Vitaliy Dudin (Social Movement)
The reshuffle in the Ukrainian government has triggered heated debates. Many discuss personalities: whether Mykhailo Fedorov was an effective minister, whether he became too influential, or whether President Zelenskyy seeks to eliminate potential rivals.
These questions may be politically relevant. But they miss the deeper issue.
The real question is what kind of state Ukraine is becoming under the pressure of a long war.
Sotsialnyi Rukh has consistently criticized Fedorov's neoliberal agenda. His vision of the "digital state" has too often meant deregulation, outsourcing and weakening labour protections while celebrating Silicon Valley-style entrepreneurship. Workers have every reason to remain critical of this model.
Yet opposing neoliberalism does not mean supporting the growing political influence of the military command.
Reports suggesting that the Commander-in-Chief played a decisive role in determining the composition of the civilian government should concern everyone committed to democracy. Military leaders are accountable for military operations. Civilian governments must remain accountable to society.
The strategic debate goes far beyond one minister.
Ukraine faces two competing approaches to a long war.
One approach seeks to compensate for Russia's numerical superiority through ever larger mobilization, tighter centralization and procurement concentrated among a limited number of large defence producers.
The other seeks to compensate for Ukraine's demographic disadvantage through technological innovation, distributed production, competition between developers, rapid adaptation and extensive use of drones, robotics and digital systems.
For Ukraine, this is not simply a question of military doctrine.
Russia can afford enormous human losses. Ukraine cannot.
Every experienced soldier is also a worker, engineer, teacher, doctor or parent whose knowledge will be indispensable for rebuilding the country after the war. A successful defence strategy must therefore maximize Ukraine's technological advantages while minimizing unnecessary human losses.
This is not only a military necessity. It is a social necessity.
At the same time, technological modernization cannot become another excuse for neoliberal restructuring. The defence sector must serve society rather than private monopolies. Innovation should strengthen public capacity, decent working conditions and democratic accountability—not enrich a new generation of oligarchs or foreign investors.
Ukraine needs both democracy and innovation.
It needs civilian control over the armed forces.
It needs technological modernization without neoliberal dogma.
And it needs a strategy that defends not only the state's borders, but also the people who will have to rebuild the country once the war is over.
The future of Ukraine will not be decided by choosing between competing factions of the political elite. It will be decided by whether the country can defend itself while preserving the democratic and social foundations worth defending.