Ukraine Needs Fundamental Governance Reform, Not Just Personnel Changes
As Ukraine reshuffles its Cabinet, experts argue the country needs a radically new model of wartime economic governance, not just new faces. Surveys show 88% of Ukrainians expect a reset of central power after the war, while businesses cite unpredictable state actions and high taxes as main obstacles.
Ukraine is undergoing a change in the personnel of the Cabinet of Ministers, but the key issue is not who will lead the ministries. The country needs not just a new Cabinet but a fundamentally new model of state governance for a wartime economy. According to a May survey by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), 88% of Ukrainians expect a reset of central power after the war (74% expect a new government). However, replacing faces without changing the governance model will only reproduce previous flaws, inefficiency, and lack of leverage for policy formation.
War does not cancel reforms; on the contrary, it makes them ultra-urgent. A state that spends more than half its budget on defense cannot afford a slow, bureaucratic, and overly centralized system. The more efficient the economy, the stronger the army. The economic block is not a “peacetime” part of the agenda that can wait – it is a direct component of defense capability.
According to a June business survey by Advanter Group, the UBI business activity index remains stuck at 34.8 out of 100, and the neutrality threshold (50) has never been reached since the start of the full-scale war. Six out of ten enterprises recorded a drop in sales compared to last year. When businesses are asked what hinders recovery most, the first obstacle is not the enemy but their own state: 56% cite “unpredictable state actions.” High taxes (39%) and regulatory pressure are more painful than many other factors. Among measures that would most improve the business climate, after a ceasefire (87%), entrepreneurs name tax reform (48%) and reducing regulatory pressure (35%).
This leads to a simple principle for the new government's mandate: maximum efficiency from the state in security, but minimum state where business or community can do better. Security and freedom mutually reinforce each other. This resonates with public demand: according to KIIS, 59% of Ukrainians consider sovereignty more important than well-being, but 60% prefer a democratic system over a “strong leader.” Society does not choose between security and freedom – it wants both simultaneously.
The author outlines three horizons for the new government: first, resilience (energy and fiscal resilience, defense industry development); second, institutional foundations (Cabinet reform, tax reform, European integration); third, subjectivity (national economic strategy, human capital, export orientation, technological sovereignty).
Liberal reforms during war are not a peacetime luxury but the only condition for victory. Economic freedom and efficient governance are direct contributions to defense capability.
