It has always been the case that in Ukrainian politics, autumn is the time to talk about elections and prepare for them. The third fully military autumn was also no exception.
As early as the end of September, analytical materials began to appear in the mass media about the fact that “the government is preparing for elections”, and even “deputies of the head of the OP are holding election meetings”.
This infectious self-suggestion has a magnetic effect on the participants of the political process from different camps. It makes one remember how they “heroically saved Kyivwhen the government shuddered”, although everyone remembers that it “didn’t shudder”, and someone bought up advertising space in the regions for election campaigning.
Advertising:
Such a trifle that the Central Election Commission, which is solely responsible for the conduct of elections, does not take any action in this direction, few people bypass it. As well as the fact that any movements of the CEC require a decision of the Verkhovna Rada to announce elections, which are still expressly prohibited (!) by law during martial law.
In order not to add to the confusion and confusion among experts and analysts, “Ukrainian Pravda” decided not to dig into legislative casuistry, but to ask sociologists whether the primary factor in the legitimization of any election is the request of society. In other words, do Ukrainians want to elect a new government, is it possible before the end of the war, and on whose side are the electoral sympathies now.
Spoiler: everything is extremely complicated, and the figure of Valery Zaluzhny makes the situation even more confusing.
Advertising:
Reasons (not) to hold elections
The third year of full-scale war, superimposed on the impossibility of a real reset of power, caused a tense electoral situation in Ukrainian society.
The total majority of voters do not see the current set of political players as capable of effective governance. But the total majority is also against holding elections.
On October 15, the Razumkov Center published a large research public attitudes, where the trend described above is clearly visible.
When asked if voters can see among the available of political forces, those who can be entrusted with power in the post-war period, only 27% of respondents answered “yes”. That is, under 70% of respondents, in fact, postulate a request to update the set of political players.
Usually, in countries with such a striking lack of acceptance of the current political elites, the risk of social cataclysms increases. But in Ukraine, everything works the other way around. A cataclysm is already a daily reality, and its presence works precisely to legitimize the ruling team.
“People are in no hurry with the issue of elections. Because first they want to hear the answer, what will be the security configuration for the country. And such critical attacks the previous president about the actions of the authorities at the beginning of the invasion will not contribute to the support of the idea of elections. Just as the spread of Russian narratives about “the illegitimate Ukrainian government that needs this war” does not help it either.
People understand that this is an existential and annihilating war, so they want to solve security issues first, and only then – elections.” – explains the executive director of the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS) Anton Grushetskyi in a conversation with UP.
“We will soon publish the data of one of our polls, and there more than 60% of people say that they are ready to endure the war as long as necessary. But there is a demand for a fair distribution of the burden of the war. And when Ukrainians see conditional prosecutors “with disabilities” and others, it strongly evokes a feeling of aggression.” – adds Hrushetskyi.
According to him, there is a clear correlation between the availability of effective security guarantees for Ukraine and the readiness of Ukrainians for some format of negotiations.
Advertising:
“Our data show that more than 80% of Ukrainians believe that if the West supports Ukraine properly, then Ukraine can succeed in the war. But we also see that a significant part of these people will not agree to the official recognition of the occupation, but are ready” postpone” the liberation of part of the lands for the future. However, only under the condition of serious security guarantees – so that Russia does not attack again.
If there is no configuration of reliable guarantees – it is either membership in NATO, or bilateral agreements, etc., – the majority of Ukrainians are against appeasement with Russia. But if convincing guarantees appear, then for the majority of Ukrainians it would be a creaking and unenthusiastic, but acceptable option.” – says Hrushetskyi.
According to him, without solving the issue of strategic security and ending the hot phase of the war, Ukrainians tend to perceive the elections as an attempt by the current elite to hold on to their positions. Especially if you take into account that the voters would like to leave the leadership of the country in other hands. In the aforementioned survey by the Razumkov Center, you can find out whose it is.
When asked what background the party should come from in order for the respondents to vote for it, almost every second person expressed confidence military – 46.6% respondents. This indicator has been stable at the level of +/- 50% since the summer of last year.
Voters’ interest in civil society organizations (19.0%) and the volunteer environment (23.6%) is also stable and significant.
In addition, 21.4% of respondents hope for new faces from the humanitarian and technical intelligentsia, such as scientists and teachers. And only 17.0% believe in already existing parties.
“People want more to see people involved in the Defense Forces, volunteers and the public sector in power. But the problem is that all these categories are currently working for the defense, and they will not be able to fully participate in the elections.
And accordingly, this will also be a reason to say that while the real Ukrainians, the real Ukrainian support, are engaged in defense, politicians and officials are trying to maintain access to the feeding troughs. Therefore, elections without a proper explanation will be a false start with negative results.” – convinces Hrushetsky from KMIS.
Advertising:
A place for new forces
On the threshold of the third winter of the great invasion, the level of support for the institutions of power dropped almost to pre-war levels. In the first half of 2022, sociologists noted a very interesting trend. Then, even the most electorally difficult bodies of power, such as the parliament and the courts, received an unheard-of level of trust.
In the face of an existential threat, Ukrainians felt that they and their state are one. Actually, it was one of the things that helped Ukraine to stand as a state in the first weeks.
But in the third year of the invasion, the sense of threat ceased to be a legitimator for the authorities’ actions. All polls in recent months show the same trend – a steady decline in the level of trust in most government institutions that are not directly involved in the Defense Forces.
The balance of trust in the Armed Forces is almost +86%, the State Emergency Service has approximately +71%, volunteer organizations – approximately +67%, the Security Service of Ukraine – almost +38%, and on the other hand, the Verkhovna Rada – -62.5% , in the government – -52%, in the state apparatus (officials) – -63.2%, in the judicial system in general – -53.8%.
Trust in President Volodymyr Zelenskyi remains a key point in this regard. His trust balance is currently sitting at +4% (48.5% Trust / 44.5% Distrust), but with a slow downward trend.
In fact, the president’s support, which reached 90% at the beginning of the invasion, becomes hostage to the general decline in confidence in the system, and the high support of the army has ceased to translate into the same support of its commander-in-chief.
Advertising:
It is interesting that the personal level of support for Zelenskyi as a politician, and not as a president, is higher: 51.3% trust / 41.5% distrust.
According to the data of the Razumkov Center, apart from the president, several well-known politicians have a positive trust rating: the head of Mykolayiv OVA Vitaly Kim has +11.4%, the head of the Security Service of Ukraine Vasyl Malyuk – +9.2%, Deputy Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov – +6, 7%.
Among the anti-rating leaders are Andriy Yermak with -40.6% and almost entirely heads of parliamentary factions: Petro Poroshenko has -45.5%, Davyd Arakhamia – about -47%, Yulia Tymoshenko – a little less than -65%, Yuriy Boyko got -74 .8%.
It is also interesting that what data is not available in the mentioned survey.
In the published part of the research of the Razumkov Center, there are no measurements not only of political ratings, but also of trust in such a key figure of the current political life as Valery Zaluzhny.
In conditions when the “old old” and “new old” elites do not inspire trust in society, such a figure as the current ambassador of Ukraine to Great Britain can play a turning role.
If you look closely at the voters’ request for the arrival of new people, then 50% of the electoral field of the conditional “party of the military” is precisely the territory for Zaluzhnyi’s offensive.
“As always, we have a leadership approach when voting. Therefore, support for political projects will largely be determined by the attitude towards the leader.
For example, Prytula’s conditional party, if we ask about the attitude towards it or insert it into certain electoral lists that we have not yet published, then this party gains sufficiently high support, because Prytula himself has high support now. We didn’t have a party, a conditional Chmut there, but I suppose that in the case of a certain communication campaign, such a force can also get some tangible support.” – says Anton Hrushytskyi from KMIS.
“There is a question about military personnel, because they can be distributed among different political forces.
But if we have a conditional party of Valery Zaluzhny, about which he himself has not yet said a word, then it can really gain very high support. When Zaluzhny is in the survey and when he is not – these are two completely different results.” – explains the sociologist.
Advertising:
As his colleague from another sociological service admits off the record, with a certain simulation of the ballot, a situation may arise when the distribution of forces will be similar to the 2019 elections. Only this time the name of the triumphant will be different.
The situation is similar with party elections to the Council. That is why, among other things, interlocutors of UP in “Servant of the People” are skeptical about talks about quick elections: people do not want them, and the government has every chance to lose them loudly. It is more logical for the government to complete the processes important to it in domestic and foreign policy, and only after that to open the door to the dark room with the inscription “Elections”.
“In the case of Volodymyr Zelenskyi, there is a slow downward trend of support. Confidence in him is high, but the trend in Zaluzhnyi is rapidly rising. He still maintains confidence at the level of 80-90%. And plus voters, as in the situation with Zelenskyi in 2019, attribute Everyone has their own traits and characteristics, they project the desired virtues and expectations for them.” – explains the nature of the potentially high political support of the former head of the Armed Forces Anton Hrushetskyi.
***
No matter how radically life and the security situation in the country changes, it has a very subtle effect on the attitude of Ukrainians to the idea of holding elections during wartime.
From the beginning of the full-scale invasion, the total majority of citizens were categorically against the elections. Gradually, by the autumn of 2024, a significant group of voters appeared who would like to renew the political system.
Still, the No. 1 priority for most remains war success and security, not elections. Recent poll showed that 25–30% of Ukrainians support the idea of holding elections. However, few of them are deeply aware of the risks associated with security, possible manipulation and limited participation in elections for those who vote and those who are voted for.
“In fact, if the question of voting is asked more deeply, the support for the elections even among their supporters is still decreasing.
Because the fact that we currently have a conditional 25-30% for the elections, it rather reflects not so much the desire for elections, as a political signal of dissatisfaction with what is happening both in the country and on the international arena.
This is actually not a demand for immediate elections, but, so to speak, an opportunity to swear at the authorities. In some polls, people are even more worried about the issue of corruption than the elections,” summarizes Anton Hrushetskyi.
Roman Romaniuk, UP
