“95th Quarter” diplomacy: it is not entirely clear what function the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry currently performs

On March 29, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky stunned Ukrainians with his diplomatic statement for the second time in a month.

In his evening address, he said that he had made an important decision: to appoint the just fired NSDC Secretary Alexei Danilov as Ambassador to Moldova. According to Zelensky, Danilov himself told him about this vision of his future career, notes ZAXID.net. And Moldova is too important a state for Ukraine from the point of view of security in the region and bilateral interaction. Therefore, this is where Danilov belongs.

Vladimir Zelensky said something similar on March 7, when he shocked everyone with the announcement that he had sent former commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny as ambassador to the UK. Then the head of state also said that the general himself chose the further direction of his own work. And I had long dreamed of working in the diplomatic field. Therefore, the president listened to his wishes. And being an ambassador in London is an honor. And developing relations with Great Britain is in the strategic interests of Ukraine.

True, by the beginning of April we had not heard confirmation of Zelensky’s words from Zaluzhny himself. The retired general did not comment on his diplomatic appointment. He did not explain why he made such a radical decision - to go into a completely unusual field of activity. And was there even such a decision when no official information about the start of Valery Zaluzhny’s work in London has yet been received? And there are no rough guesses as to when Zaluzhny will finally begin fulfilling his duties as ambassador.

There is no information on the website of the Ukrainian Embassy in the UK that it has a new head. Not only that, but the site itself looks dead and inactive. There is no current news about the work of Ukrainian diplomats in this country. The last meaningful message is dated July 21, 2023. That day, a statement was released from the newly dismissed Ambassador Vadim Prystaiko, in which he announced his resignation, thanked him for his work and shared his emotions about his years of service in the UK. It seems that the Ukrainian Embassy in London remains as orphaned as it has been since July last year. This is difficult to understand given the country's importance as a geopolitical player and its role in supporting Ukraine. However, the fact remains.

Ukrainian diplomacy during Zelensky’s reign acquired unusual features. Professional approaches to the appointment of ambassadors have largely been replaced by incomprehensible, dubious motives. In part, diplomatic positions have become a tool to get rid of undesirables and send them away from Ukraine. They have partially become a reserve platform for retired, sometimes scandalous, controversial officials, whose work in Ukraine has many questions. And sometimes - a gift for those close and chosen.

Andrey Taran, Olesya Ilashchuk, Irina Venediktova, Alexey Danilov - this is a list of people who had nothing to do with diplomacy. They worked in completely different fields of activity. They demonstrated different results. But by chance or by decision of the Ukrainian authorities they became ambassadors. This list is far from complete. Perhaps Valery Zaluzhny will officially join this list soon. It is also unknown what the fate of ex-Minister of Defense Alexei Reznikov will be. He was also previously planned to be sent as an ambassador. It is likely that new diplomatic appointments are ahead of us of persons who have lost their positions in the government, central authorities or in the Office of the President.

The main reason for such personnel decisions is the leveling of the role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs headed by Dmitry Kuleba. Perhaps, if the relevant department had influence on who should be appointed as ambassadors abroad, such appointments would not have taken place. But mono-majority rule led to excessive concentration of power around the figure of the president. In fact, Ukraine during the time of Vladimir Zelensky turned into a presidential state. Although, according to the Constitution, it still remains parliamentary-presidential. Against this background, there was a significant limitation of the role of the government, which became subordinate to the Office of the President. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not escape this bitter fate.

A full-scale war finally cemented the shifting balances of power. The Foreign Ministry has become an appendage of Bankova. The office of the president took over the implementation of foreign policy. In particular, personnel issues in the diplomatic sphere. It is doubtful that anyone asked Dmitry Kuleba’s opinion about plans to send Zaluzhny, Venediktova, and Danilov as ambassadors. I consulted with the minister about who would be best to make ambassadors in one or another foreign capital. The same goes for the decision to dismiss the Ambassador to Great Britain Vadim Prystaiko. At best, Kuleba was simply informed.

Ukrainian diplomacy has become a victim of excessive monopolization of power. And it has largely lost elements of professionalism and personnel autonomy. In some ways, it now resembles the diplomacy of the era of European monarchies. Several centuries ago, kings and emperors arbitrarily appointed and dismissed ambassadors. Diplomats at that time were predominantly representatives of the aristocracy and the royal court. Professional diplomacy is already a creation of the new era. Sometimes it was an honor to be an ambassador. And sometimes it meant that a member of the nobility had fallen out of favor and the king found a way to excommunicate such a person away from his court.

To be honest, it is not entirely clear what function the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry currently performs. After all, all key negotiations with international partners, the development of agreements on so-called “security guarantees,” and the production of messages and statements on geopolitical topics are carried out by people from the Office of the President. The same applies to the issue of appointment and dismissal of ambassadors. It is unusual to observe how sometimes during negotiations with foreign politicians Minister Dmitry Kuleba modestly sits on the side like an ordinary secretary or translator. And in the center is a respected official from the OP. Perhaps the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be made a structural subdivision of the Office of the President?

Of course, we must pay tribute to Zelensky’s active diplomatic work in 2022, which brought important results for Ukraine. Then the emotional artistry of the Ukrainian president in speeches to foreign audiences and his persistence were converted into the necessary support for Ukraine. But now times have changed. But the government’s approaches are almost non-existent. It is impossible to build an effective foreign policy on the face of the president alone.

Dmitry Kuleba can say that after an interview with Zaluzhny, he became convinced that “the respected general has a soul for diplomacy.” Former sexologist Olesya Ilashchuk is absolutely suitable to represent the interests of Ukraine in Bulgaria.

And the appointment of ex-Prosecutor General Irina Venediktova as ambassador to Switzerland is “an influx of fresh blood, thoughts and views.” However, does Dmitry Kuleba really believe what he says? After all, Ukrainian diplomacy has not shown any breakthroughs recently. Perhaps it is better to pay attention to people with diplomatic experience rather than risk personnel experiments?