Youth protests. Political science analysis

What are those structures? An idea (ideology), a leader, an organization, time, money, international backing, a clear enemy, and whether there are traitors on the other side.

What do we have now?

Let’s start with the fact that the gun we see in the first act must eventually go off (though not always in the last act).

For the past year and a half, Ukrainian politics has been running on election logic. From a strictly political science point of view, these protests are a natural continuation. You can’t live by election logic and not eventually act on it. This isn’t good or bad, it’s just how the genre works. Most protesters will sincerely say: we’re not here because of the elections. But again: a year and a half of election-mode politics demands election-style action. That’s just human nature.

Idea

People with very different ideologies have come out together, but they’re united above all by their dislike of the current government (again – election logic). The range of beliefs on the square is wide. The only thing we can say for sure is that NABU and SAPO became triggers, often unconsciously, without much reflection.

So far, the main unifying slogan seems to be the continued fight against corruption, as a key step toward EU integration. Whether this idea will evolve is hard to say. Most likely, transformation will come from the protest’s more radical corners.

Leader

There’s no clear leader – and it looks like there won’t be one for now. The political groups involved are too far apart. Some public figures are definitely building their political brands (again, election logic). But when it comes to the central issue, corruption, none of the main leaders (or stars) of the protest look like someone the broader public would trust to say, “I’ll fix this,” and actually believe it.

Structure

The core of the protest includes supporters of part of the Holos party (often called anti-corruption activists) and the European Solidarity party. Despite their coordination, it’s clearly too early to talk about a political alliance. Still, movement in that direction seems likely.

About the number of young people: there were a lot of them in 2004 and in 2013–2014. That’s the case now, too, but this time there’s also a noticeable lack of middle-aged men (35–55), for obvious reasons.

Time, money

There’s plenty of time. And money isn’t really necessary for what today’s protesters are trying to do.

International support

It’s not as active as the protesters would like. It will mostly depend on how active the protests become, and how the authorities respond.

The enemy

Still forming. But it looks like the main targets will be people from Zelenskyy’s inner circle – not the President himself, but his close entourage.

Traitors on the opposite side

This isn’t even a discussion yet. No one’s trying to storm Bankova or overthrow the government.

A note on the future

We’ll need to look at polling in a week or two, but for now we’re in a strange situation: around 70% of Ukrainians see corruption as the country’s top issue, but 62–64% don’t trust the anti-corruption body that sparked these protests. And only a small minority are ready to join protests with political demands during wartime.

So it looks like the government will offer some concessions. The protests may calm down a bit, but the deeper issue won’t go away: Ukrainians’ distrust of anti-corruption efforts will stay a major political trigger (across all parties). These rallies, sadly, look like a prelude to post-war political turbulence. And that could lead to the rise of “dark horses.”

For now, we have a chance to audit our corruption and figure out why the anti-corruption system isn’t working. International players could actually help and even support real reforms. But instead, we keep acting like football fans who care more about beating the opponent than admitting their own team plays badly. And that mindset keeps us stuck, heading straight for the next round of protests.

Source

About the author: Vadym Denysenko, political scientist.

The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.