As Russia’s war drags on, national unity in Ukraine starts to creak

An election now would be dangerous as a potential change in government would destabilise the war effort

There is no mistaking the unease in Ukraine as it ends a second year of war with Russia. Gone is earlier optimism over recovering captured territory and ending the war on strong terms. Instead, Ukrainians are facing a difficult year ahead in which battlefield conditions and the international geostrategic environment are all less favourable. And deteriorating domestic conditions are just as worrisome.

The remarkable organic relationship between Ukrainian society and President Volodymyr Zelensky ’ s government since Russia’s invasion began is under strain. That level of support is extraordinary, even unnatural, other than in situations of national emergency. A country with strong regional identities, a history of poor governance and where politicians are held in low public esteem, was brought together by a war of national survival.

Zelensky ’ s gift for public performance, democratic convictions and undeniable personal courage gave personal embodiment to the national will in a country in desperate need of leadership. This has carried Ukraine a long way, marshalling domestic and international support for a plucky defence against a larger and cruel foe in Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Zelensky and his government retain popular support and democratic legitimacy. But unity is being eroded by a mix of factors: exhaustion with the war; horror at the human and financial cost; and frustration with the apparent stalemate, combined with a sneaking fear of defeat.

State corruption — long a source of political weakness in Ukraine — is also sapping support for the government. Cynicism about elite behaviour is deeply ingrained in Ukraine, with good cause.

It would be naive to assume that the venal practices of the past had disappeared. Cases of procurement fraud in the defence sector and elsewhere have been attaching themselves to the current administration, though to its credit it is actively prosecuting them. It is worth remembering how young Ukraine’s democracy is, and that a vibrant civil society is holding the government to account. That is a sometimes uneasy relationship.

Media freedom, which is hard won in Ukraine, is a concern following evidence that intelligence services and progovernment operatives mounted surveillance and intimidation of and smear campaigns against investigative journalists.

Zelensky has condemned the intimidation and ordered an investigation into two prominent cases in January, later firing a senior official of the domestic intelligence service, the SBU. The agency ’ s director has made a public statement that media freedom will be upheld.

Journalists and activists have also complained of smear campaigns by an online information army. Who exactly is responsible for that is in question amid information campaigns by Russian intelligence to sow dissent and undermine support for the Ukrainian government and the war effort.

Local watchdog group Information Resistance notes a strong presence from Russian-controlled entities in Ukrainian social media disseminating antigovernment narratives, a standard component of Russia’s hybrid warfare technique. Media freedom in wartime, defence analysts note, is not absolute and the authorities have national security priorities in uncovering Russian agents and prosecuting corrupt officials.

Meanwhile, coverage of the war by the state or state-aligned media has had the faint whiff of propaganda, carrying optimistic narratives that do not align with the dreadful reality of conditions on the battlefield. Ukrainians, who are aware of what is going on, would prefer their government to level with them on how serious the situation is.

There is also the issue of a wartime election — a parliamentary vote was due in late 2023 and a presidential one in the northern spring of 2024, but the legal and practical basis for elections do not exist under martial law in Ukraine. Millions are also displaced abroad and internally, or are under Russian occupation. Zelensky has gone on record stating he would hold elections if it were possible, but that both the law and military conditions would need to change first.

Any attempt to hold elections now would indeed be both dubious and dangerous; a potential change of government would be highly destabilising to the war effort and national survival. But not holding them — whether they are possible or not — still carries democratic downside. Zelensky’s popularity, sky-high abroad, has weakened at home. The one institution retaining unqualified public support in Ukraine is the military.

Compulsory military service is now at issue in a country where nearly everyone can count war dead among relatives and friends. The armed forces of Ukraine do not release casualty figures, but it is thought that there may already be close to 100,000 deaths, according to US estimates.

Military service has been mostly voluntary to date, though men under 60 are forbidden from leaving the country. But the scale of losses in what is now a war of attrition is causing manpower shortages for the military, which proposes to raise 500,000 more soldiers to stave off a likely Russian spring offensive.

Military officials and defence analysts are unanimous that this is necessary to the country’s defence needs, including its ability to rotate troops from the front lines.

The buck is being passed over responsibility for an unpopular new mobilisation law — it languishes in parliament and will need to be revised further. Press ganging, though not widespread, has occurred. Ukrainians recognise that there is no way out of the current impasse, and that some form of mobilisation may be necessary, but this has made them more wary of lapses by their government. There is also distrust over how a mobilisation law would be managed.

The war otherwise remains a whole-ofsociety effort in which there is military service across a broad spectrum, the public and even celebrities — actors, sports stars, authors and artists. All have volunteered and many have paid the ultimate price.

Ukrainians face a difficult future. Russia appears determined to continue its invasion regardless of the costs. Military supplies from Western allies are less assured than earlier in the conflict. A long, grinding war beckons, in which Russia holds several advantages simply by weight of numbers. Ukrainians realised early on that there was no other option than to carry on and hope for a change in fortune on the battlefield.

They do so now with more unease than before, and with their young — and still remarkable — democracy holding, but taking strain.