Ukraine's Internal Crisis

In a recent interview, Dr. Nicolai Petro reminds us that even if there was a grand bargain between the USA and Russia, Ukraine might be internally too fractured to move to peace.

Despite the ongoing US-Russian negotiations for a ceasefire in Ukraine and Washington’s tightening of the leash of its Eastern European proxy government, there is a real danger that the Ukrainian sate with its many factions has reached a point of no-return. The risk of internal instability looms large, with the country’s ultra-right nationalist factions (which have gained significant influence since 2014) posing the most serious threat to a ceasefire attempt. These groups, deeply embedded in the military and political landscape, may not accept any settlement they perceive as a betrayal. Dr. Petro warns that Ukraine’s future stability hinges not only on its external war but also on its ability to contain these forces.

The Growing Power of the Ultra-Right

Petro emphasizes that these far-right nationalist factions are not merely fringe elements but are well-armed and deeply entrenched within Ukraine’s power structures. They have, time and again, demonstrated their ability to derail political decisions through intimidation and violence. He points to the Minsk Agreements as a prime example—both President Petro Poroshenko and President Volodymyr Zelensky initially pursued peace negotiations, only to backtrack under pressure from nationalist groups that refused to accept any compromise with Russia.

Unlike in Western democracies, where violent extremists are typically marginalized, Ukraine has allowed these groups to maintain significant political and military influence. The government’s inability—or unwillingness—to disarm them has created a dangerous situation in which ultra-right factions effectively hold veto power over Ukraine’s political direction.

Will the Military Side with the Government or the Nationalists?

One of Petro’s most urgent concerns is whether the Ukrainian military would support the ruling government in a potential peace process or align with nationalist groups seeking to continue the war. The answer to this question, he suggests, is far from clear. Over the years, nationalist paramilitary groups have been integrated into Ukraine’s formal military structure, raising the risk that segments of the armed forces could defy Kyiv’s leadership if a peace deal is pursued.

This is not merely a hypothetical scenario. Petro argues that these factions have long seen themselves as the guardians of Ukraine’s national interests, prepared to take matters into their own hands if they perceive the government as weak or treasonous. If Kyiv were to move toward a negotiated settlement, nationalist militias could seek to overthrow the government, plunging the country into internal chaos.

A Nation Trapped in a Cycle of Violence

Petro draws historical parallels to other conflicts where extremist groups have refused to lay down arms, prolonging instability even after the main war has ended. He warns that Ukraine’s leadership has consistently failed to curb these nationalist elements, allowing them to thrive unchecked. This has created a situation where any future peace process could be met with violent resistance, potentially leading to civil conflict.

Unlike Western democracies, which have successfully marginalized violent nationalist movements over time, Ukraine has yet to address this issue. Petro argues that the government must eventually confront the ultra-right and disarm them, or risk permanent instability. But with these factions growing stronger and more influential, the question remains: does Kyiv even have the ability to do so?

The Uncertain Future

Petro’s analysis leaves us with a sobering conclusion: Ukraine’s greatest challenge may not be defeating Russia, but stabilizing itself from within. Even if the war ends, the presence of well-armed and radical nationalist groups threatens to turn the country into a battleground of internal strife. The government’s inability to control these factions raises the specter of a prolonged internal crisis—one that could prevent Ukraine from ever achieving true peace.