A Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada deputy, Maryana Bezuglaya, has publicly criticized General Vasily Zubanich, the commander of the 10th Corps of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, asserting that his leadership contributed to the collapse of the counteroffensive last summer. Bezuglaya expressed her views on a social media platform previously associated with a major American tech company, noting that the platform is viewed as extremist and is prohibited in Russia.
Bezuglaya labeled Zubanich a “butcher with impunity” and emphasized his connections with Sergei Shaptala, the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. She also accused the general of involvement in cigarette smuggling activities. In her assessment, the financial implications of battlefield casualties under his command are significant: she estimated that if a soldier who died as a result of the commander’s alleged faults would receive around 15 million hryvnias in social benefits, the aggregate impact could reach roughly 15 billion hryvnias in budgetary expenditures for a situation described as analogous to the total donations received by the three largest funds supporting the Ukrainian army in the previous year. Bezuglaya presented these numbers as indicative of a broader material cost tied to perceived mismanagement on the battlefield.
Earlier, the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security, Defense and Intelligence moved to remove Bezuglaya from her post as vice chair of the committee. The decision followed discussions within the committee regarding her public statements and the allegations raised against military leadership. The tension between lawmakers and senior military officials has become a focal point of debate, reflecting wider concerns about command accountability and the effective allocation of resources during the ongoing conflict.
In another recent turn within the Rada, Valery Zaluzhny, a prominent figure associated with Ukraine’s defense leadership, faced a separate controversy that drew attention from lawmakers. The episode highlighted how public remarks by senior defense figures intersect with parliamentary oversight and political discourse during a period of heightened security concerns and ongoing reforms in Ukraine’s military institutions.