Impact of globalization on the national security of Ukraine
Abstract
The article provides a comprehensive systemic analysis of the impact of multidimensional globalization processes on the national security and defence architecture of Ukraine amidst the existential confrontation with Russian armed aggression and tectonic shifts in the global geopolitical order. Utilizing a structural-functional approach, the author conceptualizes the
Russia-Ukraine war not merely as a regional dispute, but as an acute phase of a global value-based conflict between the democratic world and authoritarian revisionism. The study demonstrates that globalization acts as an ambivalent factor for Ukraine: on one hand, it generates unprecedented challenges — such as the erosion of traditional sovereignty, trans-nationalization of threats, critical infrastructure vulnerability, and hybrid cyber-informational attacks — while on the other, it provides critical resources for national resilience, including international solidarity, global sanction mechanisms, and access to space intelligence and high-precision technologies. Special attention is paid to the transformation of warfare under the Fourth Industrial Revolution, where cyberspace, artificial intelligence, and robotic systems become decisive factors in achieving asymmetric advantages over a numerically superior adversary. Having critically re-evaluated the efficiency of existing global security institutions (UN, OSCE) and stating their institutional dysfunctionality in the face of hybrid aggression by a nuclear state, the author scientifically substantiates the lack of alternatives to deepened
Euro-Atlantic integration (NATO, EU) as the sole effective guarantee for preserving Ukrainian statehood. Based on the analysis of identified “security paradoxes”, the article proposes a strategic model of the “Défense Capability Formula”, advocating a shift from reactive defence to proactive subjectivity building through the synergy of technological modernization of the national defence industry, energy decentralization, and a resilient national security culture capable of effectively countering cognitive influences. Ultimately, the research argues that Ukraine’s experience in adapting to global challenges offers a universal framework for reforming the international security system and developing new protocols for countering hybrid threats in the 21st century.
Downloads
References
United Nations. (1945). Charter of the United Nations. URL: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter
Hoffman, F.G. (2009). Hybrid Warfare and Challenges. National Defense University. 24 p.
NATO. (2022). The NATO Comprehensive Approach to Security. URL: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52877.htm
Castells, M. (2010). The Rise of the Network Society (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. 608 p.
Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books. 240 p.
Huntington, S.P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster. 368 p.
Nye, J.S. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. PublicAffairs. 208 p.
Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers. 239 p.
Horbulin, V.P., & Kachynskyi, A.B. (2010). Strategic planning: solving national security problems. NISD. 288 p. URL: https://surl.li/qcielx [in Ukrainian].
Lipkan, V.A. (2006). National security of Ukraine. Kondor. 552 p. [in Ukrainian].
Lisovyi, A. (2024). Energy security of Ukraine: the second year of war. Modeling the development of the economic systems, (1), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.31891/mdes/2024-11-17 [in Ukrainian].
Parkhomenko-Kutsevil, O. (2025). Modern challenges to Ukraine’s national security in the context of digital challenges: public administration aspect. Publichne upravlinnia: kontseptsii, paradyhma, rozvytok, udoskonalennia, (12), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.31470/2786-6246-2025-12-116-123 [in Ukrainian].
Radchenko, O., & Chmyr, Ya. (2022). Hybrid war as a key threat to Ukraine’s national sovereignty. Tavriiskyi naukovyi visnyk. Seriia: Publichne upravlinnia ta administruvannia, No 3, 100–108. https://doi.org/10.32851/tnv-pub.2021.3.14 [in Ukrainian].
Rid, T. (2013). Cyber War Will Not Take Place. Hurst & Co. 256 p. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2011.608939 https://surl.lt/erfebw
NATO. (2022). Strategic Concept 2022. URL: https://surl.li/yvmamd
Galeotti, M. (2022). The Weaponization of Everything: A Field Guide to the New Way of War. Yale University Press. 224 p.
Greenberg, A. (2019). Sandworm: A New Era of Cyberwar and the Hunt for the Kremlin’s Most Dangerous Hackers. Doubleday. 320 p. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2021.1914503
President of Ukraine. (2020). National Security Strategy of Ukraine: Decree No 364/2020 of September 14, 2020. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/392/2020 [in Ukrainian].
Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. (1994). https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280401fbb/
Kaldor, M. (2018). New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era (4th ed.). Polity Press. 280 p. URL: https://www.sup.org/books/politics/new-and-old-wars
Keohane, R.O., & Nye, J.S. (2012). Power and Interdependence (5th ed.). Pearson. 304 p. URL: https://surl.li/ufvpwx
Waltz, K.N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley. 251 p. URL: https://academic.oup.com/psq/article/95/1/136/7144556
Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A New World Order. Princeton University Press. 264 p. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-005-0335-5
NATO. (1997). NATO-Ukraine Charter on a Distinctive Partnership. URL: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25457.htm
Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press. 429 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612183
Mearsheimer, J.J. (2014). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (Updated ed.). W.W. Norton. 576 p.
European Commission. (2024). European Peace Facility: Supporting Ukraine. URL: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/european-peace-facility/
