Ukraine's former defense minister demands wartime election

One or two things will happen:

1. No election will be held.

2. Fedorov will no longer be alive shortly due to being shot from a "stray bullet from the war."

quote:

---

For those interested, Ukrainian outlet Strana has published a very thorough and interesting breakdown of the political scheming involved in Fedorov’s latest move, and what it could mean for Ukraine’s political future:

“The coordinated statements from former Defense Minister Fedorov and his support group, regarding a crisis in state governance and the need to hold elections before the end of the war, appear to be a carefully planned tactic ahead of the vote on Khmara’s nomination as Minister of Defense. This effectively rejects the demands of the “cardboard Maidan” movement to reinstate Fedorov.

The maximum goal is to sow doubt among members of parliament (especially among the “servants of the people”): “Is it necessary to vote for Khmara and go against Fedorov, if elections and a change of power are imminent?” Alternatively, it may be to persuade Khmara himself to withdraw from the position.The minimum goal is to, even if there are enough votes for Khmara, give new meaning to the “cardboard Maidan” actions, which will now be held not to bring back Fedorov, but to hold elections.

In Ukraine, during a war, only presidential elections can theoretically be held. Parliamentary elections are prohibited by the Constitution, which cannot be amended during a state of emergency. Presidential elections are also prohibited, but not by the Constitution, but by two laws (the Electoral Code and the law on martial law), which can be amended by a majority vote in the Verkhovna Rada.

In other words, Fedorov and his support group (which is largely composed of grant-funded organizations, previously close to the US Democratic Party, and now supported by Europe – those whom their detractors call “Sorosites”) want to implement a scheme in which elections are held in the country during the war, and their representative (Fedorov) becomes president, thereby allowing them to quickly reshape both the parliamentary majority and the entire power structure.

The tools to force Zelenskyy to do this include protests, criminal cases from the NABU and SAP against his inner circle, and pressure from Europe.

Zelensky is being forced to relinquish power - he is being offered to announce elections, lose them (which is indicated by all the polls), and leave office. It is quite possible that this will be followed by criminal prosecution. And certainly, it will lead to the downfall of his entire economic and political group (”Family”). This is clearly not the future that Zelensky envisions for himself. Therefore, he will likely try to resist. For example, he may order the SBU to strike against the NABU/SAP and their support group (such a scenario is being discussed even within the grant-funded circles).

Another question is whether Europe will exert pressure, and how much. This is a key point, because Zelensky can withstand protests, and even the next criminal cases against Yermak and his associates, but if the Europeans (who are currently financing Ukraine) put pressure directly, it will be much harder to resist. Last year, during the attempt by the Presidential Administration to bring the NABU and SAP under its control, such pressure was exerted. But it was not as strong regarding Fedorov’s resignation. And it is not yet known whether Europe will insist on elections.

Thirdly, polls show that Fedorov is far from the only candidate with a chance of winning. Zaluzhny has a higher approval rating than him, and Budanov is only slightly lower. Are both of them willing to silently watch as Fedorov is brought to power? Or will they fully engage in the struggle, fiercely opposing the former minister? All of this could add elements of radical unpredictability to the process of “restoring democratic processes.”

Fourthly, the topic of “Ukraine needs elections” will begin to gain traction within the country, which could sharply intensify public discussion about Zelensky’s “illegitimacy.” Incidentally, this is what has been constantly stated in Russia, demanding that elections for the President of Ukraine be held in order to have a “legitimate head of state” with whom negotiations can be conducted. And if elections are held during the war, then, formally, the Kremlin’s demand will be fulfilled. Of course, Fedorov is unlikely to soften the negotiating position compared to Zelensky. More likely the opposite – his support group often issues calls for a tightening of mobilization, a reduction in the conscription age, an intensification of the fight against “evaders” and the “fifth column,” etc. However, any of the other “viable” candidates could cautiously (not personally, but their support group) begin to promote the idea that “Zelensky was an obstacle to achieving peace, because Putin didn’t want to talk to him about anything. If I become president, I will be able to negotiate normal terms for ending the war.” And it is not excluded that such a position could prove more popular than various variations of “fighting to the bitter end.”

---

LINK

quote:

---

I remember looking at this one time. I think it’s the constitution itself and the interplay of a few clauses. Seems like they’d have to change the constitution first to do so.

---

Exactly. They’re not like the corrupt and totalitarian country of Russia, where the President just changes the constitution to however he sees fit. Ukraine believes in the constitution and rule of law.

quote:

---

I remember looking at this one time. I think it’s the constitution itself and the interplay of a few clauses.

---

I am going from memory as well but I do not think their constitution prevents elections during war time but it does during martial law. The two often go hand in hand.

Zelensky declared martial law at the outset of the invasion, and if I recall it has to be reupped on a schedule. At the first point where it had to be extended, the Rada (their parliament) took over and has kept it in effect since then. So IIRC the Rada could lift martial law and elections could take place. However, there may be a lot of things allowed by martial law that are crucial to security during and ongoing invasion that might make it dangerous to remove even for a short time.

From the outside, it seems odd that Zelensky fired Federov, as he was portrayed as instrumental in instituting the recent mid and deep strikes in Russia. He did have some apparent issues working with Syrskyi (CiC), and it seems Zelensky picked Syrskyi over Federov. Particularly the young people in Ukraine did not like the choice if Syrskyi (old) over Federov (young).

It is hard to argue at this point that Zelensky has not done a stellar job. If you had told anyone 3 months after the invasion, with even the vaguest idea of the military powers involved, that Russia would hold less land in 4 years than they did at that point, they would have laughed at you.