"The US has pushed changes in Ukraine’s leadership before, and the current State Department undersecretary, Victoria Nuland, was behind the earlier operation. A 2014 phone call between Nuland and the then-US ambassador to Kiev, Geoffrey Pyatt, was intercepted and the content of the call was leaked to the press.

The call is interesting because Nuland and Pyatt were selecting an “acceptable” presidential candidate for Ukraine, and they enlisted then-Vice President Joe Biden to help. Note that along with Biden, Jake Sullivan, then and now Biden’s national security advisor, was also enlisted in selecting Ukraine’s next President.

Transcript of intercepted call
....

The same three American players – Biden, Sullivan and Nuland – are again deciding about Ukraine. Why would these three be willing to jettison Zelensky?

Washington has let it be known through controlled leaks that its carefully orchestrated plan for Ukraine’s counter-offensive was not followed by Zelensky. Working in opposition to his own generals – both Zaluzhny and the more-silent Syrskyi – Zelensky decided to renew military operations trying to take back Bakhmut, which had been lost after the Russian Army and Prigozhin’s Wagner forces had driven the Ukrainians out of the city.

The effect of trying to fight Russia on a much wider front meant that the impact of the battle in the south, centered primarily around the so-called Bradley Square area of Zaphorize, was diluted by committing some of Ukraine’s best forces to Bakhmut and other fronts in Donetsk.

But there is even more. Washington’s goal in the offensive was to set the stage for forcing Russia into a deal on Ukraine. By breaking through the so-called Surovikin defense-in-depth, Ukraine’s army would threaten Crimea.
....
The Ukrainians have claimed that the offensive “stalled” because they did not have the right weapons. But three Western-equipped-and-trained brigades, with top-of-the-line combat equipment, couldn’t force a positive result. Instead, much of the Western equipment was left burning in the field, including “invincible” Leopard tanks, that were rated better than even the US M1 Abrams.

Zelensky has a second problem, which may be even harder for him to overcome and which has damaged his relationship with his American and British masters. That problem is the growing perception that Ukraine is losing the war.

There are now enough verified reports to show that Ukraine has turned to draconian measures to try and add to its dwindling manpower reserves for the war. Ukraine is already mostly on its third army (replacing most of the previous two where manpower and equipment losses ended their combat usefulness), although a handful of top-quality brigades still exist. But with less capable troops and endless nightmares in maintaining diverse NATO weapons (weapons that are not interoperable, contrary to what NATO always claimed, and are exceedingly difficult to repair), Ukraine’s army appears to be heading toward disaster.

In Washington’s view the best thing to do is to negotiate a deal with the Russians. Russia has already rejected any ceasefire if negotiations come about. The war, in Russia’s view, will only end when there is an agreed settlement of the key issues, the most important (in Russia’s view) is that NATO must leave Ukraine."

https://asiatimes.com/2023/11/why-is-the-west-moving-to-replace-zelensky/