Defense Minister Reznikov rumored to be tapped for new role – interview with MP Kostenko

However, according to Roman Kostenko, secretary of the parliamentary Defense Committee, discussions are ongoing on the matter.

Kostenko discussed who might replace Reznikov and whether it will benefit Ukraine in an interview with NV Radio.

NV: Reznikov may be appointed ambassador to London. His candidacy has already allegedly been asked about and even approved there. All this is happening after Vadym Prystaiko, the previous ambassador of Ukraine to the UK, was dismissed. Who will now head the Ministry of Defense? Kyrylo Budanov, the current head of Military Intelligence, is being mentioned. What do you think about these conversations? How likely do you think the whole thing is?

Kostenko: There is information that the Office [of the President] is looking for a replacement for Reznikov. We, as MPs, also have this information. It has been confirmed. And this is not the first week this has happened.

There is also information that Reznikov may be sent as ambassador to London, which has also been confirmed by several sources.

The main question, which you rightly ask, is this: who would replace Oleksii Reznikov in his post? There are a number of names being suggested. I’ve been hearing less about Budanov, first and foremost because he would not be able to take the post as an active-duty soldier. Recall that by law, only a civilian can be the Minister of Defense. And we on the committee have not raised any changes to this legislation. This question is therefore moot.

If the Office [of the President] wants to put Budanov in this post, they would have to pass a law that would allow this to happen. Anything else would be a violation of the law and unacceptable. If they nevertheless do so, it would be a violation of all the principles by which we have followed, and by which we are going to join NATO and the European Union. Therefore, the choice here is not good enough.

In terms of other candidates, the name of General (Oleksandr) Pavlyuk (Deputy Defense Minister since Feb. 14) has been voiced, but he is also a general, and changes must also be made to accommodate him.

I have also heard of the candidacy of Mr. Kubrakov, the incumbent Infrastructure Minister There are also rumors that perhaps [Minister of Strategic Industries] Kamyshin could be tapped. As far as I know, Kubrakov is now most likely under consideration.

But I assure you that many things can change in one or the other direction. Therefore, these are just names that are generally discussed.

NV: After the scandal arose regarding the prices for food purchases for the Ukrainian military, there were immediate calls for Reznikov to be replaced. Why then did he stay in his post?

Kostenko: Being Defense Minister puts one in a rather challenging position because your deputies are approved and appointed by the President's Office... I am not revealing anything secret or inventing anything. Anyone can tell you this. You come in as a minister, and they tell you who your deputies will be. Perhaps you can bring one of your own, but only if the Office of the President agrees.

One person will be responsible for purchasing food. Another will be for international affairs. Another will be responsible for information and communications. All will be appointed from there. And, of course, we understand that it is quite difficult to manage because the people who are appointed this way usually report primarily to the Office of the President, not to their minister.

At the same time, you’re dealing with foreign relations, which Reznikov managed quite effectively.

We remember how we were at the beginning: some countries gave us three thousand helmets for a war against Russia. There was no mention of lethal weapons at all. Others said: "Here are Javelins, go fight the ‘world’s second army.’ In March of next year, we will already have Western fighter jets, I hope. We have missiles with a relatively long range – up to 200 kilometers. And we had the “tank coalition.”

That is, we worked efficiently and actively on the international arena. Sure, maybe not enough. But at this time, we received as much as was possible from our partners. And now we have halted the Russian advance.

Therefore, I believe that Reznikov has done quite well in foreign relations. The fact that we have weapons now; that we have something to fight for; the fact that we have a systematic flow [of arms] is, in particular, his doing.

All these internal scandals… He certainly needed to control them. But there are many subjective and objective reasons that are now leading to his removal, and which led to these scandals, so now he will be sent as an ambassador to the UK.

NV: Do you think this is a settled issue? Can we say with certainty that Reznikov will no longer be Minister of Defense?

Kostenko: No. I remember that this question has already been asked. It was asked more fundamentally after the scandal. And then there was a question precisely because of those purchases. We remember the eggs for 17 hryvnias, when we gathered the committee, they told us. We looked at the contracts, and they explained them behind closed doors, as there were many questions. And, let's say, there are things that cannot be disclosed.

There are things that were done at the beginning of the war, and they were done right, from a moral point of view and for the defense of the country. But now, a year and a half later, sometimes those agencies that could not be found then (during the full-scale invasion, they were somewhere in the west of Ukraine, and some, apparently, abroad) start to wake up.

Of course, there are questions. And now some, particularly officials, are beginning to be held criminally responsible for the things that were done then. I say once again: there were things, perhaps, done incorrectly, from a legal point of view. But from a moral and security point of view, they just might have saved our army at that time. And here it is necessary to keep this balance in mind.

But we understand that this moral aspect is not in the criminal code. And when you are getting demands for high-profile prosecutions, you start looking for them, and finding them.

Is it 100% [that he will be dismissed]? I will say that I already have experience [working] in the parliament. I have already heard a lot of 100% options, which were then scrapped. And that's why no one can guarantee this 100%. But the conversations are quite lively.

NV: It is widely believed that Reznikov should bear political (at least) responsibility for what happened in his ministry. Anti-corruption activists report that billions of hryvnias were saved, not stolen. That this is a very big achievement. But to what extent does the fact that Reznikov may be removed from this position and sent away as an ambassador help us fight corruption? Does it help us as a society to show that we do not tolerate such things?

Kostenko: We know that the issue of sending ambassadors has become a habit in our country. We know that the Prosecutor General (Venediktova — ed.) became an ambassador. In the past, we had Defense Minister Taran, who in fact had many questions about him…who is now also our ambassador.

We must clearly understand: for what does there need to be political responsibility? If it is indeed the case that property was stolen, it has to be proven  by law enforcement agencies. I’ll note that this particular issue is being investigated by the State Bureau of Investigation and the Security Service of Ukraine. If there is evidence of this, then let's figure it out. And if a person is guilty, and he directly signed and gave instructions, then of course he must bear both political and criminal responsibility. Definitely.

Therefore, once again: we need to examine each case. If a person is really involved in the embezzlement of public funds, or if the person tolerated it, he should be held accountable. Not sent to be an ambassador, but sent behind bars. But I say again: only with good reason.

NV: The only question is why this investigation has been ongoing for so long. Either there is evidence that the person is not guilty, or there is evidence that the person should be held responsible for possible embezzlement. We are talking about the Ukrainian army, after all.

Kostenko: If this specifically concerns the contracts we are talking about (the eggs for 17 hryvnias affair— ed.), then as far as I remember, there were no contracts as such. Journalists discovered this as the point when contracts were being signed. We looked at them then, they showed us the mistakes in all these matters.

Therefore, of course, it is necessary to investigate. We are a society that does not tolerate corruption. But now, under these conditions, it is quite easy to go from ordinary issues that are clearly corrupt to blaming people for things that never actually happened.

Therefore, only investigations, I believe, can lead [to anything] and show results. Society has shown where the problems might be. Society has studied this and provided evidence. Now, law enforcement agencies have to prove all this and the person has to answer.

NV: Can you assess the risks of changing the person at the head of the Defense Ministry? Could this negatively affect what we receive from our partners, as it will take time for everyone to become acquainted again?

Kostenko: Undoubtedly, it will be necessary to get acquainted. First, it will be difficult for the new minister, no matter who they are – military or civilian. Because Reznikov has been in the loop since the beginning of the war.

Reznikov actually built this system, including the Ramstein system. And he is already there as himself. Even as representatives from other countries have changed, Reznikov has always been there.

And, apparently, even if the minister changes, then Reznikov would somehow be included in it, because his experience and his connections are very important at this point.

And having wedged a person in there... We will take anyone – Kamyshin, Kubrakov. With all their good qualities – whatever they are – but this involves the army, weapons, working with the Armed Forces, and the conduct of operations.

It involves communication with the military, with the generals, with U.S. CJCS Gen. Mark Milley, with the Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. These are military people, generals, with whom you need to speak practically the same language in order to understand what you need. Because sometimes you listen to civilians, even those who were great managers, and they don't understand basic things about the army. And this is important to a country at war.

So, of course, it will take some time for people to get used to it, until they get into it. And this, of course, will not be to our country's advantage while it is happening.

I think it was definitely agreed with our partners. I don't think that this decision — to remove Reznikov — was made exclusively by the President’s Office. There were undoubtedly a number of these scandals, including corruption scandals, which one way or another, even when the minister works somewhere else, would still hit the Minister of Defense equally, because it is his responsibility. These are his deputies. He is responsible for them.

I think that this is unequivocally a question of politics. In a democratic country, there comes a time when a politician in one or another position has exhausted himself, having done his best. He needs to be replaced. Perhaps, Washington agrees.

NV: Did I understand you correctly, that these conversations that Reznikov may be removed from the post of Minister of Defense are tied specifically to pressure from our Western partners? Why was this conversation reactivated? Why now? Why have we started talking again about what we discussed a few months ago?

Kostenko: No, I don't think so. I think the question was raised from the very beginning. Reznikov just kept working. Everyone understands the risks. And maybe someone has worked out a plan now.

At the same time, there was even a question of appointing Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valerii Zaluzhnyi as Defense Minister. Budanov or Zaluzhnyi. I don't know who came up with it, but this idea was put forth. We said that there needs to be a civilian Minister of Defense in our country, because they need to shape policy and communicate with other civilian ministers of defense in other countries.

Why has this come out now? There are many possibilities. It may have simply accumulated. Maybe there were requests from our partners. And maybe there are people in the Office of the President who want to appoint a new person, particularly someone less popular than Reznikov. Perhaps they want to knock down some negativity, because it is clear that there is lingering negativity after these scandals.