Why Ukrainian military chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi is on the brink of being forced out

Good morning. Valerii Zaluzhnyi, commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian military, is perhaps the only man in Ukraine who is more popular than its president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

Now, after months of speculation about his future and a week-long frenzy over whether Zaluzhnyi (above left) had been asked to step aside, there finally seems to be clarity: Zelenskiy has admitted publicly that he is seeking to replace him, as part of a broad reset. “I have something serious in mind, which is not about a single person but the direction of the country’s leadership,” said Zelenskiy. “I mean a replacement of a series of state leaders, not just in a single sector like the military.”

That is a huge deal politically – but even more important is the question of how it will affect the future of the war with Russia. Today’s newsletter, with the Guardian’s Shaun Walker in Kyiv, is about how such a popular military leader fell foul of his president in wartime – and whether this is about a wider shake-up, or a personal vendetta. Here are the headlines.

Five big stories

In depth: ‘The president’s office is afraid’

The news that Valerii Zaluzhnyi’s job was in jeopardy did not come as a shock. “This has been rumoured for several months,” Shaun Walker said. “Leaks of a meeting at which he was asked to resign were denied, and then Zelenskiy dodged the question for a week. Now it’s come out via an interview with Italian TV. Nine days since the story broke, it’s still the main topic of conversation in Kyiv.”

Who is Valerii Zaluzhnyi?

In July 2021, Zaluzhnyi was drinking a beer at his wife’s birthday party when he got a phone call revealing his appointment. His first response was: “What do you mean?” In June 2022, he gave an interview to Time magazine in which he reflected on his astonishment. ”I’ve often looked back and asked myself: How did I get myself into this?” he said.

If that reaction is a reflection of his relative youth, at 48, and informality in comparison to more senior colleagues, Zaluzhnyi’s appointment has widely been seen as one of the smartest decisions of Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s presidency.

Whereas older military leaders had been trained in Soviet academies with an emphasis on a highly centralised command model, Zaluzhnyi came up the ranks post-independence and follows a western approach of delegating many big decisions to battlefield commanders: “I certainly don’t think I am the smartest one here,” he told the Economist recently. “I must and do listen to those who are in the field. Because the initiative is there.” (Julian Borger’s profile of the general from last week has more on his view of military doctrine.)

That approach bore significant fruit during the first phase of the war, when Russia’s comparative rigidity left it flat-footed in response to Ukrainian agility. The misdirection and lightning counteroffensive that routed Russian troops in the north-east of Ukraine in September 2022 were a huge vindication of Zaluzhnyi’s leadership.

Zaluzhnyi is now known as the “iron general”, feted in memes and even a stamp showing him bringing Vladimir Putin to The Hague (above). “He is very popular,” Shaun said. “His star rose with the successes of the early part of the war, but it doesn’t seem to have fallen with a more stagnant situation on the frontline. There is not a widely held view that if only someone else was in charge, things would be different. That’s why this might be a risky move for Zelenskiy.”

What has his relationship with Volodymyr Zelenskiy been like?

Initially, the two men worked well together, in part because the president did not interfere with military decision-making. “[Zelenskiy] doesn’t need to understand military affairs any more than he needs to know about medicine or bridge-building,” Zaluzhnyi told Time. Zaluzhnyi, for his part, was the ideal fit for the president’s project of reforming a military viewed as sclerotic and stuck in the past.

Zaluzhnyi shunned the media spotlight and maintained a sharp focus on military affairs. “He’s not a natural public speaker,” Shaun said. “He doesn’t come across as a narcissist who’s searching for credit. He hasn’t ever said he wants to go into politics, or come out attacking the leadership.”

What’s changed?

As the war has worn on and Ukraine’s progress has faltered, the relationship has become strained. Reports of tensions between the two men have persisted for months, and reached a new level recently when Zelenskiy publicly contradicted his commander-in-chief’s suggestion that the conflict was at a stalemate.

Last week, Zaluzhnyi published an article on CNN claiming that bureaucracy is holding back defence production and bemoaning “the inability of state institutions in Ukraine to improve the manpower levels of our armed forces”.

Zelenskiy and his aides reportedly view Zaluzhnyi’s public interventions as a sign of his ambition: “So far, Zaluzhnyi has not decided to enter politics, but he is considering this option, and the president’s office is afraid,” a source told Politico last week.

While he has still never attacked Zelenskiy, “there is a feeling around the presidency that they have been blindsided by his interventions”, Shaun said. “Officially, they will tell you that this is not a personality thing – that in a stagnant military position, there is just a need for new ideas. But he seems to be seen as a threat – there are rumours of internal polls testing whether he would have a lot of support if he started a political party.”

Last week, Shaun reported that Zaluzhnyi was offered the chance to resign, but declined to do so. Now the president has publicly acknowledged his desire to make a change, the situation appears irretrievable.

Is Zelenskiy planning other changes?

Zelenskiy’s comments about removing “a series of state leaders” in an interview with Italian TV “seem like a strange way to communicate very big changes to your people,” Shaun said. “It took some time to clarify that he definitely did include Zaluzhnyi in what he said. I do think there is a bigger shake-up coming. But it’s not clear yet what he has in mind.”

In the military, generals close to Zaluzhnyi have already been dismissed, Konstantin Skorkin wrote for Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in December. A crucial question remains over who will replace Zaluzhnyi himself.

One candidate, Oleksandr Syrskyi, is currently in charge of Ukraine’s ground forces, and led the defence of Kyiv in the early days of the war. (Here’s a good profile by the Center for European Policy Analysis.) Syrskyi is “very much seen as Zelenskiy’s guy,” Shaun said. “A large part of the army reportedly dislike him. He would be seen as a political appointee.”

Another contender is 38-year-old military intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov (above), who echoed Zaluzhnyi’s support for a mobilisation in an interview with the FT last month (£). “He would seem like a strange choice – he’s a swashbuckling young guy responsible for quite audacious operations behind enemy lines,” Shaun said.

Only last month, his department struck an oil terminal in St Petersburg using drones, and it was previously credited with the explosion on the Kerch bridge connecting Crimea to Russia in October 2022. “That might signal more emphasis on asymmetrical operations,” Shaun said. “But the truth is that we don’t know, and the future of the strategy will be clearer when an appointment is made.”

What might the impact of Zaluzhnyi’s removal be?

Zaluzhnyi’s ouster does not appear to be popular with the military. His approval with the public, too, suggests serious risks attached to his removal for Zelenskiy: “There is a fear that he’s a political rival – but the counterpoint to that is that by taking this path, they’re creating something that might otherwise not have been there.”

Another question is what impact the move would have on Kyiv’s relationships with its allies. The US maintains that any such decisions are an internal Ukrainian matter, but any perception of instability could be dangerous.

Mick Ryan, adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a retired Australian major general, wrote on his Substack last week that amid growing reluctance from Republicans in the US to provide more aid for Kyiv, some “could exploit a change … and any public fallout afterwards, as additional evidence for why they shouldn’t support further packages of US assistance”.

“It’s clear that it will be watched very closely,” Shaun said. “It can be argued that it’s not enormously unusual, in the history of war, to change your commander-in-chief. But the perception that personal rivalry is at least partly responsible could be damaging for Zelenskiy. It’s already clear that this year is going to be difficult on the battlefield, with no clear path to a cathartic victory – and it’s only going to get harder for him politically.”

What else we’ve been reading

• The Covid pandemic is a time that a lot of us just want to largely forget, but German photographer Valentin Goppel took pictures of his friends and family as a way to deal with the uncertainty of the period. It’s something of a time capsule. Nimo

• Oliver Milman and Dharna Noor have a well-sourced and seriously worrying piece anatomising what a second Trump administration would mean for the climate. “A return of Trump would be, in a word, horrific,” one expert says. “There is no logic to it other than to destroy everything.” Archie

• ICYMI: For the first time, Rylan Clark has shared the full story of his experience on The X Factor with Simon Hattenstone. It is a moving interview that unpacks the many facets of Rylan and the recovery he has made since his breakdown three years ago. Nimo

• Marina Hyde fills her boots on the launch of the Popular Conservatives (above), the new Trussite backbench grouping that is yet to prove the truth of either part of its name. Also, this isn’t really a reading, but fellow veterans of 90s Neighbours may feel a pang of dismay as they recognise this enthusiastic Jacob Rees-Mogg fan at the event. Archie

• Patrick Radden Keefe’s remarkable New Yorker feature on the mysterious circumstances surrounding the death of a London teen is an absolute must-read. Nimo

Sport

FA Cup | Three extra-time goals fired Leeds into the fifth round with a 4-1 win at Championship rivals Plymouth. Coventry (above) will host Maidstone in the fifth round after their 4-1 victory against Sheffield Wednesday. Southampton stretched their unbeaten run to 24 matches in all competitions with a 3-0 victory against Championship rivals Watford and will face Liverpool in the next round. Here is the full roundup.

Formula One | Christian Horner will be questioned on Friday as part of an independent investigation into his conduct after allegations believed to have been made by a female member of staff of inappropriate controlling behaviour were made against him. Horner has emphatically denied the claims. Read Giles Richards’ profile.

Tennis | Naomi Osaka fell to defeat against Danielle Collins in her opening match at the Abu Dhabi Open. The four-time grand slam champion made her comeback last month after the birth of her first child, reaching the second round of the Brisbane International before losing a close contest to Caroline Garcia in her opening match at the Australian Open.

The front pages

“NHS delays leave 600 children a week facing mental health crisis” – that’s the Guardian print splash for Wednesday. The king and queen are on our and others’ front page, looking out of their car window, a glance from which the Daily Express concludes: “Harry’s show of love cheers king”. But the Daily Mail sees it differently: “Harry spends just 45 minutes with Charles”. The Sun used a different stopwatch: “King’s 30 min reunion with Harry”. “Brave face of the king” says the Daily Mirror. The Daily Telegraph has “Harry’s dash to see father” while the Times’ treatment is neutral: “Harry reunited with father after diagnosis”. The i suggests “UK in ‘soft regency’” as other royals step up, while its news splash is “Post Office built second IT system behind ‘wrongful convictions’”. “Harry: i’m here for you, Pa” says the Metro while the top story in the Financial Times is “Trump denied immunity in election interference case by federal judges”.

Today in Focus

Cartoon of the day | Martin Rowson

The Upside

A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad

Belong Chester is an intergenerational community that claims to be the first older people’s “care setting” in the UK to include a fully integrated children’s research nursery. A lot of the residents have dementia but still have the opportunity to interact with the children on a daily basis. They are then studied by academics who are researching the physical and mental health benefits of intergenerational living. And it’s great for the children too – according to the parents, mixing with older people has made their kids more caring.

“I think people are ready for a change,” says Sue Egersdorff, co-founder of the charity that operates Belong’s nursery. “Everybody is ready to ask: what are the human values for this century post-Covid? How do we want to live and how do we make more of our local communities?”

Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday

Bored at work?

And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day – with plenty more on the Guardian’s Puzzles app for iOS and Android. Until tomorrow.

• Quick crossword

• Cryptic crossword

• Wordiply