How Ukraine has endured under the weight of a full-scale invasion by Russia has attracted global attention. Specifically, apart from its military defense, the embattled country has showcased how its civilian institutions remained functional in the middle of the conflict. Several papers published in Post-Soviet Affairs underscore how reforms, local governance empowerment, and various civic networks provide important lessons for nations worldwide.
Ukraine Provides a Blueprint for Surviving and Powering Through an Existential Crisis
Background: Tracing the Foundation of Ukrainian Resilience
The journal Post-Soviet Affairs published a special issue in August 2025 that discusses the local and regional dimension of the resilience of Ukraine throughout the Russian invasion. Researchers wanted to know why Ukraine did not collapse under such pressure. The inquiries focused on how institutions and communities responded when war tested every foundation.
Capturing the full picture involved polling more than 200 municipalities, interviewing local officials, and organizing focus group discussions with civic leaders. The researchers studied not only the frontline regions but also quieter areas to compare responses and circumstances. They then pieced together the anatomy of Ukrainian resilience amidst conflict.
For example, when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, researcher S. Schmäing found that leaders understood that survival would require more than strong armies. They enforced decentralization to transfer power from Kyiv to local communities. New municipalities, known as hromadas, were granted autonomy over budgets, planning, and essential public services.
The shift changed the daily lives of citizens. In small towns and villages across Ukraine, mayors and councils gained legal authority to decide how public funds were allocated and spent, while citizens sometimes voted directly on budget priorities. Hence, by the time Russia launched its full invasion in 2022, these structures had matured into vital civic lifelines.
A separate research by S. W. Sokyhey and colleagues. Banerjee et al. discovered how hromadas with higher voter turnout rates also tended to spend more money on social services. This indicates that local authorities have been listening to and responding to the demands of their constituents to allocate needed resources and deliver the most relevant government services.
Findings: The Anatomy of Resilience Against Foreign Invasion
The separate studies revealed that the resilience of Ukraine is grounded not only in military capacity but in the interplay of governance, civic action, and democratic participation. Communities with stronger traditions of engagement proved more adaptive. The following bullet points summarize the most significant findings reported across the studies:
• Decentralization Reforms
Reforms gave local governments financial and administrative autonomy since 2014. These enabled municipalities to allocate resources effectively, maintain services, and implement participatory budgeting. These reforms help build trust between citizens and institutions, laying essential groundwork for wartime resilience.
• Local Governments as First Respondents
Mayors and municipal councils were able to provide emergency housing, coordinate evacuations, maintain electricity, and support displaced persons. Their proximity to citizens and ability to act independently allowed them to respond faster than central authorities, particularly in heavily bombarded areas.
• Civil Society Networks
Community groups like volunteer groups, non-governmental actors, and even youth groups mobilized quickly to provide food, medicine, generators, and candles. Many of these groups predated the invasion, demonstrating that long-standing civic capacity can be decisive in responding to crisis and sustaining daily life.
• Importance of Democratic Participation
Municipalities with stronger voter turnout and local participation directed more funding toward social services. Communities where citizens actively shaped budgetary decisions proved better equipped to serve vulnerable populations and displaced individuals. This highlights the tangible benefits of participatory governance.
• Multidisciplinary Resilience
Resilience was measured through preparedness, robustness, and adaptation. Prepared communities had emergency plans, robust communities sustained essential services, and adaptive communities reorganized institutions for wartime shocks. High performance in all three correlated with successful crisis management.
• Trust Between Leaders and the Citizens
Trust between citizens and local governments was reinforced as officials, volunteers, and residents collaborated. This sense of ownership in the national project helped prevent social fragmentation and bolstered national unity. These impacts demonstrated the importance of social cohesion during existential conflict.
• Frontline Variations
Communities near active battle zones experienced severe shocks, including infrastructure destruction and mass displacement. However, resilience was not exclusively determined by geography. Governance quality and civic engagement often made a difference in the ability of communities to adapt successfully under fire.
• Underscoring the Limits of Resilience
Researchers warned of resource depletion and fatigue among citizens and officials. Under martial law, central authorities sometimes imposed controls that weakened local autonomy. Without continued external support, resilience risks erosion, underlining the limits of societal endurance in prolonged wars.
Implications: Enduring Insights and Lessons For Other Countries
Findings from the research tell that the survival of Ukraine is not only a story of military resistance but also of communities that continued to function against extraordinary odds. For countries in fragile political or economic situations, investment in local governance and citizen engagement can be as important as strengthening security forces.
The country provides an example of how a society can sustain itself during wartime periods or existential crises. Decentralization, civic participation, and trust between citizens and institutions enabled communities to withstand unprecedented shocks. These findings reveal that resilience is not accidental but the result of deliberate long-term preparation.
Hence, for policymakers in other countries, the lesson is clear. National security must extend beyond armies and weapons. A strong democracy at the local level, active citizen involvement, and transparent institutions create the conditions for endurance. Resilience begins in town halls, schools, and volunteer networks as much as on battlefields.
Note that the research still notes that resilience requires constant replenishment. Civil groups and local governments can carry heavy burdens, but without financial support, infrastructural investment, and international solidarity, their strength will erode. Sustainable resilience thus emerges as a partnership with broader networks of allies.
FURTHER READING AND REFERENCE
- Banerjee, I., Ganga, P., Kasianenko, N., Miadzvedz, A., Sokhey, S. W., and Van De Laarschot, S. 2025. “The Effect of Democratic Participation on Public Goods Provision: Evidence from Local Governments in Ukraine.” Post-Soviet Affairs. 1-23. DOI: 1080/1060586x.2025.2529766
- Melnykovska, I., and Sokhey, S. W. 2025. “The Local and Regional Dimension of Ukraine’s Resilience During Russia’s Full-Scale Invasion: An Introduction. Post-Soviet Affairs: 1-10. DOI: 1080/1060586x.2025.2545626
- Rabinovych, M., Brik, T., Darkovich, A., Hatsko, V., and Savisko, M. 2025. “Ukrainian Decentralization Under Martial Law: Challenges for Regional and Local Self-Governance.” Post-Soviet Affairs. 1-25. DOI: 1080/1060586x.2025.2520167
- Schmäing, S. 2025. “From Reconfiguring the Urban Space to Tesisting Russia’s War: Local Civic Engagement in Ukraine Since 2014.” Post-Soviet Affairs. 1-20. DOI: 1080/1060586x.2025.2491969