La reconstrucción del gabinete de Volodymyr Zelensky es más caótica de lo que se pensaba

The reconstruction of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s cabinet has turned out to be more chaotic than anticipated, leaving two key ministries, Foreign Affairs and Defense, without confirmed political leaders just days after Russia's invasion. The situation emerged following the confirmation of a new government led by Prime Minister Serhiy Kyrychenko by the Ukrainian parliament on July 16. Under Ukrainian law, the previous ministers of foreign affairs, Andriy Sibigia, and defense, Mykhailo Fedorov, automatically lost their positions once the new government was approved. It was customary for new appointments to follow immediately, with expectations that Zelensky would again propose Sibigia for foreign minister and Interior Minister Ihor Klimenko would take over defense. However, due to negative reactions, these roles remained unfilled as the parliament waited for Zelensky to formally submit new candidates, a step he did not take. The situation created an unusual scenario where, amid ongoing war against Russia, neither the ministry responsible for diplomacy nor the one overseeing defense had a confirmed head. This was particularly notable in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Despite being officially removed from his position on July 17, Sibigia continued carrying out ministerial duties and met with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan in Kyiv. Shortly after this meeting, the parliament confirmed the new government, which formally ended Sibigia’s tenure. Within the ministry itself, there was confusion regarding who assumed leadership, especially since the role of deputy minister was vacant, leaving no clear figure to oversee daily operations. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Georgiy Tikhyy, was asked by Kyiv Independent who was leading the ministry after Sibigia’s departure, but no response was received. Officials within the ministry were expecting to learn later that day on July 17 who would temporarily assume the role of foreign minister. A similar situation arose in the Ministry of Defense, although for different legal reasons. On July 16, Zelensky announced that he had appointed Yevhen Kharchenko, acting head of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU), as acting defense minister. However, according to Ukrainian legislation, the president does not have the authority to appoint an acting defense minister. That responsibility falls to the Cabinet of Ministers. A day later, Zelensky appeared to acknowledge a legal issue, stating he had discussed with Prime Minister Kyrychenko who should temporarily lead both the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, effectively confirming that his earlier announcement regarding Kharchenko was premature. Until the Cabinet of Ministers makes an official decision, the Ministry of Defense is legally managed by Deputy Minister of Defense Oleksiy Vischynsky, who previously served as the deputy minister. The uncertainty surrounding these two critical ministries occurred as part of a broader restructuring of the Ukrainian government, whose purpose Zelensky has yet to explain fully. Parliament members were not surprised by the replacement of former Prime Minister Julia Timoshenko with Kyrychenko, whom the parliament confirmed on July 16. Zelensky stated on July 12 that Ukraine was changing its political strategy, though he did not elaborate further on the reasons behind the changes. To appoint new ministers of foreign affairs and defense, Zelensky must formally propose candidates to the parliament, which then confirms them. However, the parliament has concluded its last session before a planned recess lasting until August 18. At present, it is unknown whether lawmakers will be recalled during this period to decide on the new ministers. The lack of clarity around these key portfolios highlights the challenges faced by Ukraine’s government amid the ongoing conflict. With the country still engaged in active warfare, the absence of clear leadership in crucial areas raises questions about the stability and effectiveness of the administration. As the situation unfolds, the focus remains on whether the parliament will reconvene sooner than expected to address the vacancies and ensure continuity in governance.