The Guardian view on Putin’s retaliation: what price will Ukraine pay for taking the war to Moscow? | Editorial

Ukraine’s audacious August incursion into Russian territory was a welcome fillip for national morale, and a message to foreign backers that Kyiv could still take the initiative after the disappointing counteroffensive of 2023. A more sober mood has now asserted itself with Moscow’s retaliation for the humiliation.

A strike on Lviv on Wednesday left at least seven dead and 53 injured, while another killed more than 50 people at a military training institution and hospital in Poltava the previous day. At the weekend, a 14-year-old girl was among at least seven people killed in Kharkiv when a bomb hit a playground. The Russian advance in eastern Ukraine also appears to be picking up steam, with tens of thousands preparing to flee . Losing Pokrovsk, a big logistics hub, would be a serious blow . There are also reports that Iran is expected to ship missiles to Russia “imminently”.

Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s long-awaited reshuffle this week , the biggest since the war began, recognises the public mood. The president said that the country needed “new energy”. No one is calling for elections. Ukrainians, though exhausted, continue to rally round the flag. Yet Vladimir Putin’s comment that the Kursk incursion had failed to slow Russia’s advance in the Donbas, and has weakened Ukrainian forces elsewhere, was meant not only to shrug off Moscow’s embarrassment but to underscore Ukrainian questions about the cost and wisdom of the operation. Russia’s advance started picking up pace earlier this year, but some analysts – and Donbas residents – believe it is picking up pace because of the Kursk foray, which seems to offer more symbolic than directly strategic gains.

The risky operation had the president’s approval. Mr Zelenskiy has pulled off many gambles – most obviously using his charisma and celebrity to catapult himself to the presidency, as explored in a new BBC documentary , The Zelensky Story. Ukrainian presidents have also had to contend with the power of oligarchs. The Russian invasion – and Mr Zelenskiy’s response – have transformed the position. National crises put leaders to the fore, but perhaps no other individual could have galvanised the domestic and international response as he did. Some concentration of powers is inevitable in wartime, but he also seems most comfortable running everything from a small team, as he did in his television days.

There were eyebrows raised when he sacked the immensely popular army chief , Valerii Zaluzhnyi, in February. This reshuffle is less dramatic but seems to strengthen the power of the inner circle, especially Mr Zelenskiy’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak.

Dmytro Kuleba, the respected foreign minister, is the highest-profile figure to step down, though he is expected to take another significant role. Separately, there are concerns about the dismissal of Volodymyr Kudrytsky , Ukraine’s energy grid chief, with two foreign board members blaming “political pressure”. Leaders under intense pressure are understandably prone to relying on trusted aides and allies. But people want to be confident that internal talent is being fully used when their country is faced with an immense, existential threat.

Mr Zelenskiy’s charismatic authority will be deployed to full effect when he travels to Washington this month to meet Joe Biden, a trip that is all the more essential given the uncertainty surrounding November’s US election. Ukraine’s allies must stand firm in support. Increasingly, however, Zelenskiy will have to manage politics at home as well as partners abroad.

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here .