Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine is rapidly approaching its second anniversary – and is not going according to plan for either side.
In a major reset that President Zelenskyy believes can change the trajectory of the conflict, he has sacked his commander-in-chief, General Valeriy Zaluzhny. After a series of disagreements, Zelenskyy has called for a ‘united approach across the whole frontline and a new vision for the war, mobilization and recruitment’.
It is a herculean task for his new chief, Colonel General Oleksandr Syrsky, previously commander of ground forces, given the reality of the current phase of war.
Ukraine had hoped to achieve a ‘miracle on Dnipro’ in 2023 by retaking substantial land in the south to cut Russian supplies to occupied Crimea and make the peninsula vulnerable. Instead, its land operation delivered little progress in contrast to some success in the Black Sea, where Kyiv managed to unblock part of the sea trade routes for its exports.
The situation on the eastern front is dire. Due to delays in the European production of 155 mm artillery shells, Ukrainian troops are rationing munition and Russians have a reported 5:1 advantage. If US assistance is further delayed, Kyiv will start losing more territory and fail to exploit the advantages created by the summer campaign. Exact casualties on Ukraine’s side are undisclosed but data from summer 2023 suggests around 200,000 dead and wounded.
Zelenskyy’s decision to oust Zaluzhny stirred dismay and anxiety in Ukraine. Why? And why now? Few see an immediate military purpose for such a move. Ukrainians overwhelmingly expressed gratitude for Zaluzhny’s service to the country on social media. Those worked with him closely spoke about his heroic defence of Kyiv during the first days of war, and how he was kind and open-minded, caring about soldiers, veterans and their families.
The choice of Syrsky does not come as a surprise. His name circulated as a possible replacement since the tensions between Zelenskyy and Zaluzhny started brewing at the end of 2023. The key anxiety among soldiers is that Syrskys’s approach is reminiscent of the old Soviet strategy, where human costs are secondary. His willingness to take heavy casualties to deliver political rather than military goals risk undermining the nascent culture of saving lives that Zaluzhny represented.
So what were the motives behind Zelenskyy’s decision? A key motive could be finding a person to blame for the failed summer campaign, problems in the army and a prolonged war. Zelenskyy’s team was keen to raise expectations in society for a quick win. His Chief of Military Intelligence Kyrylo Budanov was promising the liberation of Crimea in 2023. Those hopes are now clearly shattered and the reality of a long war is sinking in. The number of people who believe the war will last more than a year doubled from December 2022 to June 2023.
Another motive was the general’s rising popularity. Zelenskyy is very sensitive to his likability, a legacy of his past acting career. Zaluzhny is the only person who overtakes the president in public support. His personality has a saviour-like allure. His achievements, chiefly defending the capital at the start of the invasion, work in his favour. An IRI survey of public opinion shows that approval of Ukrainian armed forces remains very strong with 96 per cent support, while Zelenskyy’s approval rate declined from 94 per cent to 82 per cent between April 2022 and September 2023.
Although elections will not take place during the war and Zaluzhny has never expressed any interest in politics, this trend is causing a stir in the president’s office. The general was stealing the president’s thunder. Removing him from the spotlight solves that problem.
More importantly, this might be a fallout related to the future of war and its strategy. The reality of a war of attrition is tough and a hard sell politically. Zaluzhny’s reference to a positional phase of fighting was publicly rebuffed by the president. He was irritated that a rhetoric of stalemates projected defeatism. Zaluzhny argued for the need of strategic defence in 2024 but Zelenskyy is impatient and wants to end the deadlock on the battlefield. The new general might be more willing to pursue this line.
Syrsky led the operations near Bakhmut, which became a political symbol of resistance and heroism, but also a tragic site of many useless losses for Ukraine. Kyiv has suffered heavy casualties repelling Russian ‘meat-grinding’ attacks led by the Wagner group. Zelenskyy insisted that Ukrainian control of this town is important. Military commentators frequently questioned this strategy. Zelenskyy may be looking for a military command who is more loyal to his vision and maintains strict subordination.