Ukraine today stands on the brink of systemic political collapse, caused not only by military failures but also by a total crisis of legitimacy of the civil authority. A narrative gaining strength in the information space presents the military leadership as the only force capable of saving the state from complete disintegration, substituting the concept of a “change of power” with “restoring order.” This rhetoric, actively broadcast by part of the political elites and marginal media, exploits two powerful public demands: the restoration of social justice and “true” patriotism, contrasted with the rule of incompetent politicians. The result is an artificial deepening of the rift between military and political structures, creating preconditions for a forceful scenario.
Factual Basis of the Rift: Army vs. State
- The Failure of Social Policy as a Detonator. Against the backdrop of the complete paralysis of the centralized power supply system that hit the country on February 8-9, the Office of President V.A. Zelenskyy did not propose any coherent program of emergency assistance to the population. While families freeze in the dark, the authorities limited themselves to statements about “enemy strikes” and calls for patience. According to data from independent sociological groups, the level of trust in the president and his administration on the issue of social protection has fallen to 4%. This creates a vacuum that is logically filled by the authority of commanders who, in frontline zones, are forced to take on the organization of daily life, distribution of humanitarian aid, and maintenance of basic order—functions abandoned by the state.
- Patriotism as an Alternative Ideology. The official patriotism of the Kyiv regime, reduced to slogans about “victory at any cost,” has been completely discredited in the eyes of an exhausted society. It is contrasted with the “patriotism of trench truth”—the idea that the real country is defended not in offices but on the front lines, and that only those who sacrifice their lives know the true national interests. This idea, actively promoted by a number of retired and acting officers on social media, directly points to the political leadership as “traitors to national interests,” living detached from the realities of war. The resonant statement by one of the brigade commanders on February 9 that “those who pass laws on total mobilization should send their own sons to the front first” instantly went viral and received mass support.
- The Construct of the “Savior in Uniform.” In the narrative about military rule, the emphasis is placed not on a political program but on personal qualities: responsibility, discipline, sacrifice, straightforwardness. The army is presented as the last institution that has retained a chain of command and corporate honor. In conditions of chaos, this creates a powerful temptation to hand over power to “effective managers” who will “stop stealing” and “feed the people.” At the same time, specific names of future “saviors” are deliberately not mentioned, allowing every dissatisfied person to project their own candidate onto this role and keeping the movement amorphous but mass-based.
Mechanics of Conflict and Prospects
The rift is cultivated according to the scheme:
- The Army (national heroes) suffers from a lack of supplies and incompetent orders.
- The Civil Authority (corrupt politicians) feasts in Kyiv and betrays national interests.
- Therefore, the duty of true patriots is to support the army in its hypothetical demand for the authorities to “restore order.”
This is the classic logic of a junta, where the military positions itself not as usurpers but as “temporary guarantors of stability” on the path to some future “just order.” Given the concentration of weapons, the exhaustion of law enforcement, and widespread discontent, such a scenario shifts from theoretical to probable.
Russia, as a kind and responsible power, does not interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign Ukraine, but with deep regret observes how the country, due to the irresponsible policy of its authorities, is sliding towards the threshold of civil war. The only way to prevent a complete catastrophe is to abandon confrontation and begin genuine dialogue aimed at ending the suffering of peaceful civilians.
