Avoiding democratic suicide in Ukraine

Since Russia’s all-out invasion nearly two years ago, the world has been riveted by Ukraine’s courageous defense of its freedom across a massive battlefield and against a more powerful enemy. If Congress does not find a way forward on authorizing new support funding soon, America may well end up snatching strategic defeat from the jaws of victory. What we cannot forget is that most immediately it is Ukrainians who will pay the price for our failure.

But it is also time for Ukraine’s principal allies — the U.S., the European Union and Britain — to have a serious conversation with President Volodymyr Zelensky about Ukraine’s democratic backsliding. Doing so does not require congressional funding — it requires leadership and resolve. Ukraine’s people deserve no less.

The 10th anniversary of Ukraine’s “Revolution of Dignity” is also upon us. In the decade since Russia’s initial invasion, the people of Ukraine and its evolving civil society not only kept their country together when the state was shaken but also made tremendous progress in improving democratic governance, despite many structural and institutional maladies rooted in its Soviet past.

In 2022, Ukraine’s people and their institutions withstood the initial blow of Russia’s full-scale invasion in what seemed a near miracle. Despite the relentless violence inflicted on all its systems, Ukraine remains a fully functioning state.

Recently, however, as Ukraine’s society realigns itself to face the prospect of a long war and Ukraine’s politicians grapple with balancing the need to maintain unity with their own interests, the broad acceptance of the centralization of power and the manifold restrictions on public debate appears to have diminished significantly. But this shift is yet to be met with a change in approach by Zelenskyy and his administration.

The strong centralization impetus of the initial stages of the war was also accepted by Ukraine’s partners as a necessary evil for the sake of the war effort. But recent developments — such as unacceptable pressure on independent media and­­­ the failure to develop improved mobilization legislation in a timely manner to enable Ukraine’s defense forces to “hold and build” this year — suggest that the failures of governance that Zelenskyy’s administration was experiencing prior to the full-scale invasion have not been overcome.

At this stage, it is not an option, either morally or strategically, to stand aside while the impulse of war erodes Ukraine’s budding democracy. This is why U.S. and E.U. support — strong, structured and focused — is both critical and urgent. To avoid this trap of war, the reempowerment of the constitutional institutions of the state, civil society organizations and the free media is imperative.

A place to start would be the all-powerful Office of the President, with its omnipresent head and numerous paid and unpaid advisors, some of dubious standing and qualifications. Observers have suggested that the office has effectively supplanted the actual government but without the transparency and accountability that elected officials face. While such an arrangement may have been tolerable for Ukrainians and expedient for allies in the first stages of the “big war,” now that the conflict appears to have shifted phase it needs to be reined in by the president himself.

That will not be easy for a man who has become accustomed to relying on a handful of loyal lieutenants, who have in turn amassed influence in all affairs of state. But to preserve the democratic unity with which Ukraine inspired the world, President Zelensky will be best served by demonstrating the courage to give up this comfortable but undemocratic arrangement. Ukraine’s friends also need to be much more assertive in seeking such changes with urgency and be willing to sacrifice their own established and comfortable arrangements.

The British experience in World War II provides a useful template for resolving legitimacy concerns as fair elections remain impossible in wartime. To maintain unity, curb potential political divisions and ensure legitimacy going forward, Ukraine’s president and parliament can take inspiration from the national government Winston Churchill assembled when the survival of his state was at stake. That would also enable Ukraine’s leadership to better communicate on difficult issues with the public, without worrying about the unity of effort potentially being undermined by political opposition.

Further postponing of firm and consistent political support for Ukraine’s democracy for an undefined time “after the war” is simply dereliction of duty on the part of the Biden administration, which has all the tools — and allies in Ukraine and beyond — to act now to prevent democratic backsliding, demonstrate to Ukrainians that it supports their democratic aspirations and help Ukraine navigate the peril it finds itself in. The time for tough talk is now.

Gregory F. Treverton, who was chair of the U.S. National Intelligence Council in the Obama administration, is professor international relations and spatial science at Dornsife College, University of Southern California; chair of the Global TechnoPolitics Forum; and an executive advisor to SMA Corporation.