THE POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL IMPACT OF THE UNITED STATES ON DEMOCRATIZATION PROCESSES IN UKRAINE IN 2004–2010

DOI 10.17721/2521-1706.2025.19.5

Yevhenii Kobets,

Ph.D. Student,

Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University,

Mykolaiv, Ukraine

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5583-5792

Abstract. The aim of this article is to analyze the political and institutional support provided by the United States to Ukraine in the context of democratic transformations that took place between 2004 and 2010, with a particular focus on the events surrounding the 2004 presidential election and its aftermath. The objectives of the study include identifying the key mechanisms of U.S. influence on the development of electoral legislation, the judiciary, civil society, political parties, and independent media; examining the institutional activities of American governmental and non-governmental organizations; and assessing the role of this support in bringing Ukraine closer to European democratic standards, thus enhancing its prospects for further European integration.

The methodological framework of the study is based on the analysis of English-language academic publications, in particular the works of N. Prescott, P. Žielys, R. Rudinskaitė, and other scholars whose research has not been systematically examined in Ukrainian historiography. The article applies a retrospective and problem-chronological approach, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of external influence during a specific historical period.

The scientific novelty of the article lies in a holistic rethinking of the role of the United States in Ukraine’s democratization processes in relation to its European integration aspirations. In contrast to studies that mainly focused on domestic aspects of the Orange Revolution and related events, this article emphasizes external political and institutional factors.

The author concludes that U.S. support played a significant role in strengthening democratic institutions in Ukraine, creating a foundation for the implementation of European standards in governance, the electoral process, freedom of speech, and civic participation. Although this assistance was not always explicitly tied to European integration, its content aligned with key requirements for Ukraine’s rapprochement with the European Union.

Key words: United States, Ukraine, Orange Revolution, democratization, institutions, European integration, USAID, NDI, IRI.

 Submitted: 15.01.2025

Download

References:

  1. Artymyshyn,, Ilnytskyi, V. (2022). Ukrainian revolutions of the late 20th – early 21st century: Сauses and consequences.Humanities Science Surrent Issues, 51, 4–18. https://doi.org/10.24919/2308-4863/51-1. [In Ukrainian].
  2. Horak, V. (2016). The «Orange Revolution» in Ukraine: Concepts, interpretations, assessments. Historiographical Studies in Ukraine, 26, 439–467. https://surl.li/ubyokn. [In Ukrainian].
  3. Korniienko, N. (2015). U.S. policy towards independent Ukraine: Attempts at periodization. Scholarly Works of the Faculty of History, Zaporizhzhia National University, 42, 307–312. [In Ukrainian].
  4. Panasiuk, B. (2006). The Orange Revolution in the light of the national idea: A historical and artistic essay. KNEU. [In Ukrainian].
  5. Sasyn, H. (2015). Justification of the modern type of revolutions in transitional society based on example of Ukraine [PhD thesis in Political Science]. Ivan Franko National University of Lviv. [In Ukrainian].
  6. Khudolii, A. (2016). American-Ukrainian relationships in the light of the XXI century challenges. American History and Politics, 1, 115–122. https://surl.li/evvooq. [In Ukrainian].
  7. Bader, M. (2010). Against all odds: Aiding political parties in Georgia and Ukraine. Amsterdam University Press. https://surl.li/glkvje. [In English].
  8. Bumiller, E. (2004, November 30). A softer tone from Bush on Ukraine points to a quandary for U.S. The New York Times. https://surl.li/gqabyt. [In English].
  9. Holzen, Ch. (2011, March 2). Interview on US democracy assistance in Ukraine. Interviewed by R. Rudinskaitė. In-person interview. [In English].
  10. John E. Herbst. (n.d.). Atlantic Council: Eurasia Center. https://surl.li/ndjspq. [In English].
  11. Kempe, I., & Solonenko, I. (2005). International orientation and foreign support. In Kurth, H., & Kempe, I. (Eds.), Presidential election and Orange Revolution: Implications for Ukraine’s transition (pp. 109–148). Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. https://surl.li/lfhamp. [In English].
  12. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). (n.d.). JUSTIA: U.S. Supreme Court. https://surl.li/jgwboq. [In English].
  13. Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) Status for Ukraine and U.S.-Ukrainian economic ties. (2006, March 30). EveryCRSReport.com. https://surli.cc/eavjiu. [In English].
  14. Prescott, N. (2006). Orange Revolution in red, white, and blue: U.S. impact on the 2004 Ukrainian election. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 16, 219–248. https://surli.cc/gidtzc. [In English].
  15. Office of the Press Secretary. The White House. (2004, November 23). Statement on Ukrainian elections. https://surl.li/xzygom. [In English].
  16. Office of the Press Secretary. The White House. (2004, November 18). Statement on upcoming Ukrainian elections. https://surl.li/dgasmb. [In English].
  17. Sushko, O., & Prystayko, O. (2006). Western influence. In Åslund, A., & McFaul, M. (Eds.), Revolution in Orange: The origins of Ukraine’s democratic breakthrough (pp. 125–144). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. [In English].
  18. Woehrel, S. (2005, February 1). Ukraine’s political crisis and U.S. policy issues. Congressional Research Service. https://surl.li/qxlqle. [In English].
  19. Woehrel, S. (2004, December 1). Ukraine’s presidential elections and U.S. policy. Congressional Research Service. https://surl.li/tujjud. [In English].
  20. Žielys, P., & Rudinskaitė, R. (2014). S. democracy assistance programs in Ukraine after the Orange Revolution. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 47 (1), 81–91. https://surl.lu/yerzmz. [In English].