Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which senior Kremlin officials were dismissed in Russia during 2025 and why?
Executive summary
Several senior Kremlin figures were removed, resigned, or sidelined in 2025 for a mix of reasons: operational failure (the head of the Russian space agency was removed after a failed lunar mission), political/strategic divergence from the Kremlin line (Kremlin deputy chief of staff Dmitry Kozak resigned amid reports he opposed the Ukraine war), and opaque internal politics that include allegations of corruption and “rotation” language from the Kremlin (space chief Borisov’s dismissal was called a “rotation”) [1] [2] [3]. Reporting also shows suggestive patterns — absences and demotions of senior diplomats such as Sergey Lavrov were widely reported and publicly denied by the Kremlin, indicating internal jockeying rather than formally announced firings [4] [5].
1. High-profile technical failure: space agency chief removed after moon mission collapse
In February 2025 the Kremlin dismissed the head of Russia’s space agency after what Reuters described as a “spectacular failure” of Russia’s first mission to the moon in 47 years; Kremlin spokespeople publicly framed the move as a “rotation,” but reporting tied the removal directly to the failed mission and a troubled tenure of less than three years [1].
2. A rare Kremlin resignation tied to dissent over the war: Dmitry Kozak
Dmitry Kozak, a longtime Putin confidant and deputy chief of staff, resigned in September 2025. Multiple outlets characterized Kozak as one of the few senior officials who had opposed the 2022 invasion of Ukraine; his departure was framed as noteworthy because Kremlin insiders who dissent rarely leave voluntarily and because his responsibilities were redistributed to other Kremlin figures [2] [3] [6]. Reporting notes Kozak’s relative absence from delegations and peace talks prior to his exit, suggesting his role as negotiator had become redundant amid the war [3].
3. Diplomatic sidelining and public denials: Sergey Lavrov’s absence and speculation
Throughout late 2025 there was wide media attention to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s absence from key meetings and from Russia’s G20 delegation, prompting speculation he had fallen from favour. The Guardian and Politico reported on the absences and on commentary that Lavrov “mishandled” contacts, but the Kremlin publicly denied any ouster and said Lavrov remained in post, signaling the Kremlin’s tactic of denying factional shifts even when personnel moves are visible [4] [5].
4. Broader pattern: punishments, demotions and rotations in the elite
Analysts from Carnegie and other outlets describe a broader pattern since the war began: what used to be “tolerable” behaviour for officials has narrowed, making dismissals, demotions, and even arrests more consequential and more frequent for senior figures — examples include demotions dating back to 2024 and the expansion of actions considered “unforgivable” [7] [8]. These commentaries place 2025 moves in a longer arc of elite management, not as isolated personnel changes [7] [8].
5. Mixed official explanations: “rotation,” operational failure, and alleged corruption
Official Kremlin statements often use bland bureaucratic language — “rotation” or “no complaints” — even when outside reporting attributes dismissals to failures or political disagreements. Reuters quoted the Kremlin saying it had “no complaints” about Borisov even as it dismissed him after the moon mission debacle [1]. Other reported removals in the broader state apparatus have been linked to corruption or administrative lapses in prior years, which informs how analysts read 2025 dismissals [1] [9].
6. What sources agree on — and what remains opaque
Available sources agree that at least two prominent, senior Kremlin-linked personnel departures occurred in 2025 — the space agency head’s dismissal (tied to a failed lunar mission) and Dmitry Kozak’s resignation (tied by reporting to his opposition to the war and to a loss of functional relevance) — and that Lavrov’s reduced visibility provoked speculation that was publicly denied [1] [2] [4] [5]. What is not found in current reporting is a comprehensive, Kremlin-issued list of all senior dismissals in 2025 or detailed, verifiable internal transcripts explaining political motives beyond public statements; analysts therefore infer motives from patterns of absence, reassignment, and Kremlin rhetoric [1] [3].
7. Competing interpretations and implicit agendas
State statements (Kremlin denials, “rotation”) aim to minimize the political signal of any personnel change, while Western and independent outlets interpret dismissals as punishment for failure or dissent and as signs of factional management. Russian state-linked outlets and Kremlin spokespeople emphasize continuity and normal personnel moves; independent analysts emphasize increasing intolerance for dissent and a trend toward punitive management amid a protracted war [1] [3] [5]. Readers should weigh official minimization against independent reporting that places these moves in a pattern of elite consolidation.
If you want, I can compile a timeline of the 2025 personnel moves cited here with direct quotes and dates from each source, or search for additional named senior dismissals in 2025 not covered in the current set of documents.