Acting Defence Minister Mykhailo Fedorov stated on 16 July that the leadership of the Armed Forces of Ukraine was sabotaging the introduction of the new contract system. During a briefing, he also placed personal responsibility for mobilisation issues on the Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Oleksandr Syrskyi, as, according to him, the Territorial Recruitment Centres and Specialised Units are subordinate to the Army.
Briefly about the main points
- Fedorov declared his deliberate opposition to the new contract system.
- He linked the mobilisation issues to the military hierarchy.
- According to him, Gnativ personally signed the new contract.
- Fedorov described trust in commanders as a key requirement for recruitment.
- He cited the «Charter» and the Third Assault Corps as examples of effective management.
Mixed results across the divisions
According to Mikhail Fedorov, the transition to the new contracts depends on the work of the commanders on the ground. He said that in some units, notably «Code 9.2», a third of the personnel had signed such contracts, whilst in others the number was minimal.
The Acting Minister believes that it is impossible to carry out the reform without the active involvement of the General Staff. At the same time, he noted that the Chief of the General Staff, Andriy Hnatov, had personally signed the contract proposed by the Ministry of Defence.
Criticism of the mobilisation hierarchy
Responding to a question about conscription against the backdrop of the general conscription expected this autumn mobilisation in Russia, Fyodorov sharply criticised the military leadership. He emphasised that the TCC and the Joint Staff are subordinate to the Army, which, he said, is directly commanded by the Commander-in-Chief Alexander Syrsky.
Fedorov cited the following reasons mobilisation issues the lack of a new social contract and potential recruits’ concerns about incompetent commanders. He claims that people are discussing not the benefits of the contracts, but the officers’ questionable management decisions.
As an example, he cited the former commander of the 155th Brigade, who, according to Fedorov’s assessment, had caused considerable damage during a full-scale war.
A focus on respect and effective leadership
Fedorov rejected the notion that the front is held together solely by a «dictatorial and authoritarian» style of leadership. In his view, the military needs respect, clear contracts, defined terms of service, the possibility of transfer, and competent leaders.
He cited the Third Assault Corps and the «Charter» Brigade as examples of effective organisation. According to him, there is a queue of people keen to join the «Charter», including at least two thousand foreigners. Fedorov attributed the success of these units to a clear doctrine, logistical support, personnel selection and command style.
Contracts as part of a wider reform
Fedorov’s statements suggest that he views the contract system not as a mere change in personnel policy, but as a means of restoring trust in the service. In his argument, he suggests that people’s willingness to join the armed forces depends not only on the terms of the contract, but also on their experience of working with specific commanders.
At the same time, the allegations of sabotage and the personal criticism of the Commander-in-Chief signify a public escalation of differences between the acting Minister of Defence and the military hierarchy.
