The Politics of Imitation

Ukraine and Armenia are similar in many ways. They share a Soviet past, have recent experience with war, and strive for a better, democratic future, a goal toward which both have made progress, albeit to varying degrees. But they still have much to do to achieve it. 

This is, in part, due to a particular post-Soviet political culture, a politics of imitation, that the two countries also share. Ukraine has adopted Western-style public institutions, but bureaucracy and the state's burden on business remain high. Armenia attempts to emulate European democracy and social policies, but traditional hierarchical structures and lack of transparency persist. This article does not aim to discredit the countries' progress. Rather, it notes the domestic obstacles that slow both countries' movement toward the West and highlights sclerotic social norms that persist despite implemented reforms. Their moves, to a significant extent, only imitate Western standards for democratic principles.

Not As It Seems

Ukraine has embraced democracy and made impressive advancements in fulfilling its obligations for EU integration. Shortcomings, however, remain, and one area in which this is apparent is the rule of law. 

Kyiv has developed an impressive system of independent anti-corruption agencies that include the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutors Office, and the High Anti-Corruption Court. None existed previously in any form, and international participation was key to their establishment. These new bodies have shown extraordinary effectiveness in the dozens of high-level cases that they have handled involving the top echelons of the country’s leadership. But other law enforcement and judicial agencies remain, unfortunately, unreformed.

The National Police of Ukraine was created in 2015 as an institution formally independent of the interior ministry and, therefore, of political influence. But only one division, the so-called patrol police, which is responsible for road safety and street security, was truly new, comprising officers from outside the previous police system. All other departments, especially those overseeing criminal investigations and combatting organized crime, inherited most of their personnel, and all the practices, of the old, post-Soviet police system. 

Similar issues confront the State Bureau of Investigation, another innovation for Ukraine. It was designed to be a transparent, central investigative agency, born out of legislation developed with civil society participation. Parliament, however, blocked several provisions that would have strengthened the bureau’s professionalism. The legislature shot down an effort to ensure that non-Ukrainians hold a majority on the commission that selects the agency head, and prescribed vague procedures for civil oversight control and selecting investigators. The latter resulted in questionable appointments.

The result is an institution that is entirely dependent on the country’s political leadership and that employs an approach to law enforcement that has brought dubious cases against well-respected private companies and anti-corruption activists. The effect on Ukraine’s investment climate and public security and morale has been detrimental. 

Backsliding

Armenia has experienced its own significant deterioration in democratic norms and human rights since the progress made in the immediate aftermath of the 2018 Velvet Revolution. Political persecution, electoral erosion, and media suppression have all been on the rise, as documented by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission.

Political persecution has become a vital tool for the Armenian government, especially since the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war. Opposition figures critical of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s handling of the conflict have faced arbitrary arrests, harassment, and politically motivated legal actions. The judiciary, increasingly under executive branch influence, has been instrumentalized to suppress dissent. The Venice Commission and Freedom House have expressed concern over this, noting that courts have frequently delivered outcomes favorable to the ruling party. These have further destabilized Armenia’s fragile democratic order.

Electoral practices have also been set back. Voter intimidation, media bias, and the misuse of administrative resources are, according to an Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe report, plaguing the country. The study also notes that the electoral process has increasingly favored the ruling party. The Armenian media landscape, a focal point for governmental control, does this, too. State-aligned outlets favor the government. Freedom House reports that independent media outlets have faced legal and financial pressures, limiting their capacity to provide alternative viewpoints. The suppression of media freedom extends beyond negative portrayals of opposition figures to an environment in which independent journalism is stifled by defamation lawsuits, harassment, and even violence.

On human rights, Armenia also performs poorly. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the Armenian Bar Association have documented numerous instances of disproportionate force used by law enforcement against protesters, arbitrary detentions, and the mistreatment of detainees. At the local level, the Civil Contract party manipulated elections and interfered in council sessions to centralize power and undermine democratic norms.

The current situation is indeed discouraging, but continued engagement from the international community could yet restore democratic norms, even as the risk of further authoritarianism looms.

Help From Abroad

Political developments in Armenia and Ukraine highlight recurring efforts to imitate reforms without dismantling entrenched authoritarian and bureaucratic practices. Despite adopting Western-style institutions, both nations struggle with deep-seated issues such as political interference and lack of judicial independence, which undermine genuine reform. 

Hope, however, remains in the form of international engagement. The world’s community of democracies, committed to fostering transparency, accountability, and proper democratic governance, must redouble efforts to pressure Armenian and Ukrainian leaders to maintain a similar commitment.