A Russian drone hit a fire truck driving to a call in the village of Kushuhum outside Zaporizhzhia on 1 September, injuring four rescuers, the head of Zaporizhzhia Oblast, Ivan Fedorov, reported. The crew was on its way to a house fire that Russian shelling had started. The strike came hours after a countrywide Russian air assault overnight.

A drone hit the crew before they reached the fire

Fedorov said a Russian drone struck the State Emergency Service vehicle in Kushuhum as it drove to put out a fire. The truck took damage, and the crew was hurt. He said the men were under the supervision of medics.

The Main Directorate of the State Emergency Service in Zaporizhzhia Oblast confirmed the attack, and added that all four injured firefighters had been taken to hospital with injuries of differing severity. The directorate specified what the crew had been sent to: a fire in a detached house in the suburb, started by Russian shelling.

Over the past 24 hours, Russian attacks on Zaporizhzhia city and district killed two people and injured eight, Fedorov said. Russian forces carried out strikes on 57 settlements across the region.

The night before: a countrywide strike

Overnight into 1 September, Russia attacked with ballistic and cruise missiles, anti-radar missiles, Banderol munitions, and 218 Shahed-type strike drones, about a third of them jet-powered, Ukraine's Air Force reported. By preliminary data, air defenses downed or suppressed 199 targets. Odesa and Kyiv oblasts were the main directions of the strike.

Russia killed 12 people across Ukraine, among them a citizen of India, and injured dozens, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said. Russia killed four people and injured 13 and damaged a five-story residential building, and 50 people were evacuated. Nearly 350 rescuers worked in Kyiv and the surrounding oblast alone.

Explore further

Russia’s 6-day attack on Kyiv that started two days after CIA head’s visit to Moscow, culminates with massive ballistic missile strike on eve of school year

In Kyiv, a ballistic strike on Ukrzaliznytsia railway facilities killed seven people, six of them railway workers, and one more employee remains hospitalized. The capital's overall toll for the night stood at eight killed.

In Odesa Oblast, Russian drones, guided bombs, and missiles injured seven civilian men, four of whom went to hospital, and struck the Orlivka ferry crossing on the border with Romania again, the regional prosecutor's office found. 

Ukraine has documented Russia striking the people who respond

As of May, Ukraine has documented 11,000 Russian first-person-view drone attacks on civilians, among them repeat strikes on the same spot once medics and firefighters arrive. Ukraine's UN envoy has built part of the case for expelling Russia from the Security Council on that practice.

Rescue workers in Zaporizhzhia have been caught that way before. After a strike on a Poltava Oblast gas site, Russia hit the crews who came to the fire. Firefighters in Chernihiv Oblast went to hospital mid-rescue. In Kryvyi Rih in August, a second Russian attack reached rescue workers thirty minutes after a drone strike on a shopping center, and a repeat strike killed a 20-year-old volunteer paramedic in Kyiv the same month.

Ukraine's former defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov has offered to help the United States build a fleet of attack drones if Washington sends Ukraine the Patriot interceptor missiles it needs to get through winter, he told the Financial Times. The idea is Fedorov's own proposal, not a deal, and he holds no government post that would let him negotiate one for Kyiv. He is in Washington mainly to raise American money for a fund that would both invest in Ukrainian defense-tech companies and build new ones of its own.

Over the past year, Ukraine's partners have shifted from handing over weapons off their shelves to funding and co-producing Ukrainian-designed drones and missiles, inside and outside the country.

What the fund would do

Fedorov used his working trip to Washington to line up venture funds, entrepreneurs and tech companies as backers, Suspilne reported. The fund would not simply invest in existing Ukrainian defense-tech firms, he wrote; it would also create new companies around the technologies the front line needs most. He set out three targets: battlefield robots to replace soldiers in the most dangerous positions, jet-powered interceptor drones to bring down Russia's faster new attack drones, and cheap missiles that use artificial intelligence. He did not say what his own role would be, or whether he would profit. He said the next step is to assemble a team and launch the first projects.

Explore further

The Fedorov protesters lost. But they backed a man for what he built, not what he promised—and that may be new in Ukraine.

The interceptors behind the offer

Fedorov framed the drone help as a straight swap.

"I'm ready to make that trade," he told the FT.

Ukraine is running low on interceptor missiles for its Patriot batteries, one of the few air-defense systems able to reliably stop Russia's ballistic missiles. Fedorov declined to say whether he would meet anyone from the Trump administration.

Ukraine's ex-minister turns open critic

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy dismissed Fedorov on 15 July, after six months in the job. Fedorov said a feud with Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi, who he says blocked his reforms, drove the split, Zelenskyy removed Syrskyi on 21 July as protests spread. in an interview with Reuters published on 25 August.

"it looks as though we're gradually, slowly losing," he said in an interview with Reuters.

A NATO country's defense minister wanted Mykhailo Fedorov the day after Ukraine dismissed him. Fedorov, Ukraine's former defense minister, has agreed to advise Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto on defense innovation, he wrote on Telegram.

As deputy prime minister and digital transformation minister, Fedorov created the Brave1 defense-tech cluster, then ran the Defense Ministry from 14 January 2026 until his dismissal in July. The removal triggered nationwide protests through July, with demonstrators calling for his reinstatement.

Earlier, Fedorov refused every other post Zelenskyy offered, saying only the defense minister, the president, and the commander-in-chief truly shape the war.

"I thanked Guido for his personal support and for offering me the opportunity to serve as his adviser on defense innovation. In this role, I will help Italy develop modern warfare technologies," he said.

Crozetto moved within a day

The Italian minister said he called Fedorov the day after the dismissal and asked when he would come to Rome to work as an advisor.

Fedorov met Crosetto on the first stop of an international trip focused on digitalization and defense technology.

The focus stays on his own projects

Fedorov said his main focus is unchanged and that he continues working in Ukraine on his own projects to strengthen its defense and attract international resources. In the advisory role, he will help Italy develop technologies of modern war and adapt to new security challenges, he wrote.

The two discussed drones, autonomous systems, air defense, and the development of a defense-tech ecosystem. The future of defense belongs to countries that can quickly test and scale new solutions, Fedorov said, and Ukraine's experience could serve as the basis for a new defense model for Europe.

Earlier, the Ukrainian parliament approved Yevhenii Khmara as the new defense minister. During his first speech, Khmara made it clear that he would continue his predecessor's course — the technologization of the army.

He added that there "would be more Ukrainian weapons, and strikes would be more precise.

Serhii "Flash" Beskrestnov, advisor to the president on the development of defense technologies, has highly praised the recent personnel changes in the new Ukrainian commander-in-chief's staff. He says that Mykhailo Drapatyi is appointing the most competent people available to the Armed Forces' technical directions, adding that "after many years of war, he knows most of the army's technical specialists."

The endorsement comes from Beskrestnov, an adviser to former Ukrainian Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, considered the most effective in Ukraine's history. After the dismissal, he became a non-staff adviser to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The technology war moves weekly

Beskrestnov rates the new appointees on temperament as much as expertise.

"The main thing is that these new heads are energetic, modern, and good communicators," he wrote.

In a war of technologies, everything changes literally every week, and "we have to react to all the enemy's challenges just as fast. Analyze, forecast, respond, and act a step ahead of the enemy," he added.

Drapatyi arrived in the same reshuffle

Zelenskyy named Drapatyi commander-in-chief on 21 July, replacing Oleksandr Syrskyi, and said in the same address that he had offered Fedorov a leadership position bringing together Ukraine's technological capabilities.

Fedorov's removal drew street protests across Ukraine. Drapatyi commands the General Staff rather than the ministry, so the appointments Beskrestnov praises sit outside the structure he left behind.

Change will be slow, he expects

"I believe big positive changes are ahead of us, but this will not happen fast, because a great deal has to change," Beskrestnov said.

He did not name any of the new appointees or their posts.

Earlier, Beskrestnov disclosed Russia's new tactics in its drones. According to him, while Ukraine's cheap interceptor drones have been knocking Russia's nightly attackers out of the sky, Russia has now bolted a jammer onto some of its own drones to blind them.

Former Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov has confirmed that Kyiv had planned an operation against targets in Moscow. Recently, The Atlantic reported that at the beginning of 2026, Kyiv had planned Operation M&M’s, which involved using AI-powered drones against Moscow's airports to paralyze them.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy warned at the time that if any of the drones struck a civilian aircraft, Ukraine’s actions could be perceived as an act of piracy. Nevertheless, work on implementing the plan began.

Sources in the Office of the President have declined to confirm the organization of the operation in comments to journalists. However, former Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, who initiated the operation and whose departure from office led to the plan being shelved, did confirm it.

Why M&M’s?

In an interview with 24 Channel, Fedorov declined to explain the idea behind the operation, adding that it could still be implemented in the future.

But he provided details on the operation’s codename, saying journalists had misinterpreted it, as the plan had nothing to do with deploying a large number of cheap drones.

“That is a mistake. At a meeting where we were discussing fully autonomous deep-strike drones, I was handing out M&M’s to everyone. It was my birthday, and someone gave me a box of M&M’s. I shared them with everyone and said that we would call this autonomous-drone project M&M’s," Fedorov said.

What does the former minister plan to do next?

During the interview, Fedorov said he wants to create a venture fund to attract Western capital for investment in Ukrainian startups and developers.

“I have several priorities. One is cheap missiles, because I am convinced that they are the future of warfare involving artificial intelligence. These are inexpensive missiles that could be used to deter strikes and further escalation," he explained.

Another priority for him is the robotization of the front line and the deployment of sensors.

"We need to think about how to remove infantry from the front line. We need to robotize the front line as much as possible so that people do not have to spend months in dugouts under drone attacks," he said.

Opposition to the system

Fedorov also announced that he planned to travel to the US the following week, not to seek President Donald Trump’s support after calls for Ukraine to hold elections.

When asked whether he planned to meet Elon Musk there and continue their cooperation in some form, the former minister replied, “We’ll see.”

He said he did not yet know whether he would run for president or parliament, or, if so, which political team he would join, adding that everything would become clear only after it was possible to prepare for a vote.

The former minister also said that he was currently in opposition—not to any particular politician, but to the system.

“We are not talking about one person, or two people, or just some top officials. We are talking about hundreds of people who have simply become accustomed over the years to making money from the state budget,” he said.

Read also

• Ukraine mapped Russia’s Su-35 down to individual control units—and found 22 firms nobody has sanctioned

• The fifth fire at the same refinery this year—and Russia still calls it debris

• Ukraine destroys depot that occupiers filled with generators, after Russian state TV filmed them

Ukraine is asking Elon Musk to let it arm deep-strike drones with his Starlink network and turn them on Russian ballistic-missile launchers far inside Russia, the Financial Times reported. The plan needs Musk's approval — and US President Donald Trump was cool to the idea when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy raised it at the White House on 28 July, with people present expecting Musk to refuse.

Kyiv is chasing the workaround because its air defenses are stretched: Russia keeps escalating its missile and drone strikes, and Ukraine is running low on the Patriot interceptors that are its only dependable answer to Russian ballistic missiles. As Russia builds more missiles and drones, Ukraine's interceptor needs run into the hundreds before the year is out.

At the meeting, FT reported, Zelenskyy pressed Trump to lobby Musk for permission to fly Starlink-linked drones across the Russian border. He capped the pitch at 200 km into Russia — far enough to reach launch sites, command posts, and other targets — on the calculation that a shallower limit might make Musk likelier to agree.

Starlink could extend Ukrainian drone strikes

Riding SpaceX's satellites, Starlink drones hold a steadier link to their pilots at long range than ordinary radio allows, and they shrug off the jamming that grounds other drones. The drones have already shown their worth in the fighting at home, and Vienna-based military analyst Franz-Stefan Gady said that across the border they "could be very useful in hunting" Russian launchers, FT wrote.

Kyiv's best channel to Musk has also just closed: Zelenskyy recently fired his defense minister, Mykhailo Fedorov, who had a direct line to the billionaire.

Speaking to a Ukrainian podcast on 6 August, Fedorov said that even with a channel to Musk still open after his firing, he had made no progress on cross-border Starlink use—"a difficult task right now."

Explore further

The Fedorov protesters lost. But they backed a man for what he built, not what he promised—and that may be new in Ukraine.

Musk’s Starlink decisions have affected both sides in the Russo-Ukrainian war

Musk has backed Ukraine's heavy dependence on Starlink for military command and comms. In 2022, Musk declined to extend Starlink coverage for Ukrainian troops mid-operation near occupied Crimea, citing his fear of triggering a nuclear escalation.

He has also acted against Moscow: in February, at Fedorov's direct request, Musk shut down the Starlink terminals that Russian forces had been operating illicitly against Ukraine.

Now, Musk answered Fedorov's Monday post with a line about "trying to do the right thing" and wanting peace — and said nothing about the Starlink ask.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy allowed preparations for an AI-guided drone campaign against Moscow-area airports, The Atlantic reported on 20 August, citing two anonymous sources with direct knowledge of the proposal.

The reported plan sought to keep civilian flights grounded long enough to pressure Russia’s elite. Had it proceeded, it would have moved Ukraine toward large-scale autonomous strikes, raising questions under the laws of war about attacks without human confirmation. The Atlantic's disclosure follows months of reported Ukrainian attacks that repeatedly forced Moscow-area airport closures and sent increasingly large drone swarms toward the capital.

How the drone operation would have worked

Code-named M&Ms, the operation called for as many as 1,000 drones to fly toward Moscow-area airports each night and overwhelm Russian air defenses, one source said.

Onboard cameras would compare live views with preloaded maps and target images. They would also allow the drones to strike without pilot confirmation and to navigate without a remote-control link that is vulnerable to Russian electronic jamming, the sources said.

One source said prolonged airport closures were intended to pressure Kremlin-linked elites and push Vladimir Putin toward negotiations.

The plan was presented to Zelenskyy during the winter of 2025–26, The Atlantic reported. Preparations stopped after Zelenskyy dismissed Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, whom The Atlantic described as the operation’s mastermind, in July, both sources said. One source said another team could revive the project within about three months.

Both sources said Zelenskyy allowed preparations despite concerns that a drone could hit a civilian airliner. Planners proposed warning airlines, according to one source.

A Zelenskyy spokesperson declined to comment. Another unnamed presidential office official called the report “total nonsense,” saying Ukraine lacked long-range weapons reliable enough to strike the airports without posing undue risks to civilians.

Previous Ukrainian strikes on Moscow

The alleged M&Ms operation never launched, but other reported Ukrainian drone attacks repeatedly disrupted Moscow’s airports.

From 5 to 7 May 2026, restrictions imposed amid reported Ukrainian drone attacks delayed more than 450 flights at Moscow airports. Limits at Vnukovo remained in place for nearly 18 hours, EP reported, citing the independent Russian investigative outlet Agentstvo.

Earlier this week, Russian authorities claimed that 620 drones flew toward Moscow in one night, EP reported. The Atlantic placed Russia’s nationwide interception claim for that night at 791 drones. Ukraine’s military did not claim the attack.

On 19 August, veteran and civic activist Dmytro Koziatynskyi thanked everyone who had taken part in the month-long protests to bring back Mykhailo Fedorov, and said it was all worth it. Koziatynskyi was one of the organizers of rallies across Ukrainian cities demanding the reinstatement of Fedorov, the defense minister widely credited with driving Ukraine's military-tech overhaul, after he was abruptly dismissed on 14 July.

His firing detonated a month of protests because Fedorov was no ordinary minister: the 35-year-old reformer had exposed billions in defense overspending and built the drone programs many Ukrainians saw as their best chance in the war, so his removal read, to those in the streets, as the old system protecting itself.

Koziatynskyi's decision to end his protest came after Parliament voted 312 that same day to appoint Yevhenii Khmara as defense minister. Ukrainian President Zelenskyy did not meet the protesters' main demand: the return of Fedorov.

"It is a pity that we were never able to establish a dialogue between the authorities and society. I hope this issue will be resolved over time because, in my view, the lack of communication was the root cause of these protests," Koziatynskyi writes.

Explore further

Ukraine’s cardboard protests look like democracy working. In a war, that’s also the risk.

But the rallies may leave Ukrainian society with something that outlasts the outcome of one personnel decision, Anatolii Romaniuk, a political scientist at Ivan Franko National University in Lviv, told Euromaidan Press. The protesters lost: Parliament appointed Yevhenii Khmara as defense minister, not Mykhailo Fedorov. Yet the "cardboard Maidan," as the protests were termed for their abundance of handmade signs, may have revealed the beginnings of a broader shift in Ukrainian society. Romaniuk believes its significance lies in why people took to the streets: to support a politician not because of what he promised them, but because of what he had already done.

Actions, not words

Romaniuk believes Ukrainian society has long lived under what he calls a "political curse": large numbers of Ukrainians repeatedly bought into populist promises from politicians offering things that were simply unrealistic.

He points to every Ukrainian election from 2004 through 2019, arguing that the share of populist promises only increased. Experts could see that many of them were impossible to fulfill, he says, yet voters continued to support politicians who made them. Romaniuk points to a promise from the 2019 election campaign that Ukrainian wages would overtake Poland's—at a time when the average salary in Ukraine was around $400 a month, and Poland's was roughly three times that.

The 2026 protests may represent a change in perspective, he argues: people backed a politician not for what he said he would do, but for what he had already done.

Fedorov's signature result was an audit—in his first months, his ministry exposed roughly $7.2 billion (300 billion hryvnia) in defense overspending, and that figure became the movement's rallying cry. "The audit showed 300 billion in theft. They removed the auditor, not the thieves," read one cardboard sign in Lviv.

Explore further

“They removed the auditor, not the thieves”: why Ukrainians are protesting Zelenskyy’s reshuffle

The protesters were defending a record: open procurement built on the Brave1 marketplace, where frontline units order drones directly from certified manufacturers; a first competitive tender that cut 155mm shell prices by 16%; and, above all, Fedorov's bet on robotization—technology instead of manpower—that many Ukrainians saw as their best chance against a larger Russian army, a way to spend drones rather than lives. Fedorov was removed while he was implementing the reform, amid a conflict with then Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi.

"If this change in perspective continues, we will get out of the situation where we have become hostages to a growing wave of populism that would otherwise simply overwhelm us in the next elections. Because the degree, or the level, of populism in the 2019 elections was already very high. It was unrealistic," Romaniuk says of the protests' possible longer-term effect.

The protesters were "for," not "against"

Romaniuk sees another distinction between these demonstrations and earlier protests in Ukraine's modern history: previous movements were built around being "against" something. This time, the demand was explicitly "for" something.

"If we recall the events of the 2014 Euromaidan Revolution, and even last year's protests, they were 'against.' That is, they were against Yanukovych signing an agreement with Russia and refusing to sign the Association Agreement. They were against a decision made at the highest level in Ukraine to restrict the anti-corruption bodies," Romaniuk says, referring to former President Viktor Yanukovych, whose 2013 pivot away from the European Union set off the Euromaidan Revolution.

He argues that Ukraine has never before seen protests explicitly organized in support of a government official, making the Fedorov rallies a first.

At the same time, Romaniuk acknowledges the paradox: even protests framed as being "against" something almost always implied support for an alternative. In 2004, for example, Ukrainians protested the results of the second round of a falsified presidential election that had declared pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovych the winner over his pro-European rival, Viktor Yushchenko. But by opposing those results, Romaniuk says, they were also supporting democratic elections.

Explore further

Ukraine’s ousted defense minister took drone contracts away from the generals. Now they may take them back

The difference this time is that the "for" was clearly articulated. Protesters demanding Fedorov's return had an idea of the kind of Ukraine they wanted to see.

"In these protests, we have a situation where people are supporting the course pursued by Defense Minister Fedorov—the modernization of the army, changing approaches to warfare, and changing what the Ukrainian state should look like," Romaniuk says.

Dariia, a 22-year-old who attended the protests in Lviv, describes her reasons for joining them in similar terms.

"My motivation is to see changes in the country, to see justice, to see that young, progressive people who put technology ahead of human losses are leading us toward victory."

She says Fedorov was one of the people introducing reforms "from the very top of government all the way to the battlefield."

"And we really saw those changes," Dariia told Euromaidan Press. She credits Fedorov with the long-range drone campaign that has struck Russian refineries, defense plants, and Wildberries depots as far as Bashkortostan, some 1,300 kilometers inside Russia: "Our enemy finds ways to attack, and we must also search for new ways to respond. Fedorov, as defense minister, was the person finding ways to respond to these attacks, how to carry out deep strikes."

Explore further

Ukraine’s defense minister explained how the country buys weapons—after he was sacked

This year's cardboard protests could be a good start

Romaniuk cautions that it is still too early to speak of a change in Ukrainians' political culture. But he says he would like to see this episode become the beginning of one.

"I would like other people in power to also be judged by their results, by what they have done," he says.

A genuine pattern, he adds, could only be established if similar cases repeated themselves. For now, this remains one specific episode rather than a proven trend.

Dariia connects the rallies to her own experience of protesting more than a decade earlier.

"I remember the rallies in Mykolaiv in 2014 against the occupation regime in the east. Back then, it was five people with cardboard signs standing in the rain. My family was one of them. Nobody came out, nobody understood that position… It is nice to see that people in the south and east understand now," Dariia says.

One of Ukraine's most prominent drone volunteers has given his comments on the new defense minister. Serhii Sternenko, a civic activist and former adviser to ousted Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov, has congratulated Yevhenii Khmara on his appointment to lead the Defense Ministry, Sternenko wrote on his Telegram channel.

Ukraine's parliament confirmed Khmara as defense minister after removing Fedorov, and figures from his circle, rather than boycotting his replacement, are lining up to work with the new minister for Ukraine's sake.

Sternenko owns a charity foundation that has purchased 291,502 FPV drones, which have helped the Ukrainian military shoot down 12,954+ aerial targets.

Sternenko offered help and wished the minister endurance

Sternenko has framed his congratulations in terms of Ukraine's benefit.

"I wish Defense Minister Khmara success and resilience. He will need them. This is in Ukraine's interest," he wrote.

He offered his fund's expertise. Together with his team, he is ready to help the new minister with matters concerning FPV drones, because that, too, is in Ukraine's interest, Sternenko said, extending the cooperation of one of the country's largest drone-supply operations to the incoming minister.

He paired the welcome with a warning about dialogue

Sternenko's support came with a pointed caveat. He said the country "finally has a defense minister," but that many unresolved issues remain regarding "government-society" interaction.

Solving them requires engagement from the top, he argued. Their resolution requires the active involvement of the president and the emergence of agency in parliament, Sternenko said, expressing hope that, under extremely difficult conditions for Ukraine, "there will still be room for reasonable dialogue and cooperation for the sake of victory."

Earlier, Mstyslav Banik, who served as a deputy to Fedorov, said he would stay on under the newly appointed Defense Minister. He is responsible for carrying out the defense-procurement reform and became a deputy defense minister under Fedorov on 25 March 2026, having previously led the ministry's digital products. Batnik led the development of "Army+" and "Reserve+", the apps that digitized military service and mobilization.

A member of former Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov's team is moving over to the new minister. Mstyslav Banik, who served as a deputy to Fedorov, says he is staying on under the newly appointed Defense Minister, Yevhenii Khmara, Suspilne reports.

Khmara will propose that the core of the current Defense Ministry team stay in their positions. In particular, this concerns specialists responsible for procurement reform, according to sources from the ruling Servant of the People, per RBC-Ukraine.

Banik stays to continue the reform

Banik has run a central piece of the ministry's modernization. He is responsible for carrying out the defense-procurement reform and became a deputy defense minister under Fedorov on 25 March 2026, having previously led the ministry's digital products.

In 2025, he moved to the role of head of digital products at the Defense Ministry, where he led the development of "Army+" and "Reserve+", the apps that digitized military service and mobilization, before taking on procurement reform.

Khmara wants to keep the team

Banik is not the only figure Khmara wants to retain. According to reports, Khmara wants First Deputy Defense Minister Oleksii Vyskub to stay in his post as well, MPs said.

The priority behind the retentions is the reform's momentum. Khmara considers it important to continue the procurement reform, particularly the part connected to international support for Ukraine, MPs said, so keeping the specialists who built it preserves the expertise and the relationships with partners that the overhaul depends on.

Continuity amid a contested change

The retentions may temper a leadership change that drew protests. Khmara's appointment followed the removal of Fedorov, which prompted a month of rallies demanding Fedorov's return.

That the reformers are staying suggests that the change of minister need not mean a change in how Ukraine equips its forces.

Earlier, Fedorov addressed Ukrainians, saying the country cannot remain without a fully appointed defense minister, but at the same time called for mechanisms that would allow elections during the war.

Ukrainian activists who spent a month calling for the former defense minister’s return have criticized the appointment of his successor. People rallying in Kyiv's Mariinskyi Park for the reinstatement of Mykhailo Fedorov as defense minister greeted the news of Yevhenii Khmara's appointment to the post with disappointment, Ukrinform reports.

The rally caps a month of protests over Fedorov's dismissal. People have gathered on Ukraine's streets since President Volodymyr Zelenskyy removed Fedorov amid a logistics-lockdown operation against Russia and successful strikes deep into its territory. Parliament approved Khmara despite the protests.

"Shame!" protesters reacted to the appointment

The crowd met the appointment with anger. They began chanting "Shame!" and beating drums as the news of Khmara's confirmation broke.

They said that the post "should belong to another person" and appealed to the Ukrainian government: "We greatly respect Khmara, but please, do not hide behind Khmara," the activists said.

"We demand dialogue"

The protesters framed their grievance as a lack of dialogue with the president. They chanted slogans including "We demand dialogue," "Do not destroy our future," "Dialogue, not ignoring," "Fedorov instead of Khmara," "Power is the people," and "Power is responsibility," and said there was no dialogue with Zelenskyy on the matter.

Some held placards reading "Return Fedorov," "Against Khmara," "Thank you for Drapatyi, return Fedorov," and others praising Fedorov's record on strikes against Russia.

The protest continues

The activists announced a pause and the next step. After the news of Khmara's appointment, they said they were ending this particular protest and called on people to come to Ivan Franko Square at 7 p.m., saying they plan to hold such actions there daily.

The day before the vote, Fedorov addressed Ukrainians, saying the country cannot remain without a fully appointed defense minister, but at the same time called for mechanisms that would allow elections to be held in full during martial law.

He did not name a specific proposal or answer the question of who exactly should launch this mechanism, adding only that "democracy cannot be a hostage to Russia."

He also stated that Fedorov declared a "systemic crisis of governance" in Ukraine and criticized the influence of private interests on the parliament's work, effectively hinting that the current leaders are ineffective.

On 16 July 2026, protesters took to the squares in Ukrainian cities with cardboard signs bearing the same demand in various forms: to reinstate Ukraine’s Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov. The following day, protesters added a new demand: to dismiss Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Oleksandr Syrskyi. A few days later, Zelenskyy met the second demand—but not the first, which the protesters are still waiting on.

Since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, Ukraine has been under martial law, which necessarily restricts democracy in order to centralize governance. The country is not holding elections, citizens’ rights are restricted, and the military has become one of the country’s key institutions. Under these circumstances, the President dismissed one of the most important figures in the military at the demand of street protesters.

These centralizing tendencies of wartime rule could lead either to “strengthening democracy” or to “strengthening authoritarianism,” political science professor Anatolii Romaniuk told Euromaidan Press—and this year's protests, he argues, show that society is reaching for more democracy. Ukrainians recognize the cardboard-sign protests as an expression of democracy while also worrying about what such developments mean for a country at war.

“The fact that the authorities took the protesters’ demand into account is good,” Romaniuk says. He considers this an important element of political culture.

More than three weeks on, the protests continue—smaller than at their July peak but daily, from Lviv to frontline Dnipro, now under a broader call for "dialogue and reforms" in the defense sector. Fedorov himself has declined to lead them: he told the New York Times he will not go into opposition during the war or be "artificially dragged" into politics, and has turned down every post the president has offered except the one he lost.

We stood, we stand, and we will stand

Not every protester can fully explain every aspect of the issue, but they all recognize a sense of injustice and feel compelled to speak out against it, Ukrainian photojournalist Stas Kozliuk says.

Romaniuk sees these handwritten, highly individual signs as evidence of personal agency.

“This is a form of self-expression—of a person's identity, views, and position. To me, the cardboard sign itself is a powerful marker. Not a professionally printed slogan, because once perfectly designed placards start appearing at protests, it usually means someone has commissioned them,” Romaniuk says.

Do we know who the people holding cardboard signs at the protests are? Probably not. According to Ukrainian analyst Vadym Denysenko, no one really knows who these protesters are. He argues that no comprehensive sociological research has been done on either last year's protests or the current wave.

“Who are these people? Do they have a political program? What is their vision of the future? Ultimately, do they see themselves entering politics? These are basic questions. The answers would cost a few tens of thousands of dollars, yet no political force has been willing to spend that money,” Denysenko wrote on Facebook.

Twenty-two-year-old Dariia, who came to the rally in Lviv on 24 July, believes that the protests will not simply disappear.

“I think people will stay for as long as it takes, until Fedorov is restored to a position where he can genuinely influence the current situation,” she says.

Among the protesters at the 24 July rally in Lviv was also a woman holding a cardboard sign that read: “Swap the POWs, not Fedorov.” She came there with her husband and child.

“I am originally from Kharkiv. My father is missing, so first of all I was against Syrskyi. Now I am already satisfied. But now we need Fedorov, because he is ‘technology, not people,’” the woman said.

Explore further

Ukraine’s Gen Z protested for their anti-corruption agencies last year. Now they’re protesting for one man

Strength and risk at the same time

Russia has sought to exploit the protests for its own purposes. It seizes on the fact that Ukrainians hold different views on the protests, amplifies divisions in public opinion, and presents them as evidence that the country is becoming ungovernable.

Writing for Ukrainska Pravda, media expert Oksana Moroz argues that the Kremlin has attempted to weaponize public discontent through coordinated information campaigns.

According to Moroz, Russia relied not only on artificially generated TikTok videos spreading narratives harmful to Ukrainian society but also on Telegram. There, she says, “a classic network of Russian or pro-Russian bloggers” circulated posts aimed, among other things, at discrediting the demonstrations. These bloggers promoted claims that the protests were orchestrated and that participants were being paid to attend.

Some demonstrators have responded to those accusations with humor. Protesters voluntarily bring candy, cookies, pastries, and other snacks to share with anyone attending, joking that this is the “salary” they supposedly receive for protesting.

Military Ombudsperson Olha Reshetylova argues that “a sense of injustice in society cannot be bought, fabricated, or created overnight through a social media post. It is the result of accumulated and unresolved problems.”

Where the line has to be drawn

Opinions within the military are divided. Some servicemembers have openly supported the protests despite pressure from their commanders. Others believe demonstrations of this kind are inappropriate and harmful under wartime conditions, says Reshetylova.

“Many people around me today — including combat officers — see the cardboard-sign protests as infantile, detached from reality, and unacceptable while the country is fighting a war. Although I disagree with some of the protesters' demands, I do not share that view,” she says.

Personnel changes in the military should be made in consultation with the officers responsible for the country’s defense, says MP and member of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security, Defense, and Intelligence Oleksandr Fedienko. He emphasizes that this reduces the risk of weakening the country’s defense capabilities due to inappropriate personnel changes.

Despite his positive view of the protests, Romaniuk warns that such pressure is dangerous in a country at war.

“During wartime, changing the military because of protests rather than professional assessments carries obvious risks. In this case, things ended well. But as a mechanism, it is dangerous. Someone could organize demonstrations demanding the dismissal of any official. That is where the line has to be drawn.”

Dariia, back at the Lviv rally, voiced her own doubt about whether President Zelenskyy would meet the demand:

“The pessimistic question arises: are they feeding us these little crumbs so that we calm down and forget about it? Many older people, for example, my parents, think that they will feed us a crumb of honey now, and then start stealing the budget again.”

Ukrainians place the most trust in Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine's ambassador to the United Kingdom and former commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces, according to a nationwide survey the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) conducted between 16 and 31 July. Some 66% of respondents said they trust him, against 24% who do not—a net balance of +42%.

Close behind sits Mykhailo Fedorov, the former defense minister who previously led the Ministry of Digital Transformation and launched the Diia app. Pollsters recorded 63% trust and 16% distrust for him, producing the strongest net balance in the survey at +46%.

Kyrylo Budanov, head of the President's Office and former chief of Ukraine's Defence Intelligence, rounded out the top three. He drew 61% trust and 22% distrust, for a balance of +39%.

Zelenskyy ranks fourth

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy followed the three military and government figures, trusted by 56% of respondents and distrusted by 38%, for a net balance of +18%. At the opposite end of the ten-name list, former president Petro Poroshenko drew the weakest result—20% trust against 76% distrust, a balance of −56%.

The institute also flagged a rise in confidence in Fedorov as the standout shift since its May 2026 telephone survey, the only change it called significant.

Firm trust versus tentative trust

Sociologists further split the responses into "completely" and "rather" trust. Across the leading figures, roughly half—or fewer—of those expressing trust chose the softer "rather" option rather than "completely," the institute noted, a distinction it argued carries political weight.

Those who "completely" trust Zelenskyy mostly want to see him as president after the war—while those who "rather" trust him mostly want someone else.
— Kyiv International Institute of Sociology

KIIS interviewed 1,808 respondents using a mixed-mode design, splitting the sample evenly between computer-assisted telephone interviews and face-to-face tablet interviews on territory controlled by Ukraine.

For most of the war, a circle of generals decided which companies got paid to arm Ukraine. They named the suppliers, they named the models, and the money followed the list.

Then the defense minister Mykhailo Fedorov took that power away and made the companies compete on price and on how their weapons performed at the front. Three weeks ago, the minister was fired. Now, the people who did well under the old list are pushing to get it back.

What makes this more than a lobbying fight is that its two loudest voices agree on almost nothing else: Fedorov, who says he believes the overhaul cost him his job, and an anti-corruption watchdog who owes him no favors. Both say the reform may not outlast him.

What rides on it is real money, and Ukraine has little to spare. It now pours almost all its own revenue into defense, while the West covers nearly the entire civilian budget, roughly $50 billion in 2026. Every dollar lost to a rigged contract is one that never reaches a front already too short of soldiers to absorb the waste.

Explore further

Ukraine’s defense minister explained how the country buys weapons—after he was sacked

They describe it from opposite corners. Fedorov told Ukrainska Pravda on 30 July he believes his removal was tied to the procurement overhaul—the restructuring, he said, “sparked significant dissatisfaction” among powerful people who then leaned on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Fedorov is not a neutral witness: he has said he would take the job back tomorrow. He does not have to be neutral to be right about what he built.

Four days later, Tetiana Nikolaienko told Radio NV what the fight looks like from inside. Anonymous Telegram channels attacking one drone maker, then the next. Investigators searching companies’ offices. A loud public argument over which drones are overpriced.

These are not separate quarrels, said Nikolaienko, deputy head of the public anti-corruption council that watches Defense Ministry spending—they are the opening moves of a scramble to grab a bigger share of the weapons money, now that the man who set the rules is gone.

What the reform actually changed

What they are describing is the unwinding of one specific change. Fedorov took the power to pick winners away from the General Staff, which had named the exact companies and models the state would buy, and made the ministry buy instead on open competition and combat performance.

That widened the field of who could win a contract. It also cut the guaranteed business of the suppliers who had thrived on the old list—among them Fire Point, whose drones account for roughly 60 percent of Ukrainian long-range strikes inside Russia.

This is not a tale of one honest reformer against thieves. Fedorov’s overhaul was unfinished: only about a fifth of drone purchases were conducted through open competition when he left. And he had staffed the ministry with his own people.

Fedorov was not the spotless auditor the street protests made him out to be. But an unfinished reform can still be worth keeping, and the people fighting it are not fighting to finish it.

Explore further

Ukraine’s Gen Z protested for their anti-corruption agencies last year. Now they’re protesting for one man

What survives, and what leaves with him

What survives comes down to a plain distinction: what Fedorov wrote into Ukraine’s rules, and what was only his practice. The register of approved arms suppliers exists because of a government decree, and a decree does not walk out when a minister does. That part will most likely hold.

The part that made the reform actually bite was never set down that hard. The open competitions, the public figure showing how much buying was contested rather than quietly handed out, the team that enforced both—those were Fedorov’s way of running the ministry, not Ukraine’s law, and they are exactly what Nikolaienko says is now under pressure.

So Ukraine is about to discover that it built less of an institution than it thought. The paperwork stays, but the part that really worked walks out with one man, when Ukraine can least afford the loss.