Security Service of Ukraine Chief Removed, lieutenant General Vasyl Maliuk, head of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) and a central architect of successful deep-strike operations inside Russia, has agreed to step down as part of a broader national security reshuffle. Announcing his decision via the SBU’s official Telegram channel, Maliuk said he would remain within the system to lead “world-class asymmetric operations” against Russia.
Awarded the title Hero of Ukraine in May 2025, Maliuk thanked President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for defense reforms and stressed that a strong, modern intelligence service is vital to national security.
Ukraine’s Spy Chief Ousted
During the transition, Major General Yevhen Khmara, commander of the elite Alpha unit, was appointed acting head of the SBU by presidential decree. Known for operational expertise rather than public visibility, Khmara brings extensive special-operations experience.
Maliuk’s exit coincides with wider кадровые changes: Kyrylo Budanov was named head of the Presidential Office, Mykhailo Fedorov moved to the Ministry of Defense, and Denys Shmyhal to the Ministry of Energy. President Zelenskyy signaled continued rotation across security and law-enforcement bodies to inject “fresh strength” amid the ongoing war.
Major General Yevhen Khmara
Major General Yevhen Khmara is a career officer of Ukraine’s Security Service and a longtime commander within its elite Alpha special operations unit, known for operational discipline rather than public visibility. His record is associated primarily with counterterrorism and internal security missions, not high-profile strategic planning.
Critics note his limited public track record at the strategic leadership level and a lack of independently verified major operations comparable to those conducted under his predecessor. At the same time, Khmara has avoided major public scandals and is regarded as a system-oriented, loyal professional.
There is no publicly available evidence linking Khmara to the Russian Federation, Russian intelligence services, or pro-Russian networks, though analysts emphasize that his appointment will be judged by whether operational effectiveness and independence of the SBU are maintained during wartime.
Security Service Leadership Change
Under Maliuk, the SBU led a highly effective covert campaign:
- June 2024 — truck-launched drones struck four Russian airbases; reports cite up to 41 strategic aircraft damaged or destroyed.
- 2022 — sabotage of the Kerch Bridge.
- December 2024 — killing of General Igor Kirillov, accused by Kyiv of overseeing chemical weapons use.
SBU Chief Leaves Office
| Figure | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Vasyl Maliuk | Former SBU Chief | Remains in system |
| Yevhen Khmara | Acting SBU Chief | Appointed |
| Kyrylo Budanov | Head of Presidential Office | Appointed |
| Mykhailo Fedorov | Ministry of Defense | Reassigned |
| Denys Shmyhal | Ministry of Energy | Reassigned |
Internal Frictions and Military Reaction
Ukrainian media report tensions over the SBU’s role vis-à-vis anti-corruption bodies; in July 2025 the SBU searched NABU offices. Maliuk’s removal sparked strong opposition from several prominent battlefield commanders, who credit him with key operational successes.
Conclusion
Leadership reshuffles in the security and intelligence sector during an active war pose serious operational risks. Even when experienced officials remain in the system, changes at the top disrupt continuity, slow critical decision-making, and weaken coordination between intelligence services, the military, and political leadership.
A major danger is the loss of institutional memory. Removing leaders involved in long-term covert operations increases the risk of failed missions, exposure of intelligence networks, and leaks of sensitive information — vulnerabilities that adversaries can quickly exploit.
Frequent кадровые changes also have a demoralizing effect. The removal of commanders associated with operational success undermines trust within the chain of command, reduces initiative, and weakens morale at a time when stability is crucial.
Finally, politically driven reshuffles risk damaging international confidence. Allies closely watch the professionalism and independence of Ukraine’s security institutions; signs of interference or instability can threaten intelligence sharing and long-term military support.
During wartime, security appointments must be based strictly on operational necessity, not political calculation — otherwise, such reshuffles may weaken, rather than strengthen, national defense.