Between Hopes and Trials: A Journalistic Investigation into the Achievements and Failures of Poroshenko and Zelensky

Table of Contents

1. Introduction: Why comparing the two presidents matters
2. Prerequisites for Petro Poroshenko’s presidency
3. Achievements and successes of Petro Poroshenko
   1. Strengthening the army and defense capabilities
   2. Diplomatic successes and Euro-integration
   3. Visa-free regime
   4. Religious independence (Tomos)
   5. Economic trends and reforms
4. Failures and shortcomings of Poroshenko’s rule
   1. Corruption scandals and ineffective anti-corruption legislation
   2. Unfinished reforms and judicial problems
   3. Escalation of the conflict in Donbas and the Minsk agreements
5. Volodymyr Zelensky: the road to presidency
6. Achievements and successes of Volodymyr Zelensky
   1. Communication with the people and a new political style
   2. Parliamentary majority of "Servant of the People" and legislative initiatives
   3. Foreign policy achievements and global support for Ukraine
   4. Attempts at de-oligarchization
   5. Defending the country and the situation with the full-scale Russian invasion
7. Failures and shortcomings of Zelensky’s rule
   1. Personnel policy and scandals within the team
   2. Anti-corruption challenges
   3. Delays in key reforms
   4. Information attacks and the influence of oligarchs
8. Who “signals” to the presidents: political and financial surroundings
   1. Oligarchs and large business groups
   2. Western partners and the IMF
   3. Civil society and the volunteer movement
9. Comparing the presidencies: main lessons for Ukraine
10. Conclusion: Future challenges and prospects

1. Introduction: Why comparing the two presidents matters

Ukraine has undergone several dramatic political and social transformations over the past decade. After the Revolution of Dignity, President Petro Poroshenko came to power with a mandate to stop the annexation of Crimea, resolve the situation in Donbas, and implement important reforms to strengthen statehood. However, public support for Poroshenko gradually waned due to a series of scandals and unresolved problems.

In 2019, Ukrainians elected a new president—former showman Volodymyr Zelensky—who promised fundamental changes and “an end to the era of poverty and corruption.” Yet despite an early high trust rating, Zelensky soon faced numerous challenges: from oligarchic influence and economic issues to large-scale Russian aggression and corruption scandals within his own team.

This journalistic investigation aims to examine the key achievements and failures of both presidents, as well as identify who truly influences politics in the country and “signals” to its key figures. Its goal is to provide readers with an objective picture of the events that have shaped modern Ukrainian statehood and highlight the lessons we should learn from these two presidential terms.

2. Prerequisites for Petro Poroshenko’s presidency

Petro Oleksiyovych Poroshenko assumed power at a challenging time. The 2014 elections were held amid the Russian Federation’s annexation of Crimea and the start of military actions in Eastern Ukraine (Donbas). Blood was shed on the Maidan, society was extremely mobilized, and expectations from the new President were sky-high.

In the past, Poroshenko was a successful businessman (in particular, the owner of the Roshen confectionery corporation), served as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Thanks to his diplomatic connections and ability to negotiate, he was chosen as a “compromise figure” who could unite the country. His main promises: restore peace, strengthen the Armed Forces, steer Ukraine toward the European Union, and implement anti-corruption reforms.

3. Achievements and successes of Petro Poroshenko

3.1 Strengthening the army and defense capabilities

• Reforming the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU). Under Poroshenko, the Ukrainian army— in a dire state back in 2014—began to recover rapidly: funding increased, rearmament programs were launched, and equipment was upgraded. The army’s combat readiness began to improve.
• Formation of volunteer battalions. In the early months of the conflict, the creation of volunteer units was critical as they essentially “plugged the holes” on the front lines. Although many critics believe their role was underestimated, Poroshenko’s administration legalized them by incorporating them into the AFU and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
• International military assistance. Poroshenko’s diplomatic connections contributed to receiving support from Western partners—ranging from NATO advisers to the supply of some weaponry and military equipment.

3.2 Diplomatic successes and Euro-integration

• Signing the Association Agreement with the EU. Although the process began under Yanukovych (previous agreements), it was fully ratified during Poroshenko’s term. This agreement became the basis for deepening trade relations and political cooperation with the EU.
• Closer ties with NATO. Poroshenko aimed to enshrine the Euro-Atlantic course in the Constitution, a step positively received by the majority of society, though not all political forces supported such language.
• International pressure on Russia. Through active diplomacy, particularly in the “Normandy format” (Ukraine, Germany, France, Russia), Ukraine achieved a series of sanctions against the Russian Federation. This temporarily halted further Kremlin aggression, though it did not fully resolve the conflict.

3.3 Visa-free regime

One of Poroshenko’s most tangible achievements was the introduction of a visa-free regime with the European Union in 2017. This meant that Ukrainian citizens could travel to the Schengen Area visa-free for up to 90 days. “Visa-free travel” became a symbol of Ukrainians’ European aspirations and is considered one of the most notable “wins” of that period.

3.4 Religious independence (Tomos)

Another significant milestone was the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Orthodox Church of Ukraine, OCU) obtaining the Tomos of autocephaly. This step helped strengthen religious and spiritual independence from the Russian Orthodox Church. For many Ukrainians, the Tomos was seen as a historic breakthrough, though it sparked controversy in ecclesiastical circles and provoked outrage from the Russian Orthodox Church.

3.5 Economic trends and reforms

• Macro-financial stabilization. Together with the government and the National Bank, Poroshenko managed to maintain the hryvnia exchange rate after the collapse of 2014–2015 and stabilize the economy. Despite losing Crimea and part of the industrial capacity in the East, Ukraine’s GDP began to grow slowly from low levels.
• Budget decentralization. Implemented reforms allowed local budgets to retain a larger share of their revenues, increasing the level of accountability and potential development in the regions. However, not all communities used these additional funds effectively.
• Privatization and attempts to reduce the shadow economy. Some steps were taken to sell off state-owned enterprises, though there were no notable successes in large-scale privatization. Efforts to combat the shadow economy through transparent electronic tenders (Prozorro) proved partly effective.

4. Failures and shortcomings of Poroshenko’s rule

4.1 Corruption scandals and ineffective anti-corruption legislation

The biggest disappointment for many voters was the insufficient fight against corruption. Despite establishing the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP), and the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), high-profile cases against senior officials did not lead to widespread convictions or the systematic eradication of bribery. Poroshenko himself was embroiled in scandals involving allegations of lobbying for his own business interests, undermining public trust in the government.

4.2 Unfinished reforms and judicial problems

The judicial reform Poroshenko promised proved too slow and ineffective. Higher courts, including the Constitutional Court, remained under the influence of politicians and business groups. Numerous journalistic investigations showed the continuation of “telephone law” and politically motivated rulings.

4.3 Escalation of the conflict in Donbas and the Minsk agreements

Although Poroshenko was an active participant in the “Normandy format” and negotiated “Minsk-1” and “Minsk-2,” a lasting peace in Donbas remained elusive. Moreover, critics argue that Poroshenko underestimated potential risks or was not decisive enough in military counteraction, which led to the loss of territories and a protracted conflict.

5. Volodymyr Zelensky: the road to presidency

Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelensky is an example of someone who almost instantly went “from showman to President.” Prior to 2019, he was a well-known actor, producer, and comedian, heading “Kvartal 95” Studio. During his election campaign, Zelensky positioned himself as a “new face” outside of big politics.

The slogans “Let’s do them together” and sketches about corruption and officials greatly resonated with millions of Ukrainians, leading him to defeat Petro Poroshenko in the second round with a record 73% support. The public’s high expectations of Zelensky centered on quickly ending the war, eradicating corruption, and building a fair rule-of-law state.

6. Achievements and successes of Volodymyr Zelensky

6.1 Communication with the people and a new political style

• Openness and publicity. Early in his presidency, Zelensky frequently addressed citizens through video messages and social media, trying to eliminate the “wall of defense” between the government and the public.
• Format of “direct democracy.” One of his ideas was to hold polls and referendums on key issues, attempting to show that people directly influence government decisions.

6.2 Parliamentary majority of “Servant of the People” and legislative initiatives

• Single-party majority. For the first time in Ukraine’s independence, a presidential party secured a majority in the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament). This gave Zelensky a unique opportunity to pass laws without needing coalition compromises.
• Rapid adoption of laws. At the start of the new parliament’s work, several important laws were passed, including the lifting of parliamentary immunity, legislation on presidential impeachment, and the criminalization of illicit enrichment.

6.3 Foreign policy achievements and global support for Ukraine

• International coalition against Russian aggression. Under Zelensky, Western support for Ukraine grew significantly, especially after Russia’s full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022. Many EU countries and the U.S. provided extensive military and financial assistance.
• Strengthening relations with allies. Talks with NATO and the EU regarding Ukraine’s membership intensified. Ukraine received EU candidate status in 2022—another step toward potential full integration.

6.4 Attempts at de-oligarchization

One of the notable moves was the adoption of the so-called “anti-oligarch law,” which defines the criteria by which someone can be deemed an oligarch and limits their influence on media and politics. Although the law’s effectiveness remains controversial, it was the first systemic step aimed at reducing the role of oligarchic clans.

6.5 Defending the country and the situation with the full-scale Russian invasion

• Martial law and mobilization. After February 24, 2022, Zelensky demonstrated leadership of a nation at war. His decision to stay in Kyiv despite the risk of the capital falling boosted morale and became an important symbol for the global community.
• Diplomatic activity. Daily negotiations with other world leaders and speeches in parliaments and international organizations made Zelensky an influential figure in global politics. Ukraine managed to secure unprecedented military, humanitarian, and financial aid, which helped repel Russia’s offensive.

7. Failures and shortcomings of Zelensky’s rule

7.1 Personnel policy and scandals within the team

• Frequent dismissals and reshuffles. During Zelensky’s presidency, several prime ministers, defense ministers, and heads of law enforcement agencies have been replaced. Such instability raises concerns among investors and society.
• Scandals involving “new faces.” Some MPs from “Servant of the People” found themselves embroiled in high-profile corruption cases. Despite promises to “not cover up for our own,” practical punishment of such individuals does not always occur transparently or promptly.

7.2 Anti-corruption challenges

• Investigating high-level corruption cases. While some officials ended up under investigation, there have been few high-profile convictions. Civil society activists emphasize that the judicial system remains “rotten” and in dire need of substantial reform.
• Pressure on anti-corruption agencies. There have been repeated reports of political pressure on NABU or the SAP. Despite the new leadership of these bodies, effective cooperation with the Prosecutor General’s Office is often lacking.

7.3 Delays in key reforms

• Healthcare reform. Despite attempts to continue reforms initiated by previous administrations, the healthcare sector remains in a difficult state, particularly considering the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing military actions.
• Tax reform and de-shadowing of the economy. Businesses still complain about the absence of comprehensive tax reform. Although tax burdens have been simplified in some sectors, the overall system remains cumbersome.
• Privatization of state enterprises. The process is slow and often accompanied by scandals. Auction winners are not always determined transparently.

7.4 Information attacks and the influence of oligarchs

Despite the “anti-oligarch law,” large business groups continue to wield significant influence over the media landscape. Zelensky’s policies are subject to both internal and external information attacks, complicating reforms and creating an ambiguous public image of the president.

8. Who “signals” to the presidents: political and financial surroundings

8.1 Oligarchs and large business groups

• Under Poroshenko. He was often linked to Ihor Kolomoyskyi in the early years of the war (through PrivatBank and volunteer battalions), later to Rinat Akhmetov—especially in the energy sector. Although Poroshenko attempted to publicly distance himself from oligarchs, journalists repeatedly uncovered meetings between his administration and major business tycoons.
• Under Zelensky. The relationship with Kolomoyskyi, who owned the “1+1” TV channel featuring Zelensky and “Kvartal 95,” remains the most debated. Events have shown that the president did not always act in Kolomoyskyi’s interests, particularly regarding the situation around PrivatBank. Nevertheless, the influence of other major players like Akhmetov also persists.

8.2 Western partners and the IMF

Both Poroshenko and Zelensky had to consider the requirements of the IMF and international donors. On one hand, this provides vital financial support during war and economic hardship. On the other, reliance on external creditors forces unpopular reforms, including tariff hikes and changes in the tax system.

8.3 Civil society and the volunteer movement

Civil society activists, human rights defenders, and volunteers have a significant impact on domestic policy, often exposing corruption schemes or government abuses. They create public pressure, forcing presidents and the government to respond to high-profile issues. During wartime, their role only increased: volunteers supply the army, organize humanitarian initiatives, and monitor government spending.

9. Comparing the presidencies: main lessons for Ukraine

1. War and security. Both presidents faced Russian aggression. Poroshenko laid the groundwork for reviving the Armed Forces and exerting diplomatic pressure on the Kremlin, while Zelensky continued to bolster the international coalition and successfully repelled the first wave of the full-scale invasion.
2. Euro-integration. Poroshenko secured visa-free travel and ratified the Association Agreement; Zelensky achieved EU candidate status and strengthened relations with NATO. This is a natural continuation of the strategic course chosen by most Ukrainians.
3. Fighting corruption. Neither president fully delivered on their anti-corruption promises. Agencies changed their names and officials, but few top-level corrupt officials have been punished, and public trust in the judicial system remains low.
4. Economy and reforms. Both presidents pursued decentralization, tried to stabilize the economy, and worked with the IMF. However, reforms often stalled due to resistance in parliament, opposition from oligarchs, or lack of political will.
5. Political culture. Zelensky introduced a more open, media-driven style, whereas Poroshenko relied on diplomacy and military rhetoric. A common shortcoming remains the misconception that replacing people in power automatically guarantees systemic change.

10. Conclusion: Future challenges and prospects

The experiences of these two Ukrainian presidents teach us important lessons. First, without systematic and real anti-corruption efforts and judicial reform, even the most ambitious plans are bound to be delayed. Second, war and external threats require strong, independent institutions—from the army to law enforcement agencies. Third, a society that has paid too high a price for freedom and independence will not tolerate government inaction or manipulation for long.

Petro Poroshenko and Volodymyr Zelensky are very different politicians with different backgrounds and management styles. Yet both led the country during its most difficult times, trying to balance between domestic and external challenges. Their achievements must be preserved, and their mistakes acknowledged to build a country capable of defending its borders, economy, and citizens’ rights.

Ukraine still faces massive tasks: from fully restoring territorial integrity to building a sustainable European-style democracy. Regardless of the name of the next president, the main factor for success will not be the “new individual,” but rather the systematic, consistent work of state institutions guided by a clear strategic vision.

This investigation aims to show every Ukrainian that the president is only one factor in national politics. Only the combination of a clear state strategy, civic oversight, and everyone’s responsibility can transform crisis situations into a catalyst for development and the strengthening of Ukraine.