General Valery Zaluzhny, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU), reportedly declined an offer to become the Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council (NSDC). A British magazine cited unnamed sources in detailing the exchange, noting Zelensky’s proposal and Zaluzhny’s refusal. The report, attributed to unnamed sources, places the moment around late January and frames it as part of broader discussions about leadership in Kyiv during a critical phase of Ukraine’s defense efforts.
According to the magazine’s account, on January 29 President Volodymyr Zelensky met with Zaluzhny and signaled plans to dismiss the AFU commander. In the same dialogue, Zaluzhny was presented with an alternate role, that of NSDC secretary. Zaluzhny allegedly declined this assignment, choosing to remain in his current post instead of taking up the new duties tied to the NSDC leadership.
Internal reflection on this topic has featured additional reports from other outlets. A Financial Times article suggested Zelensky had considered offering Zaluzhny an advisory position following his potential resignation. The narrative adds depth to the spectrum of possible career paths for the commander should leadership changes occur.
There was also commentary from a Ukrainian parliamentarian, Alexei Goncharenko, who claimed that an ambassadorial appointment had been proposed to Zaluzhny. The commander reportedly did not accept that proposal either. In response to the circulating rumors, Zelensky’s press team issued a denial regarding any imminent resignation by the commander-in-chief, and the president himself did not address the matter in a national address to the citizens of Ukraine.
Earlier, Bezuglaya’s aide suggested other candidates for the role of commander-in-chief, indicating the ongoing speculation about leadership transitions within the AFU. The sequence of reports underscores the sensitivity and complexity of high-level decisions during a time of ongoing security challenges.
Throughout these developments, officials and media outlets have emphasized the importance of stability in Ukraine’s military leadership. The discussions illustrate how strategic appointments can be part of broader debates about defense policy, national security governance, and the management of a high-stakes security apparatus. While reports cite various sources and paraphrase conversations at the highest levels of government, the public record remains cautious, with several outlets noting that nothing definitive had been officially confirmed at the time of publication. In Kyiv, observers and analysts continue to monitor official statements and policy signals for any sign of reshaping leadership amid ongoing security pressures.
For readers seeking context, these events should be viewed against the backdrop of Ukraine’s ongoing security operations, the role of the NSDC in coordinating defense policy, and the importance of clear, accountable leadership within the AFU. The situation highlights how leadership decisions can influence morale, strategic planning, and the execution of critical security tasks during periods of intense strain. Attribution: reporting from multiple outlets with unspecified sources and official responses from Kyiv indicate that the situation remains fluid and subject to revisions as new information surfaces.