Source: The Conversation – Canada
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy recently made the controversial decision to dismiss Mykhailo Fedorov, his minister of defense. Fedorov, admired both by Ukrainian troops and western allies, was at the forefront of Ukraine’s increasing technological innovations in the war against Russia.
According to Fedorov, however, tension began to emerge over his own desire to replace Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces. Widespread protests over Syrskyi’s role in the conflict subsequently led Zelenskyy to remove him as well. What this now means for Federov’s future is unclear.
Power struggles aren’t new to Ukrainian politics. Zelenskyy replaced the previous commander-in-chief, Gen. Valerii Zaluzhnyi. Similar to Fedorov, Zaluzhnyi was well-liked by Ukraine’s soldiers.
Zelenskyy’s removal of Fedorov and Syrskyi highlights an ongoing tension in Ukraine’s armed forces — one that western pundits have misunderstood.
Specifically, western observers emphasize that Ukraine’s modern and technology-heavy approach in the war stands in contrast to Russia’s low-tech, industrialized approach. However, Ukraine’s army is, in fact, a hybrid force that simultaneously needs the innovative approach championed in the West along with more brutal aspects needed in a war of attrition.
With such a hybrid approach, one factor of war becomes important beyond all others: morale.
Ukraine’s army
When Ukraine gained independence in 1991, it inherited its armed forces from the Soviet Union, both in terms of equipment and personnel. While Ukraine’s post-independence economic problems led to the degradation of its material assets, the country’s officer corps remained firmly entrenched in the old Soviet model.
Russia’s annexation of Crimea and de facto annexation of ports in the Donbas region of Ukraine forced Ukrainian leaders to re-evaluate their armed forces. Specifically, there was a push to acquire western trainers and expertise to overcome Russia’s military advantages.
The Ukrainian army’s transformation was still under way when Russia invaded in 2022. Critically, while much of the lower-ranked officer corps embraced western training, several senior officers, notably Syrskyi, preferred the older, more traditional Soviet approach.
The training provided by the West was critical in Ukraine’s initial successes in the war as lower-ranked and non-commissioned officers proved vital in blunting Russia’s offence. Zaluzhnyi — himself trained in the post-Ukrainian independence era — encouraged and supported these initiatives.
By 2023, the conflict began to shift from manoeuvre warfare, where western tactics excel, to one of attrition, causing problems for Ukraine. Furthermore, the officers who made Ukraine’s tactics successful in 2022 were either promoted or killed in the conflict.
The ongoing war meant their replacements, although enthusiastic, could not be trained to the same standard.
War of attrition
International media outlets and pundits have emphasized the importance of Ukraine’s drone technology in the war.
It’s beyond question that drones play an important role in the conflict. Zelenskyy and Ukraine have, in fact, leveraged Ukraine’s drone expertise to secure diplomatic wins resulting from the American war in the Persian Gulf.
Read more:
Other nations thirst for Ukraine’s drone success — but they need a culture shift first
What this assessment misses, however, is that drones cannot fully replace human beings in any conflict. Over-emphasizing drones also falls into the common western, and specifically American, view of warfare — that technology is the decisive element in war. This belief, needless to say, is reductionist and helped create the strategic imbroglio that the United States is currently encountering in the Persian Gulf.
Zelenskyy, however, isn’t falling into this trap. Yes, he emphasizes the role of drones because he knows doing so gets Ukraine attention in the global media. Furthermore, given that Ukraine faces a protracted recruitment problem, any use of drones helps alleviate the burden on the Ukrainian people.
Read more:
Zelensky says a destructive drone arms race looms – but dystopia isn’t inevitable
Drones are also a cheap way for Ukraine to compensate for delays by western partners to provide artillery, air defence and other urgently needed supplies.
But Zelenskyy also knows that the conflict in Ukraine is now a war of attrition. In these kinds of wars, the ultimate winner is typically the state that maintains the will to fight the longest. In this goal, drones are a supplementary, not vital, component.
What Syrskyi’s removal says about the war
Syrskyi lacks the charisma of his predecessor, Zaluzhnyi. Furthermore, his strategy has often been described as unimaginative.
But he did have an advantage over Zaluzhnyi and Fedorov that initially made him vital to the war effort: he had no illusions about its nature as a war of attrition and was willing to sacrifice Ukrainian lives for long-term strategic goals.
This pragmatic and brutal outlook suggests problems for Ukraine’s war effort. Syrskyi’s willingness to pay for strategic goals with Ukrainian lives made him less popular with the troops than his predecessor. This was ultimately what led to the protests against him that caused Zelenskyy to remove him.
Zelenskyy isn’t perfect. He has made several mistakes during the conflict and even before it began. That Ukrainians currently trust Fedorov to a greater extent than Zelenskyy after his dismissal raises the spectre of a political rival in the future.
Zelenskyy does, however, recognize that war is ultimately a political act. There is a place for dissident opinions, but if they undermine the strategic goals of the political leadership, they become problematic.
For a while, Syrskyi’s brutal approach served Zelenskyy’s and Ukraine’s goal of winning a war of attrition. That’s why Zelenskyy initially chose to maintain him over Fedorov. Once the public’s disdain for Syrskyi became evident, however, Zelenskyy sacrificed him to maintain both his position and, more importantly, the support and morale of the Ukrainian people.
In a long war of attrition, after all, morale is of absolute importance.
James Horncastle does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/07/22/volodymyr-zelenskyys-removal-of-two-top-defence-officials-highlights-the-role-of-morale-in-long-wars/