BERLIN — European leaders welcomed “significant progress” in talks on a potential peace deal on Monday after nearly four years of full-scale war in Ukraine, for the first time outlining how security guarantees could prevent Vladimir Putin from invading again.  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy gave an upbeat assessment of a dramatic new offer from American officials to provide NATO-style security guarantees to Ukraine. The proposals look “pretty good,” Zelenskyy said at the end of two days of talks with Donald Trump’s negotiators and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Berlin.  But the Ukraine president cautioned that the plans were only a “first draft,” with major questions remaining unresolved. For example, there was still no deal on what should happen to contested territory in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, much of which is occupied by Russian troops. And there’s no indication that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin will agree to any of it. Merz, however, welcomed what he called the “remarkable” legal and “material” security guarantees that American negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, had proposed.  “For the first time since 2022, a ceasefire is conceivable,” Merz said at a press conference with Zelenskyy. “It is now entirely up to Russia whether a ceasefire can be achieved by Christmas.”  The emergence of an outline security guarantee marks a potentially critical step forward in the negotiations. Ukraine has consistently said it cannot consider any solution to the question of what happens to territories occupied by Russian troops until it receives a security package that would deter Putin from invading again.  Putin, meanwhile, has refused to countenance Ukraine joining NATO, and earlier this year Trump said American forces would not have a role in any peacekeeping mission.  However, recent days have seen a steady improvement in the mood among negotiators. “This is a truly far-reaching and substantial agreement, which we have not had before, namely that both Europe and the U.S. are jointly prepared — and President Zelenskyy has referred to Article 5 of the NATO Treaty — to give similar security guarantees to Ukraine,” Merz said. Article 5 is the cornerstone of the alliance’s collective defense: It states that an attack on one member will be treated as an attack on all. “In my view, this is a really big step forward. And, as I said, the American side has also committed itself politically and, in perspective, legally to do this,” Merz added. Zelenskyy also, for the first time, suggested a solution could be in sight. “Before we take any steps on the battlefield, we need to see very clearly what security guarantees are in place,” he said. “It is important that the U.S. is considering Article-5-like guarantees. There is progress there.” In a subsequent joint statement the leaders of Denmark, Finland, France, the U.K., Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Norway joined Merz in welcoming the “significant progress” in the talks. The statement was also signed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and António Costa, president of the European Council, who joined the national leaders for a dinner discussion with Zelenskyy in Berlin.  Their statement also laid out more detail on what the new peace plan might include, suggesting that “the US” had “committed” alongside European leaders to guarantee the future security of Ukraine and to foster its economic recovery. This, the leaders’ statement said, would include commitments to support Ukraine’s army to maintain a “peacetime” strength of 800,000 to be able to “deter” and “defend.”  Peace would be enforced in part by a European-led “multinational force Ukraine” made up of contributions from willing nations and “supported by the U.S.” This force would secure Ukraine’s skies, support security at sea, and build up the Ukrainian armed forces, “including through operating in Ukraine.” The statement is not clear on exactly what role the U.S. would play in supporting this force.  Separately, the U.S. would be responsible for a mechanism to monitor the ceasefire and provide early warning of any future attack. There would also be a legally binding commitment to take measures to restore peace if Russia attacks again, potentially including “armed force, intelligence and logistical assistance.” Further points in the proposal include joint efforts to reconstruct Ukraine and invest in its future prosperity, and continuing Ukraine’s pathway toward joining the EU.  On the matter of ceding territory, the European leaders said it would be for Zelenskyy to decide —if necessary by consulting the Ukrainian people.  The developments represent significant movement after weeks of stalemate. But there were suggestions from the American side that their offer may be time-limited, as the White House seeks to push the warring sides toward a peace deal by Christmas.  “The basis of that agreement is basically to have really, really strong guarantees, Article 5-like,” a senior U.S. official said. “Those guarantees will not be on the table forever. Those guarantees are on the table right now if there’s a conclusion that’s reached in a good way.” Hans von der Burchard, Victor Jack, Nicholas Vinocur and Eli Stokols contributed reporting.  

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is ready to change the Ukrainian law that bans elections during wartime to demonstrate that antidemocratic accusations against him are baseless and to win clear security guarantees for Kyiv. Pressure is building on Zelenskyy from multiple sides. Kremlin chief Vladimir Putin said he will not sign any peace agreement with Zelenskyy, who he derides as an “illegitimate” president. U.S. President Donald Trump wants a swift end to Russia’s war on Ukraine, and is urging Kyiv to cede territory to Moscow to get a deal done — while criticizing Zelenskyy’s commitment to democracy.  “They’re using war not to hold an election, but, uh, I would think the Ukrainian people would … should have that choice. And maybe Zelenskyy would win. I don’t know who would win. But they haven’t had an election in a long time,” Trump said in an interview with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns for a special episode of The Conversation. “You know, they talk about a democracy, but it gets to a point where it’s not a democracy anymore.” Ukraine was scheduled to hold a presidential vote in 2024. But elections are banned during martial law and active warfare because Kyiv cannot guarantee a free, fair and safe electoral process while Russian missiles rain down, TV channels are censored by the state and more than 20 percent of the country’s territory is occupied. “The issue of elections in Ukraine is a matter for the people of Ukraine, not the people of other states, with all due respect to our partners. I am ready for the elections. I’ve heard that I’m personally holding on to the president’s seat, that I’m clinging to it, and that this is supposedly why the war is not ending — this, frankly, is a completely absurd story,” Zelenskyy told several journalists via a WhatsApp audio message late Tuesday. The powers of the Ukrainian president and parliament, as well as other state bodies, continue until 30 days after the termination of martial law — which was installed on Feb. 24, 2022, as Russian forces poured over the border — according to Ukrainian legislation. Kyiv has already studied different EU models to conduct elections after the war. Zelenskyy said he is ready to amend Ukrainian law and hold elections during wartime — in the next 60-90 days — but he wants the U.S. and Europe to guarantee the election’s security. “I am asking our parliamentarians to prepare legislative proposals enabling changes to the legal framework and to the election law during martial law, and to prepare them for me. I will be back in Ukraine tomorrow; I expect proposals from our partners; I expect proposals from our MPs — and I am ready to go to elections,” Zelenskyy said. To override the legislative block and constitutional limitations, Zelenskyy would need a ceasefire to ensure the security of voters. Putin, for his part, has repeatedly refused to agree to a ceasefire, demanding a peace agreement and territory to stop the war. “If necessary, these articles banning elections are removed by a vote in parliament, a simple majority and two readings,” said Igor Popov, senior expert at the Ukrainian Institute for the Future. Ukrainian parliamentarians would then have to organize refugee voting in Europe and at home, and decide on whether to introduce online voting given the related risk of Russian meddling. An electoral campaign also needs to last at least 90 days. One Ukrainian election expert fears that Trump’s renewed push for Zelenskyy to hold elections is an attempt to remove the legitimate leader — who won a landslide presidential victory in 2019 — who does not want to sign a deal for his country that gives away swathes of territory to Russia. “We see a certain correlation between Donald Trump and the Kremlin’s position that Ukraine needs a new leader,” Olga Ajvazovska, head of the board at the Ukrainian election watchdog OPORA, told POLITICO.   “In the opinion of these two players [U.S. and Russia], it seems that they believe that there should be a new elected president who will sign certain peace documents, and will be ready to accept demands that are unacceptable from the point of view of the constitutional framework of Ukraine, from the point of view of the principles of protecting territorial integrity, sovereignty,” Ajvazovska added. The U.S. president appears focused solely on Ukraine’s presidential election, ignoring that Kyiv also postponed parliamentary elections in 2023 and local elections in 2025. A recent 28-point peace plan, circulated by Trump’s team, demanded that Ukraine hold elections within 100 days of signing a deal — a direct intrusion into its sovereignty. “So, the emphasis is on changing Ukrainian leadership, personified in Zelenskyy. But here you have to read Ukrainian society better. While Trump is quite distant from Ukrainian realities,” Ajvazovska said. Were an election held, those who want Zelenskyy out might be disappointed. While his favorability rating dropped sharply after last month’s blockbuster energy corruption scandal, Zelenskyy is still the most popular politician in Ukraine, with around 20 percent of Ukrainians ready to vote for him again during hypothetical presidential elections, according to the latest poll published by the Info Sapiens social research agency on Tuesday. Zelenskyy’s closest competitor is former Ukrainian army commander Valerii Zaluzhnyi, who currently serves as Kyiv’s ambassador to the U.K. By intervening in domestic politics, Trump risks consolidating Ukrainians around Zelenskyy — despite the issues that voters may have with his leadership. “So, these statements, when they are made in an aggressive form, rather adjust public opinion to a position of not supporting the transfer of power in the interests or at the request of Russia through Washington,” Ajvazovska said.

Andriy Yermak’s exit as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s all-powerful chief of staff is a tectonic shift for Ukraine that sets the stage for a fierce battle over how the country is governed. Nicknamed the “green cardinal” for wearing the military-inspired outfits his boss popularized, Yermak — a once little-known lawyer and B-movie producer — rose to wield immense influence as Zelenskyy’s top aide and was seen by many as virtually a co-president. Opposition politicians will use his firing over a $100 million corruption scandal to press home their demand for a national unity government in Kyiv, something they’ve urged ever since Russia launched its full-scale invasion nearly four years ago, and Yermak’s exit will embolden those factions. And there can be little doubt that Zelenskyy will miss the steely former attorney. Many Ukrainian commentators cast Yermak as the producer in the ruling duopoly — with the former TV comic-turned-president in the lead role.  Now Zelenskyy will be without his producer as he prepares for fraught negotiations with the U.S. over President Donald Trump’s divisive “peace plan” to end Russia’s war on Ukraine, as winter sets in and Kremlin forces try to push their advantage on the grim battlefields of the Donbas.   That said, Yermak won’t be widely mourned. His monopolization of power had drawn increasing criticism and frustration, both inside Ukraine and from Western allies. Hardly surprisingly, Ukrainian opposition politicians and former officials who had tussled with Yermak welcomed the news of his exit, saying they hoped it would mark a major change in how Zelenskyy rules and a shift away from his tightly controlled style of governing. “I didn’t believe it was possible that he would ever go,” said one former senior Ukrainian official, who asked not to be identified so as “not to be seen as dancing on Yermak’s grave.” Critics of Yermak had also pointed to Zelenskyy’s ultimately aborted moves in the summer to curb the independence of Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies — a step that initially exacerbated fears the government was tightening its grip over institutions meant to check presidential power. For opposition lawmaker Lesia Vasylenko, Yermak’s departure “shows that there’s zero tolerance for corruption and the president listens to the concerns of the people.” Others said his exit comes as a breath of fresh air.  Now Volodymyr Zelenskyy will be without his producer as he prepares for fraught negotiations with the U.S. over President Donald Trump’s divisive “peace plan” to end Russia’s war on Ukraine. | Ihor Kuznietsov/Getty Images But some opposition lawmakers questioned whether Zelenskyy will seize the moment to pursue more inclusive politics. Former Deputy Prime Minister Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze told POLITICO she remains unsure if the drama will change the way Zelenskyy governs. “Exactly that is the question. The way of governing has to go back to the constitution. Parliament has to regain its agency,” she said.  “That means the president has to agree to talk to all factions, we have to review the relationship in the parliament and form a real government of national unity, which will be accountable to the parliament, not the presidential office,” she added.  Iuliia Mendel, a Ukrainian journalist and former Zelenskyy adviser-turned-critic, told POLITICO that Yermak’s resignation was “a desperate reaction to unbearable pressure.” “Zelenskyy has no real replacement ready because he never thought things would go this far. But the heat got so intense that it boiled down to the simplest choice: him or Yermak. And Zelenskyy picked himself,” she added. But Mendel harbors some doubt that things will really change much. “Yermak might just stay the shadow puppeteer,” she warned. 

Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor and a foreign affairs columnist at POLITICO Europe. “These are the times that try men’s souls,” wrote pamphleteer Thomas Paine in the dark days of December 1776, as America’s war to free itself of the British seemed doomed. In a bid to lift flagging spirits, he continued: “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.” That victory was sorely in doubt for much of the war, but the revolutionaries persevered, and with French assistance — which has often been downplayed since — they triumphed after eight years of brutish conflict. Ukraine’s struggle has been longer. In effect, the country has been fighting to be free of Russia since 2014, and right now, these times are, indeed, trying Ukrainian souls. As it stands, there is scant grounds for optimism that, for all its heroism, Ukraine can turn things around. The country is unlikely to emerge from its most perilous winter of the war in a stronger position, better able to withstand what’s being foisted upon it. In fact, it could be in a much weaker state — on the battlefield, the home front, and in terms of its internal politics. Indeed, as it tries to navigate its way through America’s divisive “peace plan,” this might be the best Ukraine can hope for — or at least some variation that doesn’t entail withdrawing from the territory in eastern Ukraine it has managed to retain. On the battlefield, Ukraine’s forces are currently hard pressed and numerically disadvantaged. Or, as lawmaker Mariana Bezuhla recently argued: “Ukrainian commanders simply can’t keep up” and are “being jerked around within a framework set by the enemy.” Meanwhile, on the home front, pummeling Russian drone attacks and airstrikes are degrading the country’s power system and wrecking its natural gas infrastructure, which keeps 60 percent of Ukrainians warm during the frigid winter months. The country is also running out of money. It’s hard to see a Europe mired in debt providing the $250 billion Kyiv will need in cash and arms to sustain the fight for another four years — and that’s on top of the $140 billion reparations loan that might be offered if Belgium lifts its veto on using Russia’s immobilized assets held in Brussels. If all that weren’t enough, Ukraine is being roiled by a massive corruption scandal that appears to implicate Ukrainian presidential insiders, sapping the confidence of allies and Ukrainians alike. It’s also providing those in the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and the MAGA movement with ammunition to argue that Washington should be done with Ukraine. And now, of course, Kyiv is having to cope with a contentious U.S. effort to end Russia’s war, which has been advanced in such a chaotic diplomatic process that it wouldn’t be out of place in an episode of “The West Wing.” At times, negotiations have descended into farce, with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio forswearing the original peace plan one minute, saying it came from Russia and not a Trump administration proposal, only to swiftly backtrack. And earlier this week, a Reuters report suggested the 28-point plan was, in fact, modeled on a Russian proposal that Kremlin officials shared with their U.S. counterparts in mid-October. Meanwhile, on the home front, pummeling Russian drone attacks and airstrikes are degrading the country’s power system and wrecking its natural gas infrastructure. | Mykola Tys/EPA But for all the buffoonery — including reports that Special Envoy Steve Witkoff coached high-ranking Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov on how Russian President Vladimir Putin should speak to Trump — a tweaked 19-point version of the “peace plan” may well be the best Ukraine can realistically expect, even though it heavily favors Russia. As this column has argued before, a Ukrainian triumph was always unlikely — that is if by triumph one means the restoration of the country’s 1991 borders and NATO membership. This isn’t through any fault of Ukraine, the David in the fight against Goliath, but rather that of Kyiv’s Western allies, who were never clear-sighted or practical in their thinking, let alone ready to do what was necessary to defeat Russia’s revanchism and vanquish a Putin regime heedless of the death toll of even its own troops. Despite their high-blown rhetoric, at no stage in the conflict have Ukraine’s allies agreed on any clear war aims. Some pressed for a debate, among them former Lithuanian foreign minister Gabrielius Landsbergis, who was worried about a mismatch between Western magniloquence and what the U.S. and Europe were actually prepared to do and give. “We talk about victory, and we talk about standing with Ukraine to the very end — but let’s also talk about this,” he told POLITICO in a 2023 interview. But that debate never happened because of fears it would disunite allies. Nonetheless, Western leaders continued to characterize the war as a contest between good and evil, with huge stakes for democracy. They cast it as a struggle not only for territory but between liberal and autocratic values, and as one with global consequences. But in that case, why be restrained in what you supply? Why hold back on long-range munitions and tanks? Why delay supplying F-16s? And why prevent Ukraine from using Western-supplied long-range missiles to strike deeper into Russia? Or, as Ukraine’s former top commander Gen. Valery Zaluzhny fumed in the Washington Post: “To save my people, why do I have to ask someone for permission what to do on enemy territory?” For former Ukrainian foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba, for all its talk of standing with Ukraine for as long as it takes, the West never really grasped the war’s importance or consequences: “You cannot win a war where Russia clearly knows what its strategic goal is in every detail; [where] Ukraine knows what its strategic goal is in every detail; but [where] the West, without whom Ukraine cannot win, does not know what it is fighting for,” he told POLITICO last year. “This is the real tragedy of this war.” At times, negotiations have descended into farce, with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio forswearing the original peace plan one minute, saying it came from Russia and not a Trump administration proposal, only to swiftly backtrack. | Martial Trezzini/EPA The currently discussed 19-point plan is, of course, an improvement on the original 28-point plan — nonetheless, it is an ugly and shameful one. But this is what happens if you run down your military forces and arms production for decades, fail to draw enforceable red lines and don’t ask hard questions before making grand promises. For Ukraine, such a poor deal that leaves it with weak security guarantees, without 20 percent of its territory and prohibits it from joining NATO, will have great domestic consequences and carry the high likelihood of civil strife. It isn’t hard to see how the army and its veterans might react. Many of them will see it as a stab in the back, an enraging betrayal that needs to be punished. It will also mean rewarding Putin’s thuggishness and no real accountability for the bestial nature of his army’s atrocious behavior or the unlawful, detestable deportations from occupied parts of Ukraine to Russia. And it will, no doubt, embolden the axis of autocrats. The American Revolution had lasting global consequences — so, too, will this war.

KYIV — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Thursday resisted calls to oust his most powerful adviser, Andriy Yermak, amid a snowballing corruption scandal.  Earlier this week, members of Zelenskyy’s own party, opposition lawmakers and pro-democracy watchdogs pressured the president to fire Yermak, though anti-corruption agencies have not said the influential aide is implicated in a $100 million kickbacks plot in the Ukrainian energy sector.  Zelenskyy met with his parliamentary party late Thursday and made it clear he won’t bend, according to one attendee at the meeting.  “Regarding Yermak, the president clearly said that personnel issues in his office are his business,” a Ukrainian MP from Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People faction, granted anonymity to speak candidly, told POLITICO. The internal tug-of-war comes as Russia and some U.S. officials are once again pressuring Kyiv to agree to a so-called peace plan, which appears to favor Kremlin demands — though during a discussion with several reporters in Kyiv, American officials claimed the plan is comprehensive and does not amount to Ukraine’s capitulation to Russia.  “We are here to support the Ukrainians like we have been throughout this conflict, and we’re here to make sure that this is a good plan for the Ukrainian people,” U.S. Army spokesperson Col. Dave Buttler said. After the parliamentary meeting, Zelenskyy made a statement to the nation late Thursday. “I was at a meeting with the parliamentary majority faction, there were various issues, there were sensitive issues,” the president said, without specifying Yermak was the issue. “But the agreement, it is obvious — everyone must work for Ukraine, and it will be so. The wartime parliament must be functioning. And I thank everyone who helps ensure this. And there will be decisions that will help with this,” Zelenskyy added. This story is being updated.

Adrian Karatnycky is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and the author of “Battleground Ukraine: From Independence to the War with Russia.” The vast corruption scandal unfolding in Ukraine has deeply damaged the country’s image. It has also severely eroded trust in President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, turning him into a lame duck at home. Involving a plot to extort around $100 million from Ukraine’s energy sector, the scandal has so far engulfed Zelenskyy’s Justice Minister German Galushchenko, Energy Minister Svitlana Hrynchuk, as well as officials from the country’s atomic energy agency and senior officials from the State Bureau of Investigation. Most damaging to Zelenskyy, however, is that the allegations extend to his most trusted allies: Former business partner Tymur Mindich is said to be at the center of the schemes. And the highly powerful yet unpopular Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak is being accused by adversaries of subverting and impeding the work of the country’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor, whose offices uncovered the widespread conspiracy — now called “Mindichgate.” Domestically, these revelations are already causing a seismic shift in Zelenskyy’s political fortunes, contributing to widespread anger. And while there’s no evidence of personal corruption by the president, his style of rule and reliance on governing with the help of a group of pals and cronies has worn thin. Significantly, Zelenskyy came to power on a wave of high-minded rhetoric promising to root out corruption and replace generations of dishonest officials with new faces of integrity. But his inflated assurances have now been punctured by the misrule that’s being revealed each day in plot twists as riveting as a Netflix crime series. So, what, if anything, can he do to restore confidence? In office for nearly six-and-a-half years now, Zelenskyy was long riding high in the polls, bolstered by his courage and inspirational leadership in the face of Russia’s brutal war. In recent months, however, the public has started to look for fresh leaders amid growing discontent over his highly centralized, insular and — at times — authoritarian rule. In October, well before the current scandal unfolded, polls showed only one in four Ukrainians wanted Zelenskyy to run for office again once the war ended. And were he to run, they showed him being handily defeated by Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, the popular former commander of Ukraine’s armed forces whom Zelenskyy dismissed. According to opposition Deputy Yaroslav Zheleznyak, who played a crucial role in exposing the corruption scandal, polls as yet unpublished now show Zelenskyy losing a further 40 percent of his support, suggesting his electoral base now stands at around 25 percent, making him a lame-duck president. So low is Zelenskyy’s support and so damaging the effect of the corruption crisis that, speaking anonymously, individuals who have worked closely with the president and his inner circle have now hinted he may not seek a second term once circumstances permit a vote. It’s a possibility that’s bolstered by numerous reports stating Ukraine’s first lady Olena Zelenska has long felt the president shouldn’t seek reelection given the extension of his current term and the toll his absence has taken on his family. Furthermore, the crisis has not only reduced Zelenskyy’s chances of reelection, it has also opened the field to new potential challengers. But while public discontent with Zelenskyy is at a wartime peak, the Ukrainian public understands it would be perilous to engage in destabilizing mass protest amid modest Russian territorial advances — a responsible civic position that was confirmed to me by Serhiy Sternenko, a firebrand civic activist with millions of followers on social media. And though Zelenskyy’s position as president remains secure given the wartime setting, as a lame-duck president his main aim must be to restore public confidence in the government, ensure the functioning of an effective parliament, and demonstrate to the international community that Ukraine is being governed both effectively and transparently. To achieve these goals, Zelenskyy would be well advised to begin wide-ranging consultations with civic leaders, anti-corruption experts and the patriotic opposition, aiming to create a technocratic government of trusted officials. He also needs to dismantle his highly centralized presidential rule by limiting his own powers to the areas of defense, national security and foreign policy, and by drastically reducing the powers of his team of presidential aides. This could be done by transferring their domestic and economic policy responsibilities to a restructured government and parliament instead. The fact is, if Zelenskyy doesn’t act, others may do it for him. For years, the Ukrainian leader’s power has derived from his control of a parliamentary majority through his Servant of the People party, but fissures are now appearing within that base. A report from investigative news site Ukrainska Pravda indicates that the head of the party’s parliamentary faction, David Arakhamia, has now joined calls for Zelenskyy to reform the presidential office and replace Yermak. It also reports that Danylo Hetmantsev, a powerful legislator heading the parliament’s finance committee, is planning to create a new party. And on Wednesday, lawmaker Mykyta Poturayev announced his own initiative to create a new parliamentary majority, which would include members of the patriotic opposition. To respond to this pressure and restore confidence, Zelenskyy must try to assemble a strong team that holds the public’s trust, as well as that of Ukraine’s allies. Recruiting such competent officials in the current chaos won’t be easy, but there is a pool of them out there — including First Deputy Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, former Ambassador to the U.S. and Finance Minister Oksana Markarova, and former Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba, who was removed from office for unclear reasons. In short, while the damage done to Zelenskyy is likely irreversible, the president has a chance to use the current crisis to set Ukraine on a proper path of greater transparency, and to compensate for diminished support by engaging with and transferring significant authority to a team that enjoys public confidence. Following such a set of steps — coupled with the vigorous and unimpeded prosecution of those involved in the web of corruption that has been exposed — would ensure morale in Ukraine remains strong. It would strengthen the country’s hand amid reports that the U.S. administration is pressuring Kyiv to make major concessions to Russia. Above all, it would ensure a firm basis for Ukraine to continue its courageous and effective resistance in this existential war.

KYIV — Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is under fierce pressure to fire his powerful top aide Andriy Yermak amid a corruption scandal that risks spiraling into the country’s biggest domestic political crisis since Russia’s full-scale invasion. The pressure to ditch Yermak — described to POLITICO by four senior Ukrainian officials involved in political discussions in Kyiv — poses a problem for Zelenskyy because it comes partly from within the ranks of his own Servant of the People party. The crisis looks set to come to a head on Thursday, when Zelenskyy will hold crunch meetings with government officials and members of parliament. Yermak runs the presidential office and is a sharp-elbowed political operator who has been crucial in steering Zelenskyy’s rule since he took power in 2019. Some see him as almost a co-president. The attacks on such a crucial ally could hardly come at a more sensitive moment for Zelenskyy. Kyiv faces a massive budget shortfall, and the president must convince his Western allies that Ukraine is a safe place to send billions of euros in vital funding. Two people directly involved in the political discussions said Zelenskyy would fight back and defend Yermak from the mounting criticism later this week. While there have been attempts to link Yermak directly to the snowballing corruption scandal, the campaign against him is also a sign of broader frustration — within both the opposition and Zelenskyy’s party — over Yermak’s domineering presence in the presidential office. An earlier drive by that office to strip Ukraine’s anti-corruption bureau of its independence triggered public fury in July. ENERGY SCANDAL The immediate flashpoint rocking Ukrainian politics — and fueling the attack against Yermak — is a corruption scandal in the country’s shattered energy sector. The controversy erupted last week after current and former officials were officially charged with manipulating contracts at Energoatom, the state nuclear energy company, to extract kickbacks. Government investigators say the network laundered roughly $100 million through a secret Kyiv-based office. Most have publicly denied the accusations. Yermak’s political opponents are trying to link him directly to the scandal — saying either he or one of his lieutenants is the anonymous individual referred to as Ali Baba in wiretaps related to the energy case. The NABU anti-corruption bureau, however, says it can “neither confirm nor deny” that allegation, and Yermak himself protests his innocence. “People mention me, and sometimes, absolutely without any evidence, they try to accuse me of things I don’t even know about,” he told POLITICO’s sister publication Welt in the Axel Springer Group last week, when asked directly whether he was involved. The political pitfall for Yermak — amid such a high-profile scandal — is that his adversaries accuse him of having played a lead role in seeking to strip NABU of its independence just as it was looking into the Energoatom case. “He’s the one who decided to pick a fight with NABU,” a senior Ukrainian adviser told POLITICO, asking not to be identified to be able to speak frankly. “Had he not done that, basically, they think this scandal would have just been, you know, swept under the rug or it would have come out later in a year or so,” the adviser added. “His enemies see this as an opportunity to try to get rid of him.” That view was echoed by other insiders. “Of course, Yermak’s opponents and also people that he has stripped of influence and schemes, are asking the president to fire him,” a senior Ukrainian official told POLITICO on condition of anonymity to speak candidly. DAMAGE REPAIR Zelenskyy previously attempted to repair the damage from the energy scandal by imposing sanctions on his former business partner Tymur Mindich. He also launched a reshuffle and an audit at Energoatom and other state energy companies. Mindich has fled to Israel and could not be contacted for comment. Ukrainian watchdogs and MPs, however — especially from the opposition but also from the ruling Servant of the People party — claimed he had not done enough and demanded a more thorough clean-up. All the Ukrainian officials who spoke to POLITICO expected Zelenskyy would have to address the matter directly on Thursday. Former President Petro Poroshenko, who lost elections to Zelenskyy in 2019 after a similar corruption scandal involving his own close allies, said his faction had started collecting signatures to oust the entire government, citing the need to restore public trust and reassure Kyiv’s war allies. “Ukraine is experiencing the greatest threat to its existence, starting from February 24, 2022. Now it is necessary to resolve the issue of the Ukrainian people’s trust in the government, in the Verkhovna Rada [parliament]. The issue is of partners’ trust in the state of Ukraine,” Poroshenko said in a Facebook post on Tuesday. An MP confirmed to POLITICO that dissent was also present in the president’s Servant of the People faction in the Ukrainian parliament, particularly following NABU’s release of audio tapes on which suspects in the case allegedly discuss corruption schemes. “The reason is the tapes from NABU. Everyone understands the tapes are leading to him [Yermak], and that he was behind the July crisis [regarding NABU’s independence]. If this becomes publicly known, it will undermine all [members of the] Servants [party],” said the MP, who was also granted anonymity.  “There’s a high probability he will indeed resign, but we will believe it when we see it,” the MP added. POLITICO sought comment from Yermak, but he is currently traveling in Western Europe with Zelenskyy and was not able to respond immediately. Zelenskyy is expected to address the matter when he returns. Two of the Ukrainian officials said Zelenskyy had told them he would not give in to the pressure and would keep Yermak, but that he would make some government changes, possibly bringing in some opposition figures to appease critics. “This week, there will be relevant conversations with government officials and a meeting with the leadership of the parliament and MPs of the Servant of the People faction. I am preparing several necessary legislative initiatives and principled quick decisions that our state needs,” Zelenskyy said on Tuesday, while providing no further details.  Yaroslav Zheleznyak, an outspoken critic of Zelenskyy and an opposition MP from the Holos party, told POLITICO that some MPs from the Servant of the People party were in revolt and suspected a link between Yermak and the corruption schemes. But NABU head Semen Kryvonos has publicly refused to either “confirm or deny” that Yermak features in the wiretaps from the energy sector scandal.   “Of course, they would not publicly tell you details of an ongoing investigation. Lawmakers assume that without Yermak, this all would not have happened,” Zheleznyak said. Ibrahim Naber of Welt contributed reporting.

Ukraine’s Justice Minister German Galushchenko has been suspended amid a sweeping corruption investigation into the country’s energy sector, Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko announced Wednesday. “This morning, an extraordinary session of the government was held. A decision was made to suspend German Galushchenko from performing the duties of the minister of justice,” Svyrydenko said in a statement. The move comes as anti-corruption agencies intensify an investigation into what they describe as a “large-scale” $100 million kickback and money-laundering scheme involving senior energy officials. Ukrainian authorities have charged seven individuals in connection with the case, which has stirred public outrage and renewed scrutiny of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s efforts to root out graft. Galushchenko, who previously served as energy minister, was reportedly the subject of searches by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) on Monday. Galushchenko said Wednesday he had spoken with Svyrydenko and completely agreed with the government’s decision. “I believe that the suspension for the time of investigation is a civilized and correct scenario. I will defend myself in the legal arena and prove my position,” he said. Deputy Justice Minister for European Integration Issues Lyudmila Suhak will temporarily assume Galushchenko’s duties. NABU and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) said Tuesday they have also implicated a former deputy prime minister, identified by the nickname “Che Guevara,” in the scheme, alleging evidence of illicit cash transfers totaling more than $1.2 million. Searches took place two days after Russia launched its largest attack yet against the Ukrainian energy system, including nuclear plants and electric substations, and hammered power operator Сentrеgenergo’s electricity-generating capacity. Lengthy blackouts are still occurring throughout the country, as authorities struggle to restore power, while Ukrainians question whether energy facilities were properly protected from Russian attacks. This article has been updated.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is under mounting pressure from critics to keep the lights and heating on while Vladimir Putin ramps up his military assault on Ukraine’s energy supply. The Ukrainian president is fearful of a public backlash over likely prolonged blackouts this winter and is trying to shift the blame, said the former head of Ukraine’s state-owned national power company. Thirty-nine-year-old Volodymyr Kudrytskyi, who led Ukrenergo until he was forced to resign last year amid infighting over political control of the energy sector, said he’s one of those whom the President’s Office is looking to scapegoat. During an exclusive interview with POLITICO, he predicted Ukraine will face a “very difficult winter” under relentless Russian bombardment — and argued Kyiv’s government has made that worse through a series of missteps. Adding fuel to his clash with Zelenskyy’s team, Kudrytskyi was charged last week with embezzlement, prompting an outcry from Ukraine’s civil society and opposition lawmakers.  They say Kudrytskyi’s arraignment involving a contract — one of hundreds — he authorized seven years ago, when he was a deputy director at Ukrenergo, is a glaring example of the aggressive use of lawfare by the Ukrainian leadership to intimidate opponents, silence critics and obscure their own mistakes. Kudrytskyi added he has no doubt that the charges against him would have to be approved by the President’s Office and “could only have been orchestrated on the orders of Zelenskyy.” Zelenskyy’s office declined to respond to repeated requests from POLITICO for comment. Before his arrest, Kudrytskyi said he was the subject of criticism “by anonymous Telegram channels that support the presidential office with false claims I had embezzled funds.” He took that as the first sign that he would likely be targeted for harsher treatment. Kudrytskyi, who was released Friday on bail, said the criminal charges against him are “nonsense,” but they’ve been leveled so it will be “easier for the President’s Office to sell the idea that I am responsible for the failure to prepare the energy system for the upcoming winter, despite the fact that I have not been at Ukrenergo for more than a year now.” “They’re scared to death” about a public outcry this winter, he added. COMPETING PLANS That public backlash against leadership in Kyiv will be partly justified, Kudrytskyi said, because the struggle to keep the lights on will have been exacerbated by tardiness in rolling out more decentralized power generation. Kudrytskyi said Ukraine’s energy challenge as the days turn colder will be compounded by the government’s failure to promptly act on a plan he presented to Zelenskyy three years ago. The proposal would have decentralized energy generation and shifted away, as quickly as possible, from a system based on huge Soviet-era centralized power plants, more inviting targets for Russian attacks.   Thirty-nine-year-old Volodymyr Kudrytskyi said he’s one of those whom the President’s Office is looking to scapegoat. | Kirill Chubotin/Getty Images The plan was centered on the idea that decentralizing power generation would be the best way to withstand Russian missile and drone attacks. Those have redoubled to an alarming scale in recent weeks with, some days, Russia targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure with 500 Iranian-designed drones and 20 to 30 missiles in each attack. Instead of quickly endorsing the decentralization plan, Zelenskyy instead approved — according to Kudrytskyi — a rival scheme backed by his powerful Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak to “create a huge fund to attract hundreds of millions of foreign investment for hydrogen and solar energy.” Last year the government shifted its focus to decentralization, eventually taking up Kudrytskyi’s plan. “But we lost a year,” he said.  He also said the slow pace in hardening the country’s energy facilities to better withstand the impact of direct hits or blasts — including building concrete shelters to protect transformers at power plants — was a “sensational failure of the government.” Ukrenergo, Kudrytskyi said, started to harden facilities and construct concrete shelters for transformers in 2023 — but little work was done by other power generation companies. DEMOCRATIC BACKSLIDING Kudrytskyi was abruptly forced to resign last year in what several Ukrainian energy executives say was a maneuver engineered by presidential insiders determined to monopolize political power. His departure prompted alarm in Brussels and Washington, D.C. — Western diplomats and global lenders even issued a rare public rebuke, breaking their normal public silence on domestic Ukrainian politics. They exhorted Kyiv to change tack. So far, international partners have made no public comments on Kudrytskyi’s arrest and arraignment. But a group of four prominent Ukrainian think tanks issued a joint statement on Oct. 30, the day after Kudrytskyi’s arraignment, urging authorities to conduct investigations with “the utmost impartiality, objectivity, and political neutrality.”  The think tanks also cautioned against conducting political persecutions. In their statement they said: “The practice of politically motivated actions against professionals in power in any country, especially in a country experiencing the extremely difficult times of war, is a blow to statehood, not a manifestation of justice.” The embezzlement case against Kudrytskyi has been described by one of the country’s most prominent anti-corruption activists, Daria Kaleniuk, head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center, as not making any legal sense. She argued that the prosecutor has failed to offer evidence that the former energy boss enriched himself in any way and, along with other civil society leaders, said the case is another episode in democratic backsliding. Overnight Sunday, Russia launched more attacks targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, striking at regions across the country. According to Zelenskyy, “nearly 1,500 attack drones, 1,170 guided aerial bombs, and more than 70 missiles of different types were used by the Russians to attack life in Ukraine just this week alone.” Unlike previous wartime winters, Russian forces this time have also been attacking the country’s natural gas infrastructure in a sustained campaign.  Since being forced to resign from Ukrenergo, Kudrytskyi hasn’t been shy about highlighting what he says is mismanagement of Ukraine’s energy sector. For that he has been attacked on social media for being unpatriotic, he said. But he sees it differently. “Most Ukrainians understand the government should be criticized even during wartime for mistakes because otherwise it would cause harm to the country,” he said.

Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor and a foreign affairs columnist at POLITICO Europe. As Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine nearly four years ago, Volodymyr Kudrytskyi, then head of Ukraine’s state-owned national power company Ukrenergo, was scrambling to keep the lights on. Somehow, he succeeded and continued to do so every year, earning the respect of energy executives worldwide by ensuring the country was able to withstand Russian missile and drone strikes on its power grid and avoid catastrophic blackouts — until he was abruptly forced to resign in 2024, that is. Kudrytskyi’s dismissal was decried by many in the energy industry and also prompted alarm in Brussels. At the time, Kudrytskyi told POLITICO he was the victim of the relentless centralization of authority that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and his powerful head of office Andriy Yermak often pursue. He said he feared “corrupt individuals” would end up taking over the state-owned company. According to his supporters, it is that kind of talk — and his refusal to remain silent — that explains why Kudrytskyi ended up in a glass-enclosed cubicle in a downtown Kyiv courtroom last week, where he was arraigned on embezzlement charges. Now, opposition lawmakers and civil society activists are up in arms, labeling this yet another example of Ukraine’s leadership using lawfare to intimidate opponents and silence critics by accusing them of corruption or of collaboration with Russia. Zelenskyy’s office declined to comment. Others who have received the same treatment include Zelenskyy’s predecessor in office, Petro Poroshenko, who was sanctioned and arraigned on corruption charges this year — a move that could prevent him from standing in a future election. Sanctions have frequently been threatened or used against opponents, effectively freezing assets and blocking the sanctioned person from conducting any financial transactions, including using credit cards or accessing bank accounts. Poroshenko has since accused Zelenskyy of creeping “authoritarianism,” and seeking to “remove any competitor from the political landscape.” That may also explain why Kudrytskyi has been arraigned, according to opposition lawmaker Mykola Knyazhitskiy, who believes the use of lawfare to discredit opponents is only going to get worse as the presidential office prepares for a possible election next year in the event there’s a ceasefire. They are using the courts “to clear the field of competitors” to shape a dishonest election, he fears. Others, including prominent Ukrainian activist and head of the Anti-Corruption Action Center Daria Kaleniuk, argue the president and his coterie are using the war to monopolize power to such a degree that it threatens the country’s democracy. Kaleniuk was in the courtroom for Kudrytskyi’s two-hour arraignment, and echoes the former energy boss’s claim that the prosecution is “political.” According to Kaleniuk, the case doesn’t make any legal sense, and she said it all sounded “even stranger” as the prosecutor detailed the charges against Kudrytskyi: “He failed to show that he had materially benefited in any way” from an infrastructure contract that, in the end, wasn’t completed, she explained. The case in question is related to a contract Kudrytskyi authorized seven years ago as Ukrenergo’s then-deputy director for investments. But the subcontractor didn’t even begin work on the assigned infrastructure improvements, and Ukrenergo was able to claw back an advance payment that was made. Kaleniuk’s disquiet is also echoed by opposition lawmaker Inna Sovsun, who told POLITICO, “there’s no evidence that [Kudrytskyi] enriched himself.” “There was no damage done. I can’t help but think that this is all politically motivated,” she said. Sovsun turned up to the arraignment to offer herself as a bail guarantor if needed — two other lawmakers offered to act as guarantors as well, but the judge instead decided on another procedure to set Kudrytskyi free from pre-trial detention by requiring the payment of bail bond of $325,000.   One senior Ukrainian adviser, who asked not to be identified so they could speak about the case, dismissed the defense’s description of the case against Kudrytskyi as being politically motivated and claiming there was no substance to the embezzlement allegations. “People should wait on this case until the full hearing,” he added. But for former Deputy Prime Minister Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, the case “doesn’t look good from any angle — either domestically or when it comes to international partners.” The timing, she said, is unhelpful for Ukraine, as it coincides with Kyiv’s ongoing appeal for more European energy assistance ahead of what’s likely to be the war’s most perilous winter. With Russia mounting missile and drone strikes on a far larger scale than before, Ukraine’s energy challenge is likely to be even more formidable. And unlike previous winters, Russia’s attacks have been targeting Ukraine’s drilling, storage and distribution facilities for natural gas in addition to its electrical power grid. Sixty percent of Ukrainians currently rely on natural gas to keep their homes warm. Some Ukrainian energy executives also fear Kudrytskyi’s prosecution may be part of a preemptive scapegoating tactic to shift blame in the event that the country’s energy system can no longer withstand Russian attacks. Citing unnamed sources, two weeks ago Ukrainian media outlet Ukrainska Pravda reported that former energy executives fear they are being lined up to be faulted for failing to do enough to boost the energy infrastructure’s resilience and harden facilities. “They need a scapegoat now,” a foreign policy expert who has counseled the Ukrainian government told POLITICO. “There are parts of Ukraine that probably won’t have any electricity until the spring. It’s already 10 degrees Celsius in Kyiv apartments now, and the city could well have extended blackouts. People are already pissed off about this, so the president’s office needs scapegoats,” he said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the matter freely. “The opposition is going to accuse Zelenskyy of failing Ukraine, and argue he should have already had contingencies to prevent prolonged blackouts or a big freeze, they will argue,” he added. Senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and author of “Battleground Ukraine” Adrian Karatnycky also worries about the direction of political travel. “While he’s an inspirational and brave wartime leader, there are, indeed, worrying elements to Zelenskyy’s rule,” he said.