Former head of the Lviv IT Cluster, Stepan Veselovsky, has been appointed director of Unmanned Defense Systems Ukraine LLC, the Ukrainian representative office of the Lithuanian defense company Unmanned Defense Systems.
Former head of the Lviv IT cluster, Stepan Veselovsky, has been appointed director of Unmanned Defense Systems Ukraine LLC, the Ukrainian representative office of the Lithuanian defense company Unmanned Defense Systems.
This is reported by AIN, citing data from the YouControl analytical system.
According to registration data, Veselovsky took up the position of CEO on July 31, 2026. In this position, he replaced Oleg Arshinets, who had headed the Ukrainian subsidiary since its registration in December 2025.
The change of leadership of the Ukrainian representative office of the Lithuanian developer is accompanied by a somewhat ambiguous situation. Oleg Arshinets, in a comment to journalists, stated that he was not familiar with the new director, and that he was allegedly put “before the fact” about his dismissal. ADS Ukraine lawyer Borys Karas explained that the decision was made at the general meeting of the company’s participants, adding that the media’s request was forwarded to the participants, but no response was received at that time. The parent company Unmanned Defense Systems and Stepan Veselovsky himself have not yet responded to journalists’ inquiries regarding the new appointment.
Unmanned Defense Systems is a Lithuanian defense technology company specializing in the development of drone swarm systems, ISTAR (intelligence, surveillance, targeting) technologies, and long-range loitering munitions (kamikaze drones) platforms.
In 2024, the company attracted €3.2 million in investments, of which €1.1 million was invested by top management (Vytenis Buzas and Ernestas Kalabuckas), and €1.6 million by the Coinvest Capital fund together with a syndicate of 41 business angels.
Recall that in January 2026, the Supervisory Board of the Lviv IT Cluster decided to remove Stepan Veselovsky from the position of CEO . The official reason for such a harsh step was suspicions of "possible abuse of authority" by the top manager.
