Kyiv’s streets are rewriting Zelenskyy’s mandate

For the second year in a row, protests have taken over streets in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities, triggered by a decision by Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This year has seen larger and more sustained crowds ask whether he should be the person steering the country through this war and away from their Soviet-era past.

Last year, Zelenskyy signed a bill that ended the anti-corruption watchdogs NABU and SAPO. After protestors (Opens in new window) joined together under risk of Russian bombardment in the open, Zelenskyy relented. Those watchdogs would later uncover evidence of wrongdoing by close Zelenskyy associates, including (Opens in new window) his longtime chief of staff and senior advisor Andrii Yermak.

This year, protests have filled the streets (Opens in new window) over the firing of Mykhailo Fedorov. They do not threaten to remove Zelenskyy as President, but the streets can take away a leader’s mandate in Ukraine very quickly.

The war has produced a powerful, nationwide constituency that looks West and is invested in the new technologies being developed on the frontlines right now as both a way to turn the tide of the war and to introduce the country to the global economy.

Fedorov has become the symbol of this new economy. As Minister for Digital Transformation then Defence Minister, he became seen by the public as a leading figure in this transformation of Ukraine on the global stage.

Zelenskyy resolved a tension between these two factions of the Ukrainian defence apparatus by coming down on the side of Oleksandr Syrskyi, the Commander-in-Chief of Ukraine’s armed forces. Where Fedorov became the face of the forward momentum on both the battlefield and in global markets from 2025 onwards, Syrskyi is seen by the protestors in Kyiv’s streets as the leader responsible for the war of attrition that Ukraine settled into when he assumed command in 2024. This tactic may have been sustainable when it was the only option, but it has become untenable in a world where the drone program has shown there’s another.

The two men represent a generational divide. The 35-year-old Fedorov and the 60-year-old Syrskyi reflect a divide that last year’s protests also exposed: the possibility of a Western future or a step back into a system that Ukrainians are dying to escape.

To the protestors, many of whom have attended both in 2025 and 2026, there is little difference between the two years and two decisions by Zelenskyy. They are both choices about what version of the country would emerge from the war.

Zelenskyy’s wartime authority does not come from a 2019 election of a comedian in relative peacetime. It comes from the assumption by the public that he can see a route to victory. That belief has been reinforced of late with the victories both logistical and emotional supplied by the massive ramping-up of drone manufacturing. In Ukraine right now, despite the constant Russian attacks, it feels as though a future is now possible in a way that it wasn’t even two years ago. If the public starts crediting the drone economy itself for those victories rather than Zelenskyy’s judgement, his claim to authority erodes.

In Ukraine right now, legitimacy is conferred by the streets in the absence of ballots. Those decisions can move far faster than any election cycle ever could – as shown by Zelenskyy now considering (Opens in new window) firing Syrskyi himself. The pressure applied by these protests outlasted his decision entirely rather than just tinkering around its edges.

These protests have given rise to a constituency for a version of Ukraine’s future, one that is willing to meld civilian innovation with battlefield needs to make progress in the war and to provide an economic future. If Zelenskyy’s decisions become anchored to an older, more institutional model, that constituency will move to another politician.