War plan, mobilization reform, and reasons for dismissal: highlights from Fedorov's interview

“Shelter” has compiled Fedorov’s key statements from his interview with “Ukrainska Pravda.”

On the reasons for his resignation

Fedorov stated that he does not consider the conflict with the General Staff to be the real reason for his resignation. In his view, resistance to reforms within the Ministry of Defense—particularly in the area of procurement—played a key role.

According to the former minister, starting in April, pressure from law enforcement agencies and information attacks began to intensify around the Ministry of Defense.

He also stated that as early as this spring, he had warned President Volodymyr Zelenskyy about a possible smear campaign.

At the same time, Fedorov refused to name specific individuals who, according to him, were dissatisfied with the reforms.

On his conversation with Zelenskyy and Klymenko’s appointment

Fedorov said he learned of his dismissal about half an hour or an hour before the “Servant of the People” faction meeting.

According to him, it was the president himself who informed him that Igor Klymenko would be nominated for the position of defense minister. Zelenskyy cited a conflict with the General Staff as the official reason for the dismissal, but Fedorov did not disclose any details of their conversation.

On the Conflict with Syrskyi

The former minister denied having had a personal conflict with the then-Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskyi.

According to Fedorov, the disagreements concerned approaches to waging war, the pace of reforms, and management culture; however, the Ministry of Defense did not block any decisions by the General Staff during his tenure.

At the same time, he refuted Zelenskyy’s claim that he and Syrskyi did not communicate without the president’s involvement.

On turning down other positions

Fedorov stated that he did not issue any ultimatums to the president.

After his resignation, he was offered several positions—including some without his own ministry—but he declined them.

According to him, a deputy prime minister without a ministry effectively has no real tools to implement reforms.

On his relationship with Zelenskyy

Despite his resignation, Fedorov stated that he does not consider the dialogue with the president to be over.

He also said that he is receiving offers from foreign foundations and defense ministers, but emphasized that he has no plans to leave Ukraine.

On his own war plan

Fedorov stated that even before his appointment as minister, he had prepared his own concept for waging war, based on asymmetric actions and the maximum use of technology.

According to him, the plan consists of four areas:

• Air – building a small-scale air defense system and seizing the initiative in the air;
• Land – completing corps-level reform, reforming mobilization, and replacing personnel with technology as much as possible;
• Economy – “long-range sanctions,” combating the shadow fleet, and putting pressure on Russia’s economy;
• Cognitive Warfare – countering Russia in the information sphere.

Fedorov claims that there is a separate document containing a detailed description of this strategy.

On Mobilization Reform

The former minister stated that the mobilization reform was planned to be presented in July, launched in August, and was expected to significantly change the situation as early as September.

According to him, the reform entailed:

• a change in approaches to troop recruitment;
• fixed terms of service;
• new contracts;
• further digitization;
• reforming the work of the TCC.

Fedorov also reported that a meeting was scheduled for the day of his dismissal to launch the first phase of the changes.

He emphasized that the team had already been working on digital solutions for the mobilization system.

On Mobilization and Foreigners

According to Fedorov, the main problem with mobilization is people’s fear of dying.

He reported that the Ministry of Defense has opened the possibility of recruiting foreigners and expressed the view that, in the future, they could make up to 50% of the troops on the front lines or among assault troops.

He also noted that pay for assault troops and infantry has been increased to $7,000.

At the same time, Fedorov acknowledged that the team had made mistakes in communicating the mobilization reform to the public.

On Drapatyi

Fedorov stated that he supported Mykhailo Drapaty’s candidacy for the position of commander-in-chief and believes that Drapaty now has every opportunity to complete the transformation of the military that has already begun.

According to the former minister, the change in commander-in-chief has opened the door to implementing a new management culture in the army.

On Procurement and Tenders

Fedorov stated that one of the key tasks was to eliminate human influence on defense procurement.

He explained that the team sought to ensure that representatives of the Ministry of Defense or the General Staff could not influence the selection of tender winners.

He also claims that during his tenure, they managed to save about $100 million on just one tender.

On Future Plans

Fedorov stated that regardless of his position, he will continue to work on implementing his vision for the war.

According to him, he is currently assembling a team and considering various formats for his future work in Ukraine.

On media pressure

Fedorov also commented on the campaign of criticism that followed his dismissal.

As a reminder, after Mykhailo Fedorov’s dismissal, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy offered him the position of Deputy Prime Minister for Military Innovation, but the former minister declined, stating that he would only accept the position of Minister of Defense. In addition, Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto invited Fedorov to serve as his advisor in Rome.

Meanwhile, protests in his support have been ongoing for the 14th consecutive day in various cities across Ukraine. According to a poll by the “Rating” sociological group, 72% of Ukrainians opposed Fedorov’s dismissal, and he ranked third in the approval ratings for a hypothetical presidential election.