Former Ukrainian Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov’s call for presidential elections during wartime has emerged as one of the biggest internal political challenges facing President Volodymyr Zelensky, although an election is unlikely to take place under the current circumstances.
Fedorov’s demand directly touches on some of Zelensky’s political vulnerabilities, including declining popularity, controversial decisions over key officials and corruption allegations surrounding members of his administration. After more than six years as a wartime president, Zelensky has also had to make numerous difficult and unpopular decisions.
Fedorov, a young reformist and technology expert who previously served as defense minister, is now calling for Ukrainians to be given the opportunity to vote.
“Democracy cannot be held hostage by Russia. We are fighting precisely because we want to remain a free European state,” he said in a nine-minute speech delivered shortly after a new defense minister was confirmed instead of him.
However, holding presidential elections during the war would be extremely difficult. Electoral experts say Ukraine would need about six months even in peacetime to introduce legislative reforms and put the necessary technology in place to conduct elections that meet European standards.
With no ceasefire or end to the war currently in sight, an incomplete or poorly organized election could create serious questions about the legitimacy of the result and provide Moscow with an opportunity to exploit political divisions.
The Kremlin has repeatedly argued that Ukraine’s prohibition of elections under martial law makes Zelensky illegitimate, while ignoring criticism surrounding the conduct of elections in Russia itself.
An election could also create further political instability in Kyiv. A losing side could obstruct legislative reforms and weaken the presidency, potentially creating what critics describe as a defeat from within.
Fedorov is known for his technological expertise, raising questions about whether digital innovation could make remote voting possible during wartime. However, even an advanced digital system would face enormous challenges.
Millions of Ukrainians are living abroad as refugees, while others reside in Russian-occupied territories. Thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are serving on the front lines, and many Ukrainians remain missing in action with their status unresolved.
There are also millions of elderly Ukrainians who live largely offline and could struggle to participate in a digital election. Organizing secure polling at dozens of consulates across Europe and other parts of the world would present another major logistical challenge.
For soldiers fighting on the front line, poor communications and the demands of combat could make voting difficult. Any system that failed to include significant groups of voters could immediately raise questions about the credibility of the result.
As a result, an election held during the war could become vulnerable to Russian disinformation and attempts to disrupt the electoral process. Europe could ultimately be left with either a rushed election that appears to endorse Zelensky or an incomplete transfer of power to another leader.
Current polling suggests that former Ukrainian military chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi and Fedorov could be among the strongest potential candidates. Both are expected to support Ukraine’s broader direction, but they could also seek major changes to the group of advisers surrounding Zelensky, whom some critics blame for poor decisions and alleged corruption.
Fedorov’s call also signals the emergence of a new force in Ukrainian politics. It is young, has experience in government and reform, and is increasingly reminding Ukrainians that Zelensky’s original electoral mandate has long been overtaken by the realities of war.
The position could gain support as dissatisfaction with the war grows. As Ukraine expands forced mobilization to replenish its military ranks, public frustration with both the government and military leadership could increase.
Fedorov’s argument also raises a difficult question: if elections cannot be held while the country is at war, when should they take place?
Ukraine faces another difficult winter, with Russia continuing to use ballistic missiles and drones while Kyiv struggles with shortages of air-defense systems, including Patriot interceptors.
Russia is also continuing its push toward its territorial objectives in the Donbas, while extensive drone attacks are making civilian and military areas increasingly difficult to inhabit.
The coming winter could also place greater pressure on Zelensky as efforts to revive peace negotiations continue. Washington, under President Donald Trump, is seeking to restart the peace process, while pressure on Kyiv to make territorial concessions could increase.
Zelensky has repeatedly said that Ukraine needs credible security guarantees to ensure that any ceasefire becomes permanent. He has also ruled out giving up Ukrainian territory.
Despite the political controversy surrounding his administration, Zelensky has indicated that he does not intend to remain in power indefinitely. In discussions about his future after the war, he has spoken about wanting to return to his family and enjoy a normal life rather than seeking power indefinitely.
At present, there is no straightforward mechanism for replacing Zelensky with another popularly elected president during wartime. His resignation would leave the speaker of parliament to take over temporarily, but that would also raise questions about democratic legitimacy.
Fedorov’s appeal therefore has the potential to weaken Zelensky politically, intensify questions about his electoral legitimacy and strengthen calls for an end to the war.
Moscow is likely to exploit the disagreement, while Trump could also use the dispute to renew his criticism of Zelensky, whom he has previously called a “dictator.” However, Zelensky is not legally considered a dictator, and Ukraine’s wartime electoral restrictions are tied to martial law.
Fedorov’s argument comes from a desire to protect Ukraine’s democratic values during the war. But the realities of the conflict make the implementation of those ideals extremely difficult.
Ukraine is already confronting severe challenges, including manpower shortages, limited air-defense capabilities, the possibility of increased Russian mobilization and another difficult winter.
The debate over whether Zelensky remains politically legitimate now adds another major challenge.
Fedorov is right that democratic ideals should not simply disappear during wartime. But Ukraine also faces the difficult reality that attempting to hold an election under conditions that make a credible and inclusive vote nearly impossible could itself undermine the democratic values the country is fighting to protect.
