Since 2014—and especially after February 2022—Ukrainian civil society, international donors, and the Ukrainian state have developed institutions and mechanisms to support Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression and the country’s rebuilding.
Sergiy Gerasymchuk
February 24, 2022, marked a seismic moment for both Ukraine and democratic societies worldwide. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine served as a litmus test for the resilience of state institutions, civil society, and the donor community. In the wake of the attack, numerous organisations (including NGOs, representations of international organisations and funds, and representatives of governmental institutions and local administrations) found themselves grappling with frustration and uncertainty. The ongoing war cast doubt upon the feasibility of implementing various projects and planned activities. In a nation affected by crisis, adhering to previously defined objectives and fulfilling planned initiatives proved challenging amidst the chaos of war.
Russia’s attack on Ukrainian civil society
The instinctive human response to immediate and vital threats mirrors that of animals: flee, freeze, or fight. This primal reaction was reflected in the actions of state institutions, civil society organisations, and their donors in the face of the crisis. In the occupied territories, Russia’s overarching aim was to suppress any form of dissent or critical thinking diverging from the official state narrative. To enforce this, Russia sought to dismantle civil society, targeting activists through killings, imprisonments, or forcing them into exile. This systemic oppression was designed to elicit a specific reaction from those who opposed the occupying power: to flee, to be silenced, or to conform, effectively neutralising any potential opposition to Russian control. In this harsh environment, the adaptability of those who chose to resist Russia—specifically referring to those who remained in Ukraine—became invaluable.
Many NGO employees found themselves displaced internally or forced to leave the country altogether, seeking protection abroad. This was particularly pronounced among those operating in occupied territories. As advocates for democratic reforms, they faced the imminent danger of physical harm, often under the guise of being Western agents. Alleged lists of individuals targeted by Russian special services had been circulating on social media, heightening the sense of peril. These lists specifically identified government officials, journalists, activists, veterans, religious leaders, and lawyers, placing them in the crosshairs of Russian aggression. The Associated Press (AP) documented a sample of 61 cases across Ukraine, drawing on Russian lists of names obtained by Ukrainian authorities.
The experiences of Crimea, which fell under occupation in 2014, highlighted the direct threats faced by civil society activists, placing their freedom and lives in jeopardy. Approximately two hundred individuals are known to have been detained by Russian authorities on the peninsula. These include Crimeans who opposed the Russian occupation or participated in journalistic or human rights activities. Many of these prisoners face suffering, are subjected to torture and denied access to proper medical care.
Ukrainian civil society shifts to volunteering and charity
Adapting their activities to address immediate threats became paramount for those who chose to fight. Many turned to volunteering as their initial response. In Ukraine, the tradition of volunteering has deep roots in the modus operandi of civil society activists, dating back to the Orange Revolution (2004) and the Revolution of Dignity (2013/14). During those pivotal moments, the strong cohesion and synergy among grassroots civil society organisations and activist groups played a crucial role in supporting uprisings against autocratic regimes. The same model was revived and applied from 2022 onward as volunteers mobilised to confront the challenges posed by the invasion.
Numerous institutions and think tanks shifted their focus from traditional activities to charitable endeavours. Aiding internally displaced persons (IDPs) and fundraising to support the Ukrainian armed forces became commonplace for NGOs and activists. In response to the upheaval, these organisations redirected their resources and efforts towards addressing the immediate needs of those affected by the conflict and bolstering Ukraine’s defence capabilities. This shift underscored civil society’s adaptability and resilience in times of adversity, as activists rallied to support their country and fellow citizens in the midst of war.
Civil society’s support for the armed forces of Ukraine
An institutional framework for the networks of volunteers was established in 2014 when national charity foundations took on the responsibility of fundraising to support Ukraine’s Armed Forces. However, by 2022, the demand for such assistance had increased significantly due to the prolonged conflict. In response to this heightened demand, these foundations (e.g. Army SOS, Come Back Alive Foundation, Prytula Foundation, Medical battalion ‘Hospitallers’) expanded their operations, developing their own analytical units. Such units played an essential role in analysing the needs of the Armed Forces, identifying suppliers capable of meeting those needs, and establishing logistical chains to facilitate the delivery of goods to the frontline. By leveraging data-driven insights, these foundations were able to optimise their support efforts, ensuring that resources were allocated efficiently and effectively to bolster Ukraine’s defence capabilities amidst ongoing challenges.
Supporting the Armed Forces of Ukraine emerged as a top priority for grassroots organisations and individual volunteers, evolving into a more systemic and institutionalised effort. There was a significant growth of national private foundations aiding in procuring essential ammunition and military equipment. They have played a critical role in channelling support to the frontline, ensuring that Ukrainian troops have the resources needed to defend their country against aggression. By institutionalising and streamlining assistance to the armed forces, these initiatives have enhanced the effectiveness and sustainability of support efforts, contributing to Ukraine’s defence capabilities in the face of ongoing threats.
The Come Back Alive Foundation, operational since 2014, has become one of the most well-known and efficient institutions. Their primary objective is to enhance the effectiveness of the Ukrainian Defense Forces, save the lives of Ukrainian service members, and systematically counteract the enemy. To achieve this, the foundation procures equipment, including thermal optics, drones, vehicles, and surveillance and reconnaissance systems. Come Back Alive is also the first charity organisation in Ukraine authorised to purchase and import military and dual-purpose goods. Among other procurements, the foundation’s team acquired and delivered the Bayraktar TB2 UAV system to the defence units, 11 specialised armoured vehicles, and 1,460 7.62-mm calibre machine guns.
Another success story was the Prytula Foundation. Serhiy Prytula is a well-known Ukrainian TV presenter who, in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, established a charitable foundation to help in non-military areas. Since February 2022, due to the full-scale offensive of Russia, Prytula has used the resources available in the foundation to support the military. The foundation is currently purchasing equipment, medical supplies, and vehicles for the military. Another area of work is humanitarian aid. In August 2022, for the 600 million hryvnias (approximately $16 million) raised by Ukrainians, the foundation purchased a satellite from the Finnish ICEYE for the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The necessary sum was raised in just three days.
In some instances, starting in February 2022, organisations found themselves in a combination of freeze and fight modes. While ongoing projects were temporarily halted and objectives needed to be re-evaluated to align with the shifting realities on the ground, funds were reallocated to support charitable endeavours. This approach, also applied by the Foreign Policy Council ‘Ukrainian Prism’, allowed entities to maintain flexibility in their operations, acknowledging the need to adjust their strategies in response to the evolving situation while actively contributing to humanitarian efforts.
NGO-donor relations: From ad-hoc initiatives to enduring programmes based on local expertise
The surge in foreign donors and philanthropic organisations seeking to support Ukraine during wartime necessitated identifying reliable partners within the country. Under emergency conditions, the preference often leaned towards NGOs and think tanks with established social capital bolstered by their inclusion in international networks. These organisations possessed the requisite knowledge and experience in managing grants and reporting, making them trusted partners for coordinating and delivering aid efficiently. Their existing networks and expertise allowed them to navigate the complexities of humanitarian assistance amidst the war, ensuring that support reached those in need in a timely and effective manner.
In some cases, organisations transitioned to volunteer-driven activities for most of 2022, which led to the postponement or freezing of their previously undertaken project activities. Such a shift was often influenced by decisions made by donors, who may have redirected funding towards more immediate needs or imposed constraints on project implementation in light of the war. Some organisations were compelled to terminate project contracts citing force majeure, while others opted to freeze project implementation until conditions became more favourable temporarily. These adjustments reflected the unprecedented challenges posed by the war, while organisations were navigating complex logistical and financial considerations in their efforts to adapt to the evolving circumstances.
There were instances where regional branches found it necessary to communicate to their headquarters, emphasising that Ukraine should not be equated with Afghanistan; indeed, it has a functioning government and banking system, proving it is not a failed state. Those on the ground had a clearer understanding of the actual conditions, showcasing an important lesson: local representation provides a more accurate and nuanced view of the situation than distant observation. This insight is crucial for aligning support and interventions with the country’s real needs and capacities.
Additionally, local needs assessments and longer-term feasibility studies are vital for understanding regional differences within the country. Variations in needs and appropriate intervention tools are best identified by engaging local interlocutors who bring valuable expertise. By leveraging the insights of those with direct knowledge of the regional contexts, organisations can tailor their strategies to meet specific local requirements more effectively.
Ukraine’s resilience in the face of aggression has disrupted Russian plans, transforming what was initially envisioned as a swift blitzkrieg into a protracted war of attrition. In response, civil society and the donor community have exhibited remarkable adaptability. What began as ad hoc humanitarian initiatives in the wake of the war has evolved into enduring humanitarian programmes, reflecting a commitment to addressing the ongoing needs of affected populations. It became clear that the conflict would be prolonged, and the resulting damage would be significant. This understanding highlighted that reconstruction and recovery efforts would require a systemic and long-term approach. Recognising the scope and duration of the challenges ahead, stakeholders understood that a deep, region-specific understanding would be essential in crafting effective and sustainable recovery strategies.
State-donor relations: Why Ukraine is not Afghanistan
Furthermore, there has been a growing recognition of the imperative to reconstruct the country in the aftermath of the conflict. A high-level conference held in Lugano, Switzerland, in July 2022 reflected the shifting priorities towards prioritising recovery efforts amidst ongoing challenges, signalling a collective commitment to rebuilding and restoring stability in affected regions. This has paved the way for closer cooperation between donors and the government. By aligning their efforts towards the common goal of rebuilding Ukraine, stakeholders have fostered a collaborative approach that leverages resources and expertise from both the public and private sectors. Launching the Donor Coordination Platform has been a pivotal step in providing coordinated support for Ukraine’s immediate financial needs, as well as its reconstruction and future economic recovery. This platform facilitates the pooling of resources and the identification of effective funding instruments from various sources. The platform’s steering committee comprises senior officials from Ukraine, the G7 countries, and the European Union, ensuring a broad spectrum of international input and support. Additionally, international financial institutions and organisations actively participate in the steering committee meetings, contributing their expertise and resources to streamline and strengthen the collective response to Ukraine’s challenges. This structured collaboration enhances the strategic alignment of aid and development efforts, fostering more efficient and targeted interventions. What truly enhances the comprehensiveness of the coordination efforts is their integration with broader reforms and EU integration initiatives. The government has clearly outlined its priorities and detailed a reform plan designed to facilitate systematic changes. Specifically, this plan includes transformations envisaged in the Reform Matrix as well as the reforms under the Ukraine Facility programme.
Sceptics of reconstruction aid to Ukraine raise valid concerns, citing the challenges faced in countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Haiti, where funds often failed to create functional states and were vulnerable to corruption and mismanagement. Given Ukraine’s historical struggles with corruption, these concerns were particularly pronounced, as the country has long been regarded as one of Europe’s most corrupt nations.
However, Ukraine differs significantly from countries like Afghanistan and Iraq. In those cases, donors sought to impose entirely new systems of government, often met with resistance from locals. In contrast, Ukraine resembles post-war Europe, where injections of funds helped rebuild prosperous, industrialised societies that had existed before the devastation of war. Before the war, Ukraine was a democratic and relatively sophisticated middle-income country actively working to address corruption. While challenges undoubtedly lie ahead, the prospect of rebuilding Ukraine into a stronger, more resilient nation remains within reach.
Transparency as a driver for the relationship between government and donors
State-donor relations witnessed significant development during this period, with certain government initiatives (e.g., the Ukraine Development Fund, and the Ukraine Capacity Development Fund) aimed at ensuring transparency in the utilisation of aid funds. These efforts proved instrumental in boosting the inflow of donations by instilling confidence among donors that their contributions would be used effectively. Measures to enhance transparency included robust reporting mechanisms and accountability frameworks, providing stakeholders with clear insights into how aid funds were utilised.
The Ukrainian government has launched a new fundraising campaign and website to encourage donations for defence, humanitarian aid, and reconstruction efforts. This initiative led to creating the United24 website and campaign, providing donors with various options to contribute funds. Ukraine has committed to issuing weekly reports detailing the funds raised and distributed, ensuring transparency and accountability in the process. To further bolster credibility, the international accounting firm Deloitte committed to providing audit and review pro bono, enhancing confidence among donors regarding the integrity and effectiveness of their contributions. By integrating digital marketing strategies with transparent fundraising mechanisms, Ukraine aims to sustain global support and solidarity in its fight against the Russian invasion while also facilitating efficient allocation of resources towards critical needs such as defence, humanitarian aid, and reconstruction efforts.
Counteracting donation fatigue
The decline in donor support poses a significant challenge to the ongoing efforts, potentially undermining progress made in fighting the Russian invasion. Despite the intensified efforts of national foundations to collect essential weapons and ammunition, there is a concerning reluctance among key allies to provide the necessary support.
The risk of failure to reach a compromise within the EU regarding the Ukraine Facility (a dedicated instrument which will allow the EU to provide Ukraine with up to €50 billion in stable and predictable financial support) posed a grave risk to the launch of this initiative for Ukraine and the macro-financial stability of the country. However, thanks to the significant efforts of both Ukrainian allies in the EU and the international networks of civil society organisations and activists, a fragile compromise has been forged, allowing for the eventual launch of the instrument.
The launch of RISE Ukraine marked a significant milestone in the collaborative effort towards the country’s reconstruction and modernisation. RISE Ukraine is a coalition of Ukrainian and international public organisations, initiatives, state institutions, and activists united by their support for Ukraine’s reconstruction and modernization. This coalition facilitates constructive dialogue with both authorities and international partners, strongly emphasising the involvement of citizens and businesses in the planning, monitoring, and oversight of the reconstruction processes.
The delay in approving United States military aid to Ukraine is having detrimental effects on Kyiv’s forces as they confront Russia’s invading troops. Without timely support from the United States, Ukrainian forces are facing increased challenges in their efforts to defend their country and repel the aggression.
In such circumstances, if the freeze mode caused by political speculations persists and Ukraine’s ability to fight is limited, there are growing risks of repeating the February-March 2022 scenario. Those who are able to flee may choose to leave the country, while those who remain to fight will be left in a perilous situation. The efforts and interventions of the donor community and civil society could ultimately be in vain.
Sergiy Gerasymchuk is a Deputy Executive Director and Regional Initiatives and Neighbourhood Programme Director at the Foreign Policy Council ‘Ukrainian Prism’.