A Sovereignist Turn? Ukraine Needs Reformers, Not Populists

In the fifth year of Russia’s full-scale invasion, the rhetoric of some Ukrainian politicians and public commentators suggests the emergence of a new political trend that could be described as sovereignism. This tendency is a direct product of political developments, the realities of the battlefield, and broader social change. It is, above all, a way of channeling the emotions generated by war. Since 2022, Ukrainians have demonstrated an extraordinary ability to adapt to extreme circumstances. They have displayed remarkable creativity, unconventional thinking, determination, courage and resilience. Their resistance has been nothing short of extraordinary. Yet these admirable qualities may also be accompanied by a more troubling political impulse: sovereignism.JOIN US ON TELEGRAMFollow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official. ‘No one will tell us what to do”: populist sovereignism Recent tensions with Poland over historical memory offer an illustration of this trend. The dispute concerns wartime partisan formations, some of whose members Poland accuses of committing atrocities against civilians. Statements by Ukrainian leaders, official communications, and commentary in the Ukrainian media often carried a common message: “No one will tell us who our heroes should be.” This should not be interpreted merely as an attempt to defend Ukraine’s historical narrative or seek compromise. The sentiment is understandable. For centuries Ukraine had little opportunity to tell its own story in its own voice. The current war is also a struggle for independence from Russia’s narrative about Ukraine. Other Topics of Interest Kiwi K.A.R.E Founder Awarded Ukraine’s Order of Merit for Humanitarian Leadership New Zealand’s Tenby Powell has received Ukraine’s Order of Merit for leading Kiwi K.A.R.E’s lifesaving frontline aid — from evacuations to medical deliveries — amid escalating wartime danger. At the same time, virtually every EU member state – and every country aspiring to join the Union – has revised its historical memory and reshaped its national pantheon at various stages of its democratic development. Regardless of the complexities of the dispute itself, many in Poland perceive it as evidence of rising Ukrainian nationalism. The war has undoubtedly strengthened nationalist sentiment compared with the pre-2022 period, when nationalist parties remained politically marginal and failed to enter parliament. Yet what we are observing may not primarily be nationalism. A more accurate description could be sovereignism. The dispute with Poland also generated claims that Warsaw fears Ukraine as a future economic competitor. A strong ally is welcome – but perhaps not one that becomes too strong. While certain industries may indeed face increased competition, these arguments were driven more by emotion than serious analysis. Competition is a normal feature of both the European single market and bilateral economic relations, managed through negotiation and regulation. There are other examples. In July, Kyrylo Budanov referred to Ukrainians as a “chosen nation.” Like the previous examples, this can be interpreted in different ways. Emotions were also fueled by the now-infamous Oval Office confrontation between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, US President Donald Trump, and Vice President JD Vance in February 2025, when Zelensky was told that Ukraine “had no cards.” Eighteen months later, Ukraine appears to hold a much stronger hand. Its growing ability to strike military targets deep inside Russia with domestically developed weapons naturally strengthens national pride and confidence. It also reinforces a sense of independence from foreign partners – an important source of sovereignist thinking. Walking through Kyiv today, one can occasionally encounter billboards urging Ukraine not to join the European Union, carrying slogans such as “Independence from Moscow – and from Brussels” or “Friendship with the EU, yes – membership, no.” The campaign is led by Ihor Shevchenko, a politician with virtually no public support. Yet its very existence may be seen as an attempt to test public sentiment regarding growing disappointment with the West. The same pattern can be observed in reactions to Russian missiles and drones violating NATO airspace. Many commentators portray both NATO and the EU as ineffective and incapable of action. This creates an obvious contradiction: if these organizations are supposedly irrelevant, why do many of the same voices still argue that Ukraine should join them? Each of these examples may seem harmless when viewed in isolation and within its specific context. Taken together, however, they suggest the emergence of a broader political trend. The only question is how influential it may become. Why it matters As an instrument of identity politics, sovereignism is highly attractive to populists and vested interests. It offers a convenient way to divert attention from difficult reforms, obscure real governance problems behind symbolic identity conflicts, and rally public support around the flag. From a populist perspective, it is far easier to argue that “they don’t want us” than to undertake politically costly reforms required for EU accession. At times, Ukraine’s political approach toward its allies also appears dominated by an “not one step back” mentality during disputes. Once again, this may be effective identity politics. The situation looks very different, however, when hard interests are involved. A clear example came in the summer of 2025, when President Zelensky attempted to reduce the independence of Ukraine’s anti-corruption institutions. Following mass public protests and pressure from the European Union, the proposal was ultimately withdrawn. Ukraine continues to enjoy broad Western support – particularly from NATO’s eastern flank and the Nordic countries – despite periodic political disagreements. That support is unlikely to disappear, nor should it. However, the quality of these partnerships will increasingly depend on Ukraine’s own policies, including domestic governance. There is nothing wrong with national pride or self-confidence, especially for a country fighting for its survival. But building politics around these emotions alone rarely leads to good outcomes. Sovereignism may appear attractive, yet in practice it risks sliding into provincialism. Signs of sovereignist thinking can be found across the Ukrainian political spectrum, although fortunately it remains far from dominant. Recent mass demonstrations against the dismissal of Mykhailo Fedorov – widely seen as the face of Ukraine’s reform agenda – suggest that many Ukrainians still prioritize modernization over populism. That is precisely what Ukraine needs: to stay firmly on its pro-Western course, pursue pragmatism and choose reformers over populists. The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post. The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.