On 24 February 2022, I decided to leave my home in Kyiv and move to the western part of Ukraine. One month before, while planning an upcoming year with the network that I coordinate, we filled in a “risk assessment table”. The possible aggravation of conflicts was always on our list since the countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia (EECCA) are no strangers to tough geopolitical situations. Still, nothing could have prepared us for a full-scale war.
What happened next has by now been recorded and analysed in so many ways that it already seems like history. The strange fact is, now that I have returned to Kyiv, I am not much safer at home than I was on 24 February 2022. So, what actually has changed?
The world witnessed something incredible in the early days of Russia’s full-scale invasion – it seemed as if 40 million people transformed into a huge buzzing beehive united by a single goal. I was looking at this process from both the inside of the Ukrainian NGO Ecoaction for which I work and as a Climate Action Network (CAN) EECCA coordinator. I tried to grasp why, against all the odds, Ukrainians had started actively resisting a power with greater military resources. I soon found an answer for myself – our power lies in the civil society which can organise itself on any level when a common threat is hanging above their heads.
Interestingly, the ‘freedom gene’, which Ukrainians jokingly say that they all share, is frowned upon in most EECCA countries. Indeed, constant criticism of any government, protests, heated public discussions, diversity of thought – are not necessarily what a typical post-soviet government regards as ideal. During the Revolution of Dignity in 2013 when millions of Ukrainians were protesting against the government of Yanukovich and his growing affiliation with Russia, the media in the EECCA region portrayed the protests as something to be afraid of. One could hear things like: “If you don’t want another Maidan here, don’t be too political or radical in your activism”. While this worked for some people, it didn’t stop the waves of protests.
The government in Kyrgyzstan has changed after the people have risen up three times since the country’s independence: in 2005, 2010 and 2020. In January 2022, after over 200 protesters were killed during a revolution in Kazakhstan a change in power came and reforms started to unfold. These are some recent examples, although we also note the Rose Revolution in Georgia in 2003, the Velvet Revolution in Armenia in 2018, and many smaller-scale attempts in between.
Thinking about what awaits us in a future of geopolitical instability and climate crisis, I cannot help but see some common threads running through these big uprisings. The main goal being pursued by people in each case was not to remove a specific person from power, but to change what that individual represented. Reasons for this included: high energy bills, corruption, lack of civil freedoms, unprotected human rights, a low standard of living, and undesirable political alliances. When these issues are combined with people being sufficiently aware of their right to disagree with the government, protests emerge and the current holder of power is typically singled out as a symbol of the change desired.
Knowing now that the World Economic Forum concluded that the climate crisis, cost of living, and geoeconomic confrontation are among the top challenges facing humanity, we need to figure out how to mitigate those risks. I am sure that one answer lies in a strong, well-organised civil society.
Coming back to the conclusion I arrived at after a couple of weeks of full-scale war, there is no doubt that self-organised groups on the local scale have been much more effective in tackling a global threat than a centralised vertical structure. All of my colleagues from environmental NGOs began using their skills for the joint purpose of standing up to the aggressor. We already knew how to fundraise, speak in public, coordinate actions, write official appeals, and much more. All of these skills proved to be useful and helped us withstand the first big wave of shock.
Similarly, in other EECCA countries, where ever more people know their civil rights, can coordinate volunteer work, engage citizens, fundraise, write articles and speak out, big shifts in society are more possible. And these are exactly the skills or resources that authoritarian regimes do not want you to have. Through my work with environmental movements of the EECCA region, I can see that the new generation, born and raised following the fall of the Soviet Union, is much more politically active, ready to speak out and protect their freedoms. Of course, this generation doesn’t combine very well with the old institutions of EECCA countries where still today many people in power are ‘Soviet minded’. They are afraid of standing out, being innovative or too critical of the status quo as this is considered dangerous. They respect hierarchy over all and trust the government more than scientists or civil society. Last but not least, they lived through some major geopolitical shifts and could be simply exhausted thus craving stability and predictability in their life.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has triggered a lot of societal discussions in the countries that were under Russian influence for over a century. Civil society and academia have reflected on the colonising practices used by Moscow during the Soviet Union and beyond. This entailed establishing a loyal local government, keeping the native languages from developing enough to overshadow the role of the Russian language in culture, science and politics, managing the natural resources unsustainably, extracting coal, oil, gas and metals, dominating the local markets, and relying on cheap, socially unprotected immigrant work to develop its own economy. It seems as if a large share of EECCA civil society is waking up from hibernation and taking their power back to develop their countries as they consider best. Yet, is this enough?
The current system that has seen us rolling into climate chaos without interruption is still largely in place. The EECCA countries continue to struggle with corruption, which eats up a big portion of the resources needed to conduct successful reforms. The old energy systems and laws do not allow any quick and efficient energy transition, while tensions in society are rising. I don’t think that any real change is possible without the active role of citizens monitoring the actions of their government on all levels. Eventually, the current young generation will become the new government. But they would have much less time than their parents.
At the same time, we have seen examples of people using their collective power to protest and self-organise without this leading to change. Kyrgyzstan, for example, after having experienced three changes in power following revolutions, is still struggling with ensuring responsible policy implementation, human rights protection, freedom of the media, and combatting corruption. They have needed to fight so hard to get the freedoms they have today and, yet, they are still not guaranteed. Moreover, in case of the worsening climate conditions, when communities need to have the means for climate risks adaptation and the emitting industries must be controlled, we observe that most reforms tend to stay on paper. These are hardly the conditions in which EECCA countries can successfully deal with the multiple crises facing us.
Considerable work remains to be done for those developing civil society, but there truly is no other way. The civil society of EECCA countries must push hard against the status quo and authoritarian practices of their countries. Success is not guaranteed; we must fight for it with everything we have.
Today I feel safer and more confident in Ukraine than in many other countries in the world. That is because I know what our civil society is capable of fighting for. I can see small changes in mindsets and local wins happening every day as an outcome of public discussion, petitions, media campaigns etc. The reforms are literally occurring amid constant shelling and this is precisely why I am so certain that a strong civil society is the backbone of our power and democracy.
