The collective English-language monograph The Political System of Post-Soviet Ukraine: Constitutional Ramifications, Key Institutions, and Political Practices of the Independent Ukrainian State, 1991–2023 has been published in the prestigious international book series Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society (Vol. 299) by the German academic publisher ibidem-Verlag.
The volume was edited by Galyna Zelenko, Corresponding Member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor, and Deputy Director for Research at the I. F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
The monograph offers a comprehensive analysis of Ukraine’s political system, its constitutional foundations, institutional architecture, and political practices during the period from 1991 to 2023. Particular attention is devoted to the interaction between formal and informal institutions, the peculiarities of Ukraine’s semi-presidential model, and the functioning of parliament, government, judiciary, political parties, and electoral institutions. A separate chapter examines the challenges of state resilience under conditions of war and discusses prospects for post-war reconstruction.
The authors of the volume are scholars of the I. F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine: Rostyslav Balaban, Tetiana Bevz, Svitlana Brekharia, Nataliia Kononenko, Tetiana Liashenko, Oleksandr Maiboroda, Vitalii Perevezii, Oleh Rafalskiy, and Svitlana Sytnyk.
The foreword was written by Oleh Rafalskiy, Director of the I. F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and Academician of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Among the topics covered in the monograph are Ukraine’s form of government, parliament and parliamentarism, the party system, the role of civil society, financial-industrial groups, the judiciary, as well as constitutionalism and the institutional capacity of the state. The volume concludes with an authorial afterword by Galyna Zelenko, devoted to institutional resilience and the political trajectories of Ukraine’s future development.
The publication of this volume will contribute to the broader international visibility of research conducted by Ukrainian scholars and will further promote Ukraine-focused political science scholarship within the global academic community.
Contents by link.
On June 20–21, Aspen Institute Kyiv held its annual event, “Ideas Days,” in Chernivtsi, dedicated to the issues of social cohesion, trust, and the value of diversity in contemporary Ukraine.
This year, the event brought together more than 150 participants, including representatives of state authorities, local governments, businesses, educational institutions, civil society organizations, the military, and community leaders. The discussions focused on strengthening social unity during wartime and shaping the country’s post-war recovery.
One of the key events of the program was the panel discussion, “Social Cohesion in Post-War Ukraine: How It Depends on Us.” The panel featured Oleksandr Korniienko, First Deputy Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine; Father Hryhorii Kovalenko; Nataliia Yemchenko, Director of Public Relations and Communications at SCM; Taras Kytsmei, President of the SoftServe Group; and Galyna Zelenko, Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor, Corresponding Member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Deputy Director for Research, and Head of the Department of Political Institutions and Processes at the I. F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
The discussion was moderated by serviceman and television host Vadym Karpiak.
During the conversation, participants focused on the factors that shape public trust, the role of civic responsibility in strengthening democratic institutions, and the challenges of preserving unity amid diverse experiences, perspectives, and social groups.
Galyna Zelenko emphasized the importance of public trust as a foundation for state resilience and democratic development. Her remarks highlighted the functioning of political institutions, citizen participation in public life, and the need to develop an inclusive model of post-war recovery based on dialogue and shared responsibility.
The event took place in Chernivtsi, a city that has historically exemplified the coexistence of different cultures, traditions, and identities. The Bukovinian experience served as a starting point for discussing how to build a strong and cohesive society capable of transforming diversity into a source of development.
Once again, “Ideas Days” provided a platform for open dialogue among representatives of different sectors and generations around a key question: how to preserve and strengthen Ukraine’s social unity in a time of major challenges and future transformations.
On June 11, 2026, the University of Warsaw hosted the twelfth and final scientific seminar within the framework of the international research project “State Structure in Action: The Impact of Political System Types on the Quality of State Institutions’ Functioning. Polish and Ukrainian Experience and Perspectives.” For a year and a half, this project brought together Ukrainian and Polish scholars around current issues concerning the development of democratic institutions and public governance in our countries.
The seminar’s work was attended by researchers from the Department of Political Institutes and Processes: Candidates of Political Science Nataliia Kononenko and Rostyslav Balaban, and Doctor of Political Science Tetiana Liashenko.
The theme of the final meeting was dedicated to local self-government and decentralization reforms in Ukraine and Poland. Rostyslav Balaban delivered a report titled “Decentralization Reform in Ukraine.” The scholar noted that the decentralization reform is one of the most successful in Ukraine, having strengthened the agency of communities and the territorial consolidation of the state. The reform, launched in 2014–2015, led to the creation of 1,469 capable territorial communities instead of more than 11 thousand, the consolidation of districts (raions), and a significant increase in local budgets due to retaining a portion of taxes locally. At the same time, the reform requires further legislative formalization, constitutional consolidation, and the development of local democracy for successful post-war reconstruction and European integration.
On the Polish side, Professor Jarosław Flis spoke on the topic “The Significance of Local Self-Government for Political Life in Poland: Advantages and Disadvantages.” The author noted that local self-government plays a key role in Poland’s political life due to its three-tier administrative division (gminas, powiats, voivodeships) and the significant autonomy of communities. The author emphasized the stability of the system, its historical roots, and advantages such as the flexibility of division and the importance of gminas as the foundation of self-government. Meanwhile, the author pointed out certain shortcomings, particularly tension between levels of government, clientelism in resource distribution, political favoritism, and dependence on EU funds.
The discussion was joined by Ukrainian and Polish participants of the project: Professor Agnieszka Dudzińska, Professor Antoni Kamiński, Deputy Director for Research Professor Halyna Zelenko (online), as well as staff members of the Department of Political Institutes and Processes, Candidate of Political Science Nataliia Kononenko, and Doctor of Political Science Tetiana Liashenko.
The final seminar served not only as a platform for professional discussion but also as an opportunity to summarize the fruitful cooperation within the project. Over the course of twelve scientific seminars, the participants examined a wide range of issues related to state structure, political institutions, governance mechanisms, and democratic transformations in Ukraine and Poland.
The implementation of the project contributed to strengthening the Ukrainian-Polish scientific dialogue, exchanging experience between researchers, developing international academic ties, and elaborating new approaches to the analysis of contemporary political processes. The seminar participants expressed confidence that the results achieved within the project will become the foundation for further joint research and new international initiatives.
Nataliia Kononenko, a Leading Researcher at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, participated in the International Interdisciplinary Scientific Conference “Quo vadis, Europa in temporibus arduis?”, which took place on June 10, 2026, at the Maria Curie-Skłodowska University (Lublin, Republic of Poland). The conference was dedicated to an interdisciplinary reflection on the current challenges facing Europe in the context of worsening political, economic, and social crises, as well as the transformation of the security environment. The discussions focused on issues of European security, the development of the European Union, integration processes, the transformation of the international order, and Ukraine’s role in the contemporary European security architecture.
Within the framework of the conference, Nataliia Kononenko presented a report titled “Securitization of the Process of Ukraine’s European Integration,” which examined the peculiarities of rethinking Ukraine’s European integration under the conditions of a full-scale war and the strengthening of the security dimension of the European integration agenda. The event was organized by the European Center of the Maria Curie-Skłodowska University as part of the “Together for Europe” project – a Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence, co-funded by the European Union under the Erasmus+ program.
We have great news for the staff of the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and all the authors of the journal “Political Studies”.
The Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine has published an updated List of academic professional publications of Ukraine, Category “B”, which includes 1298 scientific journals. The list was formed according to new criteria that take into account the quality and transparency of editorial policy, the level of peer review, adherence to the principles of academic integrity, open access policy, the quality of metadata, and compliance with modern standards of scientific communication.
Based on the results of the evaluation, the scientific journal “Political Studies”, founded by the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, took 1st place among all Ukrainian professional publications in political sciences and 11th place in the cluster “Human Capital Development, Social Sciences and Journalism” among 259 scientific journals of Ukraine.
It is particularly important that the journal’s high result was achieved under the conditions of implementing updated requirements for scientific publications. Among the key evaluation criteria were the quality of peer review, the reliability of scientific data, the compliance of the publication’s subject matter with the declared specialties, the openness of editorial procedures, adherence to the principles of academic integrity, and the responsible use of artificial intelligence tools.
You can find the updated List of academic professional publications of Ukraine, Category “B”, at the following link:
Перелік наукових фахових видань України категорії «Б»
On 4 June, at a meeting of the Academic Council, a presentation was delivered by the Leading Research Fellow of the Department of Political Institutions and Processes, Doctor of Political Sciences Tetyana Lyashenko, titled “Civil and Social Dialogue as a Factor in Ukraine’s European Integration”.
The relevance of the topic is determined by the need for Ukraine to fulfil the requirements of the negotiation process for accession to the European Union, in particular regarding the institutionalisation of effective social partnership and structured civil dialogue, which are key prerequisites for successful European integration.
The presentation revealed the conceptual differences between civil and social dialogue, their place in the European model of governance, and their role in forming democratic mechanisms for citizens’ participation in the development of state policy.
M. Lyashenko presented a comparative analysis of key indicators of civil society development and institutional capacity in Ukraine and the European Union. She also characterised the main challenges in the areas of the rule of law, corruption control, regulatory quality, and the independence of the judiciary. Particular attention was paid to the activities of the National Tripartite Socio-Economic Council, the development of digital tools for citizen participation, the functioning of public councils and mechanisms for public consultations, as well as an assessment of their compliance with European standards of social partnership.
During the speech, issues of public trust in the main participants of social dialogue — the state, trade unions, employers, and civil society — were examined. It was emphasised that trust is an important institutional resource on which the effectiveness of social partnership and the implementation of European principles of governance largely depend.
In conclusion, the speaker noted that civil society has become one of the key factors in Ukraine’s resilience in wartime conditions and an important partner of the state in the process of implementing European integration reforms. At the same time, Ukraine’s further progress towards EU membership requires strengthening the institutional capacity of the state, developing a culture of social partnership, and ensuring the real influence of civil and social dialogue on the formation of state policy.
On May 27-28, 2026, the National Museum of the History of Ukraine in the Second World War, funded by the Memory, Responsibility and Future Foundation (Berlin, Germany), held a two-day international conference “Museum Practices and Transformations in the Coverage of World War II”.
The event brought together scholars and museum professionals, representatives of 43 leading institutions from 15 countries around the world, including world-renowned institutions as the Imperial War Museum (London, Great Britain), the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum (Auschwitz, Poland), the Terezin Memorial (Terezin, Czech Republic), the University of Miami (Oxford, Ohio, USA), the University of Victoria (Canada), and the network of European museum organizations NEMO (Berlin).
During the panel on commemoration of the victims of the Holocaust
The panel, which discussed the issues of preserving the memory of the Holocaust in the face of modern threats and challenges, was moderated by Anatolii Podolskyi, a leading researcher in the Department of Ethnopolitical Science of our Institute, Candidate of Historical Sciences. The introductory presentation on the activities of the National Historical and Memorial Reserve “Babyn Yar” was presented by the Director General of the Reserve, Roza Tapanova. The panel participants discussed the issues of memorialization, the responsibility of museums and international cooperation in combating the distortion of history. The discussion was attended by the Director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum Piotr M.A. Tsywinski, the Director of the Terezin Memorial Jan Rubinek, the Senior Historian of the POLIN Museum Krzysztof Persak and the Coordinator of the Historikerlabor e.V. Aike Stegen.
Speaking Anatoliy Podolsky
The conference became a platform for professional discussion and exchange of experience between museums, memorials and scientific institutions in Europe and the world. The focus of the discussion is the reinterpretation of World War II, particularly in post-communist countries, the memorialization of armed conflicts of the modern era, the preservation of historical memory in times of global instability, when anti-democratic forces seek to turn history into an ideological weapon. Special attention was paid at the conference to the experience of Ukraine, which, in the conditions of large-scale Russian aggression, is forming its own culture of memory and implementing unique practices of museification of war in real time.
Jan Rubinek, Piotr Tsywinski, Anatoliy Podolsky, Roza Tapanova, Krzysztof Persak
On May 27-28, 2026, the National Museum of the History of Ukraine in the Second World War, funded by the Memory, Responsibility and Future Foundation (Berlin, Germany), held a two-day international conference “Museum Practices and Transformations in the Coverage of World War II”.
The event brought together scholars and museum professionals, representatives of 43 leading institutions from 15 countries around the world, including such world-renowned institutions as the Imperial War Museum (London, Great Britain), the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum (Auschwitz, Poland), the Terezin Memorial (Terezin, Czech Republic), the University of Miami (Oxford, Ohio, USA), the University of Victoria (Canada), and the network of European museum organizations NEMO (Berlin, Germany).
During the panel on commemoration of the victims of the Holocaust
The panel, which discussed the issues of preserving the memory of the Holocaust in the face of modern threats and challenges, was moderated by Anatolii Podolskyi, a leading researcher in the Department of Ethnopolitical Science of our Institute, Candidate of Historical Sciences. The introductory presentation on the activities of the National Historical and Memorial Reserve “Babyn Yar” was presented by the Director General of the Reserve, Roza Tapanova. The panel participants discussed the issues of memorialization, the responsibility of museums and international cooperation in combating the distortion of history. The discussion was attended by the Director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum Piotr M.A. Tsywinski, the Director of the Terezin Memorial Jan Rubinek, the Senior Historian of the POLIN Museum Krzysztof Persak and the Coordinator of the Historikerlabor e.V. Aike Stegen.
Speaking Anatoliy Podolsky
The conference became a platform for professional discussion and exchange of experience between museums, memorials and scientific institutions in Europe and the world. The focus of the discussion is the reinterpretation of World War II, particularly in post-communist countries, the memorialization of armed conflicts of the modern era, the preservation of historical memory in times of global instability, when anti-democratic forces seek to turn history into an ideological weapon. Special attention was paid at the conference to the experience of Ukraine, which, in the conditions of large-scale Russian aggression, is forming its own culture of memory and implementing unique practices of museification of war in real time.
Jan Rubinek, Piotr Tsywinski, Anatoliy Podolsky, Roza Tapanova, Krzysztof Persak
May 27–30, 2026, Columbia University (New York, USA) hosted the 30th Anniversary World Convention of the Association for the Study of Nationalities (ASN) – one of the largest international multidisciplinary scholarly forums dedicated to the issues of nationalism, ethnicity, political conflicts, and identities, where leading scientists traditionally present their research findings.
This year, a large block of the program was dedicated to Ukrainian studies. Galyna Zelenko, Deputy Director for Research at the Institute, Professor, and Corresponding Member of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) of Ukraine, took part in the ASN Convention. Within the thematic section focused on modern political transformations in Ukraine, the researcher presented a report titled “The Transformation of Ukraine’s System of Checks and Balances under the Impact of the War: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.”
In the report Galyna Zelenko analyzed the impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on the functioning of the system of checks and balances of power in Ukraine. Based on quantitative (statistics regarding the implementation of the right to legislative initiative, the right of presidential veto) and qualitative analysis (spheres of competence of central government bodies), it was shown that the full-scale war indeed became an important factor in transforming the mechanisms of interaction between branches of power. At the same time, the prerequisites for strengthening the positions of the institution of the presidency were formed much earlier and are a consequence of the current constitutional model of state power organization, as well as the impact of the political results of the 2019 parliamentary elections, which resulted in a single-party pro-presidential majority in the Verkhovna Rada. It was the combination of institutional features of the constitutional system and political circumstances that created the conditions for the concentration of power resources even before the start of the full-scale aggression.
Avoiding value judgments, the researcher emphasized that the current configuration of power relations is an objective reality of wartime. Although such a model does not favor the full development of democratic processes and mechanisms of mutual control between branches of power, in conditions of war it largely acts as a necessary tool for ensuring effective state governance and national security.
Separately, the presentation raised the issue of perspectives for the development of the political system after the end of hostilities. According to Halyna Zelenko, there are reasons to assume the possibility of the so-called “wormhole effect” – the gradual habituation of society to the concentration of power and a decrease in demands for democratic procedures. At the same time, large-scale civic mobilization, the development of the volunteer movement, and an unprecedented level of public self-organization during the war significantly reduce the likelihood of such a scenario and create prerequisites for restoring full-fledged democratic mechanisms in the post-war period.
Participation in the ASN World Convention became an important opportunity to present the research results of Ukrainian scientists to the international academic community and to discuss current transformations of the political system of Ukraine in conditions of war.
Anastasiia Dehterenko, PhD in Political Science, Associate Professor, and Research Fellow at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, participated in the international Conference of the Standing Group on Central and East European Politics (CEESP), ECPR 2026, held on 21–22 May 2026 at Babeș-Bolyai University (Romania).
The conference was organized by the Standing Group on Central and East European Politics of the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) and brought together scholars from across Europe working in the fields of political science, democracy studies, international relations, security studies, and political transformations in Central and Eastern Europe.
As part of the panel “Dynamics between Russia and Ukraine”, Anastasiia Dehterenko presented her paper: “From Resilience to Antifragility: Ethnopolitical Governance in Wartime Ukraine”.
The paper examines the transformation of Ukrainian society and the system of ethnopolitical governance under conditions of full-scale war. Particular attention was devoted to the concept of antifragility, which allows Ukraine to be understood not only as a state enduring crisis, but also as a system capable of adapting, transforming, and strengthening its institutional and societal resilience under conditions of extreme pressure.
The presentation addressed:
- transformations in local governance during wartime;
- the role of territorial communities in ensuring resilience;
- the influence of ethnic and cultural diversity on adaptive governance mechanisms;
- emerging forms of solidarity and institutional practices under crisis conditions;
- prospects for rethinking the concept of resilience in contemporary political science.
Special attention was devoted to the case of Northern Pryazovya in Ukraine and to the experience of Ukrainian communities operating under constant security pressure.
Anastasiia Dehterenko’s participation in the conference was made possible through the support of the Ukrainian Women’s Fund in cooperation with the Ukrainian Resilient Development Academy, which contributes to strengthening the presence of Ukrainian academic voices in the international scholarly community.
The conference provided an important platform for presenting Ukrainian scholarly perspectives within the international academic environment and for fostering further cooperation with European research networks in the field of political and ethnic studies.
On May 19-20, Mykola Riabchuk, a principal research fellow in the Department of Political Culture and Ideology, took part in the annual international Lublin Forum, organized by the local Institute of Central Europe under the title “Russian Aggression: Roots and Forms”. On the first day, he moderated the introductory panel “History as the Instrument of Power and (Epistemic) Violence” as a follow-up to Prof. Serhii Plokhy’s keynote lecture on “The Rise and Fall of the Pan-Russian Idea”. In his initial remarks, Dr. Riabchuk averred that all the nations are prone to invent traditions and variously cherish them (fabricating a “suitable past”, in Hobsbawm’s words), but Russia is very special in this regard since it paces “invented tradition” (the faked inheritance of, and equation with, Kyivan Rus) into the core of its history and identity.
The very existence of independent Ukraine undermines Russian historical narratives epistemically and legitimizes them politically. Ukraine inflicts existential uncertainty and anxiety upon the empire, and provokes it to get rid of the irritant, eliminate uncertainty and re-establish habitual self-confidence based on historical myths and forgeries.
This is why Russian ruler Vladimir Putin is so obsessed with history, as one may notice from his quasi-historical writings and references, his one hour long “lecture” to the U.S. interviewer Tucker Carlson, or his aborted historical lecture to Trump in Alaska. No Russian leader has ever been so preoccupied with history just because there was no independent, Western-driven Ukraine, no real challenge to Russian mythical narratives, and therefore no reason for the imperial existential anxiety. Now, as Ukraine tries to fix epistemic injustice under the flag of decolonization, Russia faces the choice: either to cease to be an empire and become a “normal” nation (as late Zbigniew Brzezinski suggested), or to fight the war with Ukraine that became really existential for both sides.
The Forum Program is accessible here: https://ies.lublin.pl/aktualnosc/lublin-forum-2026-program
On May 14-15, 2026, the International Scientific and Practical Conference “”Unity in Diversity”: Historical, Socio-Cultural and Geopolitical Dimension of the Main Idea of the European Union for Ukraine” was held at the O. Honchar Dnipro National University
The conference was held within the framework of the Erasmus+ Jean Monnet Project Module “European multiculturalism as an experience and a path for Ukraine’s European integration” with the financial support of the European Union.
During conference
The conference was attended by well-known Ukrainian and foreign historians, philosophers, and political scientists. The leading researcher of the Department of Ethnopolitical Science of our institute, Candidate of Historical Sciences Anatolii Podolskyi (member of the conference organizing committee), delivered a scientific report at the conference. The report was devoted to the current state of research and educational activities in the field of Holocaust Studies & Teaching, the fate of the Jews of Ukraine during the World War II, as well as the state of research in the field of modern history of Ukrainian Jewry. The speaker noted in his speech that during the Russian war against Ukraine, the development of Jewish studies did not stop, and was and is a component of research into multicultural modern Ukrainian society.
Anatolii Podolskyi speech
The following research areas were discussed during the conference:
- historical dimension of “Unity in Diversity”: European experience for Ukraine (genesis of the idea, historical lessons and challenges of overcoming national, ethnic and other antagonisms and forming a European community, the role of cultural heritage and common historical memory in the formation of European identity; Ukraine in the historical context of European diversity: Ukraine’s multicultural past as a basis for integration into the EU, historical parallels and differences between the Ukrainian path to unification and the European experience; rethinking national history and identity in the context of European values.
- socio-cultural dimension of “Unity in Diversity”: the impact of the idea on society, culture, education, minority rights and domestic policy of Ukraine on the path to the EU; cultural, linguistic and ethnic diversity of Ukraine as a resource and challenge for the implementation of the main idea of the EU (practical implementation by the state of EU principles, ensuring the rights of national minorities of Ukraine in accordance with EU standards, the impact of migration processes and internally displaced persons on the socio-cultural structure of Ukraine, etc.)
- the geopolitical dimension of “Unity in Diversity” for Ukraine: the strategic significance of the idea in Ukraine’s foreign policy, security and European integration process.
The Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnonational Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Sciences of Ukraine participated in the exhibition and presentation of research and developments of the NAS of Ukraine on the occasion of the Science Day of Ukraine, which took place on May 14–15, 2026.
The exhibition and presentation featured the latest results of the scientific research of the Institute’s staff. In particular, it included the monographs: “Political Security of Ukraine: The Problem of Stabilizing the Country’s Political Field. Forecast Assessment, Security Mechanisms”; “Adaptive Changes in the Functioning of the Political System of Ukraine in the Context of Post-War Reconstruction”; “Institutional (In)Capacity of the State in Ukraine: How to Break the Vicious Circle”; “Socio-Political Solidarity in Ukraine Under War Conditions”; “Socio-Political Solidarity in Ukraine in the Post-War Period”; “Ukraine in Struggle: War and Transformation of the State”; “Ukraine in Struggle: War and Transformation of Society”. As well as a series of analytical reports.
The publications caught the attention of the President of the NAS of Ukraine, Anatoly Zagorodny. He highly commended the scientific achievements of the staff, particularly the publication of the monographs, noting that each published work is the result of deep research, a significant contribution to the development of science, and a testament to the high professionalism of our authors. Even in challenging times, our colleagues demonstrate dedication to their work and continue to conquer new scientific heights.
On May 12, 2026, the Scientific and Methodological Seminar “National Consolidation: Methods of Study and Conceptual Framework” was held at the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. The event was devoted to discussing theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of national consolidation processes in contemporary conditions.
The seminar brought together scholars, experts, and representatives of research institutions working in the fields of political science, public administration, social psychology, philosophy, and social communications. The main focus of the seminar was placed on defining the conceptual framework for the study of national consolidation, analyzing its key components, and identifying methods for assessing and monitoring the dynamics of consolidation processes in contemporary Ukrainian society.
A central part of the event consisted of academic presentations delivered by the Institute’s researchers. Professor Tetiana Bevz, Chief Research Fellow of the Department of Theory and History of Political Science and Doctor of Historical Sciences, presented a report entitled “The Concept and Discourse of National Consolidation in Contemporary Political Science.” In her presentation, the researcher focused on the peculiarities of the use of the concept of “national consolidation” in contemporary political and academic discourse, outlined the main approaches to its interpretation, and emphasized the complexity of developing a universal definition of this phenomenon in the context of social transformations and war.
The second presentation, “Specific Features of Consolidation in Authoritarian and Democratic Regimes,” was delivered by Maksym Rozumnyi, Head of the Department of Theory and History of Political Science and Doctor of Political Sciences. The presentation addressed the differences in the mechanisms of social consolidation within democratic and authoritarian political systems, as well as the role of political institutions, public trust, and civic participation in shaping consolidation processes.
Following the presentations, a professional discussion took place during which participants exchanged views on methodological approaches to the study of national consolidation, the possibilities of applying interdisciplinary research methods, and the criteria for evaluating consolidation processes.
Invited experts participating in the discussion included: Iryna Pavlenko, Candidate of Historical Sciences and Head of the Department for Political System Development at the Center for Social Research; Yuliia Kaplan, Candidate of Political Sciences and Head of the Department of Social Communications at the National Institute for Strategic Studies; Olena Sushyi, Doctor of Sciences in Public Administration and Head of the Department of Psychology of Masses and Communities at the Institute for Social and Political Psychology of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine; Tetiana Vasylevska, Doctor of Sciences in Public Administration and Professor at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv; and Volodymyr Fadieiev, Head of the Department of Philosophical Problems of Ethnos and Nation at the H. S. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Researchers from the Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine also took an active part in the discussion, including Corresponding Member of the NAS of Ukraine and Professor Oleksandr Maiboroda; Professor Viktor Kotyhorenko; Professor Yurii Nikolaets; Professor Yurii Shapoval; Associate Professor Oleh Kondratenko; Nataliia Kononenko; Rostyslav Balaban; Oleksandr Palii; Mykola Horbatiuk; Alyona Hurkivska, PhD in Political Science; and other members of the Institute’s academic staff.
During the discussion panel, participants focused on several key issues. In particular, they discussed the problem of defining the essence of national consolidation in contemporary conditions, the correlation between political, ideological, and socio-psychological factors of consolidation processes, as well as the possibility of developing a system of criteria and indicators for assessing the level of social consolidation.
Special attention was also devoted to tracking the dynamics of consolidation processes and identifying effective research tools for their analysis. Participants emphasized the importance of combining political, sociological, psychological, and communicative approaches in the study of contemporary socio-political processes.
The seminar became a platform for professional discussion of current methodological challenges in contemporary political science and for outlining directions for further research in the field of national consolidation.
On May 7, 2026, the University of Warsaw (Republic of Poland) hosted another academic seminar within the framework of the “State System in Action” project, with the participation of the Deputy Director for Research, Professor Halyna Zelenko, as well as researchers from the Department of Political Institutions and Processes: Doctor of Political Sciences Tetiana Liashenko and Candidates of Political Sciences Nataliia Kononenko and Rostyslav Balaban.
The topic of discussion focused on anti-corruption mechanisms, the transparency of anti-corruption bodies, and access to public information. The Ukrainian presentation, entitled “The Evolution of the Institutional Architecture of Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Policy: Development, Effectiveness, and Evaluation,” was delivered by Yuliia Kobets from Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University. The author noted that anti-corruption policy in Ukraine has evolved as a long-term process shaped by a combination of internal political transformations. Despite the institutional reforms introduced after 2014, corruption continues to affect public administration and the perception of Ukraine as a partner in reconstruction and European integration. The situation further deteriorated during the constitutional crisis of 2020, linked to the Constitutional Court’s decision restricting the powers of the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) and effectively abolishing electronic asset declarations. According to the speaker, by 2025 Ukraine had achieved noticeable progress in strengthening institutional capacity and improving transparency; however, problems of political interference, incomplete judicial reform, and growing war-related risks still persist.
From the Polish side, Professor Mariusz Jabłoński of the University of Wrocław presented a report entitled “Openness of Information on the Functioning of Public Authorities and the Activities of Public Officials as a Guarantee of a Democratic State Governed by the Rule of Law.” The presentation focused on the right of access to public information in Poland as one of the key guarantees of a democratic state governed by the rule of law. The speaker emphasized that the system of transparency guarantees in Polish law is comprehensive and includes both the general right of access to information and specialized mechanisms (transparency of public finances, public procurement, competitive procedures, and asset declarations, etc.), which complement one another. According to Professor Jabłoński, the most effective instrument of civic oversight over public authorities remains the Act on Access to Public Information of September 6, 2001, which has fundamental importance. At the same time, administrative courts play a particularly significant role in the development of the right to information by protecting the principle of maximum openness and limiting the possibility of unjustified refusals to provide information. The author stressed that transparency in the activities of public authorities and persons performing public functions is a key element in preventing corruption, increasing citizens’ trust in the state, and strengthening the principles of a democratic state governed by the rule of law.
Following the presentations, participants engaged in a discussion on ways to combat corruption risks, the role of courts—especially administrative courts—in developing the right to information, and the transparency of asset declarations in both Ukraine and Poland.
On May 4–5, 2026, the international conference Integrated Strategic Analysis for Ukraine Conference was held in Bucharest, bringing together leading security experts, analysts, and representatives of state institutions from the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, Romania, and Ukraine. The event took place at the Romanian Ministry of Defense and served as another platform for discussing current security challenges and exploring joint strategic solutions in the context of growing global instability.
At the conference, Deputy Director for Research, Professor, Corresponding Member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine G. I. Zelenko delivered a presentation titled “Who Are Ukrainians Today? Identity, War, and the Future.” In her presentation, the researcher, drawing on sociological survey data, outlined the dynamics of changes in civic and political identities under the impact of the full-scale war. She also substantiated how the strengthening of civic and political identity translates into societal self-organization, including volunteerism, the reinforcement of the European vector of foreign policy, and the rethinking of relations with the state.
The conference became an important platform for the exchange of experience between international partners and Ukrainian experts, and contributed to a deeper understanding of the Ukrainian context among Western specialists. The discussions held during the event demonstrated a high level of interest from the international community in supporting Ukraine and jointly developing security strategies in Europe.
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE IN BUCHAREST
On April 27, Mykola Riabchuk, a principal research fellow in the Department of Political Culture and Ideology, took part in a two-day Polish-Ukrainian forum titled “Paths to Ukraine’s Recovery: Security and Defense Dimensions”, where he participated in a panel discussion with Łukasz Adamski, a renowned expert on Polish-Ukrainian relations and deputy director of the J. Mieroszewski Center. The forum organizers framed the topic of the discussion as “Beyond Social Media: Preliminary Findings from Public Opinion Surveys in Poland and Ukraine after 2022.” Both speakers agreed that over the past four years, mutual attitudes between Poles and Ukrainians have noticeably deteriorated, with this deterioration being particularly notable on the Polish side.
Despite the truly significant role played by Russian online propaganda in this deterioration, and despite a certain disappointment felt by Poles and Ukrainians toward one another following the euphoria of spring 2022, the main reason for the rapid deterioration on the Polish side (whereas on the Ukrainian side it is minimal) lies, according to the Ukrainian scholar, in deep-seated Polish resentments, postcolonial traumas, and a complex of the eternal innocent victim, to whom everyone is guilty and responsible, while she herself owes nothing to anyone. This is precisely why Russian propaganda proves so effective here—far more effective than anti-Polish propaganda in Ukraine—because it falls on fertile psychological ground. Both Poles and Ukrainians have their own prejudices and stereotypes, but these can only be overcome through honest dialogue—through awareness and acknowledgment, rather than one side’s unconditional and unconstrained condemnation of the other.
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.
Scientific journal «POLITICAL STUDIES»
Новини
Оголошення
