Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Valerii Zaluzhnyi visits a monument to Holodomor victims during a commemoration ceremony of the famine of 1932-33, in which millions died of hunger, in Kyiv, Ukraine on Nov. 25, 2023.VIACHESLAV RATYNSKYI/Reuters
James Horncastle is the Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations at Simon Fraser University.
This is shaping up to be the critical year in the Russia-Ukraine War. The problem for Ukraine, however, is that domestic politics may inhibit its ability to weather the storm this year. Specifically, reports indicating that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky plans to “reset” the country’s leadership and remove the head of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, do not bode well and plays into Moscow’s hands.
The war is at an important juncture. Offensive actions are becoming increasingly costly for each side, both in terms of material and human costs. Russia currently possesses a decisive advantage in both categories as it ramps up domestic production and receives support from other countries, most notably Iran and North Korea.
Nevertheless, if Ukraine can withstand the current Russian offensive, it is well-positioned for success in the coming years. The issues that made the 2023 summer offensive a failure – inadequate time to train and organize the new units for battalion and brigade-level offensives – will be less severe.
While the material and personnel disparity may appear overwhelming, it will not last. Analysts were surprised by Russia’s growth in GDP in 2023, which surpassed expectations. This growth, however, is almost completely attributable to its spending on defence. In other areas of the economy, the outlook is not as strong. Thus, if Ukraine can survive the tumult of 2024, it will be well-positioned in the future.
The problems in the relationship between Gen. Zaluzhnyi and Mr. Zelensky stem from the fact that they are viewing the conflict from different perspectives. Mr. Zelensky remains focused on the international political situation. Gen. Zaluzhnyi, on the other hand, remains focused on the military dimensions of the campaign. His criticism of the 2023 summer offensive and his recognition that the war had reached a stalemate irked Mr. Zelensky. Given Mr. Zelensky’s efforts to rally outside support and the belief that such a statement would deter Western supporters, one can understand his concern.
Nevertheless, while the political must always take precedence over the military alone, the two must be in harmony. When the political system loses sight of the military, it can be detrimental to the former as well.
The Battle of Bakhmut is symbolic of this issue. It was initially an outstanding Ukrainian success, from both a military and political standpoint. Limited Ukrainian forces inflicted disproportionate casualties among the Russian forces. Mr. Zelensky’s adherence to his pledge to never surrender Bakhmut, however, caused the Ukrainian Armed Forces to stay longer than was needed. The Ukrainian forces, in so doing, not only suffered severe casualties, but they also lost the political advantage of embarrassing the Kremlin.
The eventual failure of the Battle of Bakhmut was likely driven by political considerations, but it is important to note that Gen. Zaluzhnyi is not a perfect military commander. His frank comments about the nature of the war are out of alignment with standard civil-military relations, at least in the West. Despite this issue, Gen. Zaluzhnyi has proven to be an able military commander who is popular both with the Ukrainian soldiers as well as the people of the country itself. If Mr. Zelensky removes him from his position, it will prove detrimental to Ukrainian morale at a critical juncture. The morale of Ukrainian soldiers remains their key advantage against Russia, and any decline will severely affect their combat operations moving forward.
Meanwhile, cracks are starting to appear in the West’s support of Ukraine. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban is increasingly using his position to undermine and delay aid to Ukraine. Furthermore, the U.S. House of Representative’s refusal to pass an aid package for Ukraine demonstrates that American domestic policy will always trump foreign policy considerations.
This fact is not lost on the people of Ukraine. Gen. Zaluzhnyi is correct in saying that Ukraine cannot be completely dependent upon foreign military aid. Ukrainian arms production is not yet near the point where it can provide much of the resources required by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. As such, Ukraine must make every effort it can to maintain outside support, at least in the short-term.
If Mr. Zelensky removes Gen. Zaluzhnyi from his position, it will further hinder Ukraine’s ability to receive outside aid. Such a move by Mr. Zelensky would be perceived by the outside world, rightly or wrongly, as saying that Ukraine’s defence is not going well. It will play into the arguments of those opposed to supporting Ukraine that arming the country is not worth the cost.
Thus, for the overall war effort, the ideal scenario would be if Mr. Zelensky and Gen. Zaluzhnyi can come to a working arrangement. Based on recent reporting, however, such a scenario appears increasingly unlikely.