Let me get this straight: Syrskyi and Fedorov didn’t get along, so Zelenskyy sacked Fedorov to keep Syrskyi, but is now about to lose him as well? That sounds less than ideal.
I’m more than a little suspicious the “grassroots protests” were potentially rooted in a Russian influence op - this sort of thing is their bread and butter. And I’m frustrated that the Ukrainian government may be caving - though I understand why, given the public momentum (regardless of its actual origins
) - on a matter of military leadership with very direct implications on strategy and tactics being used in the active defensive war they’re engaged in.
Syrsky has a preference for killing infantry in sensless assaults, and lying so he can look good (425-th recording video in Kostynatynivka saying that they’ve just completely re-taken the city in a facebook post and thanking him), and hypocrisy e.g. his recent order that said that soldiers should just shut the fuck up when ‘grownups’ are talking, followed by another order to record videos in his support. He has done good things obviously, but he is awful and anachronistic, and doesn’t want to change.
Russians would prefer Syrskyi though. Zelensky put him in charge because he became afraid of Zaluzhnyi’s popularity, so he exiled Zaluzhnyi to the UK and replaced him with Syrskyi.
Syrskyi has overseen vast reforms in how the AFU operates: Adopting a NATO style command and organization, adopting new drone capabilities as fast as he can get them, all while trying to hold off and fight the Russian horde.
Any organization has this kind of conflict between pushing innovations and technology, and trying to stay on mission where any failure means lost lives, both military and civilian.
Let me get this straight: Syrskyi and Fedorov didn’t get along, so Zelenskyy sacked Fedorov to keep Syrskyi, but is now about to lose him as well? That sounds less than ideal.
I’m more than a little suspicious the “grassroots protests” were potentially rooted in a Russian influence op - this sort of thing is their bread and butter. And I’m frustrated that the Ukrainian government may be caving - though I understand why, given the public momentum (regardless of its actual origins ) - on a matter of military leadership with very direct implications on strategy and tactics being used in the active defensive war they’re engaged in.
Syrsky has a preference for killing infantry in sensless assaults, and lying so he can look good (425-th recording video in Kostynatynivka saying that they’ve just completely re-taken the city in a facebook post and thanking him), and hypocrisy e.g. his recent order that said that soldiers should just shut the fuck up when ‘grownups’ are talking, followed by another order to record videos in his support. He has done good things obviously, but he is awful and anachronistic, and doesn’t want to change.
Russians would prefer Syrskyi though. Zelensky put him in charge because he became afraid of Zaluzhnyi’s popularity, so he exiled Zaluzhnyi to the UK and replaced him with Syrskyi.
Syrskyi is pretty awful though.
Who knows?
Syrskyi has overseen vast reforms in how the AFU operates: Adopting a NATO style command and organization, adopting new drone capabilities as fast as he can get them, all while trying to hold off and fight the Russian horde.
Any organization has this kind of conflict between pushing innovations and technology, and trying to stay on mission where any failure means lost lives, both military and civilian.
It doesn’t always work out.