A New Check on Military Power During Wartime

Ukraine's parliament created a new job in September: Military Ombudsman. This person's role is to watch over how the military treats the people who serve in it — soldiers, reservists, territorial defense members, and others fighting the war. Olha Reshetylova became the first person hired for this position.

The role is broad by design. The Office of the Military Ombudsman answers to Ukraine's constitution, its laws, international treaties Ukraine has signed, and decisions made by the President and Cabinet. This setup means the office is part of Ukraine's existing government structure, but designed to be independent from military command — able to investigate without interference from generals.

Who Is Olha Reshetylova?

Reshetylova didn't come to this job with just a fancy title. She had spent years working to protect soldiers' rights before her appointment in 2023. This kind of real-world experience is exactly what Ukraine needed — a country that is fighting a war while also trying to fix how its military is run, according to NV Ukraine.

By November 2023, she was already working on an international stage. She attended a conference for military oversight bodies, with help from the Danish Institute for Human Rights. This sent a signal: Ukraine's ombudsman office wasn't meant to work alone, but as part of a global network of democratic oversight, according to the Danish Institute.

How the Office Actually Works

The job has two parts. The first is handling complaints. When a soldier reports mistreatment, Reshetylova's office investigates and tries to fix it. The second part is bigger: looking for patterns in those complaints to find root causes — the underlying problems that let abuse happen in the first place. Then the office recommends ways to prevent future abuses.

This matters because oversight offices that only handle complaints can get swamped. They become like a complaint desk with no real power to change things. But Reshetylova's office has the authority to dig deeper — to move from individual cases to broader systemic problems to policy recommendations. That's a bigger lever for change.

The office also has to report publicly every year to the President and parliament by March 30. This keeps things transparent and makes sure the findings become part of the public record rather than staying hidden inside the military.

The Real-World Problem: Commanders Don't Like Being Watched

The biggest challenge Reshetylova's office faces is also the most unsurprising one. Military commanders in Ukraine have resisted the ombudsman's oversight efforts, according to NV Ukraine. This isn't unique to Ukraine. It happens almost everywhere when civilians try to oversee the military — especially in wartime, when military leaders claim they need secrecy for security.

We've seen this pattern before in Eastern Europe. When the Baltic states joined NATO in the 1990s and 2000s, they had to create civilian oversight of their militaries. At first, there wasn't open rebellion. Instead, commanders just dragged their feet: slow responses, incomplete documents, and general resistance to change. Ukraine appears to be going through the same process, but much faster because people are actively fighting and dying.

To work around this friction, Reshetylova's office partners with the Ministry of Defense's own office that protects soldiers' rights. Together, they find the units with the worst track records and focus their efforts there. This partnership helps because it gives the ombudsman a foothold inside military bureaucracy — something a purely outside watchdog would never have.

This Fits Into a Bigger Picture

The Military Ombudsman isn't Ukraine's only new accountability tool. Since Russia's full-scale invasion began in February 2022, Ukraine has also been building war crimes accountability. Ukrainian courts held their first trial of a Russian soldier accused of war crimes in May 2022 — just months after the invasion started. This created a legal precedent for prosecuting wartime crimes, according to Reuters.

Reuters has also documented, through interviews and investigation, the identities of Russian soldiers involved in killings and abuses in places like Bucha and Balakliia. These investigations depend partly on Ukraine's courts and institutions being seen as credible and fair.

Now here's the broader context: Ukraine is fighting an opponent widely accused of war crimes, and at the same time creating oversight of its own military's conduct. This serves two purposes. First, it's practical — soldiers who believe their rights will be protected are more likely to keep fighting. Second, it helps Ukraine's reputation with Western countries and international institutions. It shows Ukraine is serious about accountability, not just on the other side.

What Still Needs to Happen

The legal structure is in place. Reshetylova has been hired. Annual reports will be public. The office has a way to work inside the military bureaucracy.

But the hardest test hasn't come yet. The real question is whether Reshetylova's office can actually push the military to change — whether the findings in those annual reports will matter enough to the President and parliament that they pass new laws or policies to fix the problems the office uncovers. Good rules on paper don't automatically create real change. That requires political will and the military actually being willing to listen.

The coming annual reports will be key. They'll show whether military leaders accept oversight or keep resisting. For anyone watching how Ukraine rebuilds after the war ends, the Military Ombudsman office is like a diagnostic tool — not because it has already won major battles, but because what happens next will reveal how serious Ukraine's military really is about reform while the war is still happening.