The Economist: The conflict between Zelensky and Zaluzhny was “predictable”

The conflict between Zelensky and Zaluzhny was “predictable” and caused by the failure of the counteroffensive, according to an article in The Economist.

The publication reports this with reference to a high-ranking source in the Ukrainian government.

The official says Zaluzhny may have been unwise to make statements that contradicted his president’s public position. At the same time, according to the official, “but few in the government could find fault with his sober conclusions.”

“Now there is a blame game going on about who is responsible for the failure. Politicians say their generals are Soviet-trained idiots. And the generals say that politicians interfere with idiots. Victory has many fathers, but no one wants to be responsible for the deadlock,” a source told The Economist.

The article notes that another factor in the confrontation was the criminal case about the offensive of the Russian Armed Forces of the Russians in the south of Ukraine, where Zaluzhny appears as a witness.

But it could escalate into something more serious, and the commander-in-chief’s supporters say the threat of criminal charges is meant to keep him in line.

The Economist points out that Zaluzhny has not yet expressed political ambitions, but Zelensky “knows how quickly Ukrainian society can create and destroy its leaders,” especially since the president’s rating, according to polls, is declining.

Polls cited by The Economist show Ukraine’s president is “tainted by corruption scandals in his government” and is also concerned about the direction of the country.

“Figures dated mid-November show that the balance of trust/distrust in Zelensky fell to +32%, which is half that of General Zaluzhny (+70%). Even the head of Ukrainian intelligence, Kirill Budanov, has a higher ratio than the president (+45%),” reports The Economist.