The reshuffle exposed internal disagreements in the Ukrainian military

For President Volodymyr Zelensky, the most difficult days on both the political and battlefield fronts seem to be behind us this summer. Thanks to the resilience of its soldiers and the creativity of its military engineers, Ukraine began to win consecutive victories.

The front line has largely stabilized thanks to the tactic of widely using drones to raid deep into Russia’s logistics lines. Over the past week, the Ukrainian army announced it had attacked 116 targets in the Black Sea and the Sea of ​​Azov, causing an important logistics route for the Crimean peninsula to almost paralyze.

Ukraine is also receiving disbursements from the European Union’s 90 billion euro (more than 100 billion USD) loan package. And at a meeting in Türkiye last week, US President Donald Trump praised Mr. Zelensky, and allowed Ukraine to produce its own Patriot air defense missiles under a franchise license from the US.

However, that chain of success is at risk of being interrupted, not by a large-scale attack from Russia or new cracks in relations with Mr. Trump, but by disagreements within Ukraine itself. The climax was Mr. Zelensky’s dismissal of Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, who is considered the “drone boss” behind recent successes on the battlefield, in a large-scale government reshuffle.

When he assumed the leadership position of the Ministry of Defense in January, Mr. Fedorov, 35 years old, pledged to take advantage of technological solutions to help Ukraine prevent the Russian military’s advance. Just as that strategy began to bear fruit after six months of implementation, Fedorov was fired.

The decision shows that Mr. Zelensky chose to side with Ukrainian Army Commander Oleksandr Syrsky, who has continuously contradicted Fedorov on operational views. Syrsky is a 60-year-old general who commanded a successful campaign to defend Kiev at the beginning of the war, but was also criticized for his old-fashioned tactics, which led to large, avoidable losses of soldiers’ lives.

General Syrsky once firmly demanded that Ukrainian units must defend at Bakhmut, forcing them to hold out for 9 months at this “fortress” under constant Russian shelling. In the end, they had to withdraw from Bakhmut after being surrounded and suffering heavy casualties.

At a press conference in Kiev on July 16, Fedorov publicly criticized General Syrsky’s strategy, corruption in defense contracts and shortcomings in the military command since the war with Russia began.

“In the Ukrainian army, if you succeed, you will become a star, but soon you will fall into a dead end,” Fedorov said. He explained that out of jealousy, conservative generals will hinder the rise of a new class of commanders who have been trained on the battlefield and have a technological mindset.

He accused General Syrsky of hindering the careers of promising subordinate commanders and opposing drone and robot warfare, which is helping Ukraine change the face of the war on land, air and sea.

“Decisions about who needs support and who doesn’t, or which units need reinforcement and which don’t, are not based on actual data. They are made based on loyalty to senior commanders,” he said.

Mr. Fedorov also publicly called for General Syrsky to resign and is said to have persuaded President Zelensky to remove him. However, Mr. Zelensky has the opposite opinion.

In a recent social media post, the President of Ukraine said he wanted Mr. Syrsky and Fedorov to reconcile, but in this situation “I have to choose a side, because without me, they will not sit down at the negotiating table.”

Mr. Fedorov’s dismissal sparked protests by thousands of Ukrainians across the country. Many people expressed outrage that the leadership chose a veteran general instead of a pioneer in innovation.

For weeks, Ukrainians have been talking about a turning point in the conflict with Russia. But now, the country is sinking deeper into a political crisis.

This is said to be the most serious rift in the leadership since Mr. Zelensky fired former commander Valeriy Zaluzhny in 2024, who had disagreed with the President over military mobilization policies.

Andrew E. Kramer, columnist for New York Timescommented that the conflict in Ukraine’s leadership this time is not only a personal disagreement but also reflects the gap between two generations.

That also raises questions about whether Ukraine, a country praised for its military innovation, will actually embrace the high-tech solutions that Fedorov is aiming for, according to Kramer.

“I believe that Mr. Fedorov’s dismissal is a strong blow to the country’s defense,” Pavlo Yelizarov, deputy commander of the Ukrainian air force, wrote on social networks. He submitted his resignation to protest the President’s dismissal of Mr. Fedorov.

Mykhailo Drapatyi, commander of Ukraine’s joint forces in charge of coordinating activities between military services and other security agencies, issued a statement supporting Mr. Fedorov. “Silence does not protect the military, it only causes mistakes to accumulate,” he said.

Over the years, the Ukrainian army has witnessed a split between brigades that pursue technology-based warfare and infantry and mechanized units that operate in traditional ways. Mr. Fedorov said he made this issue public to discuss with the Ukrainian people about the difficulties the army is facing.

Volodymyr Yermolenko, editor-in-chief of the magazine Ukraine Worldsaid the rift in the way the war was conducted was exposed at this time “precisely because of the successes” on the battlefield.

According to him, those who always believe that the key lies in technological solutions are increasingly boldly expressing their opinions, because they believe that reality has proven them right. But the faction pursuing the traditional approach is also increasingly reacting.

Political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko in Kiev said that President Zelensky sided with General Syrsky because he considered him an experienced commander, with a role in maintaining balance in the Ukrainian military and defense leadership system.

Meanwhile, expert Yermolenko warned that Ukraine’s internal turmoil poses many potential risks. “The most dangerous enemy is internal division. History has proven that it can have deadly consequences,” he said.