Zelenksy appoints a new commander-in-chief – but will it help the war against Russia?

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine is rapidly approaching its second anniversary – and the war is not going according to plan for either side.

In a major reset that Volodymyr Zelensky believes can change the trajectory of the conflict, he has sacked his commander-in-chief, General Valery Zaluzhny. After a series of disagreements, the president has called for a “united approach across the whole front line and a new vision for the war, mobilisation 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 the 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 155mm artillery shells, Ukrainian troops are rationing munitions 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.

Zelensky’s decision to oust Zaluzhny stirred dismay and anxiety in Ukraine. Why now? What are the real reasons? Few see an immediate military purpose for such a move. Ukrainians overwhelmingly expressed gratitude for Zaluzhyny’s service to the country on social media. Many who 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 had circulated as a possible replacement since the tensions between Zelensky and Zaluzhny started brewing at the end of 2023. The key anxiety among soldiers is that Syrsky’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 risks undermining the new nascent culture of saving lives that Zaluzhny represented.

So what are the underlying motives of Zelensky’s decision? One of the key reasons for this ousting could be finding a person to blame for the failed summer campaign, problems in the army and a prolonged war. Zelensky’s team was keen to raise expectations in Ukrainian 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 in people’s minds. The number of those 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. Zelensky is very sensitive to his likeability, a legacy of his past actor/star 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. A survey of public opinion shows that approval of the Ukrainian armed forces remains very strong with 96 per cent support, while Zelensky’s approval 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, we might be seeing 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, concerned that a rhetoric of stalemates projected defeatism. Zaluzhny argued for the need for strategic defence in 2024 but Zelensky 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. Zelensky insisted that Ukrainian control of this town is important. Military commentators frequently questioned this strategy. Zelensky may be looking for a military commander who is more loyal to his vision and maintains strict subordination.

Zelensky has cast his dice. It is the first major presidential decision that goes against Ukrainian public opinion since the start of the war. It may dent Zelensky’s leadership even further. But the consequences may go well beyond.

The reshuffle could complicate a new wave of mobilisation, which is about to start. Zaluzhny embodied a new quality, of an armed forces that people trust. With political debate regaining prominence, ousted Zaluzhny may end up drawn into politics by default, as the media and opposition question the president’s legitimacy when his term expires in May 2024. Internal instability will play into Russian hands. They will exploit this, insisting Ukraine is crumbling and people are turning against Zelensky. The Kremlin has already circulated deep fake videos with the general “calling for a rebellion”.

Finally, the timing of this reshuffle, with Joe Biden struggling to secure approval of funding for Ukraine, just adds oil to the fire. The Republicans will get a chance to label Ukraine as a basket case incapable of achieving victory.

But the reality of war is brutal. There are ups and downs. One thing is clear: Ukraine remains determined to continue the fight. Its impressive mobilisation and unity of purpose in the first two years of war enabled successful resistance and destroyed half of the Russian combat capabilities. This morale and trust in the Ukrainian armed forces sustained Ukraine’s hope of victory. A new military leadership is picking up the baton at a tough time. It remains to be seen how a new war-hardened general copes with this task.

Orysia Lutsevych is deputy director of the Russia and Eurasia Programme and head of the Ukraine Forum at Chatham House