Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Ukraine Journal National Security and Defence

11. Basic Principles and Means of the Formation of a Common Identity of Ukrainian Citizens

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko and Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
06-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The materials presented in this issue are a result of the third stage of the Razumkov Centre’s project “Formation of a Common Ukrainian National Identity under New Conditions: Features, Prospects and Challenges”. From the results of the previous stages of the project we were able to form a comprehensive picture of various identity aspects of Ukrainian citizens, their hierarchy and interrelations and to identify features determined by the impact of national, linguistic, cultural, age and other factors. A particular task of the project’s third stage was the research focus on basic components of identity: the system of values inherent to the citizens of Ukraine, their features and regional differences. The struggle to promote European values in Ukraine was the driving force of the Revolution of Dignity; and the continuing confrontation of Ukraine with Russian aggression represents a struggle of different value-based systems. Establishing common values as the basis for a common national identity is a critical task for consolidation of Ukrainian society. The results of the public opinion survey conducted by the Razumkov Centre in March 2017 and published herein make it possible not only to understand value orientations of Ukrainian society, but also to compare them with values of citizens of some European countries as well as values of Russian citizens. This was made possible by having the Razumkov Centre’s survey include the same questions used in the international comparative World Values Survey research. The results of the study confirm that formation of the value system of Ukrainians and their identity is affected by complex social and political processes – the military conflict with Russia, protracted economic crisis, and political instability. This leads to a conflicted and internally contradictory nature of these value orientations. Positive trends may be considered to include the predominance of a common civil identity, an increase in Ukrainian national identification. On the other hand, there is a concern about the low level of trust among citizens of Ukraine in other members of society and government institutions and reliance on a “strong leader”. Another task was to determine the key components of state policy on the formation of a common national identity in terms of its content, institutional and organisational elements. For this purpose the Razumkov Centre conducted the expert survey of 106 experts: representatives of national and local government, research and higher educational institutions, political parties and non-governmental organisations. Survey results demonstrated an understanding among the expert community of the procedural nature of a national identity formation and, at the same time, the need for targeted government actions in this area, including the development and implementation of the appropriate national policy. To gain a more comprehensive approach to formation of a common national identity, the Razumkov Center has conducted interviews with leading national scientists and experts in philosophy, political science, sociology, ethnic policy, linguistics, and cultural studies. Based on the results of all stages of the project, the Razumkov Centre has prepared an updated draft Conceptual Approach to the formation of a common national identity of Ukrainian citizens. The Razumkov Centre believes that this document could be the basis for further discussion, elaboration, adoption and implementation by the government. “Hybrid” war waged against Ukraine makes these steps especially urgent.
Topic:
Citizenship, Ethnicity, Language, Nation-State, and Identity
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

12. Political Culture and Parliamentarism in Ukraine: Current State and Main Problems

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko and Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The Revolution of Dignity, countering Russia’s aggression and the controversial, at times painful for society, process of reform implementation in different sectors have significantly aggravated the problem of efficiency of people’s interests representation mechanisms operated by government bodies, as well as the issue of people exercising their constitutional right to participate in the management of public affairs. The evolving relationship between government and society attests, on yet another occasion in the modern history of Ukraine, to the exact same phenomenon: the period of society’s enthusiasm, active, even sacrificial participation in political processes, and high public expectations change to disappointment, despair and apathy threatening to turn into aggression. Electing candidates, who in the moment of elections seemed to match public expectations for government representatives, changes to negative, even hostile attitude with time. The level of trust in elected higher government institutions in such periods drops from highest possible to minimal levels, as it happened in 2005-2009 and 2014-2017. Today, the growing activism of civil society and manifestations of its major creative potential after the second Maidan are combined with the risks and dangers that this energy might become destructive for democracy. This problem has two components: special aspects of people’s political culture, on the one hand, and the efficiency of mechanisms for implementing their political will, representative institutions – on the other. Without understanding these aspects, their mutual influence and correlation, the process of improving democracy institution in Ukraine will keep going on according to the “trial and error” scenario, while political system operation remains doomed to regular crises, which might turn into more “revolutions” at extreme points. Democratic system stability today is impossible without further constructive (not just protesting) participation of citizens equipped with knowledge of political institutions and skills to participate in them. The main goal of the Razumkov Centre’s Project “Political Culture and Parliamentarism in Ukraine: Ways to Improve Representative Democracy” is to use the study of the current state and special aspects of Ukrainian citizens’ political culture, in particular, their attitude to interest representation institutions, and analysis of the most topical problems influencing the efficiency of operation of the highest representative and the only legislative body in Ukraine – the Verkhovna Rada, in order to create recommendations for the development of an adequate policy for citizens’ political culture formation and optimisation of political institutions with the purpose of raising the quality of democratic representation.
Topic:
Citizenship, Domestic Politics, Political Culture, and Parliamentarism
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

13. Ukrainian Identity: Changes, Trends, Regional Aspects

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The Razumkov Centre has been studying the identity of Ukrainian citizens since 2005, when for the first time in history of an independent Ukraine distinctions between the society’s different identity groups have created a foundation for a large-scale socio-political conflict known as the Orange Revolution. These studies, conducted in the period of 2005-2009 in Ukraine and its separate regions, including Crimea, uncovered a number of special features of Ukrainian identity, the major ones being: contradictions in the process of forming a common, national civic identity and vagueness of its prospects; presence of an opposing trend – formation of regional sub-national identities on the basis of regional localisation of different linguistic, cultural, national and ethnic, denominational identities of citizens in various parts of Ukraine. The studies have also found interdependence and cross impact between different identity distinctions, in particular linguistic and cultural, and the civic identity.1 Subsequently, starting from 2010, a whole number of events of different scale have taken place in the history of Ukraine due to internal and external factors. These events have, on the one hand, significantly influenced national identity formation in Ukraine and, on the other hand, have themselves become the consequence of the existing trends. In particular, the Razumkov Centre has expressed warnings that since a common national identity of Ukrainian citizens has not been fully formed yet, there is a risk of sub-national identities of some communities integrating with other foreign national identities. Unfortunately, this came true, with such tragic consequences as annexation of Crimea by Russia, attempts by several Eastern and Southern regions to split away from Ukraine (known as the “Novorossiya project”) and the armed conflict in Donbas with thousands of casualties. Results of opinion polls conducted in 2014-2015 demonstrate changes in different dimensions of Ukrainian citizens’ identity. Along with this, due to the circumstances, these changes are of different, at times inconsistent nature, and consequently may bring different outcomes for further development of Ukrainian society and statehood. This creates a need for deeper comprehensive study of Ukrainian identity, changes that occurred during 2006-2015, current processes and trends. The Razumkov Centre’s Project “Identity of Ukrainian Citizens: Changes, Challenges and National Unity Prospects” aims to solve these tasks. A national opinion poll was conducted as part of this project.2 The presented informational and analytical materials contain main results of this poll in terms of different aspects of citizens’ identity3 (“identities”) and their attitude to major topical problems in the society,4 and also describe aspects of identity of citizens from different regions and social groups.
Topic:
Politics, Citizenship, Language, and Identity
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

14. Constitutional Process: Current Results, Risks and Prospects

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The current stage of the constitutional process was initiated by the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko in March 2015 with the establishment of the Constitutional Commission.1 Already on 1 July 2015, the Parliament registered the Draft Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine – on decentralisation” (Reg. No. 2217a), developed by the Constitutional Commission and submitted by the President of Ukraine. On 31 August 2015, the day this bill was approved, grenades exploded in front of the Parliament on the Constitution Square. The presence in this bill on decentralisation of the controversial Paragraph 18 “Transitional Provisions” did not allow entering the process of final adoption of amendments to the Constitution (on decentralisation) in compliance with requirements of Article 155. On 25 November 2015, the subsequent Bill “On Amendments to the Constitution – on justice” (Reg. No. 3524) was registered in Parliament. In February 2016, the bill was approved, and on 2 June 2016, finally adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. For the first time since the “political reforms” of December 2004, significant amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine were legally introduced. The adoption of a decision by Parliament to amend the Constitution of Ukraine in the part of justice, did not complete the reform of the judiciary. The fact that a number of amendments to the Constitution raised deep concerns among representatives of the expert community, and even more the judicial community, cannot be ignored. However, a number of updated provisions of the Constitution, implemented in effective mechanisms of special laws, are capable of positively influencing the judiciary. In this regard, firstly, the adoption by Parliament of the Law of Ukraine “On Judicial System and Status of Judges” in an unconstitutional way, with a gross violation of the Verkhovna Rada requirements cannot but cause concern. Second, the main content of the implemented law, introduced to the Parliament without obtaining opinions of the Scientific Experts Office or the Venice Commission, or discussing it in the expert community, can cause a real chaos in the process of implementing constitutional changes. The question remains uncertain about the prospects of the Draft Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine – on human rights and freedoms” prepared by the Working Group of the Constitutional Commission. The analytical report has summarized theoretical grounds of regulations contained in the draft law. Since the work on the draft amendments to the Constitution was completed by the Working Group, the Constitutional Commission must make a final conclusion as to its readiness for submission to the President, who will decide on the introduction of a relevant bill to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Both aspects of constitutional amendments were analysed in the study by the Razumkov Centre, which is reflected in the content of the Analytical Report.
Topic:
Human Rights, Reform, Constitution, and Judiciary
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

15. Consolidation of Ukrainian Society: Challenges, Opportunities, Pathways

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
This issue of the journal summarises findings of the second stage of the Razumkov Centre’s Project “Formation of a Common Ukrainian Identity under New Conditions: Features, Prospects and Challenges”. Studies undertaken as part of the first project stage helped to identify the shifts that took place in various aspects of national identity between 2005 and 2015, including those brought about by the Revolution of Dignity and provoked by the Russian aggression against Ukraine. These studies paint a fairly detailed portrait of identities of Ukrainian citizens, including cross-regional differences and specifics attributable to citizens belonging to various social groups.1 Certain important issues remain insufficiently explored, particularly the hierarchy of various types of identity, the correlation between civil, national and ethnic components of identity, how citizens in different regions perceive one another, public assessment of the significance of cross-regional differences for the country’s future, etc. Since the previous public opinion survey, notable changes have taken place at the state and society levels as well as in the international political landscape. These changes have affected the public mood. They mainly have to do with falling living standards, a declining level of trust in government institutions, political parties and individual politicians, active attempts of the aggressor state to destabilise situation in Ukraine, lack of progress in resolving the Donbas conflict and returning Crimea, a somewhat decreased level of attention to Ukraine from the international community coupled with Russia’s growing influence on political processes in certain Western countries, the conflicting positions of some EU countries on Ukraine’s European future, certain aspects of Ukraine’s relations with the EU as well as Russia’s role in the ongoing armed conflict. With these factors in mind, the Razumkov Centre has outlined the following key research objectives for the second stage of the project: • Obtain a more detailed picture of how citizens understand specific aspects of identity (particularly civil and socio-cultural identity); • Assess the intensity and nature of the impact these socio-political and international trends have on various identity aspects of citizens, primarily the civil aspect; • Study how citizens in different regions of Ukraine perceive one another, explore the specifics of this perception and the existing beliefs and stereotypes; • Identify the specifics of the viewpoints that residents in different regions have on factors contributing to the division or consolidation of society, and assess their potential impact; • Learn about the attitudes of citizens to possible political approaches and specific efforts in “sensitive” areas, particularly those concerning language, cultural and national policies, and their impact on national unity; • Analyse the experience of specific post-Soviet and post-socialist countries of Europe in matters of shaping and preserving national identity. Formulated in this way, objectives are aligned with overriding goal of the second project stage: to devise effective and theoretically sound political tools adapted to the existing social reality (i.e., the substance of public policy and methods for implementing it) intended for shaping a common national identity among Ukrainian citizens, which would accelerate the process of consolidation of Ukrainian society, help achieve mutual understanding and support national unity.
Topic:
Public Opinion, Citizenship, Identity, and Society
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Poland, Romania, and Baltic States

16. Russia's "Hybrid" War -- Challenge and Threat for Europe

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko and Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
Russia’s aggression against Ukraine that started in February 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and is still going on in Donbas, demonstrated critical vulnerability of the Western world to Kremlin’s “hybrid warfare” policy. The West, divided and burdened with internal problems (“migrant crisis”, Brexit) and external challenges (D. Trump “effect”, Syrian war), is experiencing a critical deficit of unity and coordination of actions toward Russia, lack of public awareness as to the nature and goals of Putin’s regime, fears of nuclear confrontation with Russia. Meanwhile, the far-right political movements, Euroscepticism, populism, isolationism – i.e., “LePenisation” of Europe – may gain ground after the elections in France and Germany. (Quite telling in this context have been the recent elections in Bulgaria and Moldova, where pro-Russian socialists won). All of this is happening amid total depreciation of global and regional security structures, and is threatening not only with escalation of conflicts on the continent, but also with destruction of the European community. The Western world has not generated adequate and effective means, mechanisms and policies to counter Russia’s hybrid expansion. On the contrary, there is an increasing threat of disintegration of a single “sanctions front”, which Kremlin will view with impunity and encouragement for further active actions. The conflict in Syria has proven that Kremlin’s imperial policy is not limited to the post-Soviet space, and Ukraine is just a springboard for further expansion. In the past three years, the Russia-Ukraine conflict has become deep-rooted and long-term causing tectonic changes in relations between Kyiv and Moscow. Russia’s aggression has inflicted unprecedented human, territorial, economic losses on Ukraine, and from the entire range of bilateral relations (not to mention the war itself), for a long time to come has left Ukraine only the format of confrontational coexistence with Russia – limited, forced, and cold – depending on the unfolding situation. The Russia-Ukraine hybrid war is not a local, peripheral conflict. Kremlin’s aggression poses a threat not only to Ukraine’s statehood and sovereignty, but also to the unity of the EU and, in general, to the political structure of Europe. Therefore, finding adequate, effective forms of response, developing a common policy of countering Russia’s expansion is critically important.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Conflict, Hybrid Warfare, and Expansion
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

17. Law Enforcement System in Ukraine: Status, Problems, Prospects for Reform

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko and Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The year 2013 saw the beginning of a unique period in the history of an independent Ukraine. The victory of the Euromaidan, which seemed to be a successful completion of the Revolution of Dignity, in reality was merely the first step on the path of revolutionary transformation of all aspects in the life of Ukrainian society and state. Security issues are of high priority in the ambitious plans of reforms initiated by the Ukrainian government: “The security vector is our certainty about our tomorrow, being peaceful and happy. It is our certainty of justice and inevitable punishment for each crime. Our certainty that no person is unfairly convicted. The certainty of guaranteed security of investments and property”.1 Guaranteeing the required level of domestic security, primarily the security of a person and a citizen, largely depends on the capability of the law enforcement agencies to perform the functions entrusted to them by national law, and their ability to serve the society and not the government or their own selfish interests. In the system of functions delegated by the state to law enforcement agencies, the policing function has a special role, since the police, in addition to being the most numerous structure, is on the “frontier”, where a citizen may receive protection from, or be persecuted by, the state. For this reason, police reform is receiving considerable attention from the Ukrainian government, society and Ukraine’s international partners. The overwhelming majority of police officers also acknowledge the need for radical change, being dissatisfied with working conditions, level of social security and the negative view of their work on the part of society. Analysis of the current reform efforts leads to the conclusion that, despite the presence of many extraordinary aspects and significant positive differences, they still have many features typical of the prior unsuccessful reform attempts. The most important reasons impeding the implementation of the generally positive declarations and concept documents include the lack of political will as well as the pursuit of political and private ends that have nothing in common with the national interests or international standards. Taking into account our own errors is as important for success as studying the diverse international experience. The lack of coordination of reforms from a single centre, despite the formal presence of the respective structure, inefficient use of the tightly limited resources and attempts to substitute minor changes (restructuring, personnel rotations, name changes, etc.) for a true transformation – all of this has been seen on multiple occasions before. The lack of political will is most often mentioned by experts and community activists looking for answers to the questions why the reforms are advancing so slowly or why the results claimed by the politicians remain hardly noticeable for civilians. Society and the entities being reformed may become more optimistic about the success of the reforms if the Government sincerely demonstrates its interest in developing a European model of the police service, and, most importantly, proves it by real actions. The active participation by community activists, non-governmental organisations, and international partners in the reform processes are important but merely auxiliary factors. The duration and resources of a powerful international support are limited and directly depend on the demonstration of practical results. The analytical report is intended to make an intellectual contribution to the joint effort of developing the Ukrainian law enforcement agencies, whose performance is evaluated not by statistics or the opinion of the government, but by the satisfaction of society with the quality of the respective services, the citizens’ feeling of safety and justice and their level of trust in and respect for those who protect them.
Topic:
Governance, Law Enforcement, Public Opinion, Reform, and Legitimacy
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

18. Party System of Ukraine Before and After Maidan: Changes, Trends, Public Demand

Author:
Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
Mass protests of citizens against the сriminal, authoritarian regime of V. Yanukovych, known as the Revolution of Dignity, with its epicentre the Maidan was to be a turning point in the modern history of Ukraine, These events differed significantly in scale and consequences – from the final enforcement by Ukraine of its geopolitical choice, beginning of practical implementation of the course of European integration through reforms in all areas of public life to Russian military aggression, thousands of casualties and the loss of a part of the national economy and sovereign territory. The events of 2013-2014 had a significant impact on the political system in Ukraine. After the fall of V. Yanukovych’s regime and the former president’s fleeing to Russia, the 2004 Constitution of Ukraine was reenacted. All supreme state institutions underwent renewal. The new President and the Verkhovna Rada were legitimised by special elections and a new Cabinet of Ministers was formed. The process began of reforming the constitutional principles of government organisation in relation to its various branches and levels. Ukraine’s party system, which is an important element of the political system in general, also underwent significant changes. The political parties that belonged to the pro-presidential coalition before Maidan (Party of Regions and Communist Party of Ukraine) were removed from power and actually descended from the political arena. A significant reformatting of the political forces representing the new government took place. This part of the political spectrum is represented both by the “old” (“Batkivshchyna”, “Svoboda”) and the “new” parties that entered the political arena and were formed during Maidan or after it (“Samopomich”, Radical Party of Oleh Lyashko, “Right Sector”, “People’s Front”, Petro Poroshenko Bloc). The post-election period was marked by a heightened struggle not only between the new leading forces and the opposition, but also by competition and conflict between the political forces that in the period from November 2013 to February 2014 had acted as a “unified front”. The drastic changes in the party and political spectrum engendered confusion of the public electoral preferences, especially in the part that did not find any equivalent to their established sympathies among the new parties. There are still some free “political niches”, which can be claimed by new party structures. The data of public opinion surveys demonstrate that those political forces, which were enthusiastically received by society during the early parliamentary elections in October 2014, subsequently started losing their voter support. All this indicates that the party system of Ukraine is undergoing a transformation process, a process that apparently will continue at least until the next scheduled parliamentary elections. However, the development of Ukraine as a democratic European state requires an effective and representative political system, which is impossible without effective, institutionalised political parties.
Topic:
Social Movement, Reform, Domestic Politics, Protests, Political Parties, and Euromaidan Revolution
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

19. Prospects of Ukrainian-Russian Relations

Author:
Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
01-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
The “hybrid” war of Russia against Ukraine has continued since February 2014. To date, the multiple efforts of international diplomacy, unfortunately, have not resulted either in settlement or even in a “freeze” of the situation in eastern Ukraine. The previous Minsk Agreements adopted in September 2014 (Minsk Protocol and Minsk Memorandum) were disrupted and Russian aggression in Donbas continued. On 12 February 2015, the presidents of Ukraine, France, Germany, and Russia agreed on a new document, “Package of Measures for Implementation of the Minsk Agreements”, which envisaged conflict settlement by the end of 2015. However, implementation of these measures was postponed to 2016 and, given the course of events, has actually become a process which is difficult to forecast and which is indefinite in time.1 It should be noted that on the one hand, the situation in eastern Ukraine has not undergone significant changes for the better – hostilities are ongoing. There are persistent fundamental differences in the positions of the two sides, Ukraine and Russia, on conflict resolution. (In particular, implementation of the Minsk Agreements in line with the Russian scenario threatens to destabilise the internal situation in Ukraine and destroy its statehood.) On the other hand, the international situation is rapidly changing; we see further escalation of international terrorism (the terrorist attacks in Paris), the “migration crisis” in the EU, Russia’s military intervention in Syria, and the gaining momentum of the acute conflict of Moscow and Ankara. This dulls the perception of events in Donbas on the part of the international community, renders these events a somewhat “background” nature in the West, and urges attempts to “freeze” the situation there at any cost, including at the expense of Ukraine’s own interests. Meanwhile, Russia proceeds with military expansion in Donbas, aimed at the destruction of Ukrainian statehood, and now there is no reason to expect a change for the better in the Kremlin’s policy. Thus, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict (which has a regional and global dimension) acquires a long-term nature with recurrent escalation and unpredictable consequences. Russian aggression – the annexation of Crimea and the war in eastern Ukraine – has entailed profound changes in bilateral relations: (а) the legal framework of Kyiv and Moscow relations has been destroyed; (b) institutional mechanisms of state-to-state relations have been destroyed; (c) contacts at the highest level have become impossible, political and diplomatic relations have become confrontational; (d) Ukraine has suffered huge human, economic, and territorial losses; (e) an unprecedented curtailment of economic cooperation has taken place; (f) deep alienation between the peoples of Ukraine and Russia has emerged. The previous official ideology of “strategic partnership”, “fraternal peoples”, and “neighbourliness”, embedded in many joint agreements, has lost its sense.2 A new political-ideological reality has emerged in the relations between Russia and Ukraine. Therefore, a new assessment and review of the nature, ideology, and general institutional system of relations with Russia in key areas (politics, security, economy, energy, humanitarian sphere, etc.) is required, given that the main threat to Ukrainian statehood is the current government in place in the Russian Federation. There is a need to design a new conceptual model of coexistence with Putin’s Russia, which would reflect current realities and prospects of bilateral relations and would take into account the position of Western partner countries and international organisations. However, it is important to keep in mind at least two things. First, one should clearly distinguish the current Putin’s regime and the country of Russia as it is and its society. Second, in rebuffing Russian aggression, a strategic goal should be seen – to restore confidence and interest of the societies of both countries in peaceful coexistence and respect the right of each state to determine the state system in the country and its civilisation development vector.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, Energy Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

20. Social Foundation for Middle Class Formation in Ukraine: Identification Criteria, Structure, Features

Author:
Valeriya Klymenko and Hanna Pashkova
Publication Date:
01-2014
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
National Security and Defence
Institution:
Razumkov Centre
Abstract:
This issue of the National Security and Defence journal contains the results of studies of social groups in Ukraine’s modern society, which can be viewed as a prototype and a foundation for the future Ukrainian middle class in the classical sense. The journal contains two analytical reports. The first – “Middle Class in Ukraine: Life Values, Readiness for Association and Promotion of Democratic Norms and Standards”, prepared by Razumkov Centre experts on the basis of research, conducted by Centre’s Sociological Service, and namely, national surveys and focus group research. In this report, on the basis of self-definition and self-evaluation of respondents the following social class groups are being singled out: subjective middle class, “nucleus” and periphery of middle class, upper and lower classes; their comparative analysis is performed according to such parameters as understanding the main principles of democracy and social justice, attitude to participation in civic activity, level of internality/externality of these social class groups’ representatives, etc. On the basis of analysis, a conclusion is being made that according to these (and other) parameters, closest to the middle class notion in its classical sense are such groups as the “nucleus” of the middle class and the upper class. At the same time, currently, the level of trust of these groups in their fellow citizens and institutions, their readiness for regular (as opposed to ad hoc) participation in “the common cause” are insufficient for announcing the existence of an established middle class in Ukraine in its modern sense. The second – “Population with Medium Income as the Basis for Middle Class Formation in Ukraine” – prepared by the team of authors of M.V. Ptukha Institute for Demography and Social Studies on the basis of data from Household Living Conditions Survey performed by the State Statistics Service of Ukraine. Features, singled out on the basis of this data can be viewed as more objective than sociological survey results, which allows to define with more precision the socio-demographic and socio-economic portrait of a middle class representative (groups with medium income), characteristics of his behaviour in consumer market and his property ownership status, as compared to other society groups (distinguished on the basis of income). The report also provides an in-depth analysis of statistical indicators that characterise households with medium income, as well as a definition of their representatives’ key life values. The performed analysis provides a basis for conclusion that, currently, the population group with medium income, according to their assets, financial capacity, consumer behaviour, mindset and subjective evaluations, mostly does not meet the classical definition of the middle class as a special social group with specific functions in the society. At the same time, both reports have mentioned features that both groups under analysis possess, which are typical specifically for “classical” middle class. Thus, representatives of both groups have a high level of education and perform professional activity that requires high qualification, are permanently employed and provide for themselves and their families primarily with their labour income. (Although, most of them also accept social assistance, however, this is rather due to a flawed domestic social security system, which allows for receipt of such assistance by the non-poor). Characteristic of the middle class is the willingness of representatives of both groups to take responsibility for their own lives, their attitude to education, work, career, content of their leisure activities, etc. So, we can assume that both groups under analysis – the “nucleus” of the middle class and the “medium income population group”, have a certain development potential in the context of “classical” middle class formation. Currently, the main problem of both groups is the insufficient income – both from labour remuneration and business activity. Available income is mostly only enough to satisfy primary survival needs, to use certain paid educational and healthcare services for the entire family, rather than high-quality recreation. However, it is not enough to make savings, which would not only provide these groups’ representatives with a feeling of security in their position (including, social status and confidence in the future), but would also be a notable investment resource for the national economy. So, State Policy, and namely the income policy, the remuneration policy, the social policy, have to be aimed at supporting these social and social-professional groups that have the potential to develop into Ukrainian middle class. It is the support for formation of the middle class that is the most efficient way to fight poverty and to introduce democratic values, norms and standards into social, political and economic life of Ukraine, and to approximate the social structure of Ukrainian society to modern societies of developed countries.
Topic:
Democracy, Values, Norms, Middle Class, Society, and Activism
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine