ARMED CONFLICT AND CIVIL SOCIETY IN THE CONTEXT OF CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL THEORY

Abstract

The article analyzes the role of civil society in the context of an armed conflict, using Ukraine as a case study.It demonstrates the transformation of the relationship between the state and the civic sector, the intensification of volunteer practices and horizontal mobilization, and outlines threats to democracy. The research combines theoretical frameworks of modern political science with empirical observations of the activities of Ukrainian civil society institutions during the war.The author notes that armed conflicts present existential challenges to society, forcing a rethinking of civil society’s role as a catalyst for collective action. In the case of Ukraine, the war has become a mobilizing foundation for citizen self-organization. However, the work also draws attention to a number of threats to the development of civil society organizations. First, there is the risk of burnout – societal resources are limited. Second, there is the danger of losing its critical function: in a situation of consolidation, any criticism of the authorities can be perceived as destructive or even as betrayal. Consequently, mechanisms of civic control may weaken, which poses a long-term threat to democracy.Furthermore, civil society organization (CSO) development indices highlight problems of financial instability, activist burnout, and staff shortages. This threatens the long-term sustainability of the sector, especially after the war ends.The article analyzes the most prevalent models of civil society – pluralist and corporatist. The author concludes that the Ukrainian experience demonstrates the simultaneous presence of features from both civil society models.The study argues that during wartime, the state, on one hand, must maintain the legitimacy of its coercive decisions and work towards mobilizing both material and human resources, while on the other hand, it must refrain from authoritarian tendencies. It is precisely civil society that, in such situations, should influence political decision-making. The conclusions emphasize that the future of Ukrainian civil society lies in finding a balance between its mobilizing power and the restoration of a healthy critical function, thereby ensuring not only victory in the war but also the construction of an open, just, and prosperous society in the post-war period.