Civil society: the backbone of Ukraine
On June 24 in Gdańsk, more than 400 civil society leaders gathered at the European Solidarity Center to present the Gdańsk Common Message — a collective call to place people, communities, accountability, and local leadership at the center of Ukraine's recovery process.
Over the past several months, as we prepared the first Civil Society Forum ahead of the Ukraine Recovery Conference 2026 in Gdańsk, I often found myself reflecting on the origins of modern Ukrainian independence.
Not August 1991 itself, but the people who made it possible through years of struggle under Soviet occupation and through preserving Ukrainian identity beyond Ukraine's borders. I thought about the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. About the generation of Ukrainian dissidents, artists, writers, and poets. About the People's Movement of Ukraine (Rukh). About the Student Brotherhood. About the young people who took to Kyiv's central square in the autumn of 1990 and launched the Revolution on Granite.
They did not hold government positions. They had no state budgets or international support. But they possessed courage, a vision for Ukraine's future, and a willingness to take responsibility for it.
In the early 1990s, Ukraine witnessed the rebirth of a civic force that today we call civil society.
For more than thirty years, that force has repeatedly proven its value.
During the "Ukraine Without Kuchma" movement and the "Stop Censorship" campaign. During the Orange Revolution and the Revolution of Dignity. After the beginning of Russian aggression in 2014, when volunteer battalions were formed to defend the country and the volunteer movement helped equip the military while state institutions were rebuilding their capacity. After Russia's full-scale invasion in 2022, when millions of Ukrainians began acting even before formal state response mechanisms were established.
The world saw volunteers purchasing vehicles, drones, and equipment for the front lines. It saw civil society organizations working alongside Territorial Defense Forces to protect communities and evacuate people from occupied territories. It saw local communities welcoming millions of internally displaced people. It saw journalists, human rights defenders, and activists documenting war crimes, telling the world the truth about the war, and protecting democratic institutions under Russian bombs.
Today, civil society in Ukraine is the backbone of the Ukrainian state.
That is why, as a co-founder of many civil society initiatives and an expert, I joined the effort to organize the first Civil Society Forum ahead of the Ukraine Recovery Conference.
What is particularly important to me is that this document was not born in government offices or international organizations.
It was shaped and supported by people working closest to the realities of war: representatives of local communities, veterans' organizations, women's networks, disability organizations, youth movements, human rights groups, anti-corruption initiatives, international partners, and activists who work every day in places where recovery is already underway.
Because Ukraine cannot wait to recover after the war. It must endure and rebuild during the war.
That shared understanding became the starting point of our discussions.
According to the World Bank, Ukraine's recovery and reconstruction needs already exceed $500 billion. Yet throughout our consultations, one thing became clear: the challenge is not only the amount of money available. The challenge is how that money is used. Who sets the priorities. And whether the people for whom reconstruction is intended will genuinely have a voice in decision-making.
Ahead of the Forum, we conducted consultations and surveys among Ukrainian and international civil society organizations. Of the participants, 66.7% represented Ukrainian organizations and 33.3% represented international organizations. Despite their different perspectives and experiences, the results were remarkably consistent.
The first challenge is that civil society is still too often treated as an implementer rather than a partner.
Local organizations carry out projects but are not always involved in setting priorities. They are brought in after decisions have already been made, even though they are the actors who best understand local needs and see the consequences of those decisions on the ground.
The second challenge concerns funding.
Many donor programs still operate within short humanitarian funding cycles of 12 months or less. Yet Ukraine faces the reality of a long war and a long recovery.
It is impossible to seriously address mental health, social cohesion, veterans' reintegration, or community resilience if planning horizons extend no further than a single year.
The third challenge is the imbalance between physical reconstruction and human capital recovery.
We talk extensively about bridges, roads, and energy infrastructure. We do not talk enough about people.
A bridge will not restore trust in a community that has lived through occupation. A new building will not help a veteran return to civilian life if it was not designed with veterans' needs in mind. A new infrastructure project cannot substitute for investment in human capital.
The fourth challenge is the insufficient participation of those most affected by the war: veterans, young people, women, people with disabilities, internally displaced persons, frontline communities, and Ukrainians who have been forced to leave the country.
For that reason, the Gdańsk Common Message contains four concrete recommendations.
First, establish a permanent Civil Society Council within the Ukraine Donor Platform to ensure that civil society organizations participate in planning, financing, monitoring, and evaluating reconstruction efforts.
Second, transition to more flexible, multi-year funding mechanisms for Ukrainian civil society organizations.
Third, recognize human capital recovery as a priority equal to physical reconstruction.
Fourth, ensure that reconstruction remains transparent, accountable, locally driven, environmentally responsible, and aligned with European Union standards.
These recommendations emerged from the experience of people working in communities every day who understand that recovery does not begin with concrete.
Recovery begins with trust.
What is especially important to me is that the Gdańsk Common Message treats Ukraine's reconstruction and European integration as a single process.
European Union membership is not only about legislation and negotiating chapters. It is about accountability, transparency, citizen participation, strong local self-government, and trust between the state and society.
These are precisely the principles that civil society has championed since the days of Rukh and the Student Brotherhood.
Today, Ukraine is defending more than its territory. It is defending a democratic model of society in which citizens do not wait for decisions from above but take responsibility for their country's future.
That is why international partners must invest not only in Ukraine's infrastructure but also in its greatest strategic asset: its people and their capacity for self-organization.
Roads, bridges, and power plants can be rebuilt in a matter of years. Trust, civic participation, and strong institutions take generations to build.
If Ukraine has managed to withstand the largest war in Europe since World War II, it is largely because civil society has always stood alongside the state.
It helped Ukraine achieve independence. It helped defend democracy. It is helping Ukraine prevail today.
And it must become one of the principal architects of Ukraine's recovery and its European future.
As URC 2026 continues, we must build and implement a new strategy for civil society engagement. By the time we meet next year in Tallinn at URC 2027, we can say that communities have gained a real voice in the recovery process and that civil society has become a full-fledged partner in decision-making. We can also say that veterans, young people, women, and local leaders are helping shape policy rather than merely responding to it.
And that Ukraine is not simply rebuilding infrastructure. Ukraine is building a stronger democracy with people in mind.
Co-Founder and member of the Supervisory Board of Education for Victory.
Co-Founder and member of the Supervisory Board of Georgy Gongadze Price.
Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council (Washington) and Friends of Europe (Brussels). Member of the Supervisory Board of the Ukrainian Institute.