Zelensky rebukes the top general and signals a rift in Ukrainian leadership

President Volodymyr Zelensky’s office on Saturday rebuked Ukraine’s top military commander for publicly declaring a stalemate war, suggesting the comments would help the Russian invasion. It was a striking public rebuke that signaled an emerging rift between military and civilian leadership at an already challenging time for Ukraine.

Speaking on national television, Deputy Head of the President’s Office Ihor Zhovkva said that General Valery Zaluzhny’s claims that the fight against Russia was at a stalemate “ease the work of the aggressor”, adding that the comments caused “panic” among the Ukrainian population. Western allies.

At the same time, Mr. Zelensky disputed the general’s characterization of the fighting. “Time has passed, people are tired regardless of their status, and this is understandable,” he said at a press conference on Saturday, adding: “But this is not a stalemate, I emphasize this again.”

General Zaluzhny’s public censure came a day after the president’s office replaced one of his deputies, the head of the special operations forces, who said after his dismissal that he was blindsided by the dismissal. It was unclear whether General Zaluzhny, the commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian armed forces, was aware of the planned dismissal in advance.

The emerging rift between the general and the president comes as Ukraine struggles with its war efforts, militarily and diplomatically. Its operations along the approximately 1,000-kilometre-long trench line have failed to make any progress, inflicting heavy casualties on both sides, and Ukraine is facing intensified Russian attacks in the East. At the same time, skepticism about aid to Ukraine has increased in some European capitals and among members of the Republican Party in the United States.

Ukrainian leaders are also concerned that the attention of Western allies has shifted to the conflict between Israel and Hamas, and away from the war with Russia. “The war in the Middle East, this conflict takes away the focus,” Zelensky said on Saturday.

Even as Ukrainian soldiers hold out in the trenches, now drenched in mudslides from autumn rains, officials and politicians in Ukraine and allied capitals are passing the blame for the stalled Ukrainian counteroffensive that began in June and has advanced only a dozen kilometers. through densely mined fields. US officials have hinted that Ukraine is responsible for spreading its forces too widely; Mr Zelensky said his army had not received enough weapons to advance.

Speculation about tension between the president and the army’s commanding general over strategy and command appointments had been going on in Kiev for more than a year, but had not previously sparked public disagreement.

General Zaluzhny did not immediately comment on the government’s reprimand or the dismissal of his special operations chief.

The cause of the infringement was one General Zaluzhny’s essay published in The Economist claiming that drone reconnaissance and other technologies had made mechanized attacks from either side impossible. Further progress was unlikely, he wrote, and Ukraine would not achieve a “nice breakthrough” in the war without receiving more advanced weapons.

“There are problems, there are different opinions,” Mr Zelensky said on Saturday in his appearance with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who made a surprise visit to Kiev on Saturday to discuss Ukraine’s EU accession process.

“I believe we have no right to even think about giving up because what is the alternative?” he added.

Although General Zaluzhny clearly did not suggest that Ukraine was losing the war, and he pointed out that Russia had also not made any substantial progress, he acknowledged in his essay that the two sides had reached a “stalemate.” He also wrote that breaking the deadlock would require technological advances to achieve air superiority, highlighting the role of next-generation drones and electronic warfare.

In his comments Saturday, Mr. Zhovkva, the deputy in the president’s office, said General Zaluzhny’s comments may reflect a “very deep strategic plan” but risk harming Ukraine’s war effort. He said the essay prompted foreign officials to call asking, “What should I report to my leader?” Are you really at a dead end?’” He added: “Was this the effect we wanted to achieve?”

Olexiy Haran, professor of comparative politics at the Kyiv National University-Mohyla Academy, said the public proclamation of the dispute was less political than pragmatic in conveying the president’s war communications strategy. “What Zhovkva is saying is that it is better to communicate about this behind closed doors,” without fueling public debate in allied countries, Mr Haran said.

He added that Mr. Zelensky’s aides might worry that General Zaluzhny’s sobering conclusions could discourage some allies from continuing their military assistance.

Signs of friction emerged Friday when Zelensky’s office fired one of General Zaluzhny’s top deputies, the commander of Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces, General Viktor Khorenko, without initially providing an explanation. On Saturday, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov said said he had recommended the dismissal but would not explain why, fearing this would “give the enemy reasons to weaken Ukraine.”

The decision puzzled some because General Khorenko had achieved a series of successes attacking behind enemy lines, including hitting ships and infrastructure of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet in Crimea and targets in Russia. The long-range attacks and sabotage operations of the special forces had been welcomed by the Ukrainians.

But field commanders and military analysts had noted grumbling within the ranks over what were seen as politically guided decisions on strategy, including the launch of an amphibious assault across the Dnipro River in southern Ukraine, which has yet to capture a beachhead in the Russian-occupied eastern part of Ukraine. Bank. Another point of tension was the dismissal of battalion commanders who had led units in the counter-offensive in southern Ukraine during the summer.

US military officers who worked with General Khorenko were surprised by the news of his ouster and described a close and effective working relationship with him, US military officials said.

Under the Constitution of Ukraine, the president has the power to appoint and dismiss the head of the special forces, although this position is directly subordinate to the commander-in-chief of the army. The fire seemed to undermine General Zaluzhny’s authority.

Commentators, including a member of the Ukrainian parliament, said General Khorenko’s dismissal appeared to be the most significant and potentially disruptive political interference in the military’s prosecution of the war yet.

“The shooting looks like political interference in the armed forces and in their combat actions,” the member, Solomiya Bobrovska, who serves on parliament’s defense and intelligence committee, said in an interview. Ms Bobrovska is a member of the opposition political party Holos.

“This is a big mistake and there will be consequences,” she said in the interview. She suggested that it was actually the dismissal of a successful general by the presidential office that would help the Russians.

Erik Schmitt contributed reporting from washington, and Maria Varenikova from Sumy, Ukraine.