LATEST PRINTED ISSUE

LATEST FREELY ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS

Victory-in-freedom: Ukraine’s democratic resilience in the face of war

stmm. 2024 (2): 40-55

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2024.02.040

Full text: https://stmm.in.ua/archive/ukr/2024-2/5.pdf

MIKHAIL A. ALEXSEEV, Professor, Political Science Department, San Diego State University (5500, Campanile Dr, San Diego, CA 92182-4427)

alexseev@sdsu.edu

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2733-2182

SERHII DEMBITSKYI, Doctor of Sciences in Sociology, Deputy Director, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (12, Shovkovychna St., Kyiv, 01021)

sociotest.solutions@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7958-3557

The article offers a rare systematic analysis of political attitudes in societies experiencing massive military invasions using statistical analysis of two original surveys conducted by the Ukraine National Academy of Sciences Institute of Sociology — a panel survey tracking the same respondents in three waves (N = 329, November 2021, June-July 2022, and June 2023) and an additional larger survey (N = 869, June 2023). Despite devastating suffering, Ukrainians’ support for democracy as a political system and for freedom of speech have stayed remarkably resilient over this time period. Cross-sectional (multiple ordinary least squares regression) and longitudinal (linear mixed-effects model regression) tests, as well as supplementary focus group conversations in all of Ukraine’s macro-regions, show that this democratic resilience is grounded in the victory-in-freedom synergy — a widespread sense of shared sacrifice that drives determination to win the war and restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

In particular, we found a clearer understanding of the importance of political freedoms and fighting for victory among individuals who experienced loss and trauma and a strong appreciation across Ukraine’s society that victory is vital to preserve democracy. Survey data also demonstrates that democracy support has become more intrinsic to Ukrainian national identity and that the initial surge of democracy support among Ukrainians in the face of Russia’s invasion has been more than a short-term rallying-round-the-flag. In combination, these factors explain the Ukrainians’ sustained, spirited resilience in the face Russia’s mass savage invasion over more than a two-year period. Moreover, support for democratic ideals doesn’t mean Ukrainians write a blank check of trust to their government. Longitudinal analysis indicates that as the war progressed, and hardship persisted respondents held their democratic institutions accountable.

At the same time, the results of our study indicate that sustaining this resilience would require not only battlefield successes, but also accountable governance, countering Russia’s media impacts, and sustaining family incomes. Our findings contribute to the literature on war and democracy by showing the importance of considering both the external context (war duration and impacts and the aggressor state type) and the mobilization of national identity in the face of aggression.

Keywords: Ukraine; public opinion; democracy; war; national identity

References

  1. Alexseev, M.A., Dembitskyi, S. (2022). Striking Back at the Empire: Ukrainians Converge on Values and National Belonging. Program on New Approaches to Research on Security (PONARS Eurasia). Policy Memo, 793. Retrieved from: https://www.ponarseurasia.org/striking-back-at-the-empire-ukrainians-converge-on-values-and-national-belonging/

  2. Alexseev, M.A., Dembitskyi, S. (2024). Geosocietal Support for Democracy: Survey Evidence from Ukraine. Perspectives on Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592724000422

  3. Berinsky, A.J. (2009). In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226043463.001.0001

  4. Canetti-Nisim, D., Halperin, E., Sharvit, K., Hobfoll, St.E. (2009). A New Stress-Based Model of Political Extremism: Personal Exposure to Terrorism, Psychological Distress, and Exclusionist Political Attitudes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 53(3), 363-389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002709333296

  5. Carmil, D., Breznitz, St.E. (1991). Personal Trauma and World View-Are Extremely Stressful Experiences Related to Political Attitudes, Religious Beliefs, and Future Orientation? Journal of Traumatic Stress, 4(3), 393-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00974557

  6. Chemtob, C.M., Novaco, R.W., Hamada, R.S., Gross, D.M. (1997). Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for Severe Anger in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(1), 184-189. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.65.1.184

  7. Cumming, G., Finch, S. (2005). Inference by Eye: Confidence Intervals and How to Read Pictures of Data. The American psychologist, 60(2), 170-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.170

  8. Davis, D.W., Silver, B.D. (2004). Civil Liberties Vs. Security: Public Opinion in the Context of the Terrorist Attacks on America. American Journal of Political Science, 48(1), 28-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00054.x

  9. Diamond, L. (1999). Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801860140

  10. Dyrstad, K. (2013). Does Civil War Breed Authoritarian Values? An Empirical Study of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Croatia. Democratization, 20(7), 1219-1242. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.688032

  11. Easton, D. (1975). A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400008309

  12. Gaines, B.J. (2002). Where's the Rally? Approval and Trust of the President, Cabinet, Congress, and Government since September 11. PS: Political Science & Politics, 35(3), 531-536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096502000793

  13. Hetherington, M., Suhay, E. (2011). Authoritarianism, Threat, and Americans' Support for the War on Terror. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 546-560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00514.x

  14. Janoff-Bulman, R. (1992). Shattered Assumptions: Toward a New Psychology of Trauma. New York: Free Press.

  15. Kidd, Th.S. (2011). Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots. New York: Basic Books.

  16. Lipset, S.M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731

  17. Marshall, M.G., Cole, B.R. (2014). Global Report 2014: Conflict, Governance, and State Fragility. Vienna, VA: Center for Systemic Peace. Retrieved from: www.systemicpeace.org

  18. Nussio, E. (2020). Attitudinal and Emotional Consequences of Islamist Terrorism. Evidence from the Berlin Attack. Political Psychology, 41(6), 1151-1171. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12679

  19. Onuch, O. (2022). Why Ukrainians Are Rallying around Democracy. Journal of Democracy, 33(4), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2022.0045

  20. Peisakhin, L., Rozenas, A. (2018). Electoral Effects of Biased Media: Russian Television in Ukraine. American Journal of Political Science (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.), 62(3), 535-550. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12355

  21. Rasler, K., Thompson, W.R. (2004). The Democratic Peace and a Sequential, Reciprocal, Causal Arrow Hypothesis. Comparative Political Studies, 37(8), 879-908. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414004267980

  22. Rosenblatt, A., Greenberg, J., Solomon, Sh., Lyon, D., Pyszcznski, T. (1989). Evidence for Terror Management Theory: I. The Effects of Mortality Salience on Reactions to Those Who Violate or Uphold Cultural Values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 681. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.681

  23. Skocpol, Th. (2002). Will 9/11 and the War on Terror Revitalize American Civic Democracy? PS: Political Science & Politics, 35(3), 537-540. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650200080X

  24. Sniderman, P.M., Petersen, M.B., Slothuus, R., Stubager, R., Petrov, Ph. (2019). Reactions to Terror Attacks: A Heuristic Model. Political Psychology, 40(S1), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12575

  25. Tedeschi, R.G., Calhoun, L.G. (2004). The Posttraumatic Growth: Conceptual Foundations and Empirical Evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1501_01

  26. Tir, J., Singh, Sh.P. (2015). Get Off My Lawn: Territorial Civil Wars and Subsequent Social Intolerance in the Public. Journal of Peace Research, 52(4), 478-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343315571008

  27. Weber, M. (1965). Politics as a Vocation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

  28. Woods, J. (2011). The 9/11 Effect: Toward a Social Science of the Terrorist Threat. The Social Science Journal, 48(1), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2010.06.001

Received 05.04.2024

Victory-in-freedom: Ukraine’s democratic resilience in the face of war

stmm. 2024 (2): 40-55

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2024.02.040

Full text: https://stmm.in.ua/archive/ukr/2024-2/5.pdf

MIKHAIL A. ALEXSEEV, Professor, Political Science Department, San Diego State University (5500, Campanile Dr, San Diego, CA 92182-4427)

alexseev@sdsu.edu

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2733-2182

SERHII DEMBITSKYI, Doctor of Sciences in Sociology, Deputy Director, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (12, Shovkovychna St., Kyiv, 01021)

sociotest.solutions@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7958-3557

The article offers a rare systematic analysis of political attitudes in societies experiencing massive military invasions using statistical analysis of two original surveys conducted by the Ukraine National Academy of Sciences Institute of Sociology — a panel survey tracking the same respondents in three waves (N = 329, November 2021, June-July 2022, and June 2023) and an additional larger survey (N = 869, June 2023). Despite devastating suffering, Ukrainians’ support for democracy as a political system and for freedom of speech have stayed remarkably resilient over this time period. Cross-sectional (multiple ordinary least squares regression) and longitudinal (linear mixed-effects model regression) tests, as well as supplementary focus group conversations in all of Ukraine’s macro-regions, show that this democratic resilience is grounded in the victory-in-freedom synergy — a widespread sense of shared sacrifice that drives determination to win the war and restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

In particular, we found a clearer understanding of the importance of political freedoms and fighting for victory among individuals who experienced loss and trauma and a strong appreciation across Ukraine’s society that victory is vital to preserve democracy. Survey data also demonstrates that democracy support has become more intrinsic to Ukrainian national identity and that the initial surge of democracy support among Ukrainians in the face of Russia’s invasion has been more than a short-term rallying-round-the-flag. In combination, these factors explain the Ukrainians’ sustained, spirited resilience in the face Russia’s mass savage invasion over more than a two-year period. Moreover, support for democratic ideals doesn’t mean Ukrainians write a blank check of trust to their government. Longitudinal analysis indicates that as the war progressed, and hardship persisted respondents held their democratic institutions accountable.

At the same time, the results of our study indicate that sustaining this resilience would require not only battlefield successes, but also accountable governance, countering Russia’s media impacts, and sustaining family incomes. Our findings contribute to the literature on war and democracy by showing the importance of considering both the external context (war duration and impacts and the aggressor state type) and the mobilization of national identity in the face of aggression.

Keywords: Ukraine; public opinion; democracy; war; national identity

References

  1. Alexseev, M.A., Dembitskyi, S. (2022). Striking Back at the Empire: Ukrainians Converge on Values and National Belonging. Program on New Approaches to Research on Security (PONARS Eurasia). Policy Memo, 793. Retrieved from: https://www.ponarseurasia.org/striking-back-at-the-empire-ukrainians-converge-on-values-and-national-belonging/

  2. Alexseev, M.A., Dembitskyi, S. (2024). Geosocietal Support for Democracy: Survey Evidence from Ukraine. Perspectives on Politics. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592724000422

  3. Berinsky, A.J. (2009). In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226043463.001.0001

  4. Canetti-Nisim, D., Halperin, E., Sharvit, K., Hobfoll, St.E. (2009). A New Stress-Based Model of Political Extremism: Personal Exposure to Terrorism, Psychological Distress, and Exclusionist Political Attitudes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 53(3), 363-389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002709333296

  5. Carmil, D., Breznitz, St.E. (1991). Personal Trauma and World View-Are Extremely Stressful Experiences Related to Political Attitudes, Religious Beliefs, and Future Orientation? Journal of Traumatic Stress, 4(3), 393-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00974557

  6. Chemtob, C.M., Novaco, R.W., Hamada, R.S., Gross, D.M. (1997). Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for Severe Anger in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(1), 184-189. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.65.1.184

  7. Cumming, G., Finch, S. (2005). Inference by Eye: Confidence Intervals and How to Read Pictures of Data. The American psychologist, 60(2), 170-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.170

  8. Davis, D.W., Silver, B.D. (2004). Civil Liberties Vs. Security: Public Opinion in the Context of the Terrorist Attacks on America. American Journal of Political Science, 48(1), 28-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2004.00054.x

  9. Diamond, L. (1999). Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801860140

  10. Dyrstad, K. (2013). Does Civil War Breed Authoritarian Values? An Empirical Study of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Croatia. Democratization, 20(7), 1219-1242. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.688032

  11. Easton, D. (1975). A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400008309

  12. Gaines, B.J. (2002). Where's the Rally? Approval and Trust of the President, Cabinet, Congress, and Government since September 11. PS: Political Science & Politics, 35(3), 531-536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096502000793

  13. Hetherington, M., Suhay, E. (2011). Authoritarianism, Threat, and Americans' Support for the War on Terror. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 546-560. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00514.x

  14. Janoff-Bulman, R. (1992). Shattered Assumptions: Toward a New Psychology of Trauma. New York: Free Press.

  15. Kidd, Th.S. (2011). Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots. New York: Basic Books.

  16. Lipset, S.M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69-105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731

  17. Marshall, M.G., Cole, B.R. (2014). Global Report 2014: Conflict, Governance, and State Fragility. Vienna, VA: Center for Systemic Peace. Retrieved from: www.systemicpeace.org

  18. Nussio, E. (2020). Attitudinal and Emotional Consequences of Islamist Terrorism. Evidence from the Berlin Attack. Political Psychology, 41(6), 1151-1171. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12679

  19. Onuch, O. (2022). Why Ukrainians Are Rallying around Democracy. Journal of Democracy, 33(4), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2022.0045

  20. Peisakhin, L., Rozenas, A. (2018). Electoral Effects of Biased Media: Russian Television in Ukraine. American Journal of Political Science (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.), 62(3), 535-550. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12355

  21. Rasler, K., Thompson, W.R. (2004). The Democratic Peace and a Sequential, Reciprocal, Causal Arrow Hypothesis. Comparative Political Studies, 37(8), 879-908. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414004267980

  22. Rosenblatt, A., Greenberg, J., Solomon, Sh., Lyon, D., Pyszcznski, T. (1989). Evidence for Terror Management Theory: I. The Effects of Mortality Salience on Reactions to Those Who Violate or Uphold Cultural Values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 681. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.681

  23. Skocpol, Th. (2002). Will 9/11 and the War on Terror Revitalize American Civic Democracy? PS: Political Science & Politics, 35(3), 537-540. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650200080X

  24. Sniderman, P.M., Petersen, M.B., Slothuus, R., Stubager, R., Petrov, Ph. (2019). Reactions to Terror Attacks: A Heuristic Model. Political Psychology, 40(S1), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12575

  25. Tedeschi, R.G., Calhoun, L.G. (2004). The Posttraumatic Growth: Conceptual Foundations and Empirical Evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1501_01

  26. Tir, J., Singh, Sh.P. (2015). Get Off My Lawn: Territorial Civil Wars and Subsequent Social Intolerance in the Public. Journal of Peace Research, 52(4), 478-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343315571008

  27. Weber, M. (1965). Politics as a Vocation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

  28. Woods, J. (2011). The 9/11 Effect: Toward a Social Science of the Terrorist Threat. The Social Science Journal, 48(1), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2010.06.001

Received 05.04.2024

LATEST PRINTED ISSUE

LATEST FREELY ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS

} } } } }