The dust was just settling after Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov’s dismissal and the appointment of Yevhenii Khmara as his replacement. Then came the 35-year-old’s extraordinary nine-minute YouTube intervention demanding fresh elections.
If Fedorov was aiming to grab the limelight, he succeeded. But he has not changed the political weather.
The outcome of Ukraine’s political crisis now feels remarkably predictable. Fedorov’s campaign will fail.
Speaking as someone who lives and travels in Ukraine, it is actually quite difficult to find a voter who does not want elections. After more than four years of full-scale war, people naturally hope for democratic renewal, accountability and eventually the opportunity to decide who leads the country into whatever comes next.
But it is even harder to find anyone thinking now is the time for a new vote.
Keep that distinction firmly in mind, because wanting elections and believing they can be held freely, fairly and safely in the middle of this war are two very different things. That’s what made Fedorov’s comments such a surprise; his call seemed badly misjudged.
“Democracy is not a peacetime luxury; democracy is part of what we are fighting for today,” Fedorov argued in his August 19 statement, saying Ukraine must not allow Putin to decide when Ukrainians choose their government.
He has a point, but that’s easier said than done.
British by birth, I served in the Ukrainian armed forces and was captured and sentenced to death in a Russian show trial. Ukraine has been my home for many years. I listened carefully to Fedorov’s criticism and on several issues, I understood exactly what Fedorov meant. But when he called for elections, I could only grimace.
I immediately thought: his support may just have evaporated.
Fedorov is Ukrainian. More importantly, he is a former defense minister, and he knows the realities better than most. That makes it difficult to understand why he did not anticipate the backlash.
Calling for elections without explaining how they could realistically happen is rather like announcing Ukraine will win the war and, when somebody asks how, answering: “We just will.”
Ukraine remains under martial law. Millions are displaced or abroad, others remain under Russian occupation or are illegally imprisoned, while hundreds of thousands serve in the Armed Forces. Millions more live under nightly Russian attack.
How would they vote? How do candidates campaign fairly?
How do you hold rallies and debates when Russia can launch ballistic missiles at Ukrainian cities within minutes? How do soldiers around Kostiantynivka, Kupiansk, or Zaporizhzhia participate? How do millions of Ukrainians overseas vote without overwhelming the diplomatic network?
And this war is not winding down; it’s escalating into an extremely nasty phase. It is becoming more international and more dangerous, with North Korea’s growing involvement, expanding Russian ballistic capabilities, and winter approaching, while Ukraine remains desperately short of air defenses.
Then there is the issue of money.
Ukraine has an estimated $27bn defense funding gap this year while requiring weapons, ammunition, air defense, military salaries and protection for its energy infrastructure.
A nationwide election involving displaced voters, overseas voting, soldiers, security, polling infrastructure and international monitoring would cost enormous sums.
Who pays?
And if international partners can find hundreds of millions for wartime elections, Ukrainians might reasonably ask whether that money is currently better spent on polling stations or Patriot interceptors.
There is another problem.
The moment an election was announced, Russia’s intelligence and influence apparatus would go to work; actually, they would go into overdrive.
Cyberattacks, disinformation, fabricated material and covert influence would inevitably seek to magnify every political disagreement. Russia would not even need to install a preferred candidate; simply undermining confidence in the election itself could be enough.
Meanwhile, ministers would be consumed by the need to campaign as politicians, military decisions would become campaign ammunition, while battlefield setbacks would present political opportunities, precisely when Russia is trying to exploit every division it could manufacture.
At a time when Russia is paying such an extraordinary price for marginal gains, opening another political front inside Ukraine makes little strategic sense, and in my opinion, holding an election now risks scoring another own goal, and frankly, we don’t need another one of those just yet.
Of course, Ukrainians should not stop questioning their government. Wartime governments require scrutiny because enormous powers, budgets and responsibilities are concentrated in relatively few hands.
Recent KIIS polling captures that contradiction: 57% favor elections only after hostilities have ended.
Many people sympathized with Fedorov over his dismissal, me included. But somewhere along the line, his criticism crossed into territory that simply did not reflect what the majority of Ukrainians were actually asking for.
Even the protests that followed his dismissal quickly faded. Those demonstrations were about reform, accountability, and the direction of government, not personalities.
Unfortunately, calling for elections in the middle of this war turned the argument into something else entirely. Somewhere along the line, Fedorov badly miscalculated.
Until somebody convincingly explains how the hurdles of wartime elections can be overcome, there is unlikely to be broader support.
As for Fedorov himself, a man who showed real ability before and during his time in the defense ministry, it would be better for everyone if he and the government found a way to use his skills to aid the country. This is a war of national survival, and Ukraine needs all its talent engaged in the fight.
Shaun Pinner is a British-born author, public speaker, and recipient of Ukraine’s Order of Courage for selfless acts in the defense of the nation’s sovereignty. A former British Army soldier, he joined Ukraine’s Armed Forces in 2018 as a Ukrainian Marine. His 2024 book Live. Fight. Survive. recounts his experiences. Since then, Shaun has lived in the country with his wife, while supporting humanitarian work and documenting the country’s fight for freedom.
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
