accumulated experience can return to Iranian structures.

On the pages of NANews — News of Israel, we have already analyzed this connection in the article ‘Iran and Russia: How the War in Ukraine Became a Testing Ground for Future War Against Israel and the USA’. Zelensky’s new address adds another layer to this topic: the defending country is trying not only to shoot down aerial targets but also to deprive the enemy of the ability to endlessly produce and launch them.

Decisions by the US and European countries to release missiles, air defense systems, and ammunition therefore affect several regions at once. The same shortage of production capacities is felt by both Ukraine, repelling daily Russian attacks, and Israel, which needs to maintain a reserve of means to counter Iran and its allies.

Why I read this speech through the fates of people

I am originally from Ukraine and belong to the Jewish diaspora. For me, the connection between Ukrainian and Israeli reality does not pass through convenient political analogies, but through families, languages, memory, concern for people, and understanding of how quickly the words ‘distant war’ cease to correspond to reality.

I am not a military expert and cannot determine the real characteristics of a missile or the state of a specific position from open video. Therefore, in this material, I compared the official text of the address, the message about the awarding of Vladyslav Polishchuk, the open results of the World Rhythmic Gymnastics Championship, statements about the situation in the Dnipropetrovsk region, and published data on the FP-5. Where there is only a statement by the president or manufacturer, I maintain this boundary and do not present it as an independently established fact.

I think something else is important. The festive speech could have been constructed as a set of slogans about inevitable victory. Instead, its framework was people forced to act in circumstances where guaranteed salvation does not exist: a teacher goes for the wounded after the robot is defeated, an athlete steps onto the international podium, and engineers try to turn a single product into a series.

It is this human layer that cannot be replaced by a list of weapons. Without it, ‘Flamingo’, interceptor drones, and long-range strikes turn into a catalog of equipment, although their political meaning is determined by whether they will give people time — to evacuate the wounded, take cover during an alarm, save a city, and not accept the loss of their land as a final verdict.

…

I did not hear in this address a promise of an easy finale. Zelensky spoke about mass production of weapons precisely because the war does not end with a beautiful formula, and Russia does not show readiness to abandon the captured territories and the use of force.

The words that Ukraine will not fall in this speech are not based on optimism or Putin’s biology. They are based on the country’s ability to survive a specific day: produce an interceptor, find parts for a missile, return a person from captivity, evacuate two wounded, and not erase from the official language the difference between ‘almost’ and ‘completely’.

For me, this is the main meaning of the 35th Independence Day of Ukraine. Independence has ceased to be only a date, a border, or a state document. It has become a daily, costly, and very human work that cannot be done once and considered finished.