The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Issues of Political Science

BETWEEN MOBILIZATION AND TRUST: THE TRANSFORMATION OF POLITICAL LEGITIMACY IN UKRAINE DURING THE WAR

Nataliia Kononenko — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The article examines the institutional legitimation of political power in Ukraine during 2022–2025 under conditions of full-scale war. The study aims to assess the effectiveness of various instruments of legitimation and to test an analytical model for identifying «legitimacy gaps» between their normative significance and practical implementation. It traces the evolution of public trust – from emotional mobilization in the early stages of the war to a rationalized mode of «legitimation through survival», grounded in the state’s ability to ensure security, stability, and social justice. The paper analyzes the paradox of Ukraine’s «fighting democracy», where short-term mobilizational legitimacy facilitates swift decision-making but simultaneously exacerbates problems of institutional capacity, inclusiveness, and accountability. Empirical analysis based on expert surveys reveals significant legitimacy gaps within the parliament and government, while the presidency retains the highest level of public trust. Normative-legal and communicative mechanisms remain underutilized, generating asymmetry between societal expectations and institutional performance. The article emphasizes that wartime conditions have accelerated the concentration of power, further testing the resilience of democratic checks and balances. The research underscores that sustaining legitimacy in wartime democracies requires not only procedural adaptation but also renewal of the social contract based on mutual accountability between state and citizens. The author argues that post-war restoration of democratic legitimacy will require a shift from mobilizational governance to «managed openness», in which effectiveness is combined with transparency, accountability, and citizen participation in public administration. The proposed analytical model of legitimacy gaps offers a tool for assessing current stability and forecasting the prospects of democratic development. By integrating empirical indicators with normative benchmarks, the model contributes to a more nuanced understanding of institutional resilience under extreme conditions. It also provides a comparative framework for analyzing how wartime democracies recalibrate legitimacy mechanisms to balance survival imperatives with democratic continuity.

METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGIES IN UKRAINE UNDER MARTIAL LAW CONDITIONS

Marharyta Chabanna — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This article emphasizes the critical importance of public administration effectiveness during a full-scale war, highlighting the capacity of government to respond efficiently to security challenges, maintain public order, and provide essential public services. Such effectiveness is vital for the resilience of the political system and the maintenance of citizens' trust. The author notes that evaluating governance effectiveness under these conditions requires flexible approaches that account for the unique wartime context, institutional capacity constraints, and the necessity of decision-making under extraordinary resource mobilization. Based on a review of assessment methodologies and general principles of public administration effectiveness (such as the Worldwide Governance Indicators, Bertelsmann Transformation Index, Sustainable Governance Indicators, Global Competitiveness Index, Prosperity Index, Bureaucracy Index, International Civil Service Effectiveness Index, Open Government Index, European Quality of Government Index, and others) the article demonstrates that a combination of international models (WGI, OECD-frameworks, SIGMA), adapted to Ukraine’s national context, is most relevant. Special attention is given to the application of innovative technologies – machine learning and big data analytics – as tools to enhance the accuracy, timeliness, and transparency of monitoring public administration effectiveness. The article also describes the use of artificial intelligence by Ukrainian governmental bodies, including the Ministry of Digital Transformation, Ministry of Finance, National Anti-Corruption Bureau, National Agency on Corruption Prevention, State Tax Service, National Health Service, Ministry of Education and Science, and State Employment Service. Highlighting the advantages of AI integration, the author underscores its role in improving objectivity, precision, and responsiveness in evaluation processes, automating large-scale data processing, and countering misinformation. The article concludes by emphasizing that the effectiveness of such integration depends on the regulatory framework, development of digital competencies, establishment of ethical guidelines, and public monitoring platforms. In this regard, the study stresses the necessity of balancing international standards with Ukraine’s specific socio-political realities, particularly the challenges of governance under conditions of ongoing aggression. It also emphasizes that the development of adaptive and context-sensitive evaluation frameworks is not only a methodological but also a strategic task for strengthening democratic resilience. At the same time, the article highlights that the long-term effectiveness of governance assessment in Ukraine will depend on the institutionalization of innovative tools, the strengthening of cooperation with international partners, and the inclusiveness of evaluation processes. Together, these factors create a foundation for both post-war recovery and sustainable democratic transformation.

LEGITIMACY AND RESILIENCE AS FACTORS OF DEMOCRATIC AND NON-DEMOCRATIC REGIMES' DURABILITY

Sergiy Kyselov, Dariia Synhaievska — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The article delves into the study of key factors that ensure the resilience, i.e., the long-term viability and stability, of different types of political regimes – both democratic and non-democratic. The main focus is on the analysis of the concepts of political legitimacy and resilience. Drawing upon the theoretical works of David Easton, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, David Held, Seymour Martin Lipset, Immanuel Kant, as well as research on resilience by David Andersen, Jørgen Møller, Lasse Rørbæk, and Svend-Erik Skaaning, the article distinguishes between legitimacy as the deep normative foundation of power (diffuse support according to Easton) and public support as situational approval of the authorities' activities (specific support). It is emphasized that legitimacy is not an exclusive feature of democracies; non-democratic regimes also require it, transforming force into right (J.-J. Rousseau) and relying on the 'customary norms' inherent in society. The Kantian distinction is introduced between autonomy of the will (self-legislating adherence to the moral law), realized under the conditions of individual freedom in democratic regimes, and heteronomy (subordination to external causes), characteristic of non-democratic regimes, where non-freedom and non-dignity facilitate complicity in 'the banality of evil'. Research shows that the resilience of democracies significantly depends on administrative capacity and bureaucratic quality, whereas the resilience of non-democratic regimes correlates with the level of tax mobilization and expenditures on coercive structures. The different sources of resilience are also overviewed: for democracies, administrative capacity and the quality of state institutions are critically important. These differences are illustrated by historical examples: President Kennedy's rejection of Operation Northwoods demonstrates the functioning of checks and balances system in a democracy, while the events surrounding the 'Ryazan sugar' operation in Russia demonstrate the commitment of a non-democratic regime to use coercive power to maintain itself. Ultimately, the study contributes to broader debates in political science about the conditions under which legitimacy translates into stability, revealing that resilience is not merely about survival, but about the quality and nature of governance itself. Special attention is paid to the dual nature of legitimacy as both a normative justification of power and a practical tool of governance, which may either constrain rulers or empower them depending on institutional and societal contexts.

LIBERAL DEMOCRACY: THEORETICAL APPROACHES, INSTITUTIONS, RESILIENCE AND ASSESSMENT OF DEMOCRACY

Denis Revenko — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The article examines the crisis manifestations of liberal democratic institutions in Eastern European countries. It reveals the specifics of their functioning under conditions of political turbulence, characterized by the rise of populism, increasing political polarization, external pressure from authoritarian regimes, and internal dysfunctions of governance. The key institutional mechanisms for maintaining democratic order are analyzed, and their vulnerability to crisis factors is identified.
The study characterizes theoretical approaches to understanding the resilience of democracy, in particular the concept of «militant democracy», which envisages the application of temporary restrictions in order to protect democratic regimes from anti-democratic actors. It is shown that such measures, on the one hand, may strengthen institutional resilience, while on the other, they create risks of prolonging restrictions and gradual erosion of liberal values. Special attention is paid to the analysis of Ukraine’s institutional dynamics after 2014 and under the conditions of martial law. The practice of banning pro-Russian political parties, conducting decommunization measures, and applying other instruments of «self-defense» of democracy is highlighted. At the same time, the asymmetry of these processes and ongoing debates regardingtheir conformity with liberal democratic principles are emphasized.The article also considers democracy indices (Freedom House, V-Dem, Economist Intelligence Unit) as tools for assessing the state of democracy. It demonstrates that temporary restrictions introduced during crisis periods reduce scores in the components of «civil liberties» and «liberal institutions», but do not always indicate long-term democratic backsliding. It is concluded that the development of liberal democracy in Eastern European countries is determined by the ability of institutions to maintain a balance between necessary restrictions in times of crisis and the preservation of fundamental democratic principles in the long-term perspective. Moreover, the findings underline the importance of civic engagement, international support, and ongoing reforms as essential factors for strengthening democratic resilience. Ultimately, the study suggests that the future trajectory of liberal democracy in the region will depend on how successfully societies adapt to challenges without sacrificing their core values.

ELECTORAL SYSTEM FOR POST-WAR UKRAINE: CURRENT ALTERNATIVES FOR PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS

Anton Avksentiev — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This study examines the issue of selecting an optimal electoral system for the first post-war elections to the Verkhovna Rada. It argues that the design of the electoral system will have a significant impact on both the representativeness and institutional capacity of the parliament. The article traces the evolution of Ukraine’s electoral system and reviews specific electoral models applied in parliamentary elections from 1994 to 2019. It substantiates that the model currently enshrined in the Electoral Code constitutes a system with «flexible» (or «semi-open») rather than fully «open» lists. Four types of electoral systems are identified as relevant alternatives for organizing the first post-war parliamentary elections: proportional representation with closed lists, a parallel mixed system, a two-tier proportional system with flexible regional lists (as defined by the current Electoral Code), and its modified version proposed in Draft Law №13464. A comparative analysis of these models is conducted using 10 key evaluation criteria. The findings support the appropriateness of retaining the current system as the foundation for post-war parliamentary elections. The study draws not only on theoretical insights but also on empirical data from the implementation of this system in the 2020 local elections. The analysis of this experience has led to practical recommendations for transforming the current model into a fully open-list system. Such a transition is expected to enhance the role of preferential voting by citizens and reduce the degree of party leadership control over the allocation of mandates. These recommendations align with data from sociological and expert surveys, highlighting public support for «open lists». The study's conclusions may serve as an analytical basis for improving electoral legislation and making informed decisions regarding the electoral system during the transitional post-war period. Prospects for further research are outlined, with an emphasis on ensuring the full participation of overseas voters in shaping the personal composition of parliament.

GOVERNMENT–OPPOSITION RELATIONS DURING THE REVOLUTION OF DIGNITY (2014)

Zoia Shumeiko — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The interactions between the government and the opposition in Ukraine during the Revolution of Dignity (November 2013 – February 2014), a pivotal stage in the development of the contemporary Ukrainian political system, are analysed. Drawing on scholarly sources and legal documents, the study demonstrates how the gradual narrowing of institutional mechanisms of parliamentary oversight, the concentration of executive power, and the monopolisation of the media space contributed to conflict escalation and the opposition’s turn to extra-institutional forms of action. The chronology of events in 2013-2014 is shown to have unfolded in three consecutive stages: managed competition (limited effectiveness of parliamentary instruments), «dual pressure» (a combination of parliamentary activity with mass street mobilisation), and the breakdown of the institutional agreement (parliamentary delegitimation and transition to the street phase of confrontation). It is argued that the adoption of the 16 January 2014 laws marked a turning point, after which parliament ceased to serve as a negotiating arena and the opposition could no longer act as a full-fledged participant in the political process.

Special attention is devoted to the role of civil society as a non-partisan arbiter capable of influencing both sides of the conflict and reshaping the logic of political interaction. It is shown that the combination of societal self-organisation, the expansion of horizontal networks, and the weakening of the state’s monopoly over information resources facilitated the delegitimation of authoritarian practices. Post-revolutionary transformations are examined, including the reconfiguration of the parliamentary majority, the renewal of the party system, and the strengthening of institutional support for opposition activity. A comparative analysis of European practice suggests that preventing future crises requires the legislative consolidation of the opposition’s status, independent media regulation, and transparent governmental communication. The main models of government–opposition relations are identified, and the specifics of the mechanisms of their political interaction are examined. It is demonstrated that the combination of strong democratic institutions, a legitimate opposition, and an active civil society can ensure state stability in the face of political challenges.

THEORIES OF DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OF ARMED FORCES AND THEIR APPLICATION DURING CONFLICT

Taras Ivanec — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This thorough examination investigates the development and obstacles of Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF) within the framework of Ukraine's persistent conflict with Russia from 2014 to 2024. The conflict, initially characterized by the annexation of Crimea and expanding into a full-scale war, highlights the imperative of combining military effectiveness with democratic responsibility, particularly in the context of hybrid warfare. Fundamental theories – Huntington’s civil-military interactions principles, Janowitz’s professionalization, Schiff’s concordance model, and Feaver’s principal-agent theory – offer essential insights for ensuring oversight during combat. These frameworks underscore the significance of civilian authority, public trust, transparency, and mutual comprehension, however encounter challenges when authoritarian inclinations or hybrid threats obscure civil-military demarcations. Ukraine's experience illustrates that including societal engagement – via civic groups, media, diaspora activity, and technological platforms – substantially improves openness and accountability. The extensive participation of civil society, especially during periods of intensified conflict, demonstrates a transition to hybrid supervisory frameworks in which societal entities enhance formal institutions, hence bolstering democratic resilience during crises. External circumstances, particularly Russia's annexation of Crimea and hybrid strategies, serve as drivers for changes aimed at strengthening military integrity and democratic supervision. These pressures expedite legislative and societal reforms focused on enhancing military openness, restructuring command hierarchies, and fostering public discourse. The Ukrainian situation illustrates how external dangers can act as both stressors and accelerators for the reinforcement of democratic principles, compelling institutions to adjust to emerging hybrid difficulties. The integration of institutional reforms and societal engagement demonstrates a comprehensive approach to civil-military interactions. Technological capabilities enable individuals to engage actively in the oversight of military actions, elevating accountability requirements above conventional models. Civil society initiatives, diaspora efforts, and technological platforms collaboratively enhance social cohesion and resilience, essential in both conflict situations and the maintenance of democratic legitimacy. This dynamic process underscores the importance of adaptive governance structures that can respond to evolving military threats while maintaining democratic standards. Moreover, international cooperation and comparative experiences offer valuable lessons for Ukraine, facilitating the adoption of best practices in civil-military relations. Ultimately, the Ukrainian case emphasizes that sustainable DCAF relies on a delicate balance between security imperatives and the preservation of civil liberties, especially in volatile geopolitical environments.

MODERN CHALLENGES AND DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS OF UKRAINE’S FOREIGN POLICY: AN ANALYTICAL AND FORECASTING APPROACH

Alla Girman — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The article focuses on a comprehensive analysis and forecast of Ukraine’s foreign policy amid the profound transformations of the international system in the early 21st century. It explores the main trends, influencing factors, and perspectives of Ukraine’s external course within the context of European integration, security challenges, and regional cooperation. The study is based on an interdisciplinary approach that combines political science, international relations, security analysis, and strategic forecasting. The methodological framework encompasses three key components: comparative analysis of the foreign policies of Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, and Romania; scenario modeling of Ukraine’s foreign policy development for the medium term (2025-2030); and content analysis of expert opinions from leading specialists in international relations and diplomacy.

The comparative analysis demonstrates that despite differences in political traditions, the four states share common objectives–strengthening regional security, achieving energy independence, and preserving transatlantic unity. Ukraine is gradually shifting from a reactive and defensive model toward a proactive and reform-oriented strategy aimed at integration with the EU and NATO, as well as developing subregional leadership in Eastern Europe. The key factors affecting Ukraine’s foreign policy are identified as security, energy, economic, and institutional determinants. European integration is defined as the country’s central strategic direction shaping both its domestic reforms and external behavior.

Through scenario modeling, the study proposes three possible trajectories of development—reformist, conservative, and crisis-based. The reformist scenario envisions accelerated integration with the EU and NATO, enhanced defense capacity, and growing international investment. The conservative scenario implies maintaining pragmatic stability without major breakthroughs, while the crisis scenario anticipates deteriorating security and reduced international support. Expert evaluations indicate that the reformist model is the most realistic and favorable under conditions of political stability and sustained international engagement. The article concludes that Ukraine’s future foreign policy success depends on its ability to balance internal reforms, strengthen security resilience, and ensure active diplomacy in a complex and volatile global environment.

STATE SOVEREIGNTY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE INFORMATION AGE AND GLOBALIZATION

Konstantin Brynza — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The features of state sovereignty in the dimension of the information age and globalization are considered. The importance of state sovereignty for ensuring effective development and competitiveness of society is emphasized. The influence of modern conditions on the state of state sovereignty as an important actor of modern global interaction is analyzed. It is determined that in the information age, power largely depends on the ability to produce and control value meanings and cultural codes of society. The importance of identities that characterize modern social interaction at different levels is noted. The contradictions of the universal and the particular are characterized, on the basis of which many conflicts arise. This is confirmed by the multidimensionality of the selection of identities that characterize not only the existence of modern communities, but are also embodied at the personal level. Rapid technological changes, large volumes of information, the need for its adequate interpretation, not only assimilation, but also the production of new knowledge create great demands on a person, on the level of human development. Such challenges to the sovereignty of the state are revealed as instability, uncertainty, polyvariance of social processes both at the global and local, regional levels. The multicentricity of global interaction, the promotion of the influence of non-state actors in the formation of policy at different levels, latency and uncoordination as important characteristics of such interaction also enhance the role of chance and risks for the effective preservation of the sovereignty of modern states.

It is noted that «digital divides» based on integration into the latest technologies exacerbate global inequality, consolidate the inheritance of the status of poverty and the displacement of those segments that do not prove their usefulness to global trends and forces of influence to the periphery of development. The activities of modern non-state actors of world politics are most often associated with the interests of economic benefit and originate in the sphere of economics, powerful modern global players represent the sphere of information and communication, communication technologies, artificial intelligence, their influence is based on the possession of media resources, network capabilities and active intervention in the management of cognitive processes at various levels of social life. It is emphasized that the sovereignty of the state requires powerful formation and support of ideological components, protection of unique value meanings and cultural codes of the nation, which determine the modern political space, largely virtualized.

UKRAINE IN CONTEMPORARY GEOPOLITICS

Oleksii Batalov, Arthur Hrebeniuk — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The role of Ukraine on the world geopolitical arena from 1991 to 2025 is analyzed. Based on the works of H. Mackinder and Zb. Brzezinski, the geostrategic importance of Ukraine for the balance of power in Eurasia is emphasized. Three options for geostrategy that were possible for Ukraine since 1991 are distinguished: neutrality, Ukraine gaining the status of a regional leader, joining the integration projects of external «centers of power». The extent and success of Ukraine’s use of these geostrategies are investigated.

The role played by Ukraine in geopolitics since 1991 is analyzed: from 1991 until approximately the «orange events» of 2004, the Ukrainian elite positioned Ukraine mainly as a sovereign «neutral player». There were unsuccessful attempts to become a «regional leader» (GUUAM); - after 2004, the team of President V. Yushchenko first declared a change in the geopolitical vector to a pro-Western one. A complex process of geopolitical choice began inside Ukraine, which finally ended after the start of Russian aggression in 2014.

The causes and consequences of the erroneous decisions of the 1990s, as well as the specifics of European integration efforts within Ukraine, the West's unwillingness to accept Ukraine at the cost of a conflict with the Russian Federation, the real importance of Ukraine gradually degraded to the role of a «buffer zone» between the West and the Russian Federation, as a result of which external influences on Ukrainian politics grew and over time it became a convenient «victim of aggression». The stage after 2014 (and especially after 2022) is highlighted, which was marked by the fact that the Ukrainian political nation wanted to see Ukraine as an «outpost» for the USA and European countries, the purpose of which is to deter the Kremlin's revanchist intentions. It is emphasized that the resources for transforming Ukraine into an «outpost» should be provided by the West, and accordingly, real preparations for full-scale combat operations with the Russian Armed Forces, relying mainly on domestic Ukrainian resources, were not carried out. It is concluded that the consequence of this was Ukraine's unpreparedness for a full-scale war. After 02/24/2022, Ukraine received quite significant assistance from Western countries, but not enough to repel the aggressor. The current geopolitical state of Ukraine is defined as a «battlefield».

Three conclusions are drawn. The first - under the condition of the continuation of a full-scale war of attrition, the absence (or limitation) of foreign assistance, the failure to implement effective systemic changes in the Ukrainian state itself - Ukrainian geopolitical subjectivity is conditional, and the survival of Ukraine as an independent sovereign state is not guaranteed. The second - Ukraine needs to move from the state of the «battlefield» to a less destructive and more subjective one for Ukraine. The third - options for further development of events are identified: continuation of the state of the «battlefield»; spread of hostilities to European countries; Ukraine's exit from the hot phase of the current war and beyond: either «buffering» Ukraine with the subsequent risk of losing statehood, or «outposting» Ukraine (thanks to its own resources and European assistance) or turning to non-Western «centers of power» for security assistance (for example, to Turkey or India).

PROBLEMS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL POLITICAL SCIENTIFICDISCIPLINE YAK INDICATORS OF INTERDISCIPLINARY AND INTEGRATIVE NATURE

Victor Rubanov — Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The relevance of profile research into the problems of the constitution and real functioning of political science as a scientific discipline is established. Based on the latest theoretical and fundamental research of scientists and real empirical facts, as it appears, an attempt is being made to conceptually explain the interdisciplinary and integrative nature of flight biology as a scientific dissertation. chicks. The renowned author, for the first time in scientific literature, reveals the peculiarities of the Kharkiv school of political analysis, its role in the theoretical-fundamental and institutional development of political science itself disciplinary and integrative scientific discipline. In conclusion, it reveals not only the significance of the world’s first political science professors Tikhon Stepanov and Andriy Kachenovsky in these processes, but also the role of the first specialized professional practical about applied institutions of the university in constitutional political science as an interdisciplinary and integrative scientific discipline.

In realizing this goal, the author points out that this very aspect of political science is embedded in Aristotle’s well-known characterization as «the queen of all sciences». Moreover, according to the author’s opinion, in this very fact, there is not only a theoretical characteristic of the nature of political science, but also a practical - applied significance in the initial process of training future political scientists ів – the ability to integrate, to bring together disparate layers of knowledge, such as were accumulated by students for the hardships of their studies in science. First of all, this is due to the fact that a certain proportion of them reflect on the current problems of the domestic and international political present, without even mentioning the basic achievements of political scientists of Ukraine and, in particular, the Kharkiv School of Political Science. Therefore, the proposed article may be useful for current and future political scientists.