Kyiv plans sweeping government changes amid war pressure [DEFENCE24 Exclusive]

According to information provided by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the reshuffle is intended to form part of a broader reorganisation of the state administration. As he emphasised, Ukraine needs „a new configuration of executive power” that will enable it to perform more effectively in the areas of defence, national reconstruction and cooperation with international partners.

Although Yuliia Svyrydenko’s dismissal may appear sudden, it does not mean that she will withdraw from public life altogether. Zelenskyy announced that she would be assigned new responsibilities connected with one of the key areas of Ukraine’s cooperation with its foreign partners. Details of her future role have not, however, been officially disclosed.   According to unofficial information obtained by Defence24 from sources within the Ukrainian administration, Yuliia Svyrydenko is expected to become Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States. Such an appointment would place her in charge of one of Kyiv’s most important diplomatic missions.  Taking up this role would be particularly significant given the crucial importance of Ukrainian–American relations in the fields of security, military assistance and the country’s future reconstruction. Svyrydenko’s selection would also indicate an intention to make use of her economic expertise and international contacts within one of the most important channels of Ukrainian diplomacy.

Further changes coming up

According to unofficial information obtained by Defence24, the reconstruction of the Ukrainian government will be considerably broader than initially expected. It will encompass not only a change of prime minister but also a series of personnel changes across individual ministries. Sources close to the Ukrainian administration indicate that some incumbent ministers will remain in their posts, ensuring continuity of government in key areas.

One official currently expected to remain in government is First Deputy Prime Minister and Energy Minister Denys Shmyhal. Finance Minister Serhii Marchenko, Health Minister Viktor Liashko, Sports Minister Matvii Bidnyi, Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha and Social Policy Minister Denys Uliutin are also expected to retain their positions.  The future of Nataliia Kalmykova, the current minister for veterans« affairs, remains uncertain.

The changes are also expected to affect the ministries responsible for education, European integration and the management of state resources. According to unofficial information obtained by Defence24, another change at the head of the Ministry of Education and Science is being considered.  Oksen Lisovyi, who has headed the ministry since 2023, could be replaced by another official. Mykhailo Trofymenko is reportedly among the potential candidates.  Personnel changes are also expected in the area of Ukraine’s European integration. Preparations are under way in Kyiv to remove Taras Kachka, the current deputy economy minister responsible for European affairs. He would reportedly be replaced by Vsevolod Chentsov, Ukraine’s current representative to the European Union. 

One of the most important structural changes is expected to be the division of the existing Ministry of Economy, Environment and Agriculture. The large ministry, which currently has a very broad remit, will probably be split into two separate institutions.  Oleksii Sobolev would be responsible for the Ministry of Economy and Environment, while Taras Vysotskyi would head the Ministry of Agrarian Policy. The division is intended to improve the management of key sectors of the economy, particularly in the context of national reconstruction and Ukraine’s future integration with the European Union.

Changes are also planned at the Ministry for the Development of Communities, Territories and Infrastructure. A Defence24 source indicates that Oleksii Kuleba may leave the government and that the existing ministry will be divided into two separate structures.  Vitalii Bezghin would be responsible for regional affairs, while the identity of the future minister responsible for infrastructure has not yet been disclosed.

The future of the Ministry of Digital Transformation also remains unclear. Valeriia Ionan was initially being considered for appointment as head of the ministry, but the situation depends on further decisions concerning Minister Mykhailo Fedorov.

What about the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence?

Reports are increasingly circulating within Ukrainian political circles that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is considering replacing the minister of defence. According to media reports, the current head of the ministry, Mykhailo Fedorov, may soon leave his post. Ukrainska Pravda reports that one reason for his possible departure during the government reshuffle is a „systemic conflict” between him and influence groups linked to the defence budget.

According to these reports, Fedorov has come into conflict both with elements of the military establishment and with political and business groups interested in controlling defence expenditure. „Ukrainska Pravda” reports that although public criticism of Fedorov has focused on problems connected with mobilisation and reform of the military logistics system, the newspaper’s sources claim that the real reason for the pressure to remove him is a conflict arising from his efforts to target existing corruption mechanisms within the defence sector. The minister reportedly attempted to restrict the influence of groups connected with the distribution of defence funding and to increase oversight of procurement procedures and the ministry’s management of resources. These measures are said to have threatened the interests of certain influential political and business circles that opposed changes to the established system governing the defence sector.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy has reportedly asked Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko to be prepared for the possibility of taking over as minister of defence. Klymenko’s candidacy is said to be connected primarily with his close political relationship with the president and his experience in managing security and law-enforcement structures. As interior minister, he has been responsible for one of the country’s largest security ministries, encompassing the police, emergency services and other subordinate formations. His experience of managing large state structures and working in the security sector could facilitate coordination between the ministries responsible for conducting the war. Moving Klymenko to the Ministry of Defence would also strengthen the direct control exercised by the president’s inner circle over a ministry that remains one of the state’s principal decision-making centres during wartime.

It should be noted, however, that reports of a possible change at the head of the Ministry of Defence remain unconfirmed and are based on leaks and sources within Ukrainian political circles. At this stage, it is not certain that Mykhailo Fedorov will leave his post or that Ihor Klymenko will succeed him. Nevertheless, given the continuing reconstruction of the Ukrainian government and the series of personnel changes affecting the country’s most important state institutions, the possibility of replacing the defence minister remains plausible.

Why now?

The changes within the Ukrainian government should primarily be viewed as a consequence of the profound transformation the Ukrainian state is undergoing as a result of the protracted war. Ukraine is now at a very different stage from that of the first months of Russia’s full-scale invasion. Initially, the principal tasks were survival, maintaining the state administration, organising the country’s defence and securing international support.  After several years of war, the situation has become considerably more complex. The state must simultaneously conduct military operations, sustain the economy, rebuild devastated regions, reform its institutions and prepare for a long-term confrontation with Russia.  Under such circumstances, the need to adapt the country’s system of governance to new conditions becomes a natural development.

A growing conviction is emerging within Ukrainian public debate that the country has entered a phase in which military and political mobilisation alone is no longer sufficient. Greater administrative effectiveness, faster decision-making and better coordination between the different sectors of the state are required. The war has forced institutions to operate at an extraordinary pace, but it has also created numerous new challenges, ranging from the management of public finances and defence production to preparing the economy for years of uncertainty.

The relationship between Kyiv and its partners is also highly relevant here. Ukraine currently continues to function with the support of extensive financial, military and political assistance from the United States and European countries. As the scale of this assistance grows, however, so do expectations concerning the quality of state governance, transparency in the expenditure of funds and the continuation of reforms.   The Ukrainian media frequently emphasise that the country’s ability to maintain international confidence is just as important to its future as the situation on the front line. Every government reorganisation therefore also sends a signal to external partners, demonstrating that the authorities are attempting to respond to problems and improve the effectiveness of state institutions.

Public attitudes and sentiments have also changed after several years of war. The initial wave of unity and mobilisation was immense, but the prolonged conflict is causing growing fatigue within society.  People increasingly expect not only messages concerning victory and national defence but also answers to questions affecting their everyday lives: the economy, social security, the reconstruction of cities, the future of young people and the stability of the state. Under such conditions, the government must demonstrate that it is capable of responding to society’s changing needs. Personnel and organisational changes are also frequently intended to show that the authorities are not ignoring existing problems and are prepared to seek new solutions.

Ultimately, the changes within the Ukrainian government can be viewed as the result of several overlapping processes rather than any single event. They are a consequence of the war having continued for longer than initially expected and of the state being required to evolve alongside it. Ukraine now stands between two worlds: it is still fighting for its survival, while simultaneously having to think about its future, its reconstruction and its place in Europe.