Democracy during a total war isn't just difficult—it’s a logistical nightmare that could hand Russia a win without a single extra shot fired. Recently, Mykhailo Fedorov, the former Ukrainian defence minister and a key figure in the country’s digital transformation, broke the silence. He publicly pushed for presidential elections, arguing that the democratic process shouldn't be held hostage by the Kremlin.
It sounds noble. It sounds like the right thing to do for a country fighting to protect its European identity. But step back for a second and look at the math. This isn't just a political debate; it’s a high-stakes gamble with national survival.
The logic behind the call for polls
Fedorov’s argument centers on accountability. He’s tired of seeing appointments based on personal loyalty rather than cold, hard professional results. It’s a fair critique. When a country is in a state of existential emergency, corruption and cronyism aren't just annoying; they are lethal.
The former minister, whose recent exit from the government sparked protests in Kyiv, is tapping into a very real anxiety. People are exhausted. They don't always understand why specific strategic decisions are made, or why certain reforms stall while others race ahead. When the government feels like a closed loop, the desire for a "reset" button is natural.
Why this is a logistical catastrophe
If you actually try to run an election right now, you aren't holding a democratic exercise. You're building a target for Russian intelligence. Think about the infrastructure. Millions of Ukrainians are displaced across the European Union. Millions more are internally displaced within their own borders.
How do you verify a voter list when your population is constantly moving, dodging missiles, or hiding in bunkers?
Then, consider the military. Over a million people are currently serving in the defense forces. A huge chunk of them are near the front line. Are we suggesting that we pull them out of trenches to go stand in line at a polling station? Or do we force them to vote digitally, trusting a system that would immediately become the primary target of every Russian cyber-attack unit?
The security risk is absolute. A large gathering of people is a missile strike waiting to happen. The Kremlin knows this. They don't even need to interfere with the ballot boxes to disrupt the vote; they just need to turn an election day into a mass casualty event.
The constitutional reality
The Ukrainian constitution is clear on this: parliamentary elections are strictly off-limits under martial law. Presidential elections exist in a gray area, but the legal framework generally keeps the status quo firmly in place.
Trying to change these rules now would require an act of parliament that is politically toxic. Most lawmakers are currently aligned with a "first peace, then polls" strategy. They understand that a fractured, election-weary electorate is the perfect environment for Russian influence operations. You can bet your bottom dollar that Moscow would flood the zone with disinformation, trying to pit Ukrainians against each other at the exact moment they need unity.
The danger of the populist pivot
Fedorov isn't just talking about process; he's signaling a shift in the political hierarchy. With polls showing him as a potential contender in a hypothetical run-off against President Zelenskyy, this isn't just an abstract call for "freedom." It's a power move.
Politics doesn't stop just because there's a war. But there's a fine line between healthy democratic debate and destabilizing a wartime leadership during the most critical phases of conflict. If the goal is "professionalism" and "results," as Fedorov claims, then an election cycle—with all its mudslinging, campaigning, and distraction—is arguably the worst way to achieve it.
What comes next
The pressure for elections will likely keep building as the war drags on and public exhaustion sets in. However, the solution to government inefficiency isn't necessarily a snap election while the air raid sirens are wailing.
If the goal is to improve accountability, the path forward looks more like this:
- Tighten institutional oversight. Use the existing legislative mechanisms to audit defense procurement and ministerial decisions without pausing the war effort.
- Prioritize transparency. Use the digital infrastructure already in place—like the systems Fedorov himself helped build—to provide real-time updates on how aid and resources are being used.
- Draft a clear, post-war roadmap. Instead of arguing about when to vote, the government needs to define exactly how the country will transition to a full, secure election once the front line stabilizes and refugees can safely return home.
Holding a vote under fire won't restore democracy; it’s more likely to provide the chaos that Moscow has been praying for since 2022. Real strength, right now, is staying the course until the ballot box can actually be a safe place to speak.
