As the intense conflict in eastern Ukraine persists, President Volodymyr Zelensky has been actively manoeuvring to restore public trust, most recently implementing a cabinet reshuffle aimed at infusing his government with renewed energy and momentum. These changes provide important clues about the Ukrainian government’s wartime management strategy.
The timing of the cabinet reshuffle coincides with Ukraine continuing its offensive in Kursk and Russia stepping up missile attacks on Ukrainian cities. While trying to stop the Russian advance on the fronts, such changes in the cabinet seemed to be an effort to keep the support of the public, which was increasingly dissatisfied with the war, alive again. In other words, this move can be considered as Zelenskiy’s effort to show his people that he has the situation under control. It is also worth mentioning that the resignations of some ministers and senior officials are fuelled by performance deficiencies and leadership disputes. For example, the appointment of Andrii Sybiha, Deputy Head of the President’s Office, to replace Foreign Minister Dmitro Kuleba, whose recent statements offending Poland have caused a crisis between the two countries, appears to be Ukraine’s attempt to revamp its diplomatic efforts.
However, much of Ukraine’s foreign policy is already being conducted by Zelensky and the head of the Presidential Office, Andriy Yermak. The Ukrainian opposition sees these changes as Zelensky and Yermak gaining more power and weakening institutionalisation by emphasising individuals over ministries. These steps, which can be considered as a kind of power consolidation, constitute another area of debate that questions whether the changes in the administration are strategic or political.
Zelensky’s cabinet reshuffle may be aimed at providing more centralised control in military decision-making processes. How these changes will affect Ukraine’s military leadership structure is of critical importance, especially in terms of accelerating operational decisions on the frontline and developing a more coordinated defence strategy.
While some in Ukraine see these changes as a renewal of the government and a more dynamic approach to managing the war, others see such radical changes at a time of crisis as risky. NATO and Western allies may see the cabinet reshuffle in Ukraine as Zelensky’s attempt to create a more effective and coordinated leadership at a critical stage of the war. However, they also expose Ukraine’s institutional weaknesses and internal divisions. Some opposition MPs expressed concerns that such changes in the government in the middle of the war risk undermining Ukraine’s stability.
The prolongation of the war and the rapid Russian advances, especially in the Donetsk direction, are causing Ukraine to reconsider its strategic moves. The acceleration of the Russian advance despite Ukraine’s Kursk offensive is putting military and psychological pressure on the Ukrainians and straining the Ukrainian army’s capacity to protect its defence lines and launch counterattacks. At this point, Ukraine needs to develop an effective defence strategy against the Russian advance in order to be strategically effective on different fronts.
In this context, the Ukrainian offensive in the Kursk region is noteworthy. This offensive is important as it shows that Ukraine is not only on the defensive, but also has an operational capability that can reach deep into Russia. However, such moves also involve a great strategic risk, as such a bold offensive attempt by Ukraine may force Russia to retaliate and the plans may not go as planned on paper. In the process, instead of focusing on responding to the Kursk attack, we see that Russia is using more force in the Donetsk direction and continuing its large-scale missile attacks.
Although Ukraine is buoyed by the Kursk offensive, it is aware that Russia will respond to such attacks slowly and forcefully rather than quickly. This is because the mobility and speed of Russian forces are limited due to the difficulties of centralised command and control systems. This is a harbinger that the upcoming process will not be easy. With this move, Ukraine wanted to force the Russians to shift forces from the fronts in Donetsk, but the unabated advance of the Russians in Donetsk in the direction of Pokrovsk seems to have disrupted Ukraine’s Kursk plan. Ukraine also faces the challenge of protecting its advancing lines and securing its logistics convoys. While strategic advances bring opportunities, they also bring vulnerabilities, such as protecting flanks and securing supply lines. It remains to be seen whether the notion that ‘it is better to occupy part of the enemy’s territory and sit at the negotiating table with him than to sit empty-handed’ will work.
In conclusion, the cabinet reshuffle in Ukraine may herald a new era in the country’s wartime governance. Under his leadership, Zelensky is trying to strengthen Ukraine’s governance capacity and increase its resilience to the challenges of war. However, internal problems and external pressures are creating uncertainties about Ukraine’s future course.
The Kursk offensive and the fighting in Donetsk have once again highlighted the complexity and multi-layered nature of this war. The true test of Zelensky’s leadership and capacity to guide the Ukrainian people and economy through the fires of a brutal war, is far from over. The stakes are monumental—not just for Ukraine’s survival but for the very stability and security of Europe itself. The fate of nations may well hinge on the outcome of this critical battle, where every decision reverberates beyond Ukraine’s borders, shaping the future of an entire continent.
This article originally appeared in Turkish in the Analysis section of the Anadolu Agency.