Volodymyr Zelensky remains the president of Ukraine because, under the rules of survival, there is simply no alternative. To look at his continued tenure through the lens of ordinary politics is to miss the fundamental reality of a state under total mobilization. The narrative constructed by outside critics that his expiration of mandate renders him a simple usurper collapses under constitutional law and domestic consensus. Yet, the assumption that his authority remains unblemished by a series of devastating internal scandals is equally blind. He is legitimate, but that legitimacy is no longer a blank check.
The wartime social contract in Ukraine has frayed. For the first two years of the total invasion, the public tolerated an unprecedented concentration of power within the bankova presidential administration. It was viewed as a functional necessity for national survival. That patience broke when corruption investigations penetrated the absolute inner circle of the presidency, culminating in the forced exit of Chief of Staff Andriy Yermak following an energy sector bribery scandal. To understand why Zelensky still holds the presidency requires parsing the difference between constitutional technicality and the raw, shifting ground of public trust.
Under Ukrainian martial law, holding elections is legally barred and physically impossible. Millions of citizens are displaced across European borders, hundreds of thousands are in trenches under active shelling, and municipal infrastructure is targeted daily. The opposition parties in parliament understand this reality. They do not demand an immediate ballot because a wartime campaign would fragment the state and open a massive vulnerability to external subversion.
The baseline of legal continuity remains intact. Article 108 of the Ukrainian constitution explicitly states that the president exercises power until a newly elected president takes office.
The Break in the Contract
The true threat to the presidency is not a legal brief; it is the corrosive impact of institutional impunity. When independent anti-corruption authorities exposed a massive kickback scheme within the state energy sector, it implicated the highest levels of the administration. The subsequent arrest of Yermak on allegations of laundering millions of euros shattered the illusion of unified sacrifice.
For the average citizen enduring blackouts and freezing winter temperatures, the revelation that presidential allies were allegedly profiting from energy infrastructure was a deep betrayal. This domestic anger was compounded by a simultaneous military mobilization scandal involving systemic fraud. Investigations revealed that draft officials were falsifying enlistment records, even adding deceased individuals to recruitment rosters to mask severe manpower deficits.
These failures forced a radical realignment. Zelensky was compelled to strip away his most trusted political managers, replacing Yermak with Kyrylo Budanov, the head of military intelligence. Budanov possesses immense personal popularity, often outscoring the president in trust metrics. This move was a calculated effort to borrow military prestige to reinforce a declining civilian administration.
The Institutional Tug of War
The crisis exposed a deeper structural fight within the state apparatus. Over years of reform driven by international partners, Ukraine developed a network of autonomous investigative bodies, including the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO).
[Presidential Administration] ── Attempts Control ──> [State Security Service (SBU)]
│ (Friction)
▼
[International/Public Backed] ── Supports ─────────> [Autonomous Bodies (NABU/SAPO)]
A silent war for institutional independence has played out between these bodies and traditional political networks. When the administration attempted to curb the autonomy of these agencies, it triggered immediate domestic pushback and street protests. The subsequent forced resignation of Vasyl Malyuk from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) highlighted the friction. Rumors persist in Kyiv that Malyuk was sidelined because he refused to block the precise investigations that brought down the president's chief of staff.
The domestic landscape has shifted from absolute deference to aggressive oversight. Independent journalists, civil society watchdogs, and anti-corruption agencies are treated by the public as essential checks on power, rather than disruptions to the war effort. The state has discovered that pluralism cannot be fully suppressed, even by the existential pressure of a foreign invasion.
The Limits of Compromise
Zelensky faces a dual dilemma. Internationally, he must maintain the posture of an absolute, unchallenged leader capable of delivering on security commitments during erratic shifts in Western foreign policy. Domestically, he must manage an opposition that is increasingly vocal about the concentration of authority in a single office.
Demands for a national unity government have moved from marginal commentary to serious political debate. Opposition figures and independent legislators argue that a coalition cabinet would spread political responsibility and repair the cracks in public trust. For a presidency that has operated with a single-party majority since 2019, sharing real executive authority is an incredibly difficult concession.
The current strategy relies on constant personnel rotation to absorb public anger. By sacrificing key loyalists and promoting figures from the security apparatus, the administration seeks to buy time and demonstrate accountability without changing the core power structure.
The survival of the current administration does not depend on a return to the peak approval numbers of 2022. It depends on whether the restructured state can manage the crushing realities of a war of attrition while maintaining a transparent baseline of domestic justice. The presidency remains legitimate because the state requires a center of gravity to survive. But the immunity from criticism that defined the early years of the conflict is permanently gone.
