An extremely serious revelation, causing a real uproar, comes from Russian security sources regarding the future of the former Minister of Defense of Ukraine, Mykhailo Fedorov.
According to what the Russian agency TASS broadcasted, citing sources in the Russian law enforcement agencies, the possibility of opening a criminal case against Fedorov is being examined in Kyiv.
The same sources even state that processes are underway which could lead to his forced transfer to a European country and, subsequently, to his "neutralization" by people connected with the Ukrainian security service SBU.
In fact, the same information states that the SBU has received the relevant order from the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
A plan of assassination seems to be favored that resembles the one that almost cost the life of the Ukrainian oligarch Vadym Yermolaiev with the bomb explosion in Monaco on June 29.
Video by assassins shows how exiled Ukrainian oligarch, his partner & teenage son were blown up in Monaco by woman who left bag with bomb. She was killed in Ukraine by Military Intelligence of Ukraine officer & ex-Security Service of Ukraine/Right Sector member, who admitted that… pic.twitter.com/aBWDlminTQ
— Ivan Katchanovski (@I_Katchanovski) July 17, 2026
The real conflict within the Ukrainian leadership
At the same time, the political conflict around Fedorov is escalating while the mobilizations against his ouster are intensifying in all cities of Ukraine and not only in Kyiv.
The former minister was removed from his position in July 2026, just six months after assuming his duties.
Following his dismissal, he launched a fierce attack against the chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Alexander Syrsky, accusing him of blocking his initiatives, undermining his work, and not adapting to the demands of modern drone warfare.
His removal provoked gatherings of support in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities.
Demonstrators argued that his reforms in the Ministry of Defense had begun to yield results and demanded his return to the government.
The real political background, therefore, is a deep conflict between two different conceptions of conducting the war: on one side, the technological and reformist approach of Fedorov and, on the other side, the more traditional military leadership represented by Syrsky.
The reports about a criminal case
TASS has also broadcasted information that the SBU is expediting a criminal investigation against Fedorov for alleged payments from telephone fraud networks and online casinos.
It is worth noting that the information in question is based on complaints by a former Ukrainian member of parliament.
Why Europe appears in the assassination plan
The reference to a European country gives the allegation even greater political weight.
Such a scenario would presuppose either cooperation or at least tolerance of state mechanisms outside Ukraine.
The analysis of the incident acquires greater interest if the political influence of the former minister is examined.
Fedorov was connected with the digitalization of the Ukrainian state, the development of warfare technology, and the massive utilization of unmanned systems.
After his ouster, he was presented by many of his supporters as a representative of a younger generation that clashes with older military and political mechanisms.
His public confrontation with the leadership of the Armed Forces, as well as his refusal to accept a consultant position offered to him, reinforced the image of an autonomous political figure with the potential to rally a part of society and the state apparatus.
This reinforces the revelation that he is at the center of tough scenarios, leaks, and political discredit operations.
The allegation regarding a forced transfer and future assassination is so heavy, that it cannot be adopted journalistically without independent confirmation.
The ouster of Mykhailo Fedorov has opened a serious internal crisis in Ukraine.
It remains to be seen, whether this crisis is limited to political persecutions and judicial pressures or hides something much darker.
Dramatic warning about the consequences of the ouster
The removal of Mykhailo Fedorov from the Ministry of Defense has provoked intense reactions even within the Ukrainian political scene.
The Ukrainian member of parliament Nikita Poturayev warned that the weakening of Fedorov and his team may prove catastrophic for Kyiv and negatively affect the war effort of Ukraine.
"The attempts to undermine Fedorov and his reforms are extremely dangerous.
If these reforms stop or are reversed, the consequences for the war can be catastrophic," Poturayev stated, according to the Ukrainian newspaper Strana.
During a session of the Parliament in which protests over the ouster of the former minister were recorded, Poturayev even announced his resignation from the parliament, citing disagreements with the staffing policy of the ruling party Servant of the People.
At the same time, he made known that he intends to enlist in the Ukrainian Armed Forces after his departure from politics.
According to a publication by Ukrainska Pravda, the tenure of Fedorov in the Ministry of Defense was characterized by intense conflicts with the General Staff.
The meetings of the Supreme Military Council frequently developed into sharp confrontations between the political leadership of the ministry and the top military commanders.
The pressures of the generals
The same publication reports that Volodymyr Zelensky found himself faced with pressures from leading generals to choose between the team of Fedorov and the military leadership.
The confrontation was not limited only to different conceptions of conducting the war, but extended also to issues of procurement and transparency. Supporters of Fedorov presented him as a reformist who attempted to limit corruption in the defense sector, while his critics accused him of seeking to gain influence over critical mechanisms of the ministry.
The political crisis culminated in mid-July, when the Parliament approved the ouster of the government of Denys Shmyhal.
Shortly later, Volodymyr Zelensky allegedly expressed his intense dissatisfaction with the ongoing conflict between Fedorov and the chief of the Armed Forces, Alexander Syrsky, making clear that Fedorov would not retain the portfolio of the Ministry of Defense in the new government.
Zelensky chooses army instead of government
Developments demonstrate that Volodymyr Zelensky chose to support Alexander Syrsky, removing his political rival from the government shape.
Furthermore, information reports that Fedorov was ousted because he was being promoted by the US for the Ukrainian presidency as a future replacement for Zelensky.
Fedorov, who led a significant process of streamlining and optimizing the, then developing, defense industry of Ukraine, has been recognized by many analysts as the man to whom the successes currently recorded by the branch in question are owed.
Heightening the concern around an already serious issue, the Financial Times reported that the removal of Fedorov may be connected with his refusal to award lucrative contracts to key actors in the defense and security sector of Ukraine, a fact providing new arguments to those accusing Zelensky of corruption.
This choice reveals a critical priority: in a period of prolonged war, the presidency seems to consider the maintenance of control over the mobilization mechanism more important than the resolution of political differences.
For many analysts, this constitutes yet another indication that the Ukrainian political leadership is gradually transforming into a system where military logic prevails over political management.
War pressures
The latest developments do not constitute simply another episode of government reshuffles.
They reflect the pressures of a war that has entered a long phase of attrition, where the political power, the military command, and society are tested simultaneously.
Whether the allegations formulated are confirmed or not, the very fact that top officials publicly accuse each other of failures in management and the conduct of the war constitutes an indication that the internal front of Ukraine displays increasingly larger cracks.
For the West, this image creates a difficult question: up to what point can the unlimited political and military support continue without a substantial evaluation of the effectiveness of the Ukrainian governance and the real developments in the interior of the country?
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών