After three years of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, CIVICUS discusses the civil society response with Mykhailo Savva, member of the Expert Council of Ukraine’s Center for Civil Liberties, a civil society organisation (CSO) dedicated to the protection and promotion of human rights.

Ukraine faces a deepening crisis in its media and humanitarian efforts, triggered by significant cuts in US support. CSOs are struggling as funding diminishes, putting vital services at risk. Several media outlets – heavily dependent on support from the US Agency for International Development, currently under attack by the Trump administration – are being forced to scale back their coverage, particularly of critical issues such as war crimes documentation. This has heightened concerns about the spread of Russian propaganda and disinformation, within Ukraine and beyond its borders.

How have attitudes towards the war evolved over three years?

As the conflict continues, many Ukrainians are experiencing war fatigue. This manifests in some gradually downplaying the conflict’s urgency, making them more vulnerable to Russian actions.

Ukrainians still enjoy relatively open access to information, mostly via the internet and social media, as TV channels have been consolidated into a single state-run format with limited diversity. While the government has blocked Russian propaganda websites as a wartime necessity, there is online freedom of expression and criticism remains widespread.

International interest in the conflict has declined as global attention shifted towards other conflicts, particularly the war in Gaza. The new US administration appears more focused on pressuring Ukraine than on holding Russia accountable. However, rhetoric and policy don’t always align. Despite Trump’s friendly statements about Putin, his administration was the first to supply Ukraine with lethal weapons, highlighting the importance of focusing on actual policy decisions rather than political messaging.

How does civil society engage with the government?

The relationship between CSOs and the government remains largely unchanged, with the quality of engagement depending heavily on individual relationships. While some government bodies remain closed to dialogue, others welcome genuine collaboration. The Center for Civil Liberties, for instance, regularly engages with officials through its Human Rights Club events to discuss assessments and proposals, though these efforts have been disrupted by martial law suspending elections for public council members.

Without clear legal guidelines, effective engagement often relies on personal initiative, leading to inconsistent interactions that hinder civil society’s impact on decision-making.

How are people documenting war crimes and trying to ensure accountability?

The digital age has transformed war crime documentation, with civilians using mobile phones to capture crucial evidence of atrocities they’ve experienced or witnessed. Immediate documentation and first-hand accounts are vital, as evidence of war crimes can quickly disappear. The documentation of war crimes committed in Kyiv in March 2022 demonstrated the power of rapid evidence gathering and its global impact. To date, over 160,000 potential war crimes have been recorded, representing the largest documentation effort in Europe since the Second World War.

Documenting crimes against captured Ukrainians committed by Russian prison guards, investigators and judges is particularly crucial. While testimonies from returnees and court verdicts provide key evidence, Ukraine’s law enforcement is overwhelmed by the volume of cases, and Russian officials enjoy immunity in Ukrainian courts. This emphasises the need for universal jurisdiction and an international tribunal, alongside expanded sanctions against Russian officials and organisations such as the Federal Security Service and Federal Penitentiary Service.

How can independent media in conflict zones be protected?

Despite significant funding cuts, Ukraine’s civil society remains resilient and responsive. However, while the ability to express opinions and advocate for change isn’t solely dependent on large budgets, financial constraints now hamper long-term reform efforts.

Reform in Ukraine has faced resistance from entrenched oligarchic interests and legislative obstacles dating back to the 1990s. Without civil society’s consistent challenge to these barriers, meaningful progress is unlikely.

Independent media urgently need external support, particularly financial assistance. Given Ukraine’s economic challenges, many people prioritise military donations over news subscriptions, creating additional strain on media outlets.

However, funding alone isn’t sufficient. There’s a critical need to raise journalistic standards through professional development. War creates fertile ground for propaganda and misinformation, and many journalists lack adequate training in information handling. Short-term courses led by experienced professionals could address this gap. Support for journalists’ professional development is as crucial as funding media outlets to ensure independent reporting remains reliable and effective in these challenging times.