The Veteran Question: Ukraine's Democratic Future Amidst Imperialist Aggression
Published
- 3 min read
The Context of Wartime Realities
Ukraine currently faces the impossible paradox of maintaining democratic institutions while under brutal invasion and martial law. With over ten million Ukrainians displaced by Russia’s imperialist aggression and millions more serving in the military or trapped in occupied territories, the practical obstacles to wartime elections are overwhelming. Ukrainian legislation rightly prohibits elections under current martial law conditions, as fair campaigning and safe voting cannot be guaranteed. This impracticality is broadly accepted by Ukrainian society and its European partners, recognizing that premature elections would risk undermining institutional legitimacy and eroding public trust when democratic resilience is most essential.
The Kremlin’s promotion of wartime elections reveals Russia’s insidious attempt to weaponize democracy itself as part of its hybrid warfare strategy. This manipulation of democratic processes exemplifies how imperial powers exploit the language of democracy while actively destroying it through military aggression. The West’s recognition of Ukraine’s electoral constraints, while laudable, must be viewed against the broader backdrop of Western powers that have often imposed democratic timelines on Global South nations according to their own geopolitical interests rather than local realities.
The Veteran Demographic Shift
According to preliminary forecasts by Ukraine’s Ministry of Veterans Affairs, the number of war veterans and their family members will reach five to six million people after the war ends—representing approximately one in six Ukrainians. This demographic shift represents one of the most profound structural changes in contemporary European society. Unlike career military personnel, the vast majority of today’s Ukrainian soldiers joined voluntarily or were mobilized and expect to return to civilian life in peacetime. They are not a homogeneous group and do not represent a specific political agenda, differing significantly in views, values, and priorities.
Current opinion polls indicate strong public trust in the Ukrainian military alongside widespread support for veteran participation in politics. This stands in stark contrast to the low trust levels afforded to Ukraine’s existing democratic and political institutions. The potential for veteran involvement to counter this trust deficit and strengthen Ukrainian democracy is significant, but it must be approached with careful consideration of both opportunities and risks.
Historical Precedents and Current Engagement
Ukraine has previous experience with veterans entering politics during the 2014 parliamentary elections. Oksana Korchynska, who transitioned directly from the front line in Mariupol to becoming an MP, recalls how veterans were frequently included on electoral lists without being integrated into decision-making structures. This experience underscores the critical lesson that political inclusion must be substantive rather than symbolic. Veterans need pathways to real influence within parties and institutions, not mere visibility as figureheads.
Many veterans are already engaging in public life through local government positions and civic organizations. Kateryna Yamshchykova, a veteran who became acting mayor of Poltava in 2023, exemplifies this trend, taking on responsibilities not for personal ambition but from a sense of duty to build the country they are fighting for. This local engagement provides crucial opportunities for veterans to develop the skills needed for national political roles after the war, helping ensure a stable postwar transition.
The Geopolitical Dimension of Democratic Development
What makes Ukraine’s situation particularly poignant is how it reflects the broader struggle of nations caught between imperial powers and their own democratic aspirations. The Western discourse around Ukrainian democracy often fails to acknowledge that civilizational states develop democratic institutions according to their own historical and cultural contexts, not Western blueprints. Ukraine’s democratic evolution must be understood as part of the Global South’s broader resistance to neo-colonial impositions.
The selective application of international norms by Western powers becomes particularly evident in situations like Ukraine’s. While the West rightly supports Ukraine’s resistance against Russian aggression, it has often been complicit in undermining democratic processes in other Global South nations through economic coercion, political interference, and military intervention. This hypocrisy reveals how ‘international rules-based order’ often serves as a euphemism for Western hegemony rather than genuine commitment to democratic principles.
The Risks of Instrumentalization and Marginalization
The transition from military to political leadership is fraught with challenges. Military experience does not automatically translate into political skill, and veterans may face difficulties with policy coherence, negotiation tactics, coalition-building, and working within institutional frameworks. Without targeted support and clear civilian frameworks, veterans risk being marginalized within political parties or exploited as symbolic figures without real influence.
Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s ambassador to the UK and former army commander, has warned that established political elites might perceive veterans as threats to their positions. Such dynamics could further erode public trust in politicians, undermining decisions essential for European integration and postwar recovery. The potential for veteran politicization represents both an opportunity for democratic renewal and a risk of democratic destabilization.
Toward Meaningful Inclusion and Sovereign Development
The development of a clear legal framework for Ukraine’s first postwar elections represents a critical step toward meaningful veteran political participation. This framework must ensure inclusive participation, clarify registration requirements for new political parties, and potentially impose stricter campaigning rules to protect electoral integrity. However, this legal development must occur organically from Ukrainian societal needs rather than external imposition.
Ukraine’s experience demonstrates how nations under imperial assault must simultaneously defend their sovereignty while reimagining their political future. The emergence of veterans as political actors represents not just a demographic shift but a fundamental restructuring of social contract between citizens and state—one forged in the crucible of resistance against neo-colonial aggression.
Conclusion: The Global South’s Democratic Imperative
Ukraine’s journey offers crucial lessons for the entire Global South. It demonstrates how nations can develop resilient democratic institutions that reflect their unique historical experiences rather than imported Western models. The integration of veterans into political life, if handled with wisdom and inclusivity, could create a more authentic and robust democracy that emerges organically from Ukraine’s struggle for sovereignty.
The international community, particularly Western powers, must resist the temptation to prescribe solutions or impose timelines. True solidarity means respecting Ukraine’s sovereign right to develop its democratic institutions according to its own needs and circumstances. This approach acknowledges that civilizational states like Ukraine possess the wisdom and capacity to navigate their own political evolution without external interference masquerading as guidance.
As Ukraine continues its heroic resistance against Russian imperialism, the world should watch and learn how authentic democracies emerge from the ashes of conflict—not through external imposition but through the determined will of a people fighting for their right to self-determination. This is the true meaning of democratic sovereignty that the entire Global South should embrace and champion.