The epic story of the alleged resignation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) Valery Zaluzhny unfolded, lasting only a few hours, but causing a wave of nervous tension among millions of Ukrainians.
In the afternoon of Monday, January 29, President Volodymyr Zelensky expressed a desire to meet with the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to discuss the situation on the front. This happened while the head of the Presidential Office, Andriy Yermak, was in Uzhhorod for negotiations.
The meeting, which took place on Bankova Street, was attended by President Zelensky, Commander-in-Chief Zaluzhny, and Defense Minister Rustem Umerov. According to sources, the meeting was held in a calm tone. However, according to information, the president announced his decision to dismiss the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and a decree to this effect will be signed in the near future.
Information about Zaluzhny's resignation began to spread rapidly on social networks after 6 p.m. This process took place in two directions in parallel, provoking lively discussions among citizens.
The case surrounding the alleged resignation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valery Zaluzhny, has extremely activated anonymous Telegram channels, which, according to some information sources, may be connected to the Office of the President.
Despite the fact that Bankova's representatives regularly deny their involvement with these channels, they often become the source of exclusives from the presidential administration, and even receive invitations to off-the-record meetings in the President's Office.
On the other hand, other sources, who are hardly likely to be sympathetic to Zelensky, also reported on this event, citing their sources. The tone of the reports ranged from assurances that nothing serious was happening in the country to predictions of various troubles for the Office of the President.
After seven o'clock in the evening, information about Zaluzhny's resignation became a fact, which was confirmed by influential Ukrainian media outlets, citing their own sources.
But at 19:41, just an hour and a half later, after officially announcing this, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine in its telegram post rejected these rumors, calling them untrue. Later, at 19:23, Defense Ministry spokesman Ilarion Pavlyuk confirmed in a comment to the BBC that Zaluzhny had not resigned.
At 8:05 p.m., presidential press secretary Serhiy Nikiforov, in an interview with Ukrainska Pravda, denied information about Zaluzhny's resignation, claiming that "the president definitely did not dismiss the commander-in-chief.".
Only at 8:20 p.m. did the President's Office release Volodymyr Zelensky's daily address, which contained no mention of the meeting with the commander-in-chief or his resignation. Only then did it become clear that January 29 would not be Valery Zaluzhny's last working day.
There are many unknown factors in the situation surrounding the supposed resignation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Valery Zaluzhny, that make it mysterious. First, why exactly did the president decide to remove Zaluzhny now?
The friendship between Volodymyr Zelensky and Valery Zaluzhny has long turned into a problem that is difficult to hide. The conflict between the military and political leadership began in April 2022, after the retreat of Russian troops from Kyiv.
General Zaluzhny, although not a figure in the criminal case about the insufficient organization of defense in southern Ukraine, discussed it with the SBI investigators. However, the president, secretly but openly, expresses his dissatisfaction with the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Even MP Mariana Bezugla, who is associated with the head of the President's Office, criticizes Zaluzhny on social networks.
The reasons for the sharp cooling of relations between Zelensky and Zaluzhny remain mysterious. Some commentators believe that the reason may be the government's jealousy of the high level of trust and support that the population shows for Zaluzhny, who is already being called Zelensky's real competitor in the upcoming presidential elections.
Others point to Zaluzhny and Zelensky's differing views on the course of the war and its further development. Despite this, the details and exact reason for the resignation remain unknown.
Zelensky has recently considered dismissing Zaluzhny. Legally, the president has the right to issue a decree on his resignation without any additional explanation or justification.
However, what exactly inspired the president to decide to inform Zaluzhny about his imminent resignation personally on January 29 remains a mystery. The situation on the front has not shown any significant changes, and the Russian Il-76 crash near Belgorod remains inaccessible to the general public for the time being. However, the president justified the need for Zaluzhny's resignation by the desire to reboot the national security and defense system of Ukraine. So far, there has been no information about other possible personnel changes in the security, military, and law enforcement structures.
Another unknown part of this story is the reason why the president did not issue a decree dismissing Zaluzhny immediately after he informed the general of his decision.
According to BBC interlocutors in political circles, there are two main options for answering this question, leaving aside the version that Bankova hesitated due to the loud negative reaction on social media.
According to the first option, Kyiv's Western partners intervened in the situation, expressing their strong disapproval of Zaluzhny's resignation. This explanation can be easily confirmed, given Ukraine's complete dependence on Western military and financial support. Now, providing multi-billion dollar tranches of both European and American aid promises to become a critical task for Kyiv.
Foreign media also report that Western leaders are strongly recommending that Kyiv switch to strategic defense, which Zaluzhny actually supports. The dismissal of the commander-in-chief, especially without prior consent from the West, could cause a “refusal” to implement this decision by Zelensky. The West seems to have enough influence to insist on its approach to this issue.
The second possible reason that prevented the issuance of a decree on Zaluzhny's resignation could be the problem with the appointment of a new commander-in-chief. Ukrainian media indicate two main contenders for this position: Kirill Budanov, head of the Main Intelligence Directorate, and Oleksandr Syrsky, commander of the Ground Forces.
But BBC sources say both generals have shown no desire to replace Zaluzhny and have declined the appointment, saying the main problem is that any new commander-in-chief will automatically be compared to the previous, hugely popular Valery Zaluzhny.
According to a December poll by KIIS, 92% of Ukrainians trust Zaluzhny, while 60% trust Budanov and 33% trust Syrsky (it is worth noting that about half of Ukrainians do not know the latter).
It follows that even with a new appointment as the head of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, there is no immediate guarantee of improving the situation on the front lines or developing new strategies in providing the military. The task of defeating the Russian army is extremely difficult, and mobilization must be intensified regardless of the personality of the commander-in-chief.
The appointment of a new leader may also impose on him the status of a “political nominee” or “Bankova’s stooge general,” which may create difficulties in his relations with the Ukrainian military. In such a situation, the new commander-in-chief may become an object of criticism, being considered a tool of political forces. Such a leader, regardless of his officer experience and military qualifications, may be vulnerable to such a perception.
The intervention of Kyiv's Western partners could influence the appointment, especially if they disagree with the president's decision. In particular, their recommendations on strategic defense, which Zaluzhny embodies, could have a significant impact.
On the other hand, in times of war, the presidential decision must be implemented, and any new commander-in-chief must adhere to this. Refusal by any general to implement the president's decision is unacceptable, especially in times of conflict.
Thus, appointing a new head of the Armed Forces of Ukraine may be a challenge for the candidate, but in wartime conditions, the presidential decision must be recognized and implemented.
Regarding future events, BBC interlocutors in the Ukrainian defense sector believe that the resignation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is only a matter of time.
The differences between Zelensky and Zaluzhny have reached a critical point, growing into personal contradictions. Not only are questions of strategy and future actions on the front line becoming a problem, but also the personal relationship between these completely different personalities. The lack of mutual trust, which is critical for the successful conduct of the war, complicates the situation that Ukraine faces in the context of the conflict with Russia.
The president has the legal right to make such decisions, but their consequences for the political and international community are difficult to predict. How will this move be perceived by Ukraine's Western partners, who expect predictable and reasonable steps in governing the country?
It is important to note that the communications of the Office of the President, in particular Monday's, leave much to be desired, which may affect the perception of such decisions at the international level. How will Ukrainian society react to the resignation of the highly popular commander-in-chief, “Father Zaluzhny”? A KIIS poll showed that only 2% of Ukrainians support replacing Zaluzhny with another general, while 72% expressed disapproval of such a decision.
Sociologist Oleksiy Antipovych emphasized in a December interview with the BBC that Zaluzhny's resignation is not suicide, but could be a negative decision that would negatively affect citizens' perception of the situation. Such an action by the authorities could demonstrate a lack of unity, which is a key value of Ukrainian society, united in the face of war.
Zaluzhny's resignation is not just a replacement of one general for another, it is a violation of the informal agreement between the Ukrainian authorities and society that politicians do not interfere in military matters, and the military does not engage in politics.
“By dismissing Zaluzhny, Zelensky becomes not only a political leader, but also a military one. Even by appointing an ideal general in his place, he takes responsibility. Leaders like Churchill or Roosevelt knew the limits of their responsibility… When a political leader intervenes in military matters without understanding war, this can have negative consequences,” said Mykhailo Honchar, president of the Strategy XXI global studies center.
It is likely that in the event of Zaluzhny's resignation, Ukrainians will not take to the streets and the military will not turn their bayonets against Kyiv, but this may affect the general mood of society and support for the government. Experts' opinions are divided, but many of them believe that Zaluzhny's resignation may cause negative reactions among citizens and reduce support for the government, especially in conditions of military conflict.
Some experts see Zaluzhny as a potential political leader, a favorite in the elections if he decides to participate in politics. The general himself has not yet expressed political ambitions and refrained from commenting on Monday's events. However, he published a selfie on Facebook, in which he is depicted next to the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Serhiy Shaptala, which may indicate continued military service and cooperation.
