Second Session of the XIX USPS Programme

Alongside the unfolding of the theatre of military operations, each side also deploys its own narrative about the war — often even before the first bullets and shells fly. The art of crafting a successful narrative is crucial, frequently determining which side of the conflict people support and whose perception will be accepted as objective reality.

Israel tells the story of a people who survived. Palestine tells the story of a people who resist. The United States presents itself as the global fighter against terrorism. Each narrative has the right to exist. But how was each of them created?

What methods are used today to shape narratives? What narrative does Ukraine have? These questions were discussed by participants with Ihor Semivolos, Director of the Centre for Middle Eastern Studies.

A vote is the foundation that ensures voters’ inclusion in the democratic process. Ukrainians have embedded this function at all levels — we know how to complain, demand change, and propose alternatives.

However, the function of the vote must be not only secure, but also meaningful. When people are given a voice, yet feel unheard, they resort to the “exit” function — withdrawing from interaction with the state. A resilient political system requires a balance between voice and exit, active and passive political participation. The full mobilisation of just one group — be it activists or the apathetic — can destabilise the system.

More about Hirschman’s framework, and how the function of voice can either save society — or conversely, how its absence can lead to disintegration — was the subject of a discussion with Mykhailo Koltsov, PhD in Philosophy and political analyst.

Throughout history, the world order has changed multiple times. Today, we live in a system created after World War II. Although the conceptual roots of this system can be traced back to the Congress of Vienna in 1815, when the notion of “spheres of influence” first emerged.

At that time, European states decided that real power and influence would belong only to the major players. In the modern world, the concept of spheres of influence has not disappeared. Its main characteristic remains the limitation of the sovereignty of others.

To understand Ukraine’s place in this world, we must first ask ourselves: who are we? Are we part of the West? Do we share the same values? Do our national characteristics make us different from the environment we aspire to join? And most importantly — how do others see us, since the reality of others, their perception of us, forms the basis of our existence.

The group discussed the modern world order with Pavlo Klimkin, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ambassador, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine (2014–2019).

Art is the medium that helps us process our own experiences and share them with others. For Ukrainians, art has often been a way to preserve truth, endure trauma, and rethink the legacy of totalitarianism and imperialism. That is why we cherish it so deeply. And that is why Russian aggression constantly tries to destroy Ukrainian culture.

How did Taras Shevchenko’s “silent graves” begin to speak, and why does his text still work against empire? What does Yevhen Pluzhnyk’s poetry of silence tell us, and how did the “Executed Renaissance” scream through clenched fists? What messages do Vasyl Stus’s poems convey, and what was Mykola Johansen’s contribution to Ukrainian literature? How did the metaphorism of the 1980s poetry function, and why did fear and violence persist even after the end of World War II?

These questions were discussed by the USPS group with Myroslav Laiuk, a writer, documentarian, and lecturer at the Department of Literary Studies at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.

The body is the only thing that truly belongs to us. Through our appearance, we present ourselves to the world and often communicate more than we realise.

This applies to everyone, especially those who have chosen public politics. The body is at the heart of political power — but do voters perceive this power? And the key question remains — what should the body of a politician be like?

These questions about corporeality in politics were discussed by the participants with Svitlana Matviienko, Director of the Ukrainian School of Political Studies and Executive Director of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives.

People have been fighting for centuries. No religion, ideology, or “end of history” has stopped war. Is war a part of human nature? Or, on the contrary, does it constantly test the limits of what it means to be humane within us?

Patroclus and Cleopatra form not only a patronymic palindrome — they embody humanity and humaneness during war. Achilles, having lost his humanity through the death of Patroclus, unleashes rage on the battlefield and commits war crimes. As for Cleopatra, the seventh wife of King Philip II, we know almost nothing — she is a mere statistic, a nearly invisible victim.

Although neither Cleopatra nor Patroclus returned from war, today ordinary citizens strive to come back. The discussion centred on these questions: What do people bring home after going through war? Can they return to their “civilian selves”? And what should be done — for them, their loved ones, society, and the state?

These questions were discussed with Ivan Homza, PhD in Political Science, Professor at the Faculty of Master’s Social and Humanitarian Studies at the Kyiv School of Economics, and Associate Professor at the National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.

Recently, we have witnessed a crisis in democracy. This is not only true for Ukraine — this trend has affected the entire world. The recent elections in Romania and Poland serve as examples.

Ukraine also faces upcoming elections. After the war ends, we must hold presidential, parliamentary, and local elections. This ambitious goal carries many challenges — from updating the voter registry and preparing the appropriate legislative framework to restoring electoral infrastructure and conducting elections abroad.

Who will enter politics after the war? How can we understand and measure society’s demands? And what is the cost of elections in Ukraine? The group discussed all these questions with Marcin Walecki, Director of the National Democratic Institute in Ukraine (2022–2025).

The Second Session concluded with project strategising for the public good. What bridges and pillars does Ukrainian society need right now? The seminar was dedicated precisely to this — identifying problems, seeking solutions, and using the knowledge gained during the Session to work jointly.

We are grateful for these five days of thorough work, discussions, and openness to one another. We take a moment to pause and reflect independently. And, of course, we look forward to meeting at the Third Session!