When Russian troops rolled across the border in 2022, it established a new contract between Ukrainians and their president. The existential need for unity was cemented by admiration for Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s courage, and recognition of his ability to articulate the national mood and rally international support.
Ordinary politics were suspended. Critics who were already suspicious of his populist instincts and centralising tendencies did not want to aid Russia’s cause. They understood that wartime could require a different mode of leadership. This informal contract essentially held despite growing concerns about the concentration of power, the role of Mr Zelenskyy’s right-hand man, Andriy Yermak, and the departure of popular figures seen as potential rivals – notably the military chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi, now ambassador to London, and the foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba.
It is Mr Zelenskyy himself who broke it by stripping independence from Ukraine’s key anti-corruption bodies this week – prompting the first significant protests since the full-scale war began, with thousands demonstrating in Kyiv and other cities. The legislation brought the national anti-corruption bureau and specialised anti-corruption prosecutor’s office under the prosecutor general’s control – allowing him to access case files and to oversee and even close investigations. Demonstrators were angered by the way these changes were rushed into law as well as by their substance. The suspicion is that allies of the president felt under threat from investigators.
The president, apparently taken aback by the reaction, has now approved a draft law that he said would restore the agencies’ independence. Those challenging him will want to see the details.
For many, this crisis is the culmination of concerns about his style of rule and the conduct of some of those around him. It also has alarming echoes of his predecessors. Protesters are not suggesting that he is a new Viktor Yanukovych, still less the “dictator” he is portrayed as by Russian (and Maga) disinformation. But a new generation has taken to the streets, as their elders did, because they value democracy. As the broadcaster Tetyana Troshchynska wrote: “The existential threat from Russia is greater and more intense than from corruption … [but] you can’t spit on those values for which, in fact, the fight is going on.”
The current US administration has no admiration for Ukraine’s anti-corruption investigators. That may have emboldened Mr Zelenskyy. But European partners do care – and have warned that this law has endangered Ukraine’s path to EU membership. The agencies were created in part to protect foreign aid and investment. And allies had already been disturbed by moves such as last year’s dismissal of the deputy prime minister for restoration, Oleksandr Kubrakov, who had impressed them with his commitment to transparency. It’s also worrying that the president tried to tarnish the anti-corruption agencies with talk of “Russian connections”.
Mr Zelenskyy has maintained strong support at home, boosted by Donald Trump’s bullying of him. His personal popularity has always been central to his leadership – too much so. But if that has prompted him to fully reverse course, that is all to the good. He should recover support at home and abroad not only by restoring the independence of anti-corruption investigators, but by taking heed of the broader lessons about the people’s justified expectations of their government.