COLUMN: Kyiv Takes to the Streets—The Anger Behind Fedorov’s Departure

“The Architect of the Drone Revolution”

Several media outlets, including Model Diplomat and Al Jazeera, refer to Fedorov as the “architect of Ukraine’s drone revolution”—a journalistic characterization, not a quantifiable fact, that acknowledges his role in the drone war since 2022 without constituting a definitive verdict. People don’t take to the streets for just any manager; they do so for someone they believe is irreplaceable.

The specific reasons cited by Zelensky have not been officially detailed: strategic reorganization, internal tensions—mere media speculation, never confirmed.

What the protesters are criticizing, what they aren’t saying

No direct quotes from protesters have been found or verified in the sources collected. It would be dishonest to invent an individual voice; it is more honest to acknowledge that this anger exists, without a specific face, as a reported fact.

This silence does not erase the reality of the gathering: a documented protest, without individual details.

A statement that changes nothing, precisely

On the same day, Kremlin spokesperson Peskov stated that this reshuffle would not change Russia’s position on the negotiations—a statement that speaks volumes by its lack of substance: Moscow has no interest in commenting on Ukraine’s internal affairs. Such calculated silence sometimes speaks louder than a detailed statement: Moscow is watching, biding its time, and not budging an inch.

This display of indifference does not imply ignorance; Moscow is simply choosing not to give this reshuffle any public weight. A Kremlin that comments sparingly affords itself the luxury of watching Kyiv flounder without ever having to justify its own actions.

293 civilian deaths in June, the highest toll in four years

This climate of protest comes as Ukraine enters its fifth year of war since the February 2022 invasion. The civilian death toll for June 2026 stands at 293, the highest recorded in four years. A country does not take to the streets over a minister simply out of loyalty; it does so because every political upheaval falls on a population with no reserves of endurance left.

The two events coexist without a proven causal link, but they share common ground: war fatigue that makes every decision more explosive than it was in 2022.

Fatigue—a word no poll here measures

No July 2026 opinion poll on support for Zelensky was found in this collection. This column refuses to cite a popularity figure absent from the sources. What does exist is the observation of concrete demonstrations on a day of parliamentary voting.

This lack of quantified data is a documentary limitation, not a gap to be filled with speculation.

“The new government’s first task”

Zelensky, quoted by Le Monde on July 16 and 17, stated that “Ukraine must be fully prepared to protect its population and see them through the coming winter”—“the new government’s first task.” Promising a safe winter to a country that has just suffered its heaviest civilian toll in four years is a big promise to make to a skeptical public.

There is no way to verify whether this winter priority will translate into concrete measures: it is a stated political intention, not an achievement already attained.

A New Government Under Immediate Scrutiny

The Koretskyi government is taking office in a climate where its popular legitimacy is already being indirectly challenged by the anger sparked by Fedorov’s departure.

The previous government, led by Svyrydenko, lasted only one year; there is no indication that this one will last any longer.

Fatigue Is Not Defeat

It would be a mistake to confuse this protest with a collapse in support for the war effort. There is no indication of a demand for surrender; the anger is directed at a personnel decision, not the war strategy itself. One can be exhausted by a war and still, despite everything, want to keep the man one believes is capable of winning it.

A weary nation that protests a dismissal is not giving up; it is demanding that its leaders justify every decision.

A climate that Koretskyi inherits without having created it

According to available sources, the new prime minister had nothing to do with the decision to dismiss Fedorov, but he inherits a climate of mistrust that he did not choose.

This is a recurring dynamic in times of war: newcomers pay the price for their predecessors’ decisions.

At first glance, July 16, 2026, did not seem to be a pivotal day. A parliamentary vote, an appointment, a few rallies in several cities: nothing that, on paper, resembles a major turning point. But that day revealed the divide between the institutional legitimacy of a 289-vote decision and the popular legitimacy of Fedorov, whose departure was enough to bring citizens out onto the streets.

No source allows us to say for certain where this anger is headed. What we can say—with the caution this situation demands—is that a country in its fifth year of conflict, with a record number of civilian casualties in June, no longer has the patience to silently accept every reshuffle decided at the highest levels. A public protesting over a dismissed minister—rather than for peace itself—may be saying this: the people do not want less war; they want an explanation as to why the men leading it are being replaced.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist