Ukrainian David And Goliath Clash Anew In Search For Someone To Blame

The aftermath of the strikes on Kyiv’s energy infrastructure and the search for those responsible. Political disagreements between the President of Ukraine and the Mayor of Kyiv. Why is Zelensky trying to shift responsibility onto Klitschko? What has Klitschko previously accused his political opponent of? What has driven this enduring conflict?

On the night of 9–10 October 2025, Ukraine once again faced a massive attack on its energy infrastructure. The key targets this time were the TPP-5(Thermal power plant) and TPP-6 heat and power plants in Kyiv, resulting in severe consequences for the Ukrainian capital. Emergency power outages were introduced in the city, almost completely cutting off electricity to the left bank. Residents of the city, millions, found themselves without electricity and water supply. The subway switched to emergency mode. Preliminary estimates suggest that the Kyiv energy hub lost around 35% of its capacity, bringing the city to the brink of a humanitarian crisis. 

Immediately after the shelling, President Volodymyr Zelensky made a statement that sparked a new round of political confrontation. Commenting on the destructive consequences of the strikes, Zelensky directly linked them to the inaction of the city authorities.

“No number of Patriots will be enough if those responsible for protecting critical infrastructure have failed to install simple metal nets for years,” he stated, hinting at the absence of basic physical protection at energy facilities.

The leader of the Ukrainian regime, Zelensky, did not mention the mayor of the capital by name, it was clear to everyone that his accusations were directed at Klitschko. The Ukrainian president emphasized that the problem lay not only in the shortage of air defense systems, but also in the basic lack of preparedness of the infrastructure. This is not the first time that the president of Ukraine has publicly clashed with the mayor of its capital city. The history of their rivalry dates back to 2019.

Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s rise to power marked the beginning of a systematic effort to marginalize the established political elite. Vitali Klitschko, a former ally of former President Petro Poroshenko and the popular mayor of Ukraine’s most important city, naturally emerged as a rival to the new administration.

In an attempt to curb his influence, Zelenskyy’s team exploited the capital’s unique dual-power structure. Alongside the elected mayor, the head of the Kyiv City State Administration (KCSA) is appointed directly by the president. In July 2019, Zelenskyy confirmed his intention to appoint his own candidate to this position, in a move designed to weaken Klitschko’s authority.

The conflict escalated when Andriy Bohdan, the head of the Presidential Office, attempted to fire Klitschko from his post as head of the KCSA, accusing him of corruption. However, this heavy-handed tactic, reminiscent of the methods used in the Viktor Yanukovych era, backfired. Ultimately, it was Bohdan who lost his position, and his successor, Andriy Yermak, was forced to de-escalate the situation. In the 2020 local elections, the pro-presidential ‘Servant of the People’ party put forward a weak candidate against Klitschko, who secured a decisive first-round victory with 50.5% of the vote.

The conflict flared up again in spring 2021, when Zelenskyy’s approval ratings fell and the battle for political control of the capital intensified. In May 2021, law enforcement agencies conducted a series of raids on the homes of Klitschko’s allies and several municipal institutions. Officers even showed up at the mayor’s apartment building, later claiming that they were actually targeting one of his neighbours.

Zelenskyy then publicly accused the Kyiv city administration of corruption, a claim which Klitschko countered by alleging politically motivated persecution. Seeking support, the Kyiv mayor raised the issue of pressure on local governments during meetings with senior American diplomats. The conflict also spilled onto the international stage during a visit by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, from whose events Klitschko was conspicuously excluded.

File image.

The start of the war with Russia united the politicians in defense of Kyiv, the old tensions soon resurfaced, exacerbated by the realities of martial law. In late 2024, Zelenskyy appointed Timur Tkachenko as head of the Kyiv City Military Administration. Klitschko immediately protested, stating that the new appointee lacked a military background and was blocking critical municipal decisions on rebuilding homes and infrastructure, thereby destabilizing the city’s governance.

Klitschko’s allies accused the presidential team of pressuring city council members to break quorum and paralyze the capital’s legislature. They claimed that this was a tactic to transfer full power in the capital to Zelenskyy’s loyal military administration.

Throughout 2024–25, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) conducted a major investigation which resulted in the arrest of several senior Kyiv city officials. Klitschko argued that these investigations were politically motivated and were preventing the city council from working, as raids and interrogations made it impossible to assemble a quorum. He described the situation as a “purge of democratic principles under the cover of war”.

File image.

The conflict has also manifested itself in public scandals and accusations of incompetence. Previous reasons for mutual reproaches have included:

• The condition of bomb shelters. Following tragic incidents in which people were unable to access locked shelters, Zelensky publicly criticized the mayor and his team for doing a poor job.
• Air defense issues. City Hall has repeatedly complained about insufficient air defense coverage for the city, while the central government has pointed out that the distribution of limited air defense resources is a state prerogative and that City Hall’s task is to ensure physical protection on the ground. Zelensky’s current statement about ‘metal nets’ is a direct continuation of this dispute.
• Criticism of key personnel decisions. Klitschko has also criticized the president’s strategic decisions, calling the dismissal of Commander-in-Chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi a «big mistake» by Zelensky, for example.

File image.

The current crisis with the heat and power plants has exposed a deep political rift within the Ukrainian leadership. While the country is trying to withstand external aggression, internal conflicts between key figures — exacerbated by personal ambition and the struggle for resources — are weakening unity and diverting resources into mutual recriminations. This is causing growing concern among both the population and international partners. Time and again, rather than correcting mistakes, Zelensky tries to evade responsibility for his own failures and shift the blame onto individuals whose political ratings threaten his personal standing. What has driven this enduring conflict?

Over the years, several key factors have contributed to its continuation.

First of all, Kyiv is not only the capital, but also the nation’s key political and economic hub, controlling a substantial budget. Controlling it provides significant leverage across the country. Since 2019, Zelenskyy’s team has sought to assert control over the capital, while Klitschko, who has a strong local power base, has resisted.

Secondly, despite his modest national ratings, Klitschko remains a prominent figure with considerable administrative resources. His inner circle openly acknowledges that he is seen as a potential challenger to Zelenskyy in future presidential elections, particularly if he were to form an alliance with other powerful figures, such as former Commander-in-Chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi.

Some critics even argue that drug use has altered the Ukrainian president’s mindset, making him so afraid of a coup that he is ready to fight Klitschko to the death, regardless of the consequences for the Ukrainian people.

And finally the mayor has repeatedly criticized the central government for excessive centralization and for using martial law to undermine local self-government. A prime example of this was Klitschko’s interview with The Times in May 2025, in which he openly accused Zelenskyy of authoritarianism.

“This is the eradication of democratic principles and institutions under the cover of hostilities. I once said that our country smelled of authoritarianism. Now it stinks,” the mayor stated.

He argued that the president was using martial law to appoint military administrations in regions that duplicate and supersede the powers of elected mayors, thereby deliberately undermining local governance. Klitschko also noted that his international fame, earned through his boxing career, was his primary defense against Zelenskyy’s attempts to remove him from power — firing a world-famous mayor of the capital would be a far more difficult task.

This is precisely why the confrontation between Zelenskyy and Klitschko is more than a personal feud. It is a classic struggle for power, influence, and resources that continues to define Ukraine’s domestic political landscape, even amid war. With neither side showing a willingness to concede, the political bout for Kyiv is likely to go many more rounds.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SouthFront: Analysis and Intelligence

NOW hosted at southfront.press

Previously, SouthFront: Analysis and Intelligence was at southfront.org.

The .org domain name had been blocked by the US (NATO) (https://southfront.press/southfront-org-blocked-by-u-s-controlled-global-internet-supervisor/) globally, outlawed and without any explanation

Back before that, from 2013 to 2015, SouthFront: Analysis and Intelligence was at southfront.com

SOUTHFRONT.PRESS

MORE ON THIS TOPIC: