According to Ukraine’s dismissed defense minister, Fedorov, his country is slowly but surely losing the war unless a new strategy is adopted. I do not know whether this statement is driven by resentment over his dismissal or by a desire to lead the country himself. What I do know is that Fedorov is calling for presidential elections during wartime, and that his dismissal was the result of a feud with General Syrskyi, the country’s top military commander. The two fundamentally disagreed on how the war should be conducted.
Feuds of this kind undermine unity and send soldiers to the front without a coherent vision. That is disastrous, especially now that the conflict has entered a dangerous phase.
The slow Russian advance continues, and attacks on each other’s territory are turning the war increasingly into an economic struggle. It began with Ukraine attacking tankers and cargo ships in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. The aim was to disrupt supplies to Crimea. Russia responded by intensifying its attacks on the port of Odesa and on cargo vessels transporting agricultural products. Much of this traffic is now at a standstill, threatening shortages of grain and sunflower oil. President Zelensky may complain about the Russians and the humanitarian disaster this is causing, particularly in Africa, but this is the logical consequence of the new phase the war has entered.
In recent weeks, we have also seen increasing attacks on distribution centers. First, Ukraine targeted Wildberries in Russia; now Ozon is in the crosshairs. Russia is doing the same. This was to be expected.
I hear people expressing outrage over Russian attacks on logistics facilities and shopping centers in Ukraine, in which civilians are being hit. Both countries justify their attacks by arguing that these logistics facilities are also used to supply military personnel. That is a weak defense.
The primary targets are economic. The fact that this shifts the fighting towards the civilian population is the logical consequence.
There are undoubtedly people who believe this will work, but history suggests otherwise. In general, direct attacks strengthen popular support for the leader, whether he is called Putin or Zelensky. Nothing unites people more effectively than a directly felt external threat.
President Trump’s reckless war against Iran has contributed to the change in the course of the war. It created a shortage of Patriot air-defense missiles, making Ukraine more vulnerable. This forced Ukraine to adapt its strategy in order to maximize the damage it could inflict on Russia. Distribution centers cannot be adequately protected against Ukrainian drones. As a result, President Putin has decreed that companies forming part of the vital infrastructure can be temporarily nationalized if they fail to secure themselves properly. This shows just how much pressure he is under.
But the same applies to Zelensky, who is unable to protect his country against Russian ballistic missiles.
This summer, the war has become even more hopeless for civilians. I am curious to see whether Fedorov himself has a strategy capable of turning the situation around. So far, I have seen no evidence of one.
Source: Trouw, Rob de Wijk, 28 August 2026
Experts
Related Content
