On the evening of July 22, 2025, thousands of Ukrainians took to the streets of Kyiv and other major cities in the largest protests against their government since Russia’s full-scale invasion began. The demonstrations weren’t about military strategy or foreign aid. They were about the soul of Ukraine’s democratic future. For the Ukrainian diaspora watching from afar, these events represent a critical inflection point that could determine whether Ukraine emerges from this war as the European democracy it aspired to become, or slides toward the authoritarianism it has fought so hard to resist.
The Spark That Lit the Fire
The immediate trigger was President Volodymyr Zelensky’s decision to sign Law №12414, which effectively dismantles the independence of Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP). These institutions, created after the Revolution of Dignity with significant international support, were designed to investigate high-level corruption, the very cancer that had plagued Ukraine for decades and kept it from realizing its European aspirations.
The law places both agencies under the control of the Prosecutor General, whom the president appoints. In practical terms, this means those being investigated for corruption now have indirect control over their investigators, a return to the dark days of Viktor Yanukovych’s rule.
Breaking the Sacred Contract
According to prominent Ukrainian analyst Valeriy Pekar, whose Facebook post has been widely shared and discussed, these protests represent the breaking of an “unwritten agreement” that had existed in Ukraine for the past 11 years “not to liquidate the achievements of the Revolution of Dignity—primarily the course toward Europe.”
Pekar explains that “while this agreement was in effect, each government team was forgiven many things because the main thing was preserved.” But yesterday’s events were perceived by a significant part of society “as a turn away from the European course”, the very foundation upon which modern Ukraine was built.
For diaspora Ukrainians who have long supported their homeland’s European integration, this represents a betrayal of everything the Maidan sacrificed for. The rapid adoption of the law “with numerous violations of the Verkhovna Rada’s regulations, pressure on Parliament members, and immediate signing under conditions when the most important laws for the country’s defense and budget filling have not been signed for months, looked like a step toward creating an authoritarian regime.”
A Generational Awakening
Perhaps most significantly, these protests were led by Ukraine’s youth, a generation that came of age after the Revolution of Dignity. As Pekar notes, “It’s important that yesterday’s events were participated in mainly by youth—those people for whom Euromaidan is history, legend, who grew up in conditions of confidence in the unchangeability of the European course.”
Political analyst Serhii Marchenko provides additional context, emphasizing that “the bad news for the president is also that those who came out on the street were not Poroshenko supporters, but Zelensky opponents… young people who were still going to school under Poroshenko came out against the president’s policies.”
This generational dimension is crucial for understanding the depth of the crisis. These aren’t hardened political opponents or nostalgic supporters of previous administrations: these are young Ukrainians who believed in their country’s European future and now see it being betrayed.
The Loss of Legitimacy
Marchenko’s analysis provides a sophisticated understanding of what happened to Zelensky’s presidency. While the president remains legally elected and constitutionally empowered, he has “lost legitimacy among the ACTIVE PART of Ukrainian society.”
“We, who won independence and the path to the EU on Maidans, simply tolerated him,” Marchenko explains. “Because there was an unwritten social contract: we tolerate him, and he doesn’t do completely shameful stuff. Yesterday he did such shameful stuff.”
The analyst describes the attack on NABU and SAP as “a real special operation by the Office of the President, analogous to the ‘special military operation’ but in politics.” Most damaging was Zelensky’s response to criticism: he “simply IGNORED SOCIETY and its moods and turned on Trump mode—I’m great, and everyone who is against me are Russian agents.”
“But we don’t do that here, Mr. President! You are not Trump, and Ukraine is not the USA!”
The European Dimension: A Sabotaged Breakthrough
Perhaps the most shocking revelation comes from Serhii Sydorenko’s investigative report in European Pravda, which reveals that the European Union had prepared an unprecedented plan to bypass Viktor Orbán’s veto and open Ukraine’s EU accession negotiations. “The European Commission, the President of the European Council, and several important member states agreed to bypass the Hungarian veto.”
The plan was audacious: rather than forcing a vote that Orbán could block, “the Danes and the European Commission leadership proposed not to hold a vote at all.” The European Commission would simply announce the start of negotiations with Ukraine, citing that all formalities had been completed.
The opening of the first cluster was supposed to take place in Brussels on July 18 during the EU Council meeting on general affairs. Ukraine’s leadership knew about this unprecedented opportunity: Zelensky had personally participated in negotiations about it since late June.
But instead of supporting this breakthrough, Ukraine began undermining its own cause. In July, the government went ahead with “gross violation of the law on the Bureau of Economic Security,” followed by “mask-shows and searches without court sanction at Vitaliy Shabunin’s,” and the expected dismissal of Deputy Prime Minister Olga Stefanishyna, who was responsible for European integration.
Europe’s Red Line
The EU’s response has been severe. European Commissioner Marta Kos told her Ukrainian counterpart that the European Union regards the adoption of this law “as a rollback in the implementation of the seven EC recommendations that were a condition for Ukraine’s candidate status.”
Until now, official recognition of rollback in “candidate reforms” had only been heard from the EU regarding Georgia. As is known, in response to this, Brussels froze interaction with Georgia within the framework of the accession process.
A European diplomatic source told European Pravda: “The history with BEB is not a red line. The dismantling of anti-corruption institutions is unconditionally a red line. Unconditionally!”
The Strategic Catastrophe
For diaspora Ukrainians who have supported their homeland through donations, advocacy, and political pressure in their host countries, these developments represent a strategic catastrophe. As Pekar argues, “A small authoritarian country will never be able to defeat a large authoritarian country. David has no chance against Goliath in a symmetrical war. Our path to victory is, first, asymmetric warfare using the innovative power of a free society.”
The second crucial factor “that makes victory possible is European support in such form and volume as they support a value-close future member of the union, which is part of a common security system—and not in such form and volume as they support a buffer zone, whose task is to slowly bleed, buying time.”
Without these two things, “defeat is inevitable.”
What This Means for Ukraine’s Future
The consequences are already becoming clear. As one European official noted, “Even after the adoption and signing of the law, there will be no immediate consequences,” but added immediately: “this does not mean there will be no long-term consequences.”
The EU is preparing to use other levers, primarily financial ones. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has already warned the Presidential Office about consequences for defense investments and reconstruction investments due to the attack on NABU.
European officials are also reminding Kyiv about the budget hole that Ukraine has to close through borrowing. “We in the EU don’t mind helping you find money. But think—will there be many willing to lend to a country that has destroyed its anti-corruption infrastructure?”
Perhaps most significantly, Ukraine will almost certainly fall behind Moldova in the EU accession process. The so-called “decoupling”, separation of Moldova from Ukraine in the accession process and the start of accession negotiations with Chisinau while dialogue with Ukraine remains frozen, is becoming practically inevitable.
Zelensky’s Hollow Response
President Zelensky’s response to the crisis has been telling in its inadequacy. Rather than addressing the substance of the protests or reconsidering the law, he staged a photo opportunity, gathering law enforcement and anti-corruption agency heads for what he called an “open and useful” conversation. He claimed they agreed to work “exclusively constructively” and promised a joint plan within two weeks.
Notably, Zelensky still hasn’t directly mentioned either the hastily signed law limiting anti-corruption institutions’ powers or the protests against it. This performative approach, managing optics rather than addressing substance, exemplifies exactly the kind of political theater that has alienated Ukrainian civil society.
Winners and Losers
The Winners:
- Corrupt officials and oligarchs who can now expect reduced prosecution pressure
- Russia, which benefits enormously from Ukraine’s democratic backsliding and delayed EU integration
- Viktor Orbán, whose blocking efforts are now supported by Ukraine’s own self-sabotage
- Authoritarian forces globally, who can point to Ukraine as evidence that democracy is incompatible with wartime leadership
The Losers:
- Ukrainian civil society and democratic institutions built over decades of struggle
- Ukraine’s EU integration prospects, now likely frozen indefinitely
- International investors and donors who rely on anti-corruption safeguards for their support
- War veterans and ordinary Ukrainians fighting for democratic values on the front lines
- Future generations of Ukrainians who will inherit a more authoritarian system
- The Ukrainian diaspora, whose advocacy efforts have been severely undermined
A Message to the Diaspora
For Ukrainian-Canadians and diaspora communities worldwide, these events demand a recalibration of support strategies. The comfortable narrative that any criticism of Ukrainian leadership aids Putin has been shattered by Ukrainian civil society itself. When young Ukrainians risk their safety to protest in wartime Kyiv, diaspora Ukrainians cannot remain silent in the name of unity.
As Pekar concludes, “The youth who came out yesterday on the streets of Ukrainian cities instills hope that we have the strength to endure and win. Now other generations need not to betray their hopes.”
The diaspora’s role now must be to amplify these voices, to ensure that international partners understand the difference between supporting Ukraine and enabling authoritarianism. The fight for Ukraine’s freedom cannot be separated from the fight for Ukraine’s democracy.
The Path Forward
Marchenko warns that “a lot now depends on whether the Presidential Office makes critical mistakes. Protesters are not yet putting forward slogans for regime change. This is an active and conscious part of society that understands the risks and is not ready to make a revolution and internal instability during the war. But everything can change if the president does not react adequately.”
The window for course correction remains open, but it’s closing rapidly. Ukraine can still return to its democratic path, restore the independence of its anti-corruption institutions, and rebuild trust with European partners. But this requires leadership that listens to its people rather than dismissing them as foreign agents.
For the diaspora, the choice is clear: continue supporting the Ukraine that fights for democracy and European values, not the one that abandons them in the name of expedience. The Revolution of Dignity’s promise, that Ukraine would choose dignity over corruption, Europe over authoritarianism, democracy over dictatorship, hangs in the balance.
The young protesters in Kyiv’s government quarter have reminded the world what Ukraine is supposed to stand for. Now it’s up to all of us, at home and abroad, to ensure their voices are heard and their hopes are not betrayed.
The author draws on analyses from prominent Ukrainian political commentators Valeriy Pekar and Serhii Marchenko, as well as investigative reporting from European Pravda. This article reflects the views of Ukrainian civil society as expressed in recent protests and social media discourse.
Serhii Marchenko post on Facebook
Valeriy Pekar post on Facebook
Serhii Svyrydenko Article: European Pravda article on Zelensky, Orbán and Ukraine’s EU path (in Ukrainian)