Ukraine during the Russian war of aggression

The Nexus between Internal Developments and EU Accession

• The Russian war of aggression has deepened relations between the EU and Ukraine. This can be seen, above all, in Ukraine’s EU candidate status.

• Despite the war, Ukraine continues to pursue many reforms, even if their pace has slowed since February 2022.

• The strong concentration of power in the Office of the President negatively affects the separation of powers. It makes judicial reforms more difficult and hinders parliament’s ability to exercise its functions.

• The war has weakened the power of oligarchs in Ukraine in many respects. Yet the form of governance in the country has not experienced a clear break from the past.

• Even during the invasion, the authorities are continuing their fight against corruption among the elite. The population perceives some progress, but high-level corruption remains a deep-rooted challenge.

• Civil society activities have changed both qualitatively and quantitatively as a result of the war and have become more significant since the inva­sion. Civil society engagement can be fostered with the help of returning Ukrainian migrants and through the involvement of Ukrainians abroad.

• Ukraine’s municipalities will play a key role in reconstruction, or are doing so already. To ensure that reconstruction is successful in all its dimensions, municipalities should continuously be involved in the mechanisms and processes currently being developed.

• In order to meaningfully intensify Ukraine-EU relations, it is essential that rule of law be expanded and consolidated, not only in Ukraine, but also in the EU and its member states.

Issues and Conclusions

In June 2022, the European Council granted Ukraine the status of a candidate country, thus bringing it politically closer to joining the European Union (EU) than ever before.

This development was made possible thanks to Ukrainians’ courageous and determined responses to Russian aggression since 24 February 2022. Indeed, even sceptics within the EU were convinced to take this step after observing Ukraine’s emphatic defence of the values of freedom, sovereignty and territorial integrity.

In December 2023, the European Council decided to begin the process of opening accession negotiations with Kyiv. The so-called screening process started in the end of January 2024 and included composing a list of laws that need to be harmonised with existing EU legislation and regulations prior to accession. In March, the European Commission proposed a nego­tiating framework, and in June, negotiations with Ukraine (and Moldova) were officially opened.

In light of the ongoing accession process on the one hand and the continuing war on the other, the question arises: Which conditions are in place in Ukraine that are relevant to its EU accession and how have these conditions evolved over the course of more than two years of war? This analysis aims to answer that question, firstly by exploring not only the coun­try’s capacity for reform during the war but also the concrete progress made over the last two years.

Secondly, it goes on to investigate the considerable changes that have occurred in Ukraine throughout the war. Ukraine’s political sphere and (civil) society have had to adapt to the needs resulting from a large-scale invasion. Quantitatively, resources often flowed to war efforts instead of to reforms, while a series of qualitative changes also affected the landscape. Such shifts need to be taken into account when it comes to Ukraine’s potential EU accession and EU-Ukraine relations as a whole.

Thirdly, both Ukraine and the EU see Ukrainian reconstruction as closely linked to the process of EU accession. Ukrainian actors’ views on reconstruction will be decisive in charting the country’s path to­wards accession. How they organise the recovery institution­ally and operationally will shape the nexus between EU accession and reconstruction as well as the char­acter and pace of both processes. With that in mind, this analysis explores how Ukraine is positioning itself for reconstruction, which practical activities are already underway and what consequences these activities will have on accession. Particular focus will be placed on the municipal level.

The questions investigated here are interrelated and form a complex picture. First, it is clear that reforms are continuing successfully even in times of war. While the pace has slowed, progress towards reform has proven possible and should therefore be supported as the country charts its path to EU accession. In this regard, assistance will be indispensable, especially, as Ukrainian actors themselves readily admit, with respect to administrative capac­ities and negotiating expertise. This rings all the more true amid uncertainty about the implementation of the EU’s new enlargement methodology.

Second, the war has not brought about a major shift in the mode of governance employed by Ukrain­ian elites. It is certainly true that a greater degree of centralisation of decision-making is to be expected and is indeed necessary in wartime, but in the Ukrain­ian context, this phenomenon has become disproportionately problematic. Networks and struc­tures that could form the basis for a new post-war oligarchy are being created or fine-tuned. This could hinder achievement of the required tipping points for key reforms, particularly in the area of rule of law.

Thirdly, the war has changed (civil) society. Even compared to the post-2014 period, the number of people involved in various civil society activities has increased, and so have the areas in which they are active. Nevertheless, the portion of civil society’s resources devoted to supporting reforms and moni­toring their implementation has decreased as activ­ities related to the war take precedence. Moreover, emerging societal fault lines make greater attention to social cohesion necessary. This dynamic situation offers the EU new opportunities for cooperation with Ukrainian civil society while also creating new chal­lenges.

As far as reconstruction is concerned, more atten­tion must be paid to the institutional architecture at the community level. Municipalities are developing different models of reconstruction; while some focus mainly on vertical connections, others emphasise horizontal ones. Their cooperation with Ukrainian and international funders also varies. One of the ongoing objectives of reconstruction should be to con­sistently ensure and deepen the meaningful involvement of local actors, whether authorities, civil society or entrepreneurs. At the same time, municipal struc­tures should be strengthened, e.g. by continuing the decentralisation reform, which has so far been very successful, but remains incomplete. The link between reforms and reconstruction becomes clearer in this context, and the obstacles that prevent tipping points in reform processes from being reached become all the more significant. Impediments to further decen­tralisation need to be removed so that local actors can play the most effective role possible in rebuilding the country.

About the author:

Dr Susan Stewart is a Senior Fellow in the Eastern Europe and Eurasia Division at SWP.