On April 22, 2026, the State Library of Berlin (Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 8) hosted the presentation of the book “Bohdan Osadchuk. A Life in Anxiety” by Yurii Shapoval, a chief researcher of our institute, Doctor of Historical Sciences, and Professor. The publication was initiated by the Center for Historical Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Berlin and is part of the “Ukraine-Poland-Germany. Triangle of Dialogue” series. The book contains text in German, Polish, and Ukrainian. The research is dedicated to Bohdan Osadczuk (1920-2011), a journalist and scholar, and a professor at the Free University of Berlin. Born in Kolomyia, Osadczuk lived in Berlin for 70 years. Thanks to his fluency in Polish, German, and Ukrainian (he spoke and wrote them freely), he became a “man of the borderland” who, through his publications and speeches, united Poland, Germany, and Ukraine.
He prepared many important texts in German, which were published in the most influential periodicals of West Germany and Switzerland. His scientific and journalistic work as a renowned analyst of events in the countries of the “socialist camp” and the Soviet Union during the Cold War became part of the canon of Sovietology and remains relevant in many aspects today. Thanks to his many years of cooperation with Jerzy Giedroyc, the head of the Literary Institute in Maisons-Laffitte (France) and editor of the magazine “Kultura,” Osadczuk made an enormous contribution to the cause of Polish-Ukrainian understanding and reconciliation.
The book presentation took the form of a discussion event, which featured Basil Kerski, a former postgraduate student of Bohdan Osadczuk at the Free University of Berlin and currently the president of the “House of the History of North Rhine-Westphalia” Foundation (Stiftung Haus der Geschichte Nordrhein-Westfalen). The life and activities of Bohdan Osadczuk sparked great interest and numerous questions from the audience, which included Germans, Poles, and Ukrainians.
On April 21, 2026, the Educational and Scientific Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv hosted the annual International Scientific and Practical Conference “Globalization Challenges: Governance of the Future”.
The event brought together leading scientists, experts, and practitioners to discuss strategies for adapting state institutions to the conditions of global instability. The work of the third section, dedicated to the mechanisms of modern governance, attracted particular attention from the participants.
Tetiana Bevz, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, and Chief Research Fellow at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, delivered a report entitled “Public Governance in Times of Turbulence: Policy Implementation Mechanisms and Factors of National Consolidation”.
In her speech, Professor Tetiana Bevz analyzed the phenomenon of “polycrisis” – a state where security, economic, and social shocks overlap, creating a cascading destructive effect. According to the speaker, traditional bureaucracy proves ineffective in such conditions, and the institutional resilience of the state must rely on two basic vectors: administrative adaptability and national consolidation. To achieve this, the state must abandon rigid hierarchies in favor of flexible models: Agile governance with short decision-making cycles, decentralization of communities as autonomous “buffers of resilience,” and total digitalization to ensure the continuity of government through cloud technologies. However, these managerial mechanisms are effective only in the presence of strong social capital, the foundation of which is institutional trust that minimizes the costs of state coercion, transparent strategic communications to counter psychological operations (PSYOPs), and network governance that unites the efforts of the authorities and civil society into a powerful partnership synergy.
The discussion of the report sparked a lively debate among the conference participants, confirming the relevance of an interdisciplinary approach to solving the problems of modern state-building.
On the Institute’s website (in the “Our Publications” section), is available the electronic version of the monograph “Political aspects of teachings of Transcarpathian hasidic leaders in the 20 th century: mysticism and modernism”.
The monograph analyzes the political aspects of the teachings of 20th-century Transcarpathian Hasidic leaders and their practical implementation. This activity combined the traditional political agenda, formed during the emergence of Hasidism, with a specific reaction by the movement’s leaders to the challenges of the modern era. The author argues that certain concepts, which appear archaic at first glance, possess modern content, while others, despite their modern form, gravitate towards traditionalism.
The study is conducted based on the hypothesis that Hasidic doctrine constitutes a distinct source of political thought. Particular attention is paid to explaining how the development of political thought contributed to the preservation of the Hasidic movement in the modern world. Transcarpathia was destined to become one of the leading centers for the formation of the ideology of Orthodox Judaism that remains dominant to this day. Intended for political scientists, religious studies scholars, historians, and specialists in Jewish studies.
On April 10, 2026, in the city of Przemyśl, researchers from the I. F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine held a meeting with Jan Bartmiński, an economist and representative of local self-government. The event took place במסגרת the tenth seminar “State System in Action.”
The main topics of discussion included the organization and functioning of local self-government in Poland, as well as the experience of developing cross-border cooperation within the Carpathian Euroregion. Participants examined mechanisms of coordination between local self-government bodies of neighboring states, the role of euroregional structures in strengthening good-neighborly relations, and the potential of such formats for the post-conflict recovery of Ukraine’s border areas.
The discussion of the Polish experience in local self-government provided important practical insights. The Polish model, which combines the autonomy of communities in addressing local issues with clear mechanisms of intermunicipal coordination and financial capacity, is of significant interest in the context of Ukraine’s ongoing reforms. Participants emphasized that adapting this experience—taking into account the specific features of border regions—could substantially contribute to restoring the effectiveness of local self-government in Ukraine both during the war and in the post-war period.
The meeting in Przemyśl was the final event במסגרת the tenth seminar “State System in Action” within the framework of the research visit of the Institute’s delegation to Poland and confirmed the importance of deepening Ukrainian-Polish academic cooperation in the field of public administration and regional development.
The event was attended by members of the Department of Political Institutions and Processes of the I. F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, including Doctor of Political Sciences, Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine Galyna Zelenko; Doctor of Political Sciences Tetiana Liashenko; as well as Candidates of Political Sciences Nataliia Kononenko, Svitlana Stynyk, Rostyslav Balaban, Svitlana Brekharia, and Ihor Symysenko.
On April 10, 2026, a working meeting took place in the city of Rzeszów between researchers of the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and Jan Rokita, a politician and publicist who served as Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Internal Affairs and Administration (1991–1993 and 1997–2005). The event was held within the framework of the tenth seminar “State Structure in Action.”
During the meeting, key aspects of Poland’s state system reforms implemented over the past decades were discussed, along with their impact on the system of local self-government. Particular attention was paid to the experience of decentralization, the distribution of powers between central and regional authorities, as well as mechanisms for involving communities in public policymaking.
The meeting with Jan Rokita confirmed the relevance of the Polish experience for Ukraine, which is currently undergoing an active reassessment of models of territorial governance. Poland’s local government reform of the 1990s, which laid the foundations for effective decentralization and strengthened community capacity, can serve as an important reference point for Ukraine—taking into account both its achievements and the challenges faced by Polish society during its implementation.
The event was attended by staff members of the Department of Political Institutions and Processes of the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the NAS of Ukraine, including Doctor of Political Sciences and Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine Galyna Zelenko, Doctor of Political Sciences Tetiana Liashenko, as well as Candidates of Political Sciences Nataliia Kononenko, Svitlana Sytnyk, Rostyslav Balaban, Svitlana Brekharia, and Igor Symysenko.
On April 9, 2026, the tenth academic seminar was held, devoted to the issue of the resilience of the human rights protection system and the functioning of civil society in Poland and Ukraine. The event took place within the framework of the project “State System in Action,” funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Poland.
During the seminar, three academic presentations were delivered.
Resilience of the Human Rights Protection System in Poland
Prof. Monika Florczak-Wątor (Jagiellonian University) argued that the system of human rights protection in Poland has not collapsed but has undergone a process of transformation. She referred to theoretical approaches to constitutional resilience, particularly the concept developed by Christoph Grabenwarter, who defines resilience as the ability of a constitution and constitutional institutions to withstand and respond to crises and threats to democracy, the rule of law, and judicial independence. The position of András Jakab was also mentioned, according to whom constitutional resilience means the system’s capacity to resist attempts to undermine its core elements and depends not only on legal design but also on the political and social context.
In the subsequent part of her presentation, the speaker analyzed the consequences of the crisis of the Constitutional Tribunal, which led to the shifting of the main burden of human rights protection to ordinary courts and the Supreme Court. As a result, the system currently functions in a less coherent and less predictable manner than in the classical constitutional model. It was emphasized that although compensatory mechanisms allow for maintaining a certain level of protection, their long-term use cannot be considered a sufficient solution.
During the discussion, particular attention was paid to the scale of the constitutional crisis and its impact on the functioning of state institutions. It was stressed that even a crisis affecting a single key institution may have systemic consequences, and that the long-term effectiveness of the system requires the restoration of fundamental constitutional guarantees.
Civil Society in Poland
The second presentation, delivered by Ryszard Balicki (Poznań University), focused on the development and functioning of civil society in Poland. The speaker emphasized that its development took place under specific historical conditions, different from those of Western European countries. A special role was played by the “Solidarity” movement, which united millions of citizens in the 1980s.
Civil society was presented as a sphere of activity between the individual and the state, encompassing various forms of self-organization. The presentation also addressed the legal foundations of its functioning. Although the Constitution of Poland does not explicitly use the term “civil society,” its elements are present, particularly in the principle of subsidiarity. Important roles are also played by the law on access to public information and the regulation of local self-government. It was emphasized that civil society organizations can act as partners of the state, while also performing a monitoring and critical function. Problems arise when the authorities equate themselves with the state and perceive criticism as disloyalty.
The discussion addressed issues of organizational funding, transparency, and levels of public trust. The importance of mechanisms such as the allocation of 1.5% of income tax to public organizations was highlighted. Questions of volunteering and the degree of institutionalization of civil society in Poland and Ukraine were also discussed.
Civil Society, Media, and Social Partners in Ukraine under Wartime Conditions
The third presentation was delivered by Senior Research Fellow Tetiana Liashenko from our Institute, focusing on the functioning of civil society in Ukraine during wartime. She highlighted the high level of trust in volunteers, which has persisted since 2014 and exceeds trust in charitable organizations. Volunteering was identified as a key element of civil society functioning during the war.
The role of the media was also emphasized, as it performs both monitoring and mobilizing functions, influencing the formation of public opinion. At the same time, limitations on media pluralism under martial law were noted, along with the dominance of centralized information broadcasting, particularly the “United News” telethon.
The discussion explored the prospects for the development of civil society after the war, including the risk of activist fatigue. At the same time, Ukrainian experts expressed the view that the volunteer movement will remain an important component of public life. Issues related to the limits of media freedom and levels of trust in different information sources were also raised.
From the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, the seminar was attended by Deputy Director for Research, Professor Halyna Zelenko, as well as researchers from the Department of Political Institutions and Processes: Candidates of Political Sciences Nataliia Kononenko, Associate Professor Svitlana Sytnyk, Rostyslav Balaban, Svitlana Brekharia, and Ihor Symysenko.
The seminar confirmed the importance of joint analysis of institutional mechanisms for human rights protection and civic engagement for the effective functioning of both states. A shared conclusion was that the resilience of political systems depends not only on formal legal solutions but also on social, cultural, and institutional factors. At the same time, prolonged functioning under crisis conditions cannot substitute for stable and properly functioning institutions of the rule-of-law state.
On April 10, 2026, a public discussion “The Call: Making Sense of Ukrainian Jewry” took place in Kyiv. The conversation, organized by Hromadske Radio in partnership with UNESCO Ukraine, reveals the multi-layered history of relations between Ukrainians and Jews in Ukraine.
Invited experts and guests discussed the mutual influence of cultures, common traumas, experiences of coexistence, as well as how different historical eras shaped Ukrainian Jewry.
A participant in the discussion, a well-known Ukrainian historian, leading researcher in the ethnopolitical science department of our institute, head of the Ukrainian Center for Holocaust Studies Anatolii Podolskyi, said that in the 1990s, Russian scholars promoted the thesis about the alleged non-existence of Ukrainian Jews as a separate identity: “‘Ukrainian Jews’ is a natural phrase, they fought for it, and I was also a participant in this struggle. It was part of the struggle for Ukrainian identity.” As noted by a participant in the discussion, Diana Klochko, an art critic, essayist, and public lecturer, Ukrainian Jews were not only part of the cultural process, but also significantly influenced the formation of artistic trends and institutions in Ukraine. As one example, she mentioned the artist Abram Manevych, one of the founders of the Ukrainian Academy of Arts, emphasizing the uniqueness of this fact for Ukrainian history.
Anatolii Podolskyi, Diana Klochko
The discussion was moderated by Hromadske Radio host Elizaveta Tsaregradska.
The event took place as part of the Hromadske Radio project “Wiederstand. Resistance” — a podcast about Ukrainian Jews who changed the world.
Listen here: https://cutt.ly/HtFo6Svs
This initiative is part of UNESCO’s broader efforts to preserve and digitize documentary heritage in Ukraine. The podcast was created as part of a partnership project with UNESCO with financial support from the European Union. Its content is the sole responsibility of Public Radio and does not necessarily reflect the position of UNESCO and the European Union.
Anatolii Podolskyi, Diana Klochko
On the Institute’s website (in the “Our Publications” section), is available the electronic version of the monograph “Social-political Solidarity in Ukraine in the Post-war Period”.
The monograph contains a predictive analysis of problems that can affect the level of solidarity of Ukrainian society after the end of the Russian-Ukrainian war, in the conditions of reconstruction of Ukraine. The readiness of the country’s political and institutional system to perform a consolidating role is considered, possible lines of socio-group conflicts are analyzed, the main strategic lines of development are determined, on which a national consensus can be formed; a forecast is made regarding changes in the nature of the solidarity of the population and probable scenarios of this process are considered.
The main reasons and factors that can have a positive and negative impact on the level of cohesion of the authorities and citizens are considered, including in matters of dialogue between them, the use of information resources to influence public consciousness, and counteraction to external factors aimed at undermining social unity in Ukraine.
On April 2, 2026, an online lecture for students from the series “Historical Education for All. Myths and Facts: Between Legend and Reality” was held at the Donetsk Regional Institute of Postgraduate Pedagogical Education (Kramatorsk). The lecture was delivered by Anatolii Podolskyi, a leading researcher in the Department of Ethnopolitical Science of our Institute, Candidate of Historical Sciences.
The topic of his lecture – “Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust in Ukraine as a Form of Resilience and a Weapon against Russian War and Propaganda” – became the central line of discussion of the role of historical consciousness in the modern confrontation. The speaker emphasized that preserving the memory of the tragedy of the Jewish people in Ukraine is a critically important element in the formation of national identity and the civilizational choice of our state. In the conditions of Russia’s full-scale invasion, understanding the mechanisms of totalitarian regimes of the past helps society better recognize modern manifestations of misanthropic ideologies and strengthens internal resilience.
Anatolii Podolskyi speech
Anatolii Podolskyi separately focused on the issue of information security, emphasizing that a deep knowledge of history is an intellectual weapon against manipulation. For years, Russian propaganda has cynically exploited the topic of the fight against Nazism to justify its own aggression, but an honest and open discussion about of the Holocaust History makes it possible to effectively refute these myths.
During lecture
The lecture and discussion were moderated by Liliya Denisova, a methodologist at the Department of National Education, Extracurricular and Civic and Historical Education of the Donetsk Regional Institute of Postgraduate Pedagogical Education. About 90 history and social studies teachers from the Donetsk region took part in the event.
On March 25–27, 2026, representatives of the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) of Ukraine took an active part in the VII International Interdisciplinary Scientific and Practical Online Conference “Culture, Science, Education: Meaning-of-Life Values in Modern Conditions.” This significant scientific event took place within the framework of the XVII International Exhibition “Modern Educational Institutions–2026.”
Oleh Rafalskyi, Director of the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the NAS of Ukraine, Vice President of the NAS of Ukraine, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Academician of the NAS of Ukraine, and Academician of the National Academy of Educational Sciences (NAES) of Ukraine, delivered a welcoming speech to the participants of the event.
During Panel I of the plenary session (“Values of Peace vs. Values of War”), significant audience interest was sparked by the report “Meaning-of-Life Coordinates of Ukrainian Society in War: Transformation of Cultural Space and Values,” presented by Tetiana Bevz, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, and Chief Research Scientist at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the NAS of Ukraine.
During Panel II of the plenary session (“Aspects of the Development of Ukrainian Society as a Subject of the International Community”), a thorough report was presented by Oleksii Liashenko, Candidate of Historical Sciences and Research Scientist at the Institute. His speech was dedicated to an in-depth analysis of the topic “Models of Political Representation of Indigenous Peoples and National Minorities of Ukraine in the Context of Ethnopolitical Resilience.”
Participation in such large-scale events allows experts to keep their fingers on the pulse of global scientific and educational trends, effectively respond to contemporary challenges, and make a significant expert contribution to the development of domestic science and education.
Conference video materials:
On the Institute’s website (in the “Our Publications” section), is available the electronic version of the monograph “Ukraine in Struggle: War and the Transformation of society”.
The monograph contains an analysis of sociocultural transformations in Ukraine in the context of the current Russian-Ukrainian war. It examines the essential manifestations of worldview and existential shifts that have taken place at the level of individual and group consciousness regarding the perceptions of Ukrainian citizens about their life goals and value priorities.
It proposes concepts of the “Russian-Russian” threat to Ukraine’s national values and the protection of national identity in the context of cognitive warfare. It identifies transformations in the ideological preferences of Ukrainian citizens, the specifics of their assimilation of “European” values, and the ethnopolitical aspects of sociocultural changes. The sociocultural dimension of citizenship is outlined and the reassessment by Ukrainian citizens of past events and figures under the influence of Russian military aggression is characterized.
In March 2026, Anastasiia Dehterenko, PhD in Political Science, Associate Professor, researcher at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, participated in the international scientific workshop Local Party Politics (LoPaPol) Workshop 2026, held on March 24–25 at the Technical University of Darmstadt (Germany).
As part of the workshop, she presented the paper: “Local Party Competition and Coalition Governance in War-Affected Municipalities: Ukraine as a Critical Case of Resilient Local Democracy.”
The paper examines the transformation of local democracy in Ukraine under conditions of full-scale war. It focuses on the changing logic of party competition, the formation of governance coalitions, and adaptive mechanisms of municipal governance.
The study argues that war not only poses challenges to democratic institutions but also acts as a driver of their transformation. In particular, at the local level, there is a shift from ideologically structured competition toward governance oriented at effectiveness, crisis management, and the provision of essential public services.
Special attention is given to the concept of “survival coalitions” — pragmatic cross-party alliances formed to sustain governance under conditions of high uncertainty and security pressure.
In addition to the academic presentation, on March 23, 2026, within the framework of the same project, the book “Letters from a Ukrainian Mother: War, Love and Raising Children Between Sirens and Hope” was presented. The book combines academic reflection on war with personal experiences of motherhood and everyday life under wartime conditions, thus extending scholarly discourse through a human-centered perspective.
Available via international platforms (Amazon): https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GRTPXTYY
Participation in the workshop and the book presentation took place within the framework of the international project “The Voice of a Ukrainian Researcher in European Debates on Local Democracy: International Advocacy and Knowledge Transfer for Women’s Initiatives.”
The project was awarded to the Academy of Resilient Development of Ukraine, an institution dedicated to strengthening societal resilience, advancing educational and research practices, and supporting transformation processes in the context of war and post-war recovery.
The project is supported by the Ukrainian Women’s Fund with the assistance of the Government of Canada.
The engagement of Ukrainian scholars in international academic platforms contributes to the integration of Ukrainian research into the European scholarly space and supports the development of new approaches to understanding democratic resilience under conditions of war.
The full research paper and the official workshop program are available here.
On the Institute’s website (in the “Our Publications” section), is available the electronic version of the monograph “Ukraine in Struggle: War and the Transformation of the State”.
The monograph is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of transformations in Ukraine’s system of state power under the conditions of the Russian-Ukrainian war, which has become a key driver of profound institutional change. The study focuses on the contradictory processes of concentration and dispersion of power, as well as on the mechanisms for preserving democratic procedures during the legal regime of martial law. It examines the specific features of public administration functioning in crisis conditions, the transformation of bureaucratic competencies, and changes in the system of justice and anti-corruption policy. Particular attention is paid to the interaction between military administrations and territorial communities, as well as to the instruments of legitimizing public authority in wartime.
On March 10, Mykola Ryabchuk, a Principal Research Fellow of the Department of Political Culture and Ideology, participated in the conference “Latin America and Ukraine: Building Mutual Understanding,” organized in Madrid by the Barcelona Center for International Studies at the premises and under the patronage of the Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
In the conference hall
A few dozen experts from Ukraine, Spain, and several Latin American countries discussed, within the framework of three panels, the (mis)perception of the Russian war in Ukraine in Latin American societies, the influence of Russian propaganda, the notable differences between the generally supportive attitude toward Ukraine on the part of local societies and the more cynical (“pragmatic”) attitude on the part of ruling elites. The discussants agreed that Ukrainian events evoke much more empathic response when presented through life stories and individual human experiences rather than dry analytical categories and abstract arguments. Another issue that drew broad attention of the participants was a growing threat of the “new global disorder”, that accelerated dramatically under erratic policies of the new American administration. All the small and medium-sized countries should unite their efforts to prevent the division of the world into “spheres of influence” among three hegemonic predators; all of them have a vested interest in preservation of their sovereignty, and Ukraine’s current anti-imperial struggle might be of particular relevance for Latin Americans.
Honorary guests of the conference
Dr. Ryabchuk participated in all three panel discussions, presenting in part the arguments set forth in his article “Ukraine’s (im)possible engagement with the Global South,” and noting that, among all the countries of the so-called Global South, it is Latin America that is culturally and psychologically closest to Ukraine, and therefore it is here that the prospects for understanding and cooperation look the best — provided that appropriate governmental and non-governmental efforts are made.
Ukrainian participans of the conference
“Living through the War”, a collection of photographs presented during the conference
On March 5, 2026, the ninth academic seminar within the framework of the international research project “System in Action” took place at Uniwersytet Warszawski. The seminar focused on the functioning of the civil service and the relationship between public administration and the political system.
The seminar featured presentations by Svitlana Sytnyk (Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine) and Antoni Kamiński (Polish Academy of Sciences).
In her presentation, Senior Research Fellow of the Institute Svitlana Sytnyk offered an analysis of the reforms and the current functioning of the civil service in Ukraine, emphasizing the impact of political changes on the stability of the administrative system. In particular, she discussed the consequences of the 2019 elections and the challenges faced by the civil service under wartime conditions. Among these challenges are the suspension of some competitive recruitment procedures, the mobilization of civil servants for military service, and the need to maintain the institutional capacity of the administration during martial law. During the discussion, participants stressed the importance of transparency in accountability mechanisms for public officials, particularly the system of asset declarations. It was also noted that the Ukrainian Constitution lacks clear regulation of the fundamental principles of the civil service, which may contribute to institutional instability.
In the second part of the seminar, Professor Antoni Kamiński presented an analysis of the functioning of the civil service in Poland, focusing on the tensions between its professional character and political influence. His presentation addressed the problem of the politicization of the administration, including the phenomenon of appointing individuals affiliated with ruling political parties to public positions. Particular attention was also paid to the issue of so-called “staff rotation” and the challenges related to maintaining кадров stability in public administration, including in comparison with the situation in Ukraine.
During the concluding discussion, the participants noted that in both Poland and Ukraine the functioning of the civil service remains closely connected to the dynamics of the political system. One of the key challenges for the future is strengthening the professionalism of the civil service, ensuring transparency in recruitment procedures, and increasing public trust in state institutions.
The seminar was also attended by researchers from the Department of Political Institutions and Processes of the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine — PhD in Political Science Nataliia Kononenko, Rostyslav Balaban, Svitlana Brekharia, and Ihor Symysenko.
APA Style. Recommendatios for use
Join our official pages!
Summit Book Publishing has released a monograph by Pavlo Hai-Nizhnyk, Doctor of Historical Sciences and leading researcher at the Institute’s Department of Political Culture and Ideology, entitled «The Trump/Donro Doctrine and US National Security Strategy (2017–2025): The World at a Crossroads.”
Pavlo Hai-Nyzhnyk
The Trump/Donroe Doctrine and US National Security Strategies (2017–2025): The World at a Turning Point / Monograph / Pavlo Hai-Nyzhnyk. – Kyiv: Summit-Book, 2026. – 232 p., ill.
ISBN 978-966-986-804-6
The monograph analyses the editions of the National Security Strategy (2017 and 2025) developed by the administration of US President Donald Trump during his two terms in office at the White House and their transformation into the Trump Doctrine (the so-called Donroe Doctrine).
In particular, the 2017 National Security Strategy defined the geopolitical priorities of the United States in terms of the spread of Islamic terrorism, the strengthening of the role of Russia and China in the global world, changes in the regional balance of power, the intensification of transnational and migration processes, etc. and for the first time, it was stated that the world had entered an era of strategic competition.
The dominant approach of the United States to ‘preserving peace’ was emphasised as ‘projection of power,’ including through expanding its presence in global cyberspace. Consequently, in 2018, the National Defence Strategy and National Cyber Strategy of the United States were developed. In addition, in 2020 and 2021, the Solarium Commission on Cyberspace released its findings.
Despite the fact that Trump’s first term as president ended in January 2021, it was also studied in order to understand the consistency or fluidity of US foreign policy priorities and the key principles of the Strategy. Trump ended in January 2021, it was also studied in order to understand the consistency or fluidity of US foreign policy priorities and the key principles of the US National Security Strategy under President Biden, in particular in the Interim National Security Strategy Guidance (2021), the National Security Strategy (2022) and the Final Report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Position of the United States (2023), in which the concept of a ‘grey zone’ was used for the first time in high-level American official documents, the definition of a new world order and the possibility of a Third World War were discussed.
The main political groups (factions) surrounding the 47th President of the United States, Donald Trump, in 2025, which influence the implementation of the geopolitics and geostrategy of official Washington, have been analysed and identified. In November 2025, President Trump signed a new National Security Strategy, which became the official explanation of the Trump administration’s foreign policy worldview and was closely intertwined with his personal vision of the world order and America’s place and role in the international security system. An analysis of the strategy points to a grandiose and radical transformation of the White House’s geostrategic narratives, which influenced global geopolitics and changed the balance of civilisational influences on the world stage.
The main principles of the Trump Doctrine (Donroe Doctrine), its impact on the global security system, the prospects for the transformation of international relations and the establishment of a new world order are analysed.
The author’s vision of two directions of formation of the newest global model of the future world order is proposed: the imperocentric/imperopolar world or the dignuscentric/dignuspolar world (imperacentric world vs dignuscentric world). It is noted that the new world order can prevail not only as a result of a destructive war or the triumph of total chaos, but also as a consequence of a post-conflict compromise or agreement of positions and concessions in taming controlled chaos in order to prevent world ruin.
CONTENTS
Foreword. National Security Strategy as one of the main documents and a “road map” for the state on defense and foreign policy issues: from a formal document to a strategy for preventing new and future threats
Chapter 1. US National Security Strategy – 2017
Chapter 2. US National Defense Strategy and Cyber Strategy – 2018
Chapter 3. US National Security Strategy – 2021/2022
Chapter 4. Old ideologemes of Trump’s new team: the geopolitical grounding of pro-Russian mega-narratives
Chapter 5. US National Security Strategy – 2025 – Trump/Donro Doctrine
Afterword. Donro Doctrine and World Order: Impera-Polarity vs. Dignus-Polarity
On February 23, 2026, a large-scale international, political and public forum Café Kyiv was held in Berlin on the eve of the fourth anniversary of russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
This year’s forum was held under the slogan “Freedom Must Win”. For the fourth year in a row, the Konrad Adenauer Foundation (KAS) and numerous international partners have been holding such an event in Berlin in support of Ukraine, cultural, scientific, educational, and public projects aimed at helping our country and discovering the truth about European Ukraine. This year, about 5 thousand guests took part in the forum, who became participants in numerous panels of the forum. Cafe Kyiv has thus become the most important event for Ukraine in Europe and is almost unlike any other format for exchanging views and political solidarity.
Opening of the forum, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz speaking
Participants of the “Tracks of Memory” panel
At the beginning, the President of the KAS Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer and the Federal Chancellor of Germany Friedrich Merz emphasized that the future of Europe and the future of Ukraine are inextricably linked. Ukraine is defending not only its own freedom, but also the fundamental principles of the European order. “russia is not showing any readiness for peace,” the Federal Chancellor said. “This war will only end when russia can no longer finance it. That is why we must give Ukraine the opportunity to achieve a lasting and just peace.” “Russia is now waging war with even greater cruelty than four years ago,” Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer summed up at the beginning. “If Ukraine wins, Europe wins and freedom wins!”
During Anatoly Podolsky’s speech at the forum
In the work of the panel “Tracks of Memory: Ukraine and the Weimar Triangle. Best Practices in the Culture of Memory and Partnership of Cities”, organized by the Jewish Community of Düsseldorf with the support of the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was attended by Anatolii Podolskyi, a leading researcher in the Department of Ethnopolitical Science of our Institute, Candidate of Historical Sciences. In his speech, the representative of Ukraine at the forum presented the national experience in the field of studying and teaching the history of the Holocaust and combating anti-Semitism, and also refuted the manipulative Kremlin narratives aimed at justifying aggression against Ukraine.
Matthias Richter, Olena Likhovodova, Anatolii Podolskyi
On February, 19, 2026, the V All-Ukrainian Research and Practice Conference “Sociocultural Transformations in Ukraine in the 20th–21st Centuries and Overcoming the Soviet Legacy in Education, Culture, and Mentality” was held at Hryhorii Skovoroda University in Pereiaslav. The event brought together scholars and educators from different regions of Ukraine to discuss long-term societal changes, the impact of the Soviet past on contemporary institutions, and approaches to overcoming this legacy in the educational, cultural, and political spheres. Particular attention was paid to sociocultural processes unfolding under wartime conditions, identity transformations, language policy, and institutional reforms.
Among the participants were Deputy Director of the Institute, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor Yurii Nikolaets, and Leading Research Fellow of the Department of Political Institutions and Processes, Candidate of Political Sciences Rostyslav Balaban.
In his presentation, Yurii Nikolaets analyzed the impact of the sociocultural environment on citizens’ behavior in the context of the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war. He noted that lifestyles, systems of values, social roles, and identity significantly shaped public attitudes toward organizing resistance to aggression. At the same time, existing differences in public assessments of political parties, top-level politicians, historical figures, economic development prospects, foreign policy orientation, or language policy did not lead to internal armed confrontation. According to him, the involvement of Ukrainian citizens in hostilities on opposite sides of the frontline resulted exclusively from the actions of the Russian Federation aimed at achieving its foreign policy objectives.
He also addressed the emergence of a new social status in Ukraine—internally displaced persons (IDPs). The relocation of citizens from eastern regions to central and western oblasts created certain preconditions for broader use of the Ukrainian language in everyday communication. At the same time, he pointed to challenges in implementing state language policy, the continued influence of the Russian sociocultural environment (including through social media and messaging platforms), and the “normalization” effect of prolonged war. These factors, in his view, contributed not only to the persistence of a relatively large number of Russian-speaking citizens in everyday life but also to a certain increase in this number, which became particularly noticeable in 2025.
In his presentation, Rostyslav Balaban focused on the factors that long hindered the overcoming of the Soviet political paradigm. Among them, he identified the nationalization of the economy, entrenched paternalistic attitudes, and the lack of market-economy experience among the vast majority of citizens. For a considerable period, public perceptions centered on ideas such as “fair distribution,” “people’s property,” “free services,” and the notion that “the state must provide.” Political campaigns of the 1990s, in his assessment, reinforced these attitudes through numerous promises of improved living standards, contributing to the consolidation of a model of passive political behavior.
He further noted that Ukraine did not undergo comprehensive political lustration, and a significant part of the Soviet партий elite remained in power for some time, seeking to preserve its positions. Elements of Soviet-style “democratic centralism,” characterized by strict hierarchical subordination and limited opportunities for administrative modernization, persisted for years. According to the speaker, meaningful changes began with the introduction of the decentralization reform.
The presentations were followed by an open discussion. As a result of the conference, participants formulated shared approaches to assessing current sociocultural transformations and the role of institutional reforms in overcoming the Soviet legacy.
Scientific journal «POLITICAL STUDIES»
Новини
Оголошення
