The factional war within Ukraine’s political, military, and security elites is intensifying. And it is increasingly unfolding in public, albeit still underreported in mainstream Western media. The latest development has to do with former commander-in-chiefValery Zaluzhny,who hasaccusedPresident Volodymyr Zelenskyof ordering SBU searches of his office in 2022 as a means of intimidation. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU)deniesit. In any case, if true, why reveal this now? The timing is anything but accidental.
To read this article in the following languages, click theTranslate Websitebutton below the author’s name.
Русский, Portugues, Español, 中文,Français, عربي, Hebrew, Deutsch, Farsi, Italiano, 日本語,한국어, Türkçe, Српски. And 40 more languages.
Zaluzhny’s accusation surfaces precisely as discussions aroundelections, a possibleceasefire, and even a “land for peace” formula re-enter Western and Ukrainian debates. This is thus not a belated accusation driven by conscience, but more likely a political move in a struggle over succession, immunity, and narrative control. One does not survive Ukrainian elite politics by speaking out unless protection or leverage have already been secured.
This struggle is not limited to Zelensky versus Zaluzhny. It also involves the intelligence faction centered on lieutenant generalKyrylo Budanov,whose growing influence has alarmed both military commanders and oligarchic networks. Budanov has been Ukraine’s Head of the Office of the President since January 2, 2026, having previously led the country’s military intelligence (HUR). He also served in the Foreign Intelligence Service. Ukraine’s so-called “deep state” is a battlefield right now.
One may recall that frictions between Zelensky and Zaluzhny were already visible in early 2023, when Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Seymour Hershreportedthat the general had allegedly engaged in independent peace discussions with RussianChief of Staff Valery Gerasimov,bypassingthe President altogether. Zelensky, according to Hersh’s US intelligence sources, was regarded as a “wild card,” unreliable and increasingly isolated.
In fact, Zelensky is arguably a political survivor. In late 2023, there weretalksabout the West favoringAlexey Arestovichintrigues against the Ukrainian President, Arestovich being a former adviser to the President’s office, with intelligence connections. In 2024, Ukraine’s exiled opposition leaderViktor MedvedchuksaidZelensky could be ousted, having alienated allies domestically and abroad.
And yet the Ukrainian leader has managed to stay. Back in 2022, Zelensky openlydeclaredhis vision of Ukraine as a “big Israel”, meaning a heavily militarized, securitized state defined by permanent mobilization and internal surveillance. That was not mere rhetoric: it foreshadowed the consolidation of power, thebanning of opposition parties, and the further normalization of security-service intimidation: all of this in turn being the entrenchment of a process that began in 2014, with the Maidan revolution.
Thus far, Western capitals have turned a blind eye to these measures, out of geopolitical expediency, withEuropean Unionofficials discussing Ukraine’s accession (despite allcivil rightsissues pertaining to minorities). Be as it may, this tolerance is eroding. UnderPresident Donald Trump,Washington for one thing is clearly signaling fatigue with an open-ended proxy war, so as to be able to pivot elsewhere. The burden is increasingly beingshiftedonto Europe, which in turn now faces its own strategic anxieties, including tensions with the US itself over AmericanGreenland threats.
This changing external environment partly explains the renewed internal panic in Kyiv. Elections, peace talks, or a forced transition would expose unresolved rivalries, corruption networks, and extremist power centers that have been blatantly whitewashed for years (in the West), not to mention theirfar-right problem.
Source: Global Research
