UkraineWorld asked Vitalii Mykhailovskyi, historian. Key points in our brief, #UkraineWorldAnalysis
Ukrainian political culture will evolve. This has been a continuous process in Ukraine's history over the last few recent decades. We underestimate it very much, given the circumstances that we are subjected to at this moment in time.
However, if we look back 10, 20, 30 or even 40 years ago, we will see a colossal shift in Ukrainian society.
From its first manifestations in the late 1980s to the present day, Ukrainian society has been continuously learning the concepts of democracy and a democratic state. It is challenging. It is painful. And it demands a lot of time. But there simply isn't any other way.
As we move forward Ukrainian society sets higher standards for any government at the helm, regardless of the political spectrum, in the next post-war elections than ever before.
We have already reached a tipping point in our development that requires radical changes in both the state's and us, the citizens, attitude toward the effectiveness of all institutions.
A strong state is defined by strong institutions and the continued development of our civil society shall provide the impetus for institutional modernisation. All of this should have an impact on our political culture.
It should be free of the paternalism that has infiltrated our modern political landscape. And here the development of civil society must be continuous. From expecting something from the government to the active participation of citizens in shaping the government, constant dialogue in defending their rights and, of course, control of the government.
There are hopes that Ukraine, which has already decided to reduce bureaucracy through the State in a Smartphone app, can avoid bureaucratisation of processes to some extent. Historically, from the XIV century until the second half of the XIX century, there has never been a large bureaucratic apparatus in our history.
For far too long we were unable, and perhaps too eager, to communicate with the state in decision-making. This is due to passivity during political campaigns and indifference to the communication channels between voters, deputies, state authorities and local governments, as prescribed by law.
We should be much more active in all permitted mechanisms of communication with the authorities, where it is important not only to participate in elections and cast a vote for a political party or an individual candidate.
It should be an ongoing process in which the government should consult with citizens, and citizens should participate in it. I believe that a balance should be struck between consultative and participatory approaches.
Our political culture has historically been more European in nature. Nonetheless, a power shift has become the norm in our political life over the last thirty years. In this period of our history, we have already had our sixth president. And this is considerably higher when compared to the majority of post-Soviet countries. Nonetheless, history is important. Even if it is not widely known.
The fact that most Ukrainian lands in the fourteenth and eighteenth centuries were under the European political traditions and were part of a specific Ukrainian historical phenomenon, the Cossacks, led to a strong belief in the elected government.
This is perhaps the main difference between our political cultures and those of Russia. This difference is well noticed by our European partners, who have repeatedly emphasised the growing democratic nature of Ukrainian elections and political life in the country over the past decades.
Regardless of the political spectrum, we must be responsible and consistent in our path to the EU, because it creates an impression of Ukraine as a reliable and predictable partner.
We have a long way to go in adopting the body of European law, where there is no discussion about the law itself, but only our desire to join the European community.
Our political culture of defending rights within the EU should be principled, and based on Ukraine's national interests. And for this, we need allies, which, as the war has shown, we do have throughout Europe.
Flexibility also implies hard work with different political forces within the EU, because we are now interested not only in the success of the accession negotiations but also expect, perhaps not without reason, a slow accession.
And in this regard, we must act in accordance with the political and cultural principles that have emerged in the EU over the last 20 years. They are not without flaws, but they are the ones we must work with.
We need to understand the different cultures of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as Northern and Southern Europe. We must instill sincerity and integrity in our political culture when establishing contacts between neighbours. There are many good examples of cooperation, but there is no sustainable process that involves as many of our citizens as possible.
Even those Ukrainian lands, such as Galicia, Bukovyna and Transcarpathia, which were perhaps the least Soviet, have to some extent lost their connection with the historical experience of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Romania or Poland in the 1920s and 1930s.
Although the examples of democracy in countries such as Hungary and, to a lesser extent, Slovakia are not the best, they should still serve as lessons for us to avoid repeating similar trajectories in the development of political culture in Ukraine.
