https://t.me/V_Zelenskiy_official/9406
I am grateful to General Zaluzhny for two years of defense. I am grateful for every victory that we achieved together and thanks to all Ukrainian soldiers who heroically carry this war on themselves. We talked frankly today about what needs to change in the army. Urgent changes. I offered General Zaluzhny to continue to be together in the team of the Ukrainian state. I will be grateful for his consent.
From today, a new management team is joining the leadership of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. I want the vision of war to be the same in our soldiers in Robotino or Avdiivka, and in the General Staff and the Headquarters. I had dozens of conversations with commanders of different levels. In particular, today I spoke with brigade generals Andriy Gnatov, Mykhailo Drapaty, Igor Skybyuk and colonels Pavlo Palisa and Vadym Sukharevsky.
They are all considered for leadership positions in the army and will serve under the guidance of the most experienced Ukrainian commander. He has a successful experience of defense - he conducted the Kyiv defensive operation. He also has a successful experience of advance - the Kharkiv liberation operation.
I appointed Lieutenant General Syrsky as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Today I also spoke with generals Moysyuk and Zabrodsky. Their experience is in the service of the state.
2024 can be a successful year for Ukraine only on condition of effective changes in the basis of our defense, which is the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦
The US relieved 16 out of 155 generals while in combat during WW2. This is not the end of Ukraine, Zelensky or Zaluzhnyi. This is how things go.
The world should be forever grateful to Zaluzhnyi for progress so far, but he is also only human and needs a break. Strategy needs to change as the enemy makes changes.
Victory is a team effort, not just the work of one guy. Of course, on the internets, few understand this.
He at least deserves to go with his family to a warm beach and do nothing for some weeks. And then maybe come back with some fresh eyes and serve on the high command as his insight is very valuable.
@Badeendje @sepi on point. Absolutely. I always wonder how they cope with that stress.
@Badeendje @sepi but: it’s a mistake to leave him in the general staff. Beside all his achievements. He will always shadow Syrski.
I don’t know, the military is pretty flexible in these terms, and the hyrarchy established so this would not nessicarily be an issue. but it is a risk, sure… hero veneration is a thing.
What about the insights of others who are in the field right now? Do they not count? Is Zaluzhnyi’s input the only valuable input? Is everybody else chopped liver? Remember he is but one person, and the Ukrainian effort is a team effort.
As far as the warm beach sentiment, from your mouth to god’s ears.
Hold up :) That thing I never implied, or hinted at.
You read something that was not there. The whole concept of the NATO doctrine is to allow as much freedom throughput the ranks to complete objectives in the way they seem fit. As they are closest to the problem and can determine the best way to solve it.
Top down only works down to a certain level, then it starts to work against you because you fail to utilize the expertise of your subordinates too much.
Apparently Zalushni embraced and fostered this, with the results we see today. So no, not his opinion only matters… the opposite even… the plurality of opinions makes it work. As long as everyone agrees who has the final say on strategic decisions.
We can only hope that his successor will be able to build on this and take it to the next level.
I live in the west and am super pro-NATO rah rah all the way dude. But the last time the US and allies fought meat waves, they were pushed down to the 38th parallel.
NATO has a lot to offer Ukraine, but NATO is not prepared for the exact style of war going on. Just doing 100% NATO practices is going to be an equivalent of “fighting the previous war”. Ukraine is right to take a bit from column A and a bit from column B for everything: they are the ones fighting and dying - they see what works and what doesn’t.
Let’s also hear opinions from others stating that the NATO concepts are not 100% aplicable here: https://youtu.be/4t84giGYMq4
Absolutely, it is just a lot more flexible than top down Russian style.
We saw the limits of NATO strategy on the offence. Strategy for tanks is to go around the minefield if you encounter it. Apparently 400km wide 100m deep triple density minefield was not something anyone imagined… LoL. And in terms of NATO doctrine, utilizing peoples expertise optimally is what I focussed on. Ukraine is incapable of excersising full NATO doctrine, they have no discernable Airforce.
Warfare has changed a lot since. Drones and DPICM make a lot of difference. But we need to step up our supply as the west. And the limitation of no cluster munitions need to be revisited. As it is good in theory, but without the cluster munitions of the US Russians would have rolled up on avdiivka a month ago.
I can’t armchair general this, I can only see what both sides are accomplishing and how and at what costs and be amazed, donate some money and let my prime minister know we need to do more.
Plus I can see NATO adapting their whole playbook on what is happening here.
Not only that, but those relieved were not necessarily out, they often went on to command other units to success or rotate through more administrative roles where their experience and expertise paid dividends.
If anyone is interested in a long and anecdotal talk about this topic: https://youtu.be/OehvY94N-WA?si=hO5NxroniyNR2naw
I think this is a mistake. Zaluzhny is widely popular with the public and this may hurt confidence in the government.
In situations like this, I think it would be better to agree to disagree on differences but keep a united front. This just gives ammo for Russia to exploit and drive a wedge in society.
Zaluzhny is widely popular with the public and this may hurt confidence in the government.
I don’t know much about domestic politics in Ukraine. Michael Kofman was critical of the move. But end of the day, it was Zelenskyy’s call to make, we do not have full vision into the inputs to the decision, and while I don’t know anything about Syrsky, I do not believe that Zaluzhnyi is the only competent military leader in Ukraine.
And Zelenskyy’s fate is on the line on putting someone competent in the spot at least as much as anyone else’s, so whatever the disagreement between Zaluzhnyi and him, I think that he has a strong incentive to make sure that whoever does occupy the office is competent.
Complaining about a decision that has been made is the wedge. History will judge if it was the right decision, and internet randoms will not be consulted.
It could be, but he is as much a political player as he is a military one. And if in the past 2 years his effectiveness on the political stage has been eroded then it might indeed be a good move to replace him.
Not because he is a bad soldier, but because someone else in that position might be better suited now. Because politics.
No doubt Russia will spin this as zelenski removing a potential political rival before he gets too big.
No doubt Russia will spin this as zelenski removing a potential political rival before he gets too big.
They can spin all they want, but Zelensky actually didn’t make his next presidential bid any easier - quite the contrary, because he’s now completely free to run against Zelensky.
I don’t think Zaluzhny knows or wants to fight a mobile war which is what Ukraine needs to do with less man power.
