Fedorov’s gamble failed – but can Zelensky contain Ukraine’s corruption crisis?

UKRAINE

The former defence minister’s call for wartime elections has backfired, but scandals surrounding Zelensky’s inner circle are fuelling demands for broader, more accountable leadership.

WHEN Mykhailo Fedorov called for elections in Ukraine this week, the former defence minister launched the most significant internal political challenge to President Volodymyr Zelensky since Russia’s full-scale invasion began.

Fedorov, unexpectedly dismissed in July after six months at the Ministry of Defence, said corruption and the concentration of power around the presidential office had created a “crisis of governance”. Ukraine, he argued, must find a “legal, safe and realistic mechanism” to restore democratic processes during a prolonged war.

His intervention sought to harness the anger that followed his removal. Thousands joined demonstrations demanding his return and the dismissal of commander-in-chief Oleksandr Syrskyi, with whom he had clashed.

Zelensky subsequently replaced Syrskyi with 43-year-old General Mykhailo Drapatyi but refused to reinstate Fedorov, instead appointing former special forces commander Yevhenii Khmara as defence minister.

Fedorov then overplayed his hand.

With most Ukrainians opposed to elections during the war, protest organisers distanced themselves from his demand and demonstrations dwindled.

“Fedorov’s announcement has weakened Fedorov’s position,” says Sibylline Lead Europe Analyst Alexander Lord.

“The call for elections was ill-timed.”

Ukrainians may have rejected Fedorov’s proposed remedy, but the corruption crisis underlying his challenge is far harder for Zelensky to dismiss.

“Corruption scandals have the ability to seriously rock his government in a way that nothing else really can at this stage,” Lord says.

Gallup polling found that 85% of Ukrainians believed corruption was widespread in government in 2025.

The danger intensified this week when Zelensky dismissed Iryna Mudra, a deputy head of the presidential office, after her office was reportedly searched by investigators.

Mudra has not been named as a suspect and Zelensky has not explained her removal.

Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau, NABU, says the latest investigation concerns an alleged UAH150m, approximately £2.5m, money-laundering scheme involving former politicians, senior bankers and a deputy head of the presidential office.

It is linked to Operation Midas, a widening investigation into an alleged $100m corruption scheme involving Energoatom, Ukraine’s state-owned nuclear energy company.

Investigators allege that contractors were forced to pay kickbacks worth 10-15% of contracts or risk having payments blocked.

Some contracts were intended to strengthen energy infrastructure against Russian attacks, even as Ukrainians endured blackouts caused by Moscow’s bombardment of the power grid.

The investigation has reached people formerly close to Zelensky, including ex-chief of staff Andriy Yermak, who denies allegations against him, and Timur Mindich, a former business associate of the president.

Zelensky has not been implicated, and NABU says he is not currently under investigation.

But the proximity of some of the accused to the president ensures that the political damage reaches his office.

The scandal demonstrates that wartime corruption is not merely about officials enriching themselves.

Money diverted from defence procurement, energy protection and national resilience leaves Ukraine less able to withstand Russian attacks.

“We know corruption in defence procurement is extensive,” Lord says. “We do not know its full extent, but there have been various scandals and revelations involving very senior individuals, including those close to Zelensky.”

The damage extends beyond the battlefield. Such allegations risk weakening confidence among Ukraine’s allies, strengthening opponents of continued aid and obstructing its EU ambitions.

Zelensky’s commitment to reform was questioned in July 2025, when he signed legislation weakening NABU and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office. It prompted protests and alarm in Europe.

He reversed course following public and international pressure, but Lord says the episode caused lasting damage.

“Zelensky has made decisions which have elicited awkward conversations in the West, particularly in Europe, about his commitment to the reforms which European money and aid require,” he says.

Zelensky won the presidency in 2019 on an anti-corruption platform.

Wartime powers have since concentrated unprecedented authority in his office, making it harder to avoid responsibility for failures across government.

A defence source in Kyiv says Zelensky “is responsible for everything because he has all of the power in this country”. Yet the source also rejects Fedorov’s attempt to present himself as the man who can clean up the system.

Fedorov joined Zelensky’s administration in 2019 and remained its longest-serving minister until July.

He has suggested that attempts to reform defence procurement contributed to his dismissal. Lord regards him as a genuine reformer, but the Kyiv source argues that he tolerated the system until it rejected him.

“Fedorov has been one of the leaders of this government for more than seven years,” he says.

“Until he was fired, the level of corruption and the level of democracy in Ukraine were completely fine for him. Suddenly, after being fired, he started seeing problems.”

That history creates a central paradox. Fedorov’s seven years at the heart of government weaken his attempt to pose as an outsider, but give weight to his warning that the system is failing.

“He is not any sort of solution,” the source says. “He is a problem.”

His proposed solution is equally contentious.

Ukrainian law prohibits elections under martial law, millions could struggle to vote and Moscow would seek to manipulate the contest.

Instead, the Kyiv source argues that Zelensky should form a national unity government incorporating Ukraine’s overwhelmingly pro-independence opposition parties.

This could restore checks and balances and increase democratic oversight without the dangers of a wartime election.

Fedorov’s failed gambit has strengthened Zelensky in the short term, but another major corruption revelation could rapidly revive the political challenge.

And while the consequences could be severe for the president, Lord says the greatest cost is ultimately paid on the battlefield, warning: “In a time of war, every penny lost to corruption is a penny that cannot be spent on bullets, artillery shells, air defence or resilience packages.”