Analyses by Ukraine's previous Defense Minister discovered that some politically favored units were getting excess recruits and new weaponry despite high casualties and underperformance in achieving goals, while others, which exceeded expectations, were being starved for resources. That is now changing under the new Commander in Chief, as the need for more effective performance is taking precedence over connections. Many in Ukraine's traditional hierarchy are unhappy about losing control of budgets and power, but to continue to modernize its armed forces and keep morale high, these changes are essential - as they are in so many global organizations. JL
William Dixon and Maksym Beznosiuk report in the Center For European Policy Analysis:
William Dixon and Maksym Beznosiuk report in the Center For European Policy Analysis:
Armed forces do not resist new technology; they resist losing control over how resources are allocated and who decides. Personalities matter, but the confrontation is institutional. Fedorov’s procurement reforms did not just seek to modernize Ukrainian defense spending: they challenged the General Staff’s control over how personnel, equipment, and resources were allocated. After conducting a performance audit of Ukraine’s 120 brigades, Fedorov’s team discovered nearly 15% suffered disproportionately from poor leadership and high casualty rates. His solution: consolidate underperforming brigades and reallocate their personnel to competent and more effective units chronically short of manpower. The General Staff resisted. The breaking point occurred when the civilians tried to reassign technology-led units, only to find the military hierarchy prioritizing legacy formations, such as the 425th and 225thAssault Regiments, which persisted in high-casualty attacks.























