Why "major rotation" of ambassadors stirrs discontent among the diplomatic community

The current wave of dismissals and appointments of Ukrainian ambassadors is unprecedented.

Never before have so ambassadors been replaced almost simultaneously.

This "major diplomatic rotation," already underway, is set to replace the heads of 40 Ukrainian diplomatic missions.

Most appointees are still awaiting agrément from the host countries, but the candidates have been selected. The list of approved candidates, first published by Dzerkalo Tyzhnia, quickly spread across Telegram channels and social media, sparking criticism, including from opposition politicians and journalists, despite several errors in the initial publication.

Read more about where the appointments face real challenges and where the issues are overstated in the article by Sergiy Sydorenko, European Pravda's editor – Diplomats without experience and troubling histories: issues of the 'major rotation' of ambassadors in detail.

The replacement of Ukraine’s ambassadors has begun and is indeed extensive. On 21 December, President Zelenskyy dismissed nine and appointed seven ambassadors. Alongside these decrees, the President approved at least 38 new ambassadorial candidates.

The appointments include ambassadors to 16 European countries (including Türkiye), two North American countries (Canada and Mexico), three postings to international organisations (NATO, the UN and multilateral bodies in Geneva), 11 Asian states (including China and Japan) and six African nations.

Such a large-scale filling of vacancies is commendable.

Some appointments though have left diplomats puzzled and even shocked.

The undisputed "headline maker" of this list has taken her position. That would be Olha Nikitchenko, Ukraine’s new ambassador to Lithuania.

Over the past few days, numerous diplomats have voiced unanimous discontent with this appointment, particularly over how, according to the diplomatic community, she secured this post in a country of utmost importance to Ukraine. More details can be found in the full article.

Nikitchenko is not the only appointee lacking the necessary diplomatic experience.

According to European Pravda, 10 of the candidates are not career diplomats but political appointees without substantial experience in the diplomatic service.

Criticism has also focused on the anticipated (and likely) appointment of Olha Selykh as Ukraine's ambassador to Oman. But several European Pravda sources insist she was selected earlier through a competition by former Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba.

It is essential to emphasise: a political appointee does not necessarily mean a poor choice.

Political appointees often become highly effective ambassadors, valuable assets to the diplomatic corps, and genuine finds for their country. There are plenty of successful examples of such appointments.

Still, over a quarter of "political" appointees among the entire pool of ambassadors is significant. However, many of the announced appointments are expected to yield positive outcomes.

For example, appointing Nariman Dzhelyal, Deputy Head of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, as Ukraine’s ambassador to Türkiye sends a strong message to the world about the importance of Ukrainian Crimea and the protection of its indigenous peoples.

Similarly, the selection of Alyona Hetmanchuk to lead Ukraine’s mission to NATO is a litmus test proving Ukraine’s genuine commitment to joining the Alliance.

The same applies to Yulia Fediv, who is set to head the newly established Ukrainian embassy in the Philippines.

However, concerns about Oleh Havrysh’s appointment to Norway turned out to be unfounded. This news, which alarmed many in the media, was incorrect.

The "major rotation" has also revealed other issues. Ambassadors learning from the news or a presidential decree that they are being replaced is problematic. But even worse is recalling ambassadors prematurely to appoint certain individuals.