Ukraine After Martial Law: Challenges and Opportunities for Democratic Renewal

The war in Ukraine, now stretching into its third year, has transformed every dimension of the nation’s political, social, and economic life. Under martial law, the usual rhythms of democracy—regular elections, vigorous parliamentary opposition and full media freedom—have been suspended or constrained by necessity. Yet as Ukraine looks to eventual victory and the lifting of martial law, the question of what kind of political order will emerge takes centre stage. This moment presents both formidable challenges and historic opportunities for democratic renewal.

Ukraine's Political History: From Soviet Republic to Sovereign Nation

Ukraine's path to independence was shaped by decades of resistance, national consciousness, and the eventual unraveling of the Soviet Union. Throughout the 20th century, Ukraine experienced waves of repression under Soviet rule—from the Holodomor famine of 1932–33, that some consider was engineered by Stalin to crush Ukrainian nationalism, to forced collectivisation, mass purges and the suppression of the Ukrainian language and culture.

Despite these efforts a sense of Ukrainian identity persisted, reinforced by a dissident intelligentsia, underground religious institutions and historical memory. The 1986 Chernobyl disaster, which exposed the failures and secrecy of the Soviet regime, further undermined public trust in Moscow.

In the late 1980s, as Mikhail Gorbachev's policies of perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (openness) took hold, Ukrainian activists, writers, and reformers began to demand greater autonomy. The Rukh movement, founded in 1989 as a civil and political platform for democratic reform, galvanised mass support for national sovereignty. On 16 July 1990, the Ukrainian parliament (the Verkhovna Rada) adopted a Declaration of State Sovereignty, asserting the primacy of Ukrainian law over Soviet legislation.

The decisive moment came after the failed Moscow coup against the Gorbachev regime in the USSR by Soviet hardliners in August 1991. On 24 August 24 1991, the Verkhovna Rada declared Ukraine's full independence from the Soviet Union. This decision was overwhelmingly endorsed by a national referendum on 1 December 1991, in which over 90% of voters supported independence, including majorities in every region of the country.

Independence marked the beginning of a turbulent political journey. The 1990's were characterised by economic collapse, political instability and the rise of oligarchic power. Despite these challenges, Ukraine remained formally democratic, with competitive elections and active civil society organisations.

The Democratic Record Under Pressure

Since 1991 Ukraine has had a turbulent but resilient democratic trajectory. Despite widespread corruption, oligarchic influence and regional polarisation, the country has consistently defied authoritarian regression. The 2004 Orange Revolution and the 2014 Revolution of Dignity (Euromaidan) both demonstrated the public’s insistence on transparent, accountable governance and alignment with European norms.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s election in 2019 on an anti-corruption, reformist platform marked another democratic milestone. Yet the 2022 invasion forced a radical shift: martial law suspended regular elections, consolidated executive power, and introduced wartime restrictions on political expression and party activity. These changes, while largely accepted domestically under the logic of survival, now raise questions about the shape of post-war democracy.

Challenges to a Post-War Democratic Reboot

1. Political Pluralism in Recovery: Several political parties, particularly those associated with pro-Russian sentiment, have been banned or suspended during the war. Restoring full political pluralism without undermining national security or enabling subversion will be a delicate balancing act. Rebuilding a legitimate, diverse multi-party system will be essential to maintain public trust in government.

   
   

2. Oligarchic Influence: Although the war has weakened the principal oligarchs (one of whom is now in prison) and nationalised strategic industries previously under their control, their influence remains embedded in Ukraine’s political economy. There is a risk that post-war privatisation or reconstruction could revive the oligarchs' networks of power and influence in the economy, unless guarded by robust transparency and anti-corruption safeguards.

   
   

3. Veterans’ Integration: Hundreds of thousands of combat veterans will return to civilian life with immense moral authority and political influence. Their participation could energise civic engagement but may also introduce radical or nationalist voices into the political mainstream. Ensuring representation without militarising politics will be a key test.

   
   

4. Judicial Reform and Rule of Law: The judiciary, long seen as a locus of corruption and political manipulation, will face renewed scrutiny in post-war Ukraine. Genuine judicial independence and fair electoral adjudication will be prerequisites for credible elections.

   
   

5. Civic Fatigue and Disillusionment: Prolonged war, economic hardship and trauma may produce apathy, disillusionment, or extremism. Ensuring that democracy delivers tangible improvements in daily life will be crucial to countering populist or authoritarian temptations.

   
   

Opportunities for Democratic Reinvention

1. A New Social Contract: The war has fostered an unprecedented sense of national unity, civic engagement and trust in state institutions, especially the military and local governments. These bonds offer a foundation for a renewed democratic culture based on solidarity and mutual responsibility.

   
   

2. Digital Governance and Civic Technology: Ukraine’s globally admired government digital services platform, Diia, has become a tool of efficient governance and citizen interaction. Expanding this model to enhance electoral participation, transparency and public consultation could modernise democratic processes.

   
   

3. European Integration: EU candidate status and the reconstruction agenda provide strong incentives for reform. The prospect of accession demands adherence to democratic benchmarks, judicial integrity and anti-corruption progress. European partners can serve as guarantors and accelerators of reform.

   
   

4. Diaspora and Refugee Engagement: Millions of Ukrainians displaced across Europe may return with new experiences, networks and expectations. Their reintegration and participation in political life could inject fresh perspectives and broaden democratic horizons.

   
   

5. Emergence of New Leadership: Wartime has revealed a new generation of leaders—military officers, civil society organisers, local administrators—whose legitimacy is grounded in action and sacrifice rather than wealth or party machinery. Their entry into politics could rejuvenate institutions and widen representation.

   
   

Looking Ahead: Designing the Next Election

The timing and format of Ukraine’s next presidential and parliamentary elections will be critical. Ensuring security, especially for soldiers and refugees, while guaranteeing inclusivity and fairness, will require innovations in voting logistics and observation. International partners should support these efforts without dictating outcomes. Efforts should be made, starting now, to structure the next set of elections so that they are as free and fair as possible in an inevitably chaotic post-war environment.

A successful democratic transition after martial law will not merely restore pre-war politics; it will redefine them. Ukraine stands at a pivotal crossroads: either to entrench wartime authoritarian tendencies or to build a more inclusive, participatory and resilient democracy. The choices made in the first post-war election will resonate for decades.

In the ruins of invasion lie the blueprints of rebirth. Ukraine has shown the world her courage and unity. Now she must show that these same qualities can sustain democratic renewal.