A balance between defense needs and democratic values is what Ukraine needs in the current conditions of war against the racist federation.
This was stated by Oleksiy Ivashyn, coordinator of the Civil-Military Movement and a veteran of the Russian-Ukrainian war, at a meeting of the Ukrainian Security Club on June 5 in Zhytomyr.
Oleksiy Ivashyn emphasized that each Ukrainian region and the country as a whole must change its political and organizational model.
“Both in the Zhytomyr region and in Ukraine as a whole, we need to change approaches to the political model and the organizational component. Because the war against the enemy that attacked us will be very long. The human, economic and natural potentials of our enemy are completely different. And he will not give up on us. So, we have to take the quality,” said Oleksiy.
Oleksiy Ivashyn called the concept that should replace the existing paradigms “Defense Democracy.”
“We will implement the concept of defense democracy, i.e. a balance between defense needs and democratic values, democratic institutions, democratic humanitarian approaches that should be in a normal democratic country. This is the only way to realize effective national security, while guaranteeing the rights and freedoms of citizens, political pluralism and freedom of speech, which is essential if we want to preserve Ukraine as we want it to be. Otherwise, the question simply arises: What is this all for? What is this struggle for? What do we want to build? Do we want to build Makhnovshchyna? Or do we want to build Russia number two? Or do we want to build the DPRK?” – Ivashyn added.
According to Ivashyn, the concept of “Defense Democracy” includes the following points:
- Preservation of Ukraine’s political and legal model and all democratic procedures, including the electoral process.
- Equality of all before the law, building an independent judiciary and punishing all those who oppose Ukrainian sovereignty, territorial integrity and statehood.
- Return of all occupied Ukrainian territories.
- The events are aimed at strengthening unity between veterans, the military, civilians, and family members of veterans and the military.
- Assisting veterans and their families in realizing their legal rights and interests.
Ivashyn also cited examples of countries that were able to combine defense and democracy, such as Finland, Israel, and the United States. He noted that during the interwar period, Finland was able to mobilize the entire population for defense without losing its democratic institutions. Israel is an example of a country that constantly lives under threats, but retains parliamentary control and freedoms. And the United States, after the September 11 attacks, was able to strengthen security without destroying the foundations of democracy.
Oleksiy Ivashyn cited the Israeli system as an example of a defense democracy that works.
“Democratic institutions are preserved in Israel. Elections are held there, there is a multi-party system, there is freedom of speech. But at the same time, there is compulsory military service, and the Shabak, the Israeli Security Service, has very broad powers. For example, at such a moment as the disclosure of personal data, if a person falls into any of the sensitive categories, the Security Service gets the right to unilaterally disclose and study his or her personal data, personal information. Read correspondence and so on. This helps Israel fight Islamic terrorism. But at the same time, there is very strong parliamentary control over the Security Service. There are parliamentary commissions that are transparent and constantly monitor the Security Council. And they submit a constantly open, transparent report on what they have controlled. That is, there is constant work of the executive branch, the legislature, special services, and public organizations. They constantly interact with each other,” the expert noted.
According to Oleksiy Ivashyn, the example of building a model of defense democracy in the United States is interesting. Americans began to develop and implement this concept after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack.
“The country was beginning to turn toward more attention to security issues at that time. They passed the Patriot Act. The special services were given broader powers for surveillance and data collection. There were also extrajudicial detentions without trial. And then the trial is held without warrants – retroactively. But at least this gave the United States the opportunity to nip in the bud Islamist organizations, al-Qaeda, on its territory. In 2002-2004, when the criticism began, the United States made responsive reforms, limited surveillance, and introduced independent control over the intelligence services and commissions,” said Oleksiy Ivashyn.
“Defense democracy is not a utopia. It is a way of survival for countries like ours. And we have to build such a Ukraine,” Ivashyn summarized.
On Thursday, June 5, the Ukrainian Security Club held a regular offsite meeting in Zhytomyr on the topic “National Security and Internal Cohesion: Challenges and Prospects”. The event was attended by military personnel, veterans, academics, volunteers, representatives of local government and business, historians and experts.
As a result of the meeting, a number of practical recommendations were developed to strengthen the region’s security, support veterans and develop a system of national-patriotic education. The organizers of the event plan to submit these proposals to state and local authorities.
The Ukrainian Security Club is a platform that brings together representatives of the Security and Defense Forces, government and local self-government, think tanks, academics, public and political figures, and entrepreneurs who coordinate their activities to ensure Ukraine’s stable development, achieve sustainable peace, overcome internal contradictions, and promote social cohesion.
Roman Korzhyk, journalist at Infolight.in.ua
Leave a Reply