National Security Drivers of Ukraine: Information Technology, Strategic Communication, and Legitimacy (Contributions to Political Science) 3031337239, 9783031337239

Citation preview

Contributions to Political Science

Oleksandr Radchenko Valeriia Kovach Inna Semenets-Orlova Artur Zaporozhets   Editors

National Security Drivers of Ukraine Information Technology, Strategic Communication, and Legitimacy

Contributions to Political Science

The series Contributions to Political Science contains publications in all areas of political science, such as public policy and administration, political economy, comparative politics, European politics and European integration, electoral systems and voting behavior, international relations and others. Publications are primarily monographs and multiple author works containing new research results, but conference and congress reports are also considered. The series covers both theoretical and empirical aspects and is addressed to researchers and policy makers. All titles in this series are peer-reviewed. This book series is indexed in Scopus.

Oleksandr Radchenko • Valeriia Kovach • Inna Semenets-Orlova • Artur Zaporozhets Editors

National Security Drivers of Ukraine Information Technology, Strategic Communication, and Legitimacy

Editors Oleksandr Radchenko Institute of Social Sciences University of Gdańsk Gdańsk, Poland

Valeriia Kovach National Aviation University Kyiv, Ukraine Interregional Academy of Personnel Management Kyiv, Ukraine Center for information-analytical and technical support of nuclear power facilities monitoring of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine Kyiv, Ukraine

Inna Semenets-Orlova Interregional Academy of Personnel Management Kyiv, Ukraine

Artur Zaporozhets General Energy Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine Kyiv, Ukraine

ISSN 2198-7289 ISSN 2198-7297 (electronic) Contributions to Political Science ISBN 978-3-031-33723-9 ISBN 978-3-031-33724-6 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Preface

Since the beginning of the third millennium, there has been an aggravation of the global inter-civilizational confrontation, which in 2022 has already resulted in Russia's open military aggression on the territory of Ukraine. Moreover, the hybrid war of “Russian peace” against the world of democracy has put the issue of ensuring the national security of the state, primarily its informational component, on the front pages of the world and national agendas. In the modern world, which has already grown out of the outdated framework of the Westphalian international political system, any political, socioeconomic, cultural, or informational processes in each country are inevitably assessed for compliance with the global value system established by relevant documents of the United Nations and other international organizations. However, the problem is that the national values, as a category of the theory of sustainable development and the idea of national security of the state, are exceptionally poorly developed, especially concerning countries such as Ukraine, which is in a long-term systemic crisis and in harsh conditions of a transitional economy, which is worsened by the increasing level of conflicts. Using Ukraine as a case study, the authors of the book demonstrate how, to achieve their geopolitical interests, authoritarian regimes incite information wars as a prerequisite for the transition to an armed “hot” war and how these processes actualize the formation of a fundamentally new state policy to ensure information and, in a more broaden term—national security. The proposed monograph was written before Russia's war in Ukraine, and today this book has only increased its relevance. Because it allows us to compare and understand in what state of understanding and ensuring information and national security Ukraine met the Russian invasion. To find out where and why the actions of Ukrainians were successful (for example, in the struggle in the information space) and where there were security gaps (for example, in the fight against internal corruption). The specified processes are one of the essential directions of joint scientific research of such research institutions of Ukraine and Poland as the Institute of v

vi

Preface

Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, National Aviation University, State Institution “The Institute of Environmental Geochemistry of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine,” Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts, Shupyk National Healthcare University of Ukraine, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Academician Yuri Bugay International University of Science and Technology, Academy of Science the Public Administration, Educational and Scientific Institute “Institute of Public Administration” of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, General Energy Institute of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and others. In this book, the scientists of the mentioned universities and research institutions present the key informational, communication, and socio-political aspects of the state’s national security in the Ukrainian dimension. National security is considered in the context of the unfolding of information wars in the global information environment, which undermine the legitimacy of public governance systems and cause a “legitimacy crisis” of modern democracies and require new approaches to the formation of strategic communications in the state administration system. Finally, the main threats to the state's national security in current conditions are systematized, and ways of protecting Ukraine's national interests are identified. The book will be interesting not only to scientists, politicians, and experts but also to ordinary citizens because it allows seeing the internal origins and mechanisms of the heroic resistance of the Ukrainian people, who are successfully fighting for their freedom, and their democratic values in the face of Russian aggression. Gdańsk, Poland Kyiv, Ukraine Kyiv, Ukraine Kyiv, Ukraine August 2022

Oleksandr Radchenko Valeriia Kovach Inna Semenets-Orlova Artur Zaporozhets

About This Book

Since the beginning of the third millennium, there has been an aggravation of the global inter-civilizational confrontation, which in 2022 has already resulted in open military aggression on the territory of Ukraine. The hybrid wars against the world of democracy have put the issue of ensuring the national security of the state, primarily its informational component, on the front pages of the world and national agendas. Using the example of Ukraine, the book demonstrates how, in order to achieve their geopolitical interests, authoritarian regimes incite information wars as a prerequisite for the transition to an armed “hot” war and how these processes actualize the formation of a fundamentally new state policy to ensure information and, more broadly, national security. The mentioned processes are one of the important directions of joint scientific research of such research institutions of Ukraine and Poland as (Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Interregional Academy of Personal Management, National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, etc.). In this book, the scientists of the universities present the key informational, communication, and socio-political aspects of national security of the state in the Ukrainian dimension. National security is considered in the context of the unfolding of information wars in the global information environment, which undermine the legitimacy of public governance systems and cause a “legitimacy crisis” of modern democracies and require new approaches to the formation of strategic communications in the state administration system. The main threats to the state's national security in modern conditions are systematized and ways of protecting Ukraine's national interests are identified. The book is addressed to politicians, managers, scientists, and everyone who is interested in the problems of protecting national interests, information, and national security of the modern state.

vii

Contents

Part I 1

2

3

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of the Modern State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valeriy Dovgan, Yaroslav Chmyr, Andrey Moshnin, Maxym Kravtsov, and Iryna Yermolenko Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security” Phenomenon in the Information and Communication Context . . . . Yaroslav Chmyr, Andrey Moshnin, Bohdan Tsymbal, Rostyslav Shchokin, and Anatolii Balashov The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the State in Modern Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fedir Venislavskyi, Oleksandr Bondarenko, Yaroslav Chmyr, Andrey Moshnin, and Vasyl Shoiko

Part II 4

5

6

National Security: Theoretical and Methodological Approaches 3

25

43

Informational Security Phenomenon

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as Infrastructure Medium and Factor for Actualization of the State Informational Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yaroslav Chmyr, Anastasia Nekryach, Larysa Kochybei, Аllа Dakal, and Lilia Strelbytska Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information Security” in the Age of Information Society . . . . . . . . Larysa Hren, Nadiia Karpeko, Olena Kopanchuk, Mykola Strelbitsky, and Violeta Tohobytska Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status, Trends, and Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oleksandr Radchenko, Serhii Bielai, Valeriia Kovach, Nataliia Hrabar, and Ihor Yevtushenko

61

75

93

ix

x

Contents

Part III

Strategic Communications

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of State and Society in the Context of National Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Oleksandr Radchenko, Fedir Venislavskyi, Оlenа Krutii, Oleksandrа Marusheva, and Oleksii Kriukov

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Tomash Michalski, Tetyana Syvak, Svitlana Dombrovska, Valentyn Stanishevskiy, and Ivan Servetskiy

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System of National and Informational State Security . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Tetyana Syvak, Maryna Shkliaruk, Volodymyr Kopanchuk, Оlenа Postupna, and Olena Fendo

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their Functional Influence on Efficiency of State Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Tetyana Syvak, Petro Vorona, Yurii Nesteriak, Viktor Paliukh, and Аllа Dakal

Part IV

Legitimacy and Legitimation

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legitimation” and its Place in the Information Security System of the Modern State . . . . . . . . . . . 185 Oksana Radchenko, Oleksiі Stepanko, Stanislav Poroka, Oleksii Piddubnyi, Vasyl Omelchuk, and Svitlana Marchenko

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation in Authoritarian, Democratic and Transitional Societies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Oksana Radchenko, Anastasia Nekryach, Larysa Kochybei, Tomash Michalski, and Yurii Berezhnyi

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United Territorial Communities as a Modern Mechanism of Local Public Authorities’ Legitimation in Ukraine . . . . . . . . . . . 219 Serhii Chernov, Serhii Bogutskij, Tetiana Gogol, Olena Hafurova, Artem Koshelenko, and Oleksandr Zemlianskyi

Contents

14

xi

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of the System of Public Authorities of the State during the Formation of the Global Information Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 Stanislav Dovgy, Oksana Radchenko, Oleksandr Radchenko, Aleksander Kuczabski, and Maryna Kryvoberets

Part V

Informational Wars

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics and Factors of Actualization in the Modern World . . . . . . 259 Roman Primush, Yaroslav Chmyr, Maxym Kravtsov, Yuliia Perehuda, and Andrii Koniushkov

16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 Oleksandr Radchenko, Oleksandr Nepomniashchij, Ivan Shkurat, Yaroslav Chmyr, and Valeriia Kovach

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements of Information War in Ukraine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Yaroslav Chmyr, Maryna Deineha, Eduard Shchepanskiy, Artem Koshelenko, and Roman Kozenko

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context of “Civilizations Clash” as the Main Object of Information War in Ukraine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 Oleksandr Radchenko, Oleksii Kriukov, Valeriia Kovach, Inna Semenets-Orlova, Artur Zaporozhets, and Vitalii Kostenko

About the Editors

Oleksandr Radchenko Doctor of Public Administration, Professor. Affiliation: Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Professor of the Department of Landscape Research and Environmental Management. Valeriia Kovach Doctor of Public Administration, Senior Researcher. Affiliation: Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Professor of the Department of Public Administration. Inna Semenets-Orlova Doctor of Public Administration, Professor. Affiliation: Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Director of the Educational and Scientific Institute of Management, Economics and Business. Artur Zaporozhets Doctor of Technical Sciences, Senior Researcher. Affiliation: General Energy Institute of NAS of Ukraine, Deputy Director.

xiii

Part I

National Security: Theoretical and Methodological Approaches

Chapter 1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of the Modern State Valeriy Dovgan , Yaroslav Chmyr , Andrey Moshnin Maxym Kravtsov , and Iryna Yermolenko

,

Abstract Current stage of human development is characterized by exacerbation of various information, communication, and sociopolitical risks and threats to national security due to the active penetration of the global information space in all spheres of life of the state and citizen. It is substantiated by the given work. Discourse field of national and information security is systematized. It is based on the analysis of 1500 related publications, and 14 cluster directions of scientific approaches are singled out and characterized. The clusters include the following: historical-comparative, philosophical-ontological, theoretical-conceptual, state-administrative, methodologicalsecurity, information-security, law-normative, strategic-communication, corruptionpublic, sociopolitical, value-psychological, information-technological, legitimization, and cluster of information wars. Keywords National security · Global information space · Political risks · Information wars

1 The Problem Statement The current stage of humanity development is characterized by the exacerbation of various information-communicational and sociopolitical risks and threats to national security due to active penetration of the global information space in all spheres of life

V. Dovgan · M. Kravtsov Bohdan Khmelnitsky National Academy of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine, Khmelnytskyi, Ukraine Y. Chmyr (✉) Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Moshnin V.I. Vernadsky Taurida National University, Kyiv, Ukraine I. Yermolenko National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_1

3

4

V. Dovgan et al.

of the state and citizen: sociopolitical, financial and economic, environmental, communication, spiritual, cultural, private, etc. Transition to the era of information society is accompanied by rapid development of information systems and software for database management, radical changes in public administration and management technologies, and emergence of fundamentally new high-tech industries, methods, and communication tools. The global information space connects continents, states, social groups, and individuals into a single information-interdependent conglomerate, which opens up extremely wide opportunities for successful personal and national development, rapid acquisition, and operation of necessary information. It carries fundamentally new challenges and threats to man, society, and the state [1]. The information revolution brought into our lives advanced not only information and communication technologies but also a large number of external and internal threats of psychological, moral and ethical, spiritual and cultural, sociopolitical, economic character. It shows urgency of triad “personal-social-national security.” New opportunities provided by the information society to broad sections and individuals create conditions for use of ICTs for criminal, destructive, terrorist, and immoral purposes. It threatens state systems and commercial structures, social order and public order, and ultimately personal rights and freedoms [2, 3]. This causes extreme saturation of foreign and domestic discourse field of national and information security, which is studied by experts, scientists, and experts in different areas and at different angles of focusing scientific attention. This issue is associated with complexity and versatility of information and communication processes, impact of numerous external and internal factors on these processes. Representatives of various scientific and professional communities studying this phenomenon faced the fact that the nature of information and security problems is washed by intersection of traditional disciplinary approaches and methods, complex architecture of information networks and flows, accelerating open and latent changes in the information space, emergence of technological innovations, etc. [4]. All this arouses extraordinary scientific public-administrative interest in revealing the genesis, social essence, and main trends of formation and development of information-communication and sociopolitical aspects of national security of the modern state and development of mechanisms and public-administrative tools to prevent and overcome global threats to human civilization.

2 Main Material Presentation The discourse space analysis of information-communication and sociopolitical factors of the national security of the state shows considerable attention to these processes by both scientists, practitioners, and mass media. Thus, according to the elementary analysis by keywords, the website of the V. Vernadsky National Library contains more than 1500 publications related to national security issues, including thorough monographs, strategic analytical documents, etc. This is not surprising

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

5

taken into account the key role that is played by the policy of the national security ensured in democratic state-building. In addition, the main library of Ukraine contains in its repository more than 1400 publications related to information security, about 500 information wars, and 1700 scientific articles that reveal such a negative component of national security as corruption and more. Based on an interdisciplinary approach, we will try to conduct source analysis of scientific understanding problems of components and factors of the national security phenomenon in the global and domestic discourse field. In our opinion, the whole significant array of scientific publications of the last decade can be most adequately systematized in 14 clusters: historical-comparative, philosophical-ontological, theoretical-conceptual, public administration, methodological-security, information-security, legal-normative, strategic-communication, corruption-public, sociopolitical, value-psychological, information-technological, legitimizing, and cluster of information wars (subject to certain simplification characteristic of any theoretical model, in particular, when the same author has different publications, which can be attributed not to one but to two or more clusters in particular; the works of Professor G. Sytnyk can be attributed to the philosophical and essential and to public administration and security areas). Schematically, the systematization of the discourse space on the relationship between corruption and national and state security is presented at Fig. 1.1. Let’s move to more detailed source analysis of the scientific achievements of the representatives of each of these clusters. Representatives of philosophical-ontological approach consider issues of information and national security in its philosophical and paradigmatic dimension and determine conceptual foundations and ontological content of this global phenomenon, which during the transformational processes of human civilization at the beginning of the third millennium is one of the leading factors and trends of nation-states and supranational world institutions. Thus, Frank Webster in his work Theories of the Information Society considers the “information explosion” of the late twentieth century. He notes that a key feature of our time is power of information that led to transition to the information society [5]. The author focuses on a critical analysis of the social and technological changes of today—from the “Twitter revolutions” of North Africa and the “color revolutions” of Eastern Europe to global financial crises, the emergence of social media, and the phenomenon of blogging—and overestimates the work of key theorists. In the book The Information Society: Issues and Illusions, David Lyon discusses the classical approaches of thinkers and researchers to the phenomenon of the information society. The author reveals myths about the creation of information society in the context of social theory and use of social influence technologies. In 2012, Ersel Aydinli and James Rosenau presented the book Globalization, Security, and the Nation State: Paradigms in Transition which reveals links at the philosophical level between concepts of globalization, security, and authority of the nation-state, paying attention to why and how these three concepts are interrelated and why they should be considered in systemic unity, where global transformations

6

V. Dovgan et al.

Discourse space of scientific understanding of components and factors of the national security phenomenon K. Biork, A. Demartino, Dzh. Kirshner, R. Patman, D. Reveron, R. Khassan, A. Datsenko, V. Konakh, O. Kuchmii, M. Turanskyi Ya. Holdman, S. Maret, Kh. Fahan, R. Miunk, R. Samiuels, O. Baranov, Ye. Nikipielova, O. Zharyi, O. Zaduvailo, Kh. Zavada, Ye. Kubanov, M. Medvid, V. Panchenko, A. Fisun R. Bkhan, E. Holdman, M. Libitski, Dzh. Skott, N. Snou, R. Stenhel, Z. Brzhevska, O. Krislata, B. Kalinichenko, V. Petrova, I. Parfeniuk, H. Pocheptsov, I. Pronoza, O. Ryzhuk, S. Sunhurova, V. Chalapko Dzh. Vakka, M. Vaitmen, Kh. Mattord, M. Hupta, K. Knapp, R. Hryshchuk, K. Molodetska-Hrynchuk, V. Domarev, R. Klymchuk, A. Mishchenko

historicalcomparative cluster

philosophicalontological cluster

E. Aidinli, F. Vebster, D. Laion, D. Rozenau, N. Averianova, T. Voropaieva, O. Danilian, O. Dzoban, S. Zhadanenko, V. Khimei

theoreticalconceptual cluster

public administration cluster

A. Amiri, F. Bannister, M. Dusett, M. Lips, Dzh. Teilor, R. Kholton, I. Bodnar, I. Hromyko, V. Zahurska-Antoniuk, O. Zozulia, A. Kaliaiev, O. Kriukov, H. Svtnvk

information wars cluster

methodologicalsecurity cluster

P. Battersbi, E. Holdman, T. Paul, S. Shvartsshtain, N. Ripsman, Dzh. Sirakuza, A. Balanda, O. Vlasiuk, V. Volynets, O. Hlazova, V. Horbulin, D. Kuchma, I. Korzh, L. Radovetska, V. Stroianovskyi, T. Stukalin, O. Ustymenko

informationtechnological cluster

informationsecurity cluster

O. Andreeva, O. Barybin, N. Bilousova, O. Vyhovska, V. Hurkovskyi, O. Zolotar, O. Kosohov, Yu. Nesteriak, O. Panchenko, O. Radutnyi, A. Ruban, O. Solodka, A. Turchak Kh. Villiam, U. Marselino, A. Barovska, P. Bohutskyi, V. Voroshylov, O. Kapshtyk, V. Kushnir, O. Salnykova, H. Sashchuk, T. Syvak, K. Pol, H. Pocheptsov

M. Kolaresi, O. Krutii, U. Ilnytska, Ye. Manuilov, O. Mateta, Yu. Kalynovskyi, B. Kalinichenko, M. Hnatko, O. Zolotar Z. Koval, R. Puida, O. Radchenko, V. Sabadukha

valuepsychological cluster

strategiccommunication cluster

L. Bilynska, I. Draliuk, L. Duchyminska, O. Kolb, M. Komiienko, V. Krut, M. Lutsenko, V. Pautov, O. Radchenko, K. Rostovska, V. Shchehortsova, L. Shcherbyna

corruptionpublic cluster

legitimizing cluster

legal-normative cluster

socio-political cluster

R. Aliamkin, M. Ilnytskyi, M. Kantoka, B. Kormych, H. Lynnyk, A. NashynetsNaumova, Yu. Sarychev, P. Snitsarenko, T. Tkachuk, O. Tykhomyrov, M. Fedorin

S. Yudkhoiono, T. Kemper, M. Plattner, Dzh. Uolen, V. Kovalchuk, T. Nahomiak, V. Nechesa, S. Prykhodko, O. Radchenko, N. Riezanova, L. Stanislavenko, L. Yakovleva M. Hupta, R. Sharman, O. Barna, M. Baiuk, A. Holovka, V. Homyk, K. Dubniak, K. Zakharenko, V. Nedbai, D. Nelipa, O. Oliinyk, V. Pasichnyk

Fig. 1.1 Systematization of the discourse space of scientific understanding problems of the national security phenomenon

distort institution of security and cause appropriate changes in state structures and mechanisms of national security [6]. O. Danilyan and O. Dzioban offer an author’s philosophical reflection on national security in the context of Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration, arguing that “the European vector of domestic statehood is one of the basic objects of national security of Ukraine” [7]. In another publication, O. Dzioban and S. Zhadanenko consider philosophical and legal aspects of relationship between human rights and national

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

7

security, emphasizing that “human rights and national security are closely interrelated, and real interdependence of national security phenomena of and human rights has contradictory character. At the same time, the interdependence problem of national security and human rights is a problem of compromise between ensuring national security and respect for human rights, between the realization of human rights and the protection of national security” [8]. Socio-philosophical aspects of information security are studied by N. Averyanov and T. Voropaev on the basis of which they distinguish “key-semantic-dimension of information and communication processes, which is system-forming in the field of information and psychological security of man, society and state” and note that “Comprehensive consideration of semantic dimension of information and psychological security will adequately counteract the destructive information influences on the citizens of Ukraine, as well as create optimal level of information and psychological security of the state” [9]. In the frame of historical-comparative approach, researchers focus on studying peculiarities of formation and development of national and information security mechanisms in different countries; comparing the best achievements of Europe, North America, and Asia in combating threats to the information and communication environment of the state and society; and identifying characteristics and general trends. The most famous representatives of this field are American and European researchers K. Bjork, R. Patman, R. Hassan, J. Kirchner, D. Reveron, and A. Demartino, as well as our compatriots A. Datsenko, V. Konakh, O. Kuchmiy, and M. Turansky. In particular, well-known new media theorist Robert Hassan in his book The Information Society: Cyber Dreams and Digital Nightmares analyzes and critically evaluates historical approaches of major information society theorists from Daniel Bell to Nicola Negroponte and Vincent Mosco to Manuel Castells and forms them into a holistic narrative to shed light on the phenomenon of the information society. Jonathan Kirchner demonstrates his view on the theory genesis of globalization in relation to the global information space formation and its impact on national security in the book Globalization and National Security. He underlies three clear “processes” of globalization: intensification of economic exchange, information flow, and marketing (expanding range of social relations governed by market forces) through the prism of how they can affect capacity and power of states and conflicts within and between and how non-state actors (in particular, terrorist organizations) take advantage of globalization by changing nature of security space [10]. In his book Globalization and Conflict: National Security in a ‘New’ Strategic Era, Robert Patman focuses on detailed analysis of the US national security strategy that has changed dramatically since the 9/11 attacks [11]. Based on international expertise, this book reveals four interrelated themes: globalization impact on the security concept, strategic worldview of the United States as the world’s superpower, the new post-Cold War conflicts, and efforts of the United States and international communities to manage emerging models of conflict in the world. The history of information technology use to achieve national interests in the global space of the United States is analyzed in detail in the work of Colin Bjork

8

V. Dovgan et al.

America’s Information Wars: The Untold Story of Information Systems in America’s Conflicts and Politics from World War II to the Internet Age [12]. Our compatriots Alina Datsenko and Victoria Konakh also turn to the American experience of building the state information security system. Andriy Demartino and Olena Kuchmiy raise this issue with emphasis on the global confrontation between the United States and China, which appears to be an information war. Mykola Turansky reveals the historiographical aspects of the vision of foreign and Ukrainian specialists and researchers of information and psychological operations in a hybrid war [13]. In Cyberspace and National Security: Threats, Opportunities, and Power in a Virtual World, Derek Reveron provides comparative analysis of American, European, Russian, and Chinese approaches and advocacy mechanisms of their national interests through the use of cyberspace and special operations in the information sphere, which pose certain threats to the information security of other countries [14]. Theoretical-conceptual cluster joined together researchers who focus scientific attention on understanding and interpreting definitions and concepts of scientific apparatus to study phenomena of information security and national security of the state as a whole. The approach combines scientific publications, which present separate explorations on one or two specific concepts, as well as thematic glossaries and systematic encyclopedias. This comprehensive encyclopedia of social and cultural aspects of relationship between globalization and security is called “Globalization and Security: Social and Cultural Aspects” [15] by Honor Fagan and Ronaldo Munk at ABC-CLIO in California. It has been published for the past 10 years. The encyclopedia is divided into 24 thematic sections, which cover all possible aspects and threats to human security in the globalization era—from human rights and finance, public administration, and geopolitics to information wars and terrorism. The Encyclopedia of United States National Security has a total volume of more than 900 pages. It was prepared by another American specialist, the director of the Ford Center for International Studies, Professor Richard Samuels. Seven hundred fifty articles of the encyclopedia provide comprehensive answers to many difficult questions: how, why, when, and where national security is developed. This two-volume encyclopedia is intended to provide a comprehensive overview of some more complex and abstract issues related to world politics and national security [16] in addition to presenting historical facts and analyses. Dictionary guide with the definition of key terms of theoretical, conceptual, and organizational aspects of information policy and information about national American experts Jan Goldman and Susan Maret [17] should be singled out among other publications of this type. In the Ukrainian discourse space, it is worth noting such scholars as E. Nikipelov (researches the essence of “security” concept), O. Zhariy (presents the genesis of the “state security” concept), H. Zavada (defines the concept of Ukraine’s interests in the field state security), M. Medvid (characterizes the conceptual spectrum of national and state security), V. Savitsky (considers the concept of information security in

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

9

categorical relationship with the national security concept), E. Kubanov (highlights theoretical approaches to conceptual and categorical apparatus of cybersecurity in the public administration system), V. Panchenko (reveals relationship between concepts: information and cyber security), O. Baranov (defines and interprets the “cybersecurity” concept), O. Zaduvailo (analyzes concept of “sensitive information” in the context of information security of the state), and A. Fisun (represents theoretical and categorical understanding of the concept of “information warfare” in the structure of information and political space of the state). Public administration approach focuses on the state and the system of public governance, activities of government and local government, political parties, and civil society institutions in the formation and implementation of state policy in the field of information security (especially state regulation of public relations in the information space). In particular, the director of Hamrah International Law Firm (Amin Amiri) in his book Freedom of Information and National Security discusses balance between the right of citizens to access government information and the need to protect confidential information about national security as one of the most important responsibilities of any country government [18]. Professor Robert Holton in his book Globalization and the Nation-State identifies the links and conflicts between global and national processes, institutions, and cultures and raises the question “Does globalization mean the end of the nationstate? Cans sates respond adequately to global change?” [19]. The book Public Administration in the Information Society: Essays on Risk and Trust by European scholars Miriam Lips, John Taylor, and Frank Bannister is quite interesting. The authors note that information streams today are avalanche spilled on governments. Information and communication technologies of today permeate every link of public administration and all public policy [20]. Therefore, processes of information collection, management, and development of information resources are more and more at the center of government agencies’ attempts to control and regulate risks of information abuse and acceptable level of trust in public administrations for interference in the information space to ensure information security of the state and society in conditions of increasing information openness. Miguel de Larrinaga and Marc Dussett reveal complex intertwining of globalization, governance, and security. The study of government structure culture allowed the authors to identify two key trends in public governance today—global regulation of national and international security and securitization of global governance [21]. The most thorough work among Ukrainian researchers is done by Doctor of Science in Public Administration, Professor H. Sytnik. He headed the Department of National Security at the National Academy of Public Administration under the president of Ukraine for a long time and was an adviser of the president of Ukraine on national security. Now, he is the president of the NGO “Academy of National Security.” In his opinion, the classical paradigm of studying the problems of national security has practically exhausted its possibilities as a methodological basis for finding adequate answers to threats to national interests. Therefore, it is appropriate to move to institutional-civilizational paradigm of these problem research. It involves the integrated use of activity, civilization, synergetic approaches, and

10

V. Dovgan et al.

institutional analysis and should be basis for public administration methodology development in the field of national security [22]. Lviv scientist A. Kaliaiev explores theoretical approaches to transformation of modern models of public administration in the field of security and defense, substantiates basic principles of governance characteristic of democratic countries, and identifies areas of democratic principle limitation in creating modern models of public administration in security and defense. Responding to modern challenges and threats in the context of Ukraine’s European integration aspirations requires the formation of a fundamentally new system of national security according to the researcher. It must be commensurate with scale of existing threats and be effectively integrated into system of international and regional security as an integral part of them. At the same time, Ukraine is a victim of aggression. It has every right and must actively promote idea of developing an effective pan-European collective security mechanism with clearly defined scope of obligations and sanction list that will be promptly applied to violators of peace and security [23]. V. Zagurska-Antoniuk investigates the institutional basis of public administration for ensuring national security of Ukraine. From the same perspective, S. Kruk determines that subjects of public administration system in the field of national security interact closely with each other, but each of them specializes in solving specific problems in accordance with its subject competence. These entities complement each other as result of such interaction. So, they form single organizational and functional system, which is core for ensuring security of domestic and foreign policy of the state [24]. Iryna Bodnar focuses on the fact that rapid development of information sphere is accompanied by emergence of fundamentally new threats to interests of individual, society, state, and its national security. Taking into account components of the state information policy to ensure information security, the Lviv researcher identifies main activities of public authorities in this area and emphasizes the need to ensure continuity of the information security system to monitor new threats and identify risks and levels of intensity. Igor Gromyko identifies the state dominants of information security of Ukraine in face of modern challenges and threats. Oleksiy Zozulia proposes four-stage author’s periodization of system development of the state management of information security of Ukraine [25]. Professor Oleksii Kriukov analyzes the main directions and miscalculations of the state information policy in the context of national security and highlights main problems of information support of public authorities and their impact on national security in the globalization context [26]. N. Sitsynskii defines strategic priorities of the state administration of ensuring national security of Ukraine in the foreign policy sphere in the conditions of military aggression, aimed at protecting the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and inviolability of the state borders of Ukraine; realization of its national interests; restoration of the territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state; guaranteeing peaceful future of Ukraine as sovereign and independent, democratic, social, legal state; ensuring Ukraine’s integration into the EU; and creating conditions for NATO membership [27].

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

11

Methodological-security cluster is focused on general problems of national security ensuring of the state and considering information security as one of its important components. In particular, Emily Goldman in the book National Security in the Information Age [28] describes how the information revolution affected the logic of peace and war; the democratic restrictions on social, political, and armed conflicts; the strategy of military organization of the state and warfare, as well as the growing role of private sector in ensuring the national security of the state. Norrin Ripsman and Tom Paul in Globalization and the National Security State [29] correlate globalization spread with declining role of the nation-state as a guarantor of national security as government power is declined relative to transnational government institutions, NGOs, and transnational capitalism. The authors argue that traditional twentieth-century defense blocs and regional security arrangements such as the EU and ASEAN have today proved incapable of ensuring peace and security, leaving weak states most affected by globalization forced to rely on their own resources rather than to regional and transnational security institutions. Similarly, Paul Buttersby and Joseph Syracuse in Globalization and Human Security question the usefulness of traditional post-Cold War national security framework and argue that we urgently need to reconsider the principle of state sovereignty in the global world when overcoming existing threats to humanity cannot be solved by unilateral action of any nation [30]. London researcher Stuart Schwarzstein in The Information Revolution and National Security: Dimensions and Directions examines the relationship between law, civil society, national security, and information wars. Among Ukrainian scientists, a prominent place in this cluster is occupied by the longtime head of the National Institute for Strategic Studies under President of Ukraine Volodymyr Horbulin with numerous publications on national security, including, for example, the monograph “Information Operations and Public Security: Threats, Counteraction, Modeling.” Theoretical principles of national security are revealed by O. Berezovska-Chmil; methodological approaches to the state mechanism of ensuring the safety of society are studied by D. Kuchma; T. Stukalin, O. Ustymenko, and V. Stroianovskii defend strategic approaches to the national security sector management system. In particular, a number of measures are proposed to implement the concept of security and defense sector development of Ukraine. It will contribute to the security sector formation as a single functional association managed from single center. Such sector is developed on the basis of unified planning to respond to complex nature of current threats to the national security of Ukraine, taking into account the presence of simultaneous action of danger factors, different in content and scope [31]. O. Vlasiuk reveals scientific and methodological approaches to the formation of the national security system; highlights evolution of threats to national security; explores the formation of Ukrainian national identity, human development, regional policy, information security, and security sector reform; and analyzes problems of national security in Russia aggression. A. Balanda identifies the most relevant today social determinants of national security and reveals the social determinants of national security of Ukraine in his

12

V. Dovgan et al.

doctoral dissertation. These determinants include the following: demographic crisis, growing property stratification, rising poverty, negative trends in the labor market, “shadow” economic activity, and corruption. The researcher offers scientific justification of state policy to prevent major threats to national security of Ukraine, source of which are social factors. V. Volynets explores main theoretical and methodological approaches to determining content and function specifics of guaranteeing national security and proves that such function in modern global development occupies one of the leading positions in the state. It becomes basis for public administration in economic, political, social, information, and public relations. Similarly, theoretical constructions of state security are revealed by L. Radovetska; essence, features, modern concepts, and geopolitical factors of national security are subject of research by O. Glazov; principles of management in the field of public security, objects and subjects of special state administration, its power and special means, mechanisms, forms, and methods is studied by I. Korzh. Information security cluster contains publications that are focused on scientific attention on security aspects and threats of global information space. Thus, O. Panchenko considers information security in the context of challenges and threats to national security; O. Solodka explores dialectic of relationship between information sovereignty and information security of Ukraine; A. Ruban offers conceptual principles of the state regulation of national security; O. Zolotar reveals concept and content of the category “human information security” [32]. A. Turchak reveals main components of information security of the state and emphasizes that information security is based on information organization of the country. It is designed to guarantee information security of the state and its subjects in globalization of the modern world. Institutional aspects of state policy improvement of Ukraine in the field of information security in the conditions of information confrontation and hybrid war are studied by Doctor of Public Administration Iu. Nesteriak. He substantiates the urgent need for the formation and active functioning of single information center for combating hostile propaganda and single national regulator in the information sphere of the state. Their activities would be aimed at developing Ukrainian national information policy, intellectually qualified repulsion of manipulative and propaganda attacks, formation of patriotic beliefs, and creation of the Ukrainian national information space as basis of national security of society and the state. Very deep monograph “Information component of national security of Ukraine” was prepared by researchers of the Institute of International Relations: Olga Vyhovska and Natalia Bilousova. Monographic character is typical for book by Oleksii Barybin “Information Security Risk Management”; features of informational component of the national security is analyzed by Doctor of Political Sciences of Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University, Olena Andreeva. O. Radutnyi and O. Kosogov focus on various aspects of information security of the state and protection of domestic cyberspace. They emphasize that growing dependence on information technology (IT) makes modern Ukrainian society more vulnerable to possible negative consequences of illegal use of cyberspace [33].

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

13

It is also necessary to highlight the number of thematic publications of the head of the NGO “Center for Public Administration Studies”—Professor Volodymyr Gurkovskyi. He reveals organizational and legal issues of cooperation between public authorities in the field of national security and considers information security as a component of national security [34]. Director of the Research Institute of National Security of Ukraine Professor Oleksandr Kyrychenko and Associate Professor of the University of Economics and Law “Krok” Olena Shikova in their publications cover theoretical foundations of information security systems and analyze different positions on general theoretical approach to information security. Oksana Kyrychenko (Associate Professor at the same university) raises similar topic of conceptual foundations for formation of the state information security system. Cluster of legal-normative approach contains numerous publications of domestic lawyers and jurists (R. Aliamkin and M. Fedorin, M. Ilnytsky, M. Kantoka, B. Kormych, G. Linnyk, A. Nashynets-Naumova, P. Snitsarenko, Y. Sarychev and V. Tkachenko, O. Tikhomirov, T. Tkachuk, etc.). They determine legal framework and mechanisms of state regulation of national security in general and information security of the state in particular. Thus, monograph by Anfisa Nashynets-Naumova (Doctor of Laws of Kyiv University named after Borys Hrinchenko) “Information Security: Issues of Legal Regulation” examines the legal aspects and means of information security in Ukraine and the world and focuses on administrative and legal features of information security systems. The monograph of Taras Tkachuk (Doctor of Laws from Uzhhorod) is devoted to the study of conceptual legal bases of information security of the state in the conditions of European integration of Ukraine and development of practical recommendations on mechanism improvement of its realization in our state. In this monograph, the author proposes criteria for assessing negative impact of threats to the state of information security of Ukraine and substantiates inclusion national interests, values, goals, and achievements in the information sphere into the objects of legal support of information security of Ukraine [35]. Peculiarities of legal support of information data protection during implementation of management decisions in the field of public administration are considered by another scientist of Uzhhorod National University, Mykhailo Ilnytskii. He proposes to supplement legal mechanism of public information classifying as restricted in access by preventive mechanisms of state supervision by created (authorized) bodies and introduction of the institute of judicial control in this area. Specialists of the Ivan Chernyakhovsky National Defense University of Ukraine—Petro Snitsarenko, Yuriy Sarychev, and Volodymyr Tkachenko—are concerned with general theoretical preconditions for the need to improve current legislation of Ukraine on information security of the state. Ruslan Aliamkin and Mykola Fedorin also raise issue of legal support of national information security; comprehensive scientific analysis of the complex and multifaceted system of legal relations related to the formation and implementation of the state information security policy of Ukraine is carried out in dissertation research by Borys Kormych; analysis of administrative legislation in the field of information security and

14

V. Dovgan et al.

mechanisms of legal regulation of information security of Ukraine is carried out by Hryhoriy Linnyk. Mykola Kantoka proposed the study of the peculiarities of the legal regulation of information security of the state in the interdisciplinary aspect of the combination of law and public administration and civil society. In the same way is the monograph of scientist of the National Academy of Internal Affairs, Alexander Tikhomirov. He reveals features of legal provision of information security as a function of the modern state [36]. Strategic-communication cluster is represented by scientists who studies problems of formation and functioning of strategic communications of state bodies as an important tool for ensuring national security and stability of state system and political regime of the country. The essence and content of strategic communications are described in more details in official US documents. They emphasize that “strategic communications can define agenda and create context that will contribute to achievement of political, economic and military goals. Over time they can form other people’s ideas in support the interests of America” [37]. Theoretical foundation of the modern understanding of strategic communications was laid by K. Paul. He established that strategic communications are not only a tool to counteract terrorism and extremism but are also ability of government to demonstrate intentions and inspire confidence in their own actions; the author proved that success of many policies depends on the support of different groups; H. William singled out such important component of strategic communications as narratives; W. Marcelino considered strategic communications in focus of discursive rhetoric to convince objects of influence to implement effective strategies of the state [38]. In Ukraine, two of the leading experts in this field are G. Pocheptsov and T. Sivak. The last author in 2020 defended her doctoral dissertation “Institutionalization of strategic communications in the system of public administration of Ukraine.” It identified “strategic communications” as an appropriate technology of public administration which include a set of actions that should be consistently techniques implemented by the subject of public administration in the information space to achieve the strategic goals of the state [39]. The team of authors of the National Academy of the Security Service of Ukraine is headed by A. Barovska. They substantiated the role and importance of strategic communications in hybrid war conditions. Mechanisms of counteraction in information warfare are revealed by O. Kapshtyk, O. Salnikov, I. Sivokha, and A. Ivashchenko; features of strategic communication implementation in the security and defense sector of Ukraine are considered by G. Sashchuk. Jurist P. Bohutskii singles out objects of strategic communications of national security. V. Kushnir proposed structural and organizational model of public administration in the field of strategic communications in the security and defense sector of Ukraine [40]. O. Voroshilov defines the role of strategic communications in counteracting information aggression. Formation and development of strategic communication system for security and defense sector was the subject of monographic study by team of authors led by V. Pylypchuk. It reveals philosophical, ideological, and

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

15

socio-legal principles of strategic communications, relevant experience of EU and NATO member states, organizational and legal issues, and strategic communication systems of the security and defense sector in Ukraine [41]. Corruption-public cluster combines understanding of corruption as one of the main threats to Ukraine’s national security. O. Kolb and L. Duchyminska are convinced of such a statement of the problem. In turn, O. Radchenko, V. Shchegortsova, K. Rostovska, and V. Krut focus on issue of combating corruption in public administration system as a key component of national and state security. This opens pandemic nature of Ukrainian high-level elite corruption. It is based on the fact that corruption shifts from isolated, disparate schemes to organized and coordinated actions united in criminal communities that form corruption networks. The need to urgently overcome corruption is caused by systemic threats to national security. It undermines rule of law and foundations of public administration, morality, and stability of democratic processes; violates principles of equality and social justice; creates latent market monopolization and legal basis for free, fair competition; and leads to distortions in optimal combination of methods of administrative regulation and market self-regulation at all levels of government and administration [42]. I. Draliuk attributes corruption and organized crime to real and potential threats to national interests in the field of national security. It causes significant damage to the entire system of government in the country. Ignoring of corruption can lead to the following consequences: (a) falling authority, delay in modernization and development of the national economy, and violation of competition principle, (b) price increases due to inclusion of bribes as a mandatory component in the price formula for goods and services, (c) deterioration of investment attractiveness of the state, and (d) discrediting law as a universal regulator of public relations and turning it into a means of satisfying private and corporate interests. M. Lutsenko and L. Shcherbyna emphasize that corruption is a kind of social corrosion. It erodes and destroys first of all public authorities, the state and society as a whole. Counteraction to this corruption becomes very important when corruption level crosses certain limit and begins to threaten the national security of the state, the society, and the existing government. L. Bilinska argues that corruption threatens the national security and social order of Ukraine. It systematically and comprehensively affects formation and operation of government and political institutions, undermines citizens’ trust in government, and complicates Ukraine’s relations with foreign partners. V. Pautov proposed improving of institutional support of anti-corruption in the system of national security [43]. In sociopolitical approach issue of information threat’s impact on social and political systems, public moods, and opinions, nature of social power relations in the country comes to the fore. Representatives of this approach are M. Gupta, R. Sharman, O. Barna, M. Baiuk, A. Golovka, V. Gornyk, K. Dubniak, K. Zakharenko, V. Nedbay, D. Nelipa, O. Oliinyk, and V. Pasichnyk. For example, Manish Gupta and Ray Sharman in “Social and Human Elements of Information Security: Emerging Trends and Countermeasures” [44] identify that the weakest link in information security chain is people. The authors focus attention on

16

V. Dovgan et al.

the social and human aspects of information wars. Researchers analyze the nature of man and its social interactions, characterize current trends in manipulation of human communities, and propose countermeasures to protect against constantly growing information threats. K. Zakharenko should be singled out among Ukrainian researchers. He published monograph “Political Institutions of Information Security of Ukraine: Transformation, Modernization, Development” in 2017. It analyzes the formation of the information society in Ukraine and its impact on political institutions and processes and determines legal and political problems of information security of the state. G. Sytnyk, D. Nelipa, and M. Orel study political, public, and state governance in the field of national security in the context of public and state policy. Lviv Doctor of Science in Public Administration V. Pasichnyk insists on the formation of the national idea as a guarantee of state security in the sociopolitical space of the state. Philosophical category of security is new paradigm basis of public policy and public administration of national security in his opinion. The author’s philosophical understanding of security as protection of individual, family, nation, and humanity leads him to justify new paradigm of national security. The paradigm will include not only protection of national values and interests from threats and dangers in certain social spheres but also protection of the nation and its components (individuals, society, and the state in general) and fight not against consequences but with causes of threats and dangers. It will focus on targeted systematic activities to implement preventive measures to ensure stability and optimal and balanced development of all spheres of public life taking precautionary measures to avoid threats and dangers to national values and interests [45]. V. Hornyk and S. Kravchenko define partnership between the state and the civil society as an important factor of national security. Researchers consider transparency of public authorities as extremely important means of uniting society. It significantly increases the state’s resilience to threats to national security. In particular, public cooperation is effective in reducing political corruption. Limitation of such corruption opens possibilities for real social and economic changes from which the national security is critically dependent. Therefore, the authors believe that strengthening of national security will contribute to introduction of effective public control over the actions of high-ranking officials and civil servants. Activities of corrupted officials often cause direct harm or pose significant threats to national interests. Kateryna Dubnyak examines socio-communication dimension of information security of the state against background of undeniable development of information and communication technologies. She emphasizes that information security of the state increasingly depends on socio-communication aspects due to a wide access of citizens and social groups to technologies and their use. Deputy of Ukraine of the VIII Convocation O. Barna argues that democratic way to overcome consequences of hybrid war is a broad public dialogue where pluralism of opinions and freedom of speech should take place in terms of information security of man, society, and state. Chief Consultant of the Institute of Legislation of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine O. Oliynyk characterizes positive and negative effects

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

17

of information revolution on information security of the individual, society, and state. A. Golovka identifies main problems that hinder the effective use of civil society in policy implementation security in the information sphere of Ukraine. M. Baiuk is focused on humanitarian component of the state security policy, its role in strengthening sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state. State security is an integral concept that covers a wide range of issues related to various aspects of the state and society functioning: environmental, energy, information, social, and humanitarian sphere security. The researcher proves that it is necessary to adhere to its conceptual and theoretical foundations in developing and implementing effective state security policy in the humanitarian sphere at the state and regional level. The proposed principles will preserve, strengthen, and protect the progressive development of state interests overcoming internal and external threats [46]. Value-psychological approach is supported by such researchers as M. Kolaresi, M. Hnatko, O. Zolotar, U. Ilnytska, Y. Kalinovskii, B. Kalinichenko, Z. Koval, O. Krutii, E. Manuilov, O. Mateta, R. Puida, O. Radchenko, and V. Sabadukha. They put in a prominent place the value and moral and ethical aspects of human psychology as the main target of technologies and tools of information influence. Thus, Michael Colaresi reflects on the dilemma of democracy and national security based on axiological basis [47]. He asks: “How can modern democracies balance the need for confidentiality in sensitive foreign policy issues with the need for openness in gaining and maintaining the trust of citizens?” Broad opportunities of the executive power to interpret information as confidential or non-secret create possibility of abuses. It contributed to the emergence of Watergate, domestic espionage, and repression in France, Norway, and Canada over the past 40 years. The author concludes that information can be confidential. But society will no longer be able to control this information and this government if government, group, or official has the opportunity to decide which information is to keep in secret. It inevitably leads to covert corruption and abuse of power. M. Colaresi sees solution of the problem in introduction of special sociopolitical institutions for supervision of national security which can deter abuse and reassure the public. In the Ukrainian discourse space, the value aspects of information security of Ukraine and their role in the attitude of information sovereignty of the state are characterized by Professors E. Manuilov and Y. Kalinovskii. They emphasize decisive role of civil society in ensuring axiological rise of information security. B. Kalinichenko says that stable values formation of state creation and national identification in the public consciousness determines the main factor in ensuring success in information war. Professor O. Radchenko touches genetic sources of value system of individuals. Their dominant psychotype in given society determines general state of the value system of the society, people, and country [48]. He and O. Krutiy argue that the most effective tool is open honest and partnership public dialogue between public authorities and citizens, between the state and civil society, in order to avoid significant part of threats to information space of the state regarding the use of internal conflicts between government and society.

18

V. Dovgan et al.

Information and psychological aspects of ensuring stability of the state and national security are considered by Z. Koval. O. Zolotar in monograph “Human information security: theory and practice” performs comprehensive analysis of international, national, and foreign experience. The researcher explores problems of human rights and freedoms in the information society, threats to human information security, state of legal support, and prospects for its development. The representative of Lviv Polytechnic—U. Ilnytska—reveals problems of information security of Ukraine and protection of the national information space from negative propaganda-manipulative information-psychological influences. She comprehensively studies types of real and potential information threats to media space of Ukraine and provides practical recommendations for improving state information policy and creation system information security of Ukraine. V. Sabadukh and R. Puida study spiritual foundations of national security. Systematization and classification of such value phenomenon as “national interests” in the context of national security of Ukraine is proposed by O. Mateta. Information-technological approach considers problems of technical and hardware protection of information systems, networks and equipment, and in general information space of the state. Prominent representatives of this cluster are such foreign specialists as J. Wacka, M. Whitman and H. Mattord, M. Gupta, K. Knapp, our compatriots R. Gryshchuk and K. Molodetska-Hrynchuk, V. Domarev, and A. Mishchenko. Thus, John Wacca in his book Managing Information Security [49] offers in-depth coverage of modern technologies and practices of information security management solutions: how to protect mission-critical parameters; how to deploy security management systems; how to provide management of identification systems, intrusion detection, and prevention systems; etc. It is interesting to present and characterize such innovative areas of human activity as computer and network forensics. Michael Whitman and Herbert Mattord present the third edition of popular European book Principles of Information Security [50]. It is based on internationally recognized standards and body of knowledge needed by managers and information systems professionals. Particular attention is paid to key areas of CISSP (Certified Information Systems Security Professional), risk management, cryptography, physical security, and more. Manish Gupta describes strategic and practical approaches to information security management and concludes that security should be planned and prepared in advance, rather than used as a response to landscape changes taking into account complexity of large-scale distributed IT environment. A holistic approach to cybersecurity and information security is proposed by Kenneth Knapp [51]. He considers both technical and managerial aspects of information security. The author argues that growing public dependence on information technology brings cybersecurity to the forefront of information security of the state as one of the most pressing issues facing the world community. Ruslan Hryshchuk and Kateryna Molodetska-Hrynchuk propose an author’s methodology for system building of information security in social Internet services. They emphasize that uncontrolled spread of such phenomena in real life of society

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

19

poses a threat to information security, as the use of social Internet services for information operations can have consequences of national hostility manifestations, growth of protest sentiments, and transition of virtual community to chaotic dynamics of interaction. Valerii Domarev and Roman Klymchuk consider methodological, technological, and organizational bases of safety systems creation of information technologies for the purpose of organizational and technical action efficiency increase at stages of designing, introduction, and operation of systems of safety of information technologies. Andrii Mishchenko proposes structural-parametric model of information resource relationships of hierarchical complex of information security management system of state. He conducts simulation mathematical modeling, which “allows to study properties and characteristics of object and choose appropriate organizational and operational management of its application.” Legitimizing cluster contains scientific publications on such important component of national security as legitimacy of public authorities which is a “basic factor in stability of political system of any state, its efficiency and guarantee of public support for public institutions in crisis moments of sociopolitical development” [52]. Well-known European researchers T. Kemper and J. Wallen associate the guarantee of national security; the functional efficiency of the public administration system, state executive institutions, and self-government bodies; and their officials with the appropriate level of legitimacy. The connection between legitimacy and formation of democratic system and the threat of democracy collapse due to delegitimization of public power of the state is revealed by M. Plattner. Conditional sign of equality between democracy and legitimacy of public power is also found in works of P. Rosenvalon and S. Iudhoiono. In Ukraine, L. Iakovlev works on this topic, considering paradoxes, ideological sources, and political alternatives to democratic legitimacy. Mechanisms of power legitimation in conditions of electronic democracy are investigated by S. Prykhodko; theoretical and methodological aspects of legitimation technologies of political power in Ukraine are subject of scientific interest of V. Chubaievskii, and features of manifestation of power legitimacy in political transformation conditions are revealed by V. Kovalchuk. Problems and prospects of overcoming the legitimacy power crisis in Ukraine are raised in researches of I. Gorbatenko, V. Neches, I. Lopushinskii, N. Rezanova, T. Nagorniak, and L. Stanislavenko. National security topic is continued by informational wars cluster. We distinguish it into independent cluster taking into account its importance, especially in context of war on the territory of Ukraine. There are here publications on such extremely threatening phenomenon in the era of information society development as information wars. There are numerous publications on this topic of such foreign and Ukrainian scholars as R. Bhan, E. Goldman, M. Libitskii, J. Scott, N. Snow, R. Stengel, Z. Brzewska, O. Krislata, B. Kalinichenko, V. Petrova, I. Parfeniuk, G. Pocheptsov, I. Pronoza, O. Ryzhuk, S. Sungurova, and V. Chalapko.

20

V. Dovgan et al.

Martin Libicki’s in his book Conquest in Cyberspace: National Security and Information Warfare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) substantiates the role of public policy and shows how the Internet is becoming more widespread and complex. It is used as infrastructural environment for modern information wars. “Future wars will be won by (dis)information” says Ramesh Bhan, an Anglo-Indian publicist in his latest book. He shows numerous examples how powerful countries in the world used disinformation to destabilize and weaken hostile political regimes. Richard Stengel continues this same theme in Information Wars: How We Lost the Global Battle Against Disinformation and What We Can Do About It. American writer Nancy Snow claims that the US government is waging an information war not only against other countries but also against its own people. Se says that real democracy and dissent thinking became the first victims of US public policy. Her book Information War: American Propaganda, Free Speech and Opinion Control Since 9–11 describes how the US administration tries to increase its dominance by restraining dissent thinking and controlling opinions of citizens and sets out propaganda methods used by the government to combat dissent thinking in the twenty-first century. “I think—so I exist!—quotes the ancient Roman catchphrase James Scott and continues: but who will I when my thoughts are stolen and replaced by someone else?” The author notes that we live in new world order where technological operations of digital influence became a new norm of control over the electoral process, public opinion, and narrative. Actors who struggle in this space are fierce. Both nation-states and special interest groups in all possible ways have fight for the highest position in control of public opinion, using the “almighty meme” and other information weapons of the digital age [53]. The most famous Ukrainian researcher of information wars is Doctor of Philology, Professor Georgii Pocheptsov, whose books are translated and published in many countries. The following articles and books are among the latest publications in Pocheptsov’s research: “Information Wars: Trends and Ways of Development,” “Meanings and Wars: Ukraine and Russia in Information and Meaning Wars,” and “Propaganda 2.” Their works have several reprints in 2 years. Thorough works in this direction are dissertation research “Military information security of Ukraine in conditions of increasing threats of information wars” by Valentina Petrova and monograph “Information security of Ukraine in the context of globalization challenges and hybrid war” by Alexander Ryzhuk. Conceptual approaches to study the concept and phenomenon of information warfare are proposed by S. Sungurova. Polyparadigmatic scientific approaches to defining essence and content of information wars are described by Anna Horpynych; typical features of information war conduction at the current stage of humanity development and determining key ways of counteract strategy are analyzed by Bohdan Kalinichenko; informational content of modern hybrid wars are described by Olena Krislata; verbal means of information and psychological warfare describes V. Tarasova, V. Chalapko, Z. Brzhevska, G. Haidur, A. Anosov, and N. Dovzhenko’s research problem of the state vulnerability in informational war

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

21

conditions and main threats to informational security of Ukrainian society in “hybrid war” conditions; peculiarities of information war manifestation are determined by Inna Pronoza; the specifics of information war tools as a set of information and psychological measures are revealed by Igor Parfenyuk.

3 Conclusions Conducted analysis of the discourse space on issues of information, communication, and sociopolitical factors and factors of national security of the state showed significant relevance of various aspects in consideration of the national security policy of state. The whole array of considered publications is systematized and characterized in 14 interdisciplinary clusters: historical-comparative, philosophical-ontological, theoretical-conceptual, state-administrative, methodological security, information security, legal-normative, strategic social communication, corruption public, social political, value-psychological, information-technological, legitimization, and cluster of information wars. Academician V. Horbulin is an authoritative Ukrainian specialist in the field of national security. He explains this diversity by the fact that current Ukrainian “theory of national security is in the stage of active formation and dynamic development due to the rapid development of globalization, intensive growth of threats in many spheres of life, society and state and complicating their relationships. System of national security is in the stage of deep transformation and on the one hand acquires a multilevel, multi-purpose direction. On the other hand it requires development of new approaches and methods to ensure effective forecasting, planning, development scenarios, etc.” [54].

References 1. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2021). Formation of the scientist image in modern conditions of digital society transformation. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1840, 012039. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012039 2. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 3. Hubanova, T., Shchokin, R., Hubanov, O., Antonov, V., Slobodianiuk, P., & Podolyaka, S. (2021). Information technologies in improving crime prevention mechanisms in the border regions of southern Ukraine. Journal of Information Technology Management., 13, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.22059/JITM.2021.80738 4. Dutchak, S., Opolska, N., Shchokin, R., Durman, O., & Shevtsiv, M. (2020). International aspects of legal regulation of information relations in the global internet network. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 23(3), 1–7. 5. Webster, F. (2014). Theories of the information society. Routledge. 6. Aydinli, E., & Rosenau, J. N. (2012). Globalization, security, and the nation state: Paradigms in transition. SUNY Press.

22

V. Dovgan et al.

7. Danilyan, O. G., & Dzoban, O. P. (2020). National security in the context of Euro-Atlantic integration of Ukraine: Philosophical reflection. Bulletin of the National University “Yaroslav the Wise Law Academy of Ukraine”, 1, 8–22. 8. Dzoban, O. P., & Zhdanenko, S. B. (2020). Human rights and national security: Philosophical and legal aspects of the relationship. Information and Law, 2, 9–22. 9. Averyanova, N. M., & Voropaeva, T. S. (2020). Information security of Ukraine: Sociophilosophical aspects. Young Scientist, 10(2), 297–303. 10. Kirshner, J. (2013). Globalization and national security. Routledge. 11. Patman, R. G. (2006). Globalization and conflict: National security in a ‘New’ strategic era. Routledge. 12. Burke, C. B. (2018). America’s information wars: The untold story of information systems in America’s conflicts and politics from World War II to the Internet Age. Rowman & Littlefield. 13. Turansky, M. O. (2018). Information and psychological operations in hybrid warfare: Historiographical aspect. Bulletin of Cherkasy University. Series: Historical Sciences, 1, 111–121. 14. Reveron, D. S. (2012). Cyberspace and national security: Threats, opportunities, and power in a virtual world. Georgetown University Press. 15. Fagan, G. H., & Munck, R. (2009). Globalization and security: Social and cultural aspects: An encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. 16. Samuels, R. J. (2006). Encyclopedia of United States National Security. Sage. 17. Goldman, J., & Maret, S. (2016). Intelligence and information policy for national security: Key terms and concepts. Rowman & Littlefield. 18. Amiri, A. P. (2015). Freedom of information and national security. Herbert Utz Verlag. 19. Holton, R. J. (2011). Globalization and the nation state (2nd ed.). Macmillan International Higher Education. 20. Lips, M., Taylor, J. A., & Bannister, F. (2005). Public administration in the information society: Essays on risk and trust. IOS Press. 21. de Larrinaga, M., & Doucet, M. G. (2010). Security and global governmentality: Globalization, governance and the state. Routledge. 22. Sytnik, G. (2017). Institutional-civilization paradigm as a basis of public administration methodology in the field of national security. Scientific Journal of the Academy of National Security., 1–2(13–14), 11. 23. Kalyaev, A. (2018). Theoretical approaches to the transformation of modern models of public administration in the field of security and defense. Efficiency of Public Administration, 1(54), 13–19. 24. Kruk, S. (2018). Institutional basis of public administration to ensure national security of Ukraine. Theory and Practice of Public Administration and Local Self-Government, 2. http:// nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Ttpdu_2018_2_6 25. Zozulya, O. S. (2016). Periodization of the development of the state management system of information security of Ukraine. Investments: Practice and Experience, 8, 106–114. 26. Kryukov, O. I. (2016). Information support of public authority as a factor of national security in the context of globalization. Bulletin of the National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine, 1, 142–149. 27. Sitsynsky, N. (2015). Strategic priorities of public administration to ensure the national security of Ukraine in the foreign policy sphere in the context of military aggression. Investments: Practice and Experience, 19, 96. 28. Goldman, E. O. (2004). National security in the information age. Routledge. 29. Ripsman, N., & Paul, T. V. (2010). Globalization and the national security state. Oxford University Press. 30. Battersby, P., & Siracusa, J. M. (2009). Globalization and human security. Rowman & Littlefield. 31. Stukalin, T. (2016). The system of public administration in the field of national defense and the main directions of its development in the context of reforming the security and defense sector. Theory and Practice of Public Administration, 2(53), 219.

1

Review of the Ukrainian Discourse Field of National Security Issues of. . .

23

32. Zolotar, O. O. (2021). The concept and content of the category “human information security”. Information and Law, 1, 73–78. 33. Kosogov, O. (2014). Priority areas of state policy to ensure the security of national cyberspace. Collection of Scientific Works of Kharkiv University of the Air Force, 3(40), 127. 34. Gurkovsky, V. I. (2002). Information security in Ukraine as a component of national security. Collection of Scientific Works of UADU, 2, 9–18. 35. Tkachuk, T. Y. (2018). Ensuring information security in terms of European integration of Ukraine: The legal dimension. ArtEc. 36. Tikhomirov, O. O. (2014). Ensuring information security as a function of the modern state. Center for Scientific Sciences and scientific-practical. kind. at the Security Service of Ukraine. 37. Report of the House Armed Services Committee on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year. (2012). https://www.congress.gov/112/crpt/hrpt78/CRPT112hrpt78.pdf 38. Marcellino, W. M. (2014). Revisioning strategic communication through rhetoric and discourse analysis. https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News-Article-View/Article/577589/jfq76-revisioning-strategic-communication-through-rhetoric-and-discourse-analy/ 39. Sivak, T. (2020). Institutionalization of strategic communications in the system of public administration of Ukraine. National Academy for Public Administration under the President of Ukraine. 40. Kushnir, V. O. (2021). Structural and organizational model of public administration in the field of strategic communications in the security and defense sector of Ukraine. Investments: Practice and Experience, 7, 44–48. 41. Pylypchuk, V. H., et al. (2018). Formation and development of the system of strategic communications of the security and defense sector. ArtEk Publishing House LLC. 42. Shchegortsova, V. (2012). Ways to prevent and combat corruption in public administration of Ukraine. State Building, 2. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/DeBu_2012_2_40 43. Pautov, V. O. (2020). Improving the institutional support of anti-corruption in the system of national security. Economy and State. Series: Public Administration, 1, 17–19. 44. Gupta, M., & Sharman, R. (2008). Social and human elements of information security: Emerging trends and countermeasures. IGI Global. 45. Pasichnyk, V. (2011). Philosophical category of security as the basis of a new paradigm of public administration of national security. Democratic Governance: A Scientific Journal, 7. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/DeVr_2011_7 46. Bayuk, M. (2018). Humanitarian component of state security policy: Concepts, principles. University Notes, 65, 189–195. 47. Colaresi, M. P. (2014). Democracy declassified: The secrecy dilemma in national security. Oxford University Press. 48. Radchenko, O. V. (2008). Anthropological nature of the value system of society. Theory and practice of public administration, 2(21), 275–282. 49. Vacca, J. R. (2013). Managing information security. Elsevier. 50. Whitman, M., & Mattord, H. (2009). Principles of information security. Cengage Learning EMEA. 51. Knapp, K. J. (2009). Cyber security and global information assurance: Threat analysis and response solutions. IGI Global. 52. Radchenko, O. O. (2017). Genesis of legitimation of institutes of public power in Ukraine: State-administrative aspect. Mizhrehionalna akademiya upravlinnya personalom. 53. Scott, J. (2019). Information warfare: The meme is the embryo of the narrative illusion. Amazon Digital Services LLC - KDP Print US. 54. Horbulin, V.P.: National Security of Ukraine: Stages of formation and problems of scientific and information-analytical support. http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/soc_gum/nac_bez/ texts/2008-01/gorbulin.pdf

Chapter 2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security” Phenomenon in the Information and Communication Context Yaroslav Chmyr , Andrey Moshnin , Bohdan Tsymbal Rostyslav Shchokin , and Anatolii Balashov

,

Abstract Semantic-ontological analysis of the most significant scientific categories and concepts of the categorical-conceptual apparatus of the issue of national security in their interrelation and interaction is carried out. Hierarchy of the state functions is proposed. It is focused on the place of the function of ensuring the national security of the state in the family of functions of modern democracies. Comparison of the characteristics of competitive and security concepts of national security is done. Structural and functional model of the national security system is developed. The essence of national security of Ukraine is the freedom of life and democratic social and state self-development of the people of Ukraine. Defense of the state is the essence of activities to ensure the national security of Ukraine. Keywords Information context · Determinants · Phenomenon · Societal content · Functions of public management

1 The Problem Statement Beginning of the third millennium is characterized by the fact that globalization processes and formation of global information society raise issue of national security of man, community, state, and society in the modern world to a fundamentally new level. V. Zagurska-Antoniuk states that “cardinal geopolitical changes taking place Y. Chmyr (*) · R. Shchokin Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Moshnin V.I. Vernadsky Taurida National University, Kyiv, Ukraine B. Tsymbal National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine A. Balashov Academy of Science the Public Administration, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_2

25

26

Y. Chmyr et al.

at the beginning of the XXI century indicate that the world entered into phase of another global transformation, and with it into crises and dangers to the world order” [1]. Security importance in current virtually limitless penetration of information influence in all spheres of human life up to personal space is recognized as so great that in 2000 the leaders of developed countries adopted the Okinawa Charter of the Global Information Society. It expressed deep concern and advocated the need to create national and global information security systems as mechanism to ensure state of global information space which minimizes the possibility of influence and violation of human rights, society, and the state. The whole set of information and communication relations and systems of their regulation have decisive influence on the state and dynamics of political, socioeconomic, military defense, spiritual-cultural, and other components of human’s sociopolitical life and the whole system of public administration of each country in information society and the global information space of information flows. This means that information security plays an important role in each of these components. Information security itself is increasingly coming to the forefront of overall national security, and this trend in the growth of information wars in the modern world will continue to grow.

2 Main Material Presentation First of all, the scientific publications mentioned in the previous section were subjected to software processing on the Internet service “Word Cloud” in order to illustrate categorical number of concepts related to national security. It allows to generate a “Tag Cloud” (see Fig. 2.1)—“visual representation of categories list (or tags, also called labels, shortcuts, keywords, etc.) where importance of each word is indicated by font size and\or color. This representation is convenient for quick perception of the most used words, phrases and terms and to distribute terms by popularity relative to each other” [2]. Let’s select the most significant scientific categories and concepts from the given tag cloud for further semantic-ontological analysis. We will present schematically the family and interrelation of main categories of conceptual apparatus of national security issues (see Fig. 2.2). Figure 2.2 shows that the key characteristic of national security is security as a societal phenomenon. From an academic point of view, “security” is a state when nothing threatens someone or something [3]. Philosophers define security as “state, development trends and living conditions of society and its structures, which ensure preservation of their qualitative certainty and optimal balance of freedom and necessity; and lawyers define it as a system of legal protection guarantees of individual and society, provision of their normal life, rights and freedoms” [4]. “Political Science Encyclopedic Dictionary defines security as a social phenomenon that consists in activities of people, society, state, world community to identify

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

27

Fig. 2.1 Tag cloud of the discourse space of national security issues

(study), prevent, weaken, eliminate and prevent threat that can: destroy it; deprive it material and spiritual values and cause irreparable damage; block ways for progressive development” [5]. Psychology interprets security as a key characteristic of a person’s psychological state which is “a sense of trust, integrity, lack of fear or anxiety, especially in relation to meeting their own current and future needs” [6]. Complexity of categorical-conceptual definition of “security” according to David Baldwin is that after the “Cold War” there were so many definitions of the term “security” that it became known as a “concept in dispute” [7]. Summarizing these approaches, we can determine that such concept as “security” is a sociopsychological phenomenon and at the same time is a state of man, society, and country where there are no threats and obstacles to vital functions of these subjects and their free development and satisfaction of all material, communicative, and spiritual needs of life. This interpretation allows us to define security as one of key natural human rights along with other constitutional rights: to life, liberty, and free development (which will become impossible or difficult in the absence of human security). Semantic antipode of “security” is “danger,” which in social sense is defined as an objectively existing possibility of negative impact on person, community, and social organism. In danger any object can be harmed or give it undesirable dynamics or parameters (nature, pace, forms of development) of its development [8].

28

Y. Chmyr et al.

Global information society

Global information space

Information space Information war

Information networks

Information and communication technologies

Cyber security Disinformation

Communication Information

State information security policy INFORMATION SECURITY

Strategic communications

Information sovereignty SECTORAL SECURITY NATIONAL SECURITY

National sovereignty

Economic security Protection

Social security

Security Danger

Energy security Threats

Risks Ecological safety

Shadow economy

Corruption ............... security Human security

Fig. 2.2 Relationship of main categories of discourse space of national security issues

Since security at everyday consciousness level is perceived as the absence of threats and risks of getting into danger, with some caution, the definitions of “threat” and “risk” can be defined as certain forms of danger and its inseparable components. In our opinion, the difference between “threats” and “risks” is the following: the first concept is an objectively existing phenomenon and the second only as a potential possibility. Threats can be both static and dynamic. In the first case, it is constant phenomenon, characterized by the presence of threat source subject, object to which the threat is directed, and means and tools by which subject tries to influence the object. In the second case, it is a process of negative impact of threatening factors on the system of ensuring optimal parameters of threat object which has its stages and implementation algorithm and requires object to protect its life support system. Thus, security needs protection from threats and risks. Security of a person, community, society, state, and political nation differs depending on who needs

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

29

such protection. Such protection is the main task and function of national security. It should be noted here that in Ukraine there are two concepts in parallel—state and national security. However, in legislative space of the basic Law of Ukraine “On National Security of Ukraine,” the concepts of state security and national security are defined almost equally: state security is a protection of state sovereignty, territorial integrity and democratic constitutional order, and other vital national interests from real and potential threats of nonmilitary nature, whereas national security of Ukraine is a protection of state sovereignty, territorial integrity, democratic constitutional order, and other national interests of Ukraine from real and potential threats [9]. Main criteria and essence of “national security” and “state security” have a slight difference according to above definition. The first concept is broader and absorbs the second. It includes not only all areas of activities of the state but also non-state social life. At the same time, the expanded interpretation of the scientific concept of “state security” includes all necessary measures of state bodies to ensure all processes of safe life of man and citizen, including private life, etc. In this interpretation, “state security” is fully extended to the concept of “national security.” Therefore, more integrated definitions of “national security” are used [2]. L. Bobrytskii and O. Meiko note that “the most important strategic task of Ukraine’s state policy is to ensure its national security, protection of state sovereignty and restoration of territorial integrity” [10]. Ensuring security of man and society as a whole is one of the most important functions of the state, institutionally entrusted to the system of national security of the state. Indeed, any state as a social organism is designed to ensure the orderly life of society and its progressive development. Each state has certain functions in the heart of its activities. They specify main tasks and objectives of the state as a whole and its individual public authorities in particular. Such functions can be both fundamental and national (majority or all public authorities are involved in their implementation), specialized (its implementation is entrusted to specific central authorities and their territorial subdivisions), and operational (related to the regulations and procedures of specific units of public authorities of the country). According to the functional approach, socially important and socially defined function for its implementation determine separation in the state mechanism of relevant structural units—branches of government, ministries, departments, government agencies, and so on. Hierarchy of state functions (focusing on the subject of our study) can be represented as the following scheme (see Fig. 2.3). Figure 2.3 shows that fundamental function of national and state security is divided into structural components—specialized functions/tasks—which include the following functions: ensuring protection of vital national interests, state defense, state border protection, and neutralization of real and potential threats to vital activity of society, ensuring law and order and combating crime, ensuring the protection of society from dangers, guaranteeing realization of legal rights and interests of man and citizen, and creation of favorable conditions for citizens to live, develop, selfrealize, etc. Thus, according to A. Balanda, ensuring national security is an effective function of the state, society, and man. It is aimed at identifying, preventing, and eliminating dangers and threats that can destroy them or deprive them of

30

Y. Chmyr et al.

Fig. 2.3 Place of the function for national security ensuring in the family of functions of modern democracies

fundamental material or spiritual values. It should characterize harmonious development of community of people, individuals, as well as social activities of public institutions aimed at realizing their own interests in the field of protection or overcoming consequences of various risks and threats [11]. In turn, V. Volynets defines function of guaranteeing national security as the state’s choice of specific means and ways to ensure national security due to the need for timely adequate measures to nature and scale of threats to national interests [12]. Public authorities usually develop scientific paradigms and concepts and adopt relevant national doctrines, strategies, or concepts in order to implement the tasks of any fundamental function of the state. It contains detailed description of tasks, mechanisms, tools to achieve desired result, as well as actors/institutions responsible for implementation of tasks and deadlines and forms of control. It should be noted that the leading scientific approaches in this area are the competitive and security concepts (see Table 2.1) if we analyze the world practice of adopting such documents on the function of national security of the state [10–13]. Here, we will not consider the concept of force inherent in totalitarian and authoritarian states. According to A. Balanda, the state that professes the concept of power hinders the civilized progressive development of the country. In this case, society is left without guidelines, incentives, and resources for such development. Main function of law is corporate claims of the state bureaucracy; control mechanism of the system, including the security system, is supported by stability of the artificially created “absolute perfection” of the system elements. In this case, the security system cannot respond quickly to threats, and its level does not ensure the safety of society and citizens [11]. These two approaches do not claim to be exclusive and true. In the scientific literature, there are other views on organization of national security systems. Thus, I. Korzh identifies three types of systems for national security management and state security (two of which are correlated with the above):

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

31

Table 2.1 Comparison of characteristic features of competitive and protective concepts of national security Key approaches Determination power as a source

Main function of the legal system

Role of subjects/ authorities

Role of citizens

Format of interaction between the state and society National security format

Inherent for formational type of society

Typical features Competitive concept People is a source of power-only will of citizens and laws, and their openness gives right to power to realize the common interest within the state The function of law is to enshrine vital interests of society in law to ensure security and to enshrine nature, level, and degree of probability of threats to these interests Implementation of legal norms for regulating mechanisms and procedures of functioning of state institutions in the interests of man and citizen High degree of citizens’ interest in ensuring national security, high social activity in the management of public affairs Subordination of state institutions and bureaucracy of officials to interests of society, protection of human and civil rights and freedoms Flexible mechanism of security system management is supported by a combination of possibilities of both destruction of its separate elements and their continuous replacement Inherent for predominantly democratic society

Protective concepts Only the state and its institutions are the bearers of concentrated power and can unconditionally exercise the right to violence for political reasons Legal substantiation of the so-called law of force and right of state to violence in all spheres, including the private life of citizens National security is identified with the state, thus focusing on the protection of state institutions and officials Interests of the state take precedence over the interests of citizens; they must be submissive who have more responsibilities than rights Subordination of civil society institutions by the state apparatus, which leads to arbitrariness of power and alienation of society from power Mobilization based on principles of closed society, total bans, forceful solution of political and social problems Inherent for authoritarian and totalitarian societies

– Punitive and repressive system is focused on finding enemies, their suppression, isolation, expulsion, and destruction. – Security system—Attention is focused on ensuring security of the ruling elite and regime with main reliance on force, as well as the use of “flexible” measures (bribery, deception, creation of false associations, oppositions, etc.). – System based on democratic legislation uses mostly nonviolent means of violence (spiritual, psychological, informational, judicial and law enforcement, etc.) [14]. Specialized functions of state management in the field of national security were studied in detail by O. Batrachenko from Sumy. In his opinion, main specialized and operational functions aimed at fulfilling fundamental function of national security are the following:

32

Y. Chmyr et al.

1. Functions of orientation system of public safety and order: formation of state policy in the field of public security and order, creation of regulatory framework necessary for effective functioning of public safety and order system, improving its organizational structure, generalization of application practice of administrative legislation in the field of public safety and order, approval of strategic programs of activity and determination of priority directions of the police and other subjects who work to ensure public safety and order, and approval of work plans. 2. Functions of system support: complex personnel, financial, material, technical, informational, and other maintenance of vital activity of components (structural elements) of the system, decision-making on encouragement and bringing to disciplinary responsibility of civil servants of the central body of police management and other subjects of ensuring public safety and order, preparation of forces and means of system subjects for their application according to purpose, formation of data database (banks) included in unified information system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine, etc. 3. Functions of operational management of public security system and order: constant monitoring of impact on public security and order of processes occurring in political, social, economic, environmental, scientific, and technological information and other spheres, religious environment, and interethnic relations, forecasting changes taking place in them and potential threats to national security, signing police orders, division of responsibilities between the deputy heads as well as between different departments and subdivisions of the headed body, etc. 4. Functions of external organizational support of the system: implementation of information interaction with other public authorities of Ukraine, law enforcement agencies of foreign states, and international organizations, formation of interdepartmental groups, appointment of their leaders, organization and holding of joint meetings, etc. 5. Functions of public reporting and external control: organization of statistical and other information reporting on the state of public security and order, conducting personal reception of citizens on relevant issues, ensuring disclosure of public information, ensuring access of external control subjects to documentary and other information resources of the body for public safety and order, etc. [15]. A slightly different vision of the functions of public administration in the field of national security of Ukraine is showed by N. Sitsinskii. In particular, he highlights the following functions: – Organization of the state administration of ensuring the national security of Ukraine in the foreign policy sphere. Public administration of foreign affairs is activity of state bodies aimed at conducting Ukraine’s foreign policy, ensuring its national interests and security by maintaining peaceful and mutually beneficial cooperation with members of the international community on the basis of generally accepted principles and norms of international law. – Strategic forecasting in the context of immediate challenges and threats to Ukraine’s national security in the foreign policy sphere, which can become

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

33

new territorial claims to Ukraine by individual states. The State Department for National Security of Ukraine in the Foreign Policy Sphere is called upon to solve long-term tasks. Solution of these tasks will take place in conditions of uncertainty, where executive bodies involved in the protection of national security interests must develop forecasts, manage them, and solve their problems on their basis. – Strategic planning to ensure national security in the foreign policy sphere. Methodology of planning in public administration in this area is based on the principles of scientificity, complexity, variety of solutions, choosing the best option, regulations, etc. – Control in public administration in the field of foreign policy, as a special function of public administration to ensure national security in foreign policy. It can be carried out through the mechanisms of presidential control (President of Ukraine, National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine), governmental and parliamentary control (Cabinet of Ministers, Committees of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine), and civil society institutions (public councils, volunteers, etc.) [16]. Let’s stop on the essence of scientific concepts “national/state security.” We agree with the corresponding member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Professor O. Vlasyuk. He says that security is the main condition of public life and the first function of statehood. Inability to implement and guarantee this basic social value leads to the inevitable decline of societies and states. National security is guaranteed by identifying and further neutralizing threats to statehood, social order and political system, and national identity. Danger is created by everything that destroys state independence, creates instability and outbreaks violence, erodes and destroys established and identifying ideas of the national political community about themselves and in the world [17]. L. Radovetska defines “state security” as activity of subject set of different nature in certain conditions under which they perform their functions and thus guarantee crisis-free optimal functioning and development of state institutions as the most optimal subject of society. In this context, security acquires such substantive characteristics that will be more dependent on the actors. It becomes not only subjective but also objective in view of both various opportunities and needs of the sub-objects [18]. The scientists identify the following main components of national security: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Protection of social order. Protection of the state regime. Ensuring territorial inviolability and sovereignty. Ensuring political and economic independence of the nation. Ensuring health of the nation. Protection of public order. Fight against crime. Ensuring technogenic safety. Protection against the threat of natural disasters [14].

34

Y. Chmyr et al.

Fig. 2.4 Structural elements of the national security system of Ukraine

V. Zagurska-Antoniuk notes that “state management of national security is a system of extensive causal links between the nation and need to achieve state of security in today’s globalized world, which constantly generates various types of challenges, threats and dangers. This system is based on the national interests and values. It is more complex formation than system of national security. So, governance in the field of national security is strategic priority for implementation of domestic and foreign policies of the leading states of the modern world in the process of globalization” [1]. Structurally, the national security system consists of number of subsystems (see Fig. 2.4). First of all, such subsystems include the levels of measure implementation to ensure national security, its actors, and functional areas. There will be no security in the state if conditions for safe living of citizens and territorial communities are not created, and if danger threatens certain regions, at each level, there must be certain institution and measures to prevent and counteract various threats to state and national security. Organizations such as the UN Security Council, the OSCE, international defense alliances, and NATO are designed to combat such international threats at

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

35

geopolitical level. At the same time, intergovernmental agreements and intergovernmental cooperation play an important role in ensuring security and good neighborly relations between countries with a common border, for example, in ensuring the so-called “small border traffic,” joint operations of special services to combat drug trafficking, smuggling, etc. At the intergovernmental and geopolitical levels, the key institutional actors of national security are state’s diplomatic services, the president and his subordinate National Security and Defense Council, parliament, the state border service, foreign intelligence, and so on. The role of institutional subjects of the national security system of Ukraine at the national level is that these public institutions carry out specific activities aimed at creating (or destroying) appropriate constitutionally guaranteed decent conditions for safe society, realization of human interests, rights and freedoms, development of the human potential, and state as a whole. Local state administrations and local special services are involved in this activity at the regional level. Security of territorial communities’ life is largely ensured by local selfgovernment bodies and self-organization of citizens. All these abovementioned entities must act in accordance with approved national Strategy or Doctrine of National Security and Defense and constitute holistic system of institutions. Their main function is to guarantee sovereignty, independence, and security of the state, society, and citizens. The key criteria of national security can be identified as follows: – National independence and sovereignty, territorial integrity of the state. – Development of civil society, level of democracy, formation and effectiveness of the legal framework of the rule of law, protection of the individual. – Economic opportunities of the state. – State of the armed forces, their combat capability, and combat readiness. – National definition and identity. – Development of national self-consciousness and culture. – Presence of common strategy of national development, “national idea,” generally accepted goal. – National consent and unity. – Domestic political stability. – Readiness and ability of political forces to realize the generally defined goals [19]. Direction of subject activity in functional spheres in the greatest generalization can be systematized on such spheres: political-administrative, social-economic, spiritual-cultural, legal-normative, ethno-national, information-communicative, military, scientific-technological, confessional, ecological, etc. Thus, the political and managerial component of the system of national and state security should fight systemic political crises, prevent loss of control or even destruction of administrative apparatus, and counteract political technologies aimed at splitting society on any grounds and manifestations of separatism. Problem of legitimacy of public authorities is a key for political and administrative sphere. High level of legitimacy of public authorities contributes to the stabilization of the sociopolitical situation, increases the level of interaction between government

36

Y. Chmyr et al.

agencies and civil society, and improves social well-being of civil servants. P. O’Neill says that ensuring effectiveness of public administration requires that any government, any institution or structure of public authority, and any official have appropriate level of rational legitimacy [20]. At the same time, process of delegitimizing power is extremely dangerous for stability of the state system, political regime, and sociopolitical development of the country as a whole. Ukraine remembers well that it was critical delegitimization of Yanukovych’s regime that led to the Revolution of Dignity in 2014. E. Gugnin argues that “weakening of legitimacy is the first step in challenging monopoly right of the state to public use of violence and coercion. These processes entail colonial expansion of certain territories or their transformation into zones of frozen conflicts with accompanying negative consequences for the state” [21]. Legitimacy is closely linked to corruption—the higher the level of corruption is, the more vigorous the process of delegitimizing power is. That is why corruption is one of the biggest threats to national security for modern Ukraine. Ukrainian corruption belongs to the so-called crisis type. Therefore society does not produce alternative legal means for the use of power [22]. Most experts and scientists of our country agreed with it. M. and I. Niniukiv state that it became one of the most important factors of negative impact on the efficiency of government, undermining people’s confidence in the government and the actual legitimization of the system of public governance in our country. It is an indisputable fact that the greatest risk for any country is the loss of statehood. At the same time, if the impact of corruption on key areas is decisive and if corrupt ways of solving public affairs become dominant, then the state becomes doomed [23]. Therefore, according to both foreign and domestic experts, in contrast to 2014, for Ukraine, armed aggression is no longer the main danger and threat to national security, but corruption and bribery. In particular, Professor O. Radchenko emphasizes this [24]. It is no coincidence that in the Transparency International Corruption Promotion Index published in 2019, Ukraine ranked 126th, losing two points in the year, returning to the level of 2017. All neighboring countries, except the Russian Federation, have significantly higher scores and fight corruption more effectively [23]. In the socioeconomic sphere, the main focus of national security measures is to ensure energy and economic sovereignty of the state, positive parity of foreign trade balance, decent standard and quality of life, compliance of wages and pensions with utility costs, and the consumer basket in general. Among the most important activities of national security actors here is fight against economic corruption and “shadowing of the economy.” Doctor of Economics A. Balanda says that it leads to deinstitutionalization of the state (the country creates an artificial shortage of legal opportunities, then legal rights citizens are converted into bribes, and the right becomes a commodity that is monopolized by representatives of the corrupt bureaucracy). In this case, the most real threat to national security begins to be the state (public administration) [11]. Measures to preserve and develop language, ethno-national culture, art, and cinema in all their diversity, to strengthen national values and mental and cultural

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

37

unity of the people, and to create socialization and education system of youth according to certain national idea or national system of social values become very important in spiritual and cultural sphere. Ethno-national confessional spheres are important for multinational states, because in the modern world there is an increase in the processes of national self-identification aggravation [25]. On its waves, nationalist-fundamentalist movements are appeared and strengthened. It creates foundations for aggravation of interethnic and interfaith confrontation. According to the world practice, such conflicts can lead to armed conflicts that have lasted for decades (Nagirnii-Karabakh) and even disintegration of individual countries as happened with the former Iugoslavia. Generally, the importance of spiritual and cultural sphere for the national security of country is that “any security strategy is developed on the basis of national interests and values”. System of national interests has common universal character on the one hand. On the other hand, there is unique set of elements for particular state [11]. Legal and regulatory sphere is designed to form legislative simplification of the state favorable for full development of human potential and unfavorable for corruption and destructive and deviant actions of any members of society, their groups, parties, and more. L. Bobrytsky says that significant results in ensuring national security in the legal and regulatory sphere (in particular seven detections of corruption offenses) can be achieved only with close cooperation of law enforcement agencies with public authorities and civil society institutions through comprehensive implementation of appropriate anti-corruption measures. Their effectiveness should be ensured by appropriate mechanisms of responsibility and control and clear coordination by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine [10]. Mankind’s transition to the age of the information society raises issue of national security in information, communication, and scientific and technological spheres. Their fight against industrial espionage and data theft, databases, banking and economic confidential information, and classified information about plans of government management is increasingly an important factor in national security [26]. It brings information security and protection of information sovereignty of the state to forefront as a relatively independent industry. At the same time, an attempt to reduce such approaches into a single formulation was made by O. Kyrychenko and O. Shikova. They propose to consider concept of information security in its broad sense, which includes “legislative formation of state information policy; creation of opportunities to achieve information sufficiency for decision-making by public authorities, citizens and associations of citizens, and other legal entities in Ukraine in accordance with legislative; guaranteeing freedom of information activities and right of access to information in the national information space of Ukraine; comprehensive development of the information structure; support of national information resources of Ukraine taking into account achievements of science, technology, and peculiarities of spiritual and cultural life of people; creation and implementation of secure information technologies; and protection of property rights of all participants in information activities in the national space of Ukraine” [27].

38

Y. Chmyr et al.

In our opinion, the most successful formulation is proposed by L. Ievdotchenko. In the context of public administration, information security is considered by him “as an independent component of national security, determined by the following factors: a) state desire to realize and protect its own national interests, which in the globalization of global information processes not only develop and strengthen the national information potential, but also protect it from wide range of existing and potential information threats; national interests in the information sphere, the implementation of unified state and regional policy to ensure information security of Ukraine; creation of an effective system for combating information threats” [28]. Military sphere and the state’s ability to repel any external and internal threats were dominant in ensuring national and state security in the twentieth century. Today, in global scale, it is already one of the many areas for many countries, but not for those where which armed conflicts are taking place. Russia’s open armed aggression forces lead to shifting focus of national and state security issues to military sphere. Our country strengthens armed forces and increases militaryindustrial potential. We have made significant progress in this area: in 5 years of armed conflict, Ukraine has formed one of the best armies in Europe, developed defense industry, stopped the enemy, and stabilized the front line. At the same time, the fundamental task of returning the occupied territories and fully restoring the state system throughout Ukraine is not resolved. This means that we need to strengthen state policy of national security and to look for new mechanisms and tools to defend national sovereignty. In this regard, Z. Koval notes that “supporting components of the state and national security require the introduction of new approaches in conditions of undeclared hybrid war. Among them the most relevant is comprehensive process of state and national stability. The EU already applies in practice approach where the state of national security is measured by such a new category as “national resilience” [29]. The last in our systematization, but not the last in the list of real threats to national security of the beginning of the third millennium, is the ecological sphere and the subsystem of ecological safety. Climate and environmental threats reached planetary proportions, including ozone holes in the atmosphere; rapid destruction of forests; deteriorating quality and shortage of drinking water; depletion of minerals, especially hydrocarbons; reducing number of flora and fauna; pollution of the atmosphere and seas by harmful emissions and debris; and climate fluctuations causing typhoons, tornadoes, droughts, floods, etc. [30–33]. It poses a growing threat to the existence of mankind. For Ukraine, the situation is significantly aggravated by the fact that in the zone of armed conflict in the Donbass, there are numerous long-closed mines. The absence of proper technical administration and maintenance can lead to environmental catastrophe in the region. It is no coincidence that the National Security and Defense Council has already addressed problems of the ecological sphere in the context of Ukraine’s national security. Of course the proposed systematization is the author’s view of the essence and structure of the national and state security system. It cannot claim to be exhaustive. There may be other options for structuring system of national security. For example, L. Radovetskaia offered own approach for structuring:

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

39

– By the territorial boundaries of state security: international activities, national activity, local activity. – By the spheres of public (state) life: ensuring security of the state in economic, political, military, and other spheres. – By the objects of state security: sovereignty, territory, national currency, independence of state power, etc. – By the main areas of the state and non-state activities related to state security: activities that are basis for safe existence of the state (positive aspect) and activities to prevent and overcome threats (dangers) to state security (negative aspect). – By the forms of state security: direct creation of conditions for the safe existence of the state in various spheres of public life, management of direct safe existence of the state, regulation of the direct safe existence of the state and its management, etc. – By the subjects of state security: state activity and non-state activity, which in turn can be divided into the activity of state bodies (general, special, and exclusive competence), activity of state enterprises and institutions or activity of various civil society institutions, and activity of various civil society institution societies: territorial communities and their bodies, political parties, foundations, public associations, social networks, independent media, etc. [18].

3 Conclusions Thus, analysis showed that the essence of national security of Ukraine is freedom of life and democratic social and state self-development of the people of Ukraine. Its protection is the essence of activities to ensure national security of Ukraine. We consider it possible to summarize conducted research by authoritative conclusion of Academician V. Gorbulin, according to which today’s “domestic theory of national security is in the stage of active formation and dynamic development, due to rapid development of globalization, intensive growth of threats in many spheres of life, society and state. The system of national security is in the stage of deep transformation and acquires multilevel, multi-purpose direction on the one hand and requires development of new approaches and methods to ensure effective forecasting, forecasting, planning, development scenarios on the other hand” [34]. Therefore, urgent scientific task is to conduct research and deepen scientific provisions of theory and practice of public administration in the field of national and state security.

40

Y. Chmyr et al.

References 1. Zahurska-Antoniuk, V. F. (2020). National security and public administration. Public Administration: Improvement and Development, 5. https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2156-2020.5.57 2. Moshnin, A. A. (2020). Corruption in the system of public power of Ukraine as a factor threatening state security. Mizhrehionalna akademiia upravlinnia personalom. 3. Academic explanatory dictionary of the Ukrainian language. http://sum.in.ua/s/bezpeka 4. Pronoza, I. I. (2017). Information security of the state: The essence and basic definitions. Gileya: Scientific Bulletin, 127, 348. 5. Khramov, V. O. (2004). Security. Political science encyclopedic dictionary. Heneza. 6. Explanatory dictionary of psychology. https://psychology_dictionary.academic.ru/1169 7. Baldwin, D. (2007). The concept of security. Review of International Studies, 23(1), 3–26. 8. Abramov, V. I. (2012). Danger. NADU. 9. The Law of Ukraine “On National Security of Ukraine”. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/2469-19 10. Bobrytskyi, L. (2009). Council of National Security and Defense of Ukraine as a body of coordination and control in the fight against corruption. Fight Against Organized Crime and Corruption (Theory and Practice)., 20, 96. 11. Balanda, A. L. (2008). Social determinants of national security of Ukraine: Theory, methodology, practice. Institute Of Demography and Social research NAS of Ukraine. 12. Volynets, V. (2013). The function of guaranteeing national security in the context of state and legal development of modern Ukraine. Legal Ukraine., 1, 10. 13. Nitsenko, V., Kotenko, S., Hanzhurenko, I., Mardani, A., Stashkevych, I., & Karakai, M. (2020). Mathematical modeling of multimodal transportation risks. In R. Ghazali, N. Nawi, M. Deris, & J. Abawajy (Eds.), Recent advances on soft computing and data mining. SCDM 2020. Advances in intelligent systems and computing (Vol. 978, pp. 439–447). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36056-6_41 14. Korzh, I. (2012). Principles of governance in the field of state security of Ukraine. Economics and Law, 20, 45. 15. Batrachenko, O. (2015). Significance and functions of public administration in the field of public safety and order. Prykarpattya Legal Bulletin., 3(9), 129–130. 16. Sitsinskyi, N. (2015). Strategic priorities of public administration to ensure national security of Ukraine in the foreign policy sphere in the context of military aggression. Investments: Practice and Experience, 19, 96. 17. Vlasiuk, O. S. (2016). National Security of Ukraine: The evolution of domestic policy: Selected scientific papers. 18. Radovetska, L. (2015). Theoretical construction of state security. Bulletin of Zaporizhia National University., 1(11), 40–42. 19. Hlazov, O. National security: Essence, features, concepts and geopolitical factors. Scientific works of the Petro Mohyla Black Sea State University. Political Science Series, 143(155), 44. 20. O’Neil, P. (2010). Essentials of comparative politics. W.W. Norton & Company. 21. Huhnin, E. (2020). Corruption, illegitimacy and external influence: Political factors of state instability. Faces, 23(8), 51–56. 22. Kvasha, O. O. (2020). Political will is a necessary condition for effective counteraction to corruption. Constitutional State, 31, 360. 23. Nyniuk, M., & Nyniuk, I. (2015). Corruption as a threat to national security and social order of Ukraine. Historical and Legal Journal, 2, 71. 24. Radchenko, O. V., & Zadorozhnyi, S. A. (2018). Political corruption as a threat to national security. Public administration in the context of institutional change: A monograph. IPKDSZU. 25. Shytyk, L., & Akimova, A. (2020). Ways of transferring the internal speech of characters: Psycholinguistic projection. Psycholinguistics., 27(2), 361–384. https://doi.org/10.31470/23091797-2020-27-2-361-384 26. Hubanova, T., Shchokin, R., Hubanov, O., Antonov, V., Slobodianiuk, P., & Podolyaka, S. (2021). Information technologies in improving crime prevention mechanisms in the border

2

Societal Content and Main Determinants of “National Security”. . .

41

regions of southern Ukraine. Journal of Information Technology Management., 13, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.22059/JITM.2021.80738 27. Kyrychenko, O. A., & Shykova, O. M. (2011). Theoretical foundations of information security of the state. Economy and State, 3, 27. 28. Yevdochenko, L. O. (2011). Improving of state information security system of Ukraine in the context of globalization. Lvivskyi rehionalnyi instytut derzhavnoho upravlinnia Natsionalnoi akademii derzhavnoho upravlinnia pry Prezydentovi Ukrainy. 29. Koval, Z. (2021). System of state stability and national security: Information and psychological aspect. Current Issues of Public Administration., 1, 106. 30. Koval, V., Mikhno, I., Udovychenko, I., Gordiichuk, Y., & Kalina, I. (2021). Sustainable natural resource management to ensure strategic environmental development. TEM Journal, 10(3), 1022–1030. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM103-03 31. Yatsyshyn, T., Mykhailiuk, Y., Liakh, M., Mykhailiuk, I., Savyk, V., & Dobrovolsky, I. (2018). Establishing the dependence of pollutant concentration on operational conditions at facilities of an oil and gas complex. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2(10–92), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126624 32. Latysheva, O., Rovenska, V., Smyrnova, I., Nitsenko, V., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Management of the sustainable development of machine-building enterprises: A sustainable development space approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management., 34(1), 328–342. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-12-2019-0419 33. Biletskyi, V., et al. (2017). Research into the process of preparation of Ukrainian coal by the oil aggregation method. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(5–8), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2017.104123 34. Horbulin, V. P. National Security of Ukraine: Stages of formation and problems of scientific and information-analytical support. http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/soc_gum/nac_bez/ texts/2008-01/gorbulin.pdf

Chapter 3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the State in Modern Conditions Fedir Venislavskyi , Oleksandr Bondarenko Andrey Moshnin , and Vasyl Shoiko

, Yaroslav Chmyr

,

Abstract The isolation and systematization of the main threats to state security in modern conditions is undertaken. This allows the determination of the forms, methods and directions of activity of management system subjects in the field of state security. The work emphasizes that all three types of threats (external, hybrid and internal) affect certain spheres of society (economic, energy, environmental, political, social, ethno-national, ethno-confessional, etc.). These are military, territorial, state-political, regional-sectoral and generally humanitarian in nature. The most topical threats were identified and characterized, including: the ineffectiveness of international security systems; the territorial claims of neighbors; external management; information wars; armed aggression of the Russian Federation; terrorism; poverty; corruption; separatism; energy dependence; the oligarchization of the state; the shadow economy; political crises; organized crime; excessive social differentiation; civilizational division of society; and social conflicts. Keywords Threats · Political crisis · Types of threats · National security · State · Ukraine

F. Venislavskyi Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Bondarenko National Academy of the National Guard of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine Y. Chmyr (*) Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Moshnin V.I. Vernadsky Taurida National University, Kyiv, Ukraine V. Shoiko Ukrainian Research Institute of Civil Protection, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_3

43

44

F. Venislavskyi et al.

1 The Problem Statement The need for the requirement of society security has existed since its very formation. Various threats have been faced by humanity throughout its existence. Z. Koval notes that “potential or obvious threats and dangers in life of states, society and people, unfortunately, are quite permanent. They can decrease in their potential, and may be restored, so the nation state should constantly exercise its protective function, i.e. act constantly and effectively” [1]. Therefore, any study of the formation and functioning of an effective system of national security of the modern state requires a synthetic approach and the application of general scientific and specialized methodological tools, the most common political and managerial methods and mechanisms of public authorities aimed at maintaining the highest level of personal, group, social state and, in general, the national security of the state. Essentially, public administration in the field of national security is involved in organizing political and administrative activities designed to perform security function of the state as a whole, and the goals and objectives that specify this function. Such activities are carried out in accordance with legal regulations and the approved state Strategy (Doctrine) and state policy in the field of national security in clearly defined administrative and organizational manner and in accordance with powers and competencies of public authorities. The main purpose of this activity should be to aim to ensure the effective functioning of subjects of the national security system and the creation of general favorable conditions for the safe functioning of society and its further development by neutralizing existing and preventing potential threats. Therefore, the urgent scientific task is to identify and systematize the main threats to state security in modern conditions. This will determine the forms, methods and activities of subjects of government in the field of state security. This means “a set of public authorities, public relations, means, methods and measures to ensure protection of the main features of the state and minimize negative effects on them by internal and external threats” [2].

2 Main Material Presentation O. Berezovska-Chmil defines the priority of the state’s activities as to ensure national security. It is the prevention and the minimization of external and internal threats. Careless, unpredictable, risky and irresponsible attitude to external and internal threats to the country, a lack of timely action to prevent their manifestation cause unstable and dangerous situations with significant negative consequences and a loss of human, economic, military, innovative, scientific and technical, information and other potentials of the state. In any sphere of security, the entire global community works to prevent implementation and minimize the risks, dangers, challenges of different directions [3]. It should be noted that security threats, in one way or

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

45

Fig. 3.1 System of threats to the national security

another, arose from criminal or other activities that threaten the national interests carried out by various organizations, social groups, corporate associations and other groups which are focused on meeting certain interests directed (in whole or in part) against the interests of individuals, societies and states [4]. Threats to national security traditionally consist of two systemic arrays according to its source: external threats and internal threats. In our opinion, in the modern era it is quite legitimate to talk about the third array: “hybrid” threats. These occur when certain internal threats are actually inspired, financed and “driven” from outside (by other states, international organizations, transnational corporations, etc.) conducting subversive activities in relation to the existing state system, with the aim of obtaining certain political, economic benefits for these non-state actors. In this sense, the system of threats to national security can be structurally represented as follows (see Fig. 3.1). In our opinion, all three types of threats (external, hybrid and internal) either affect certain spheres of society (economic, energy, environmental, political, social, ethno-national, ethno-confessional, etc.) or have military, territorial, political, regional/sectoral or general humanitarian aspects. Thus, military threats can be both external and hybrid in nature. One clear example of this threat can be seen with regard to Russian military aggression in the Donbass. At the same time, it is a threat to the territorial integrity of the state. Threats, hybrid and internal (in the first case, for example, certain territorial claims to Ukraine by Romania, in the second— is financing and supporting separatist movements, for example, in Transcarpathia, in the third—self-organization of ethno-social groups—whose goal is to separate from Ukraine and create an independent state, as was (and still is), for example, the main goal of the Crimean Tatar Majlis). Threats to the energy sector have been mostly external in character due to pressures from energy-exporting countries, principally the Russian Federation. External threats to the economic sphere are manifested in the form of sanctions or economic war (for example, between the United States and China; Ukraine had problems with Russia’s refusal to buy Ukrainian dairy products). The main internal threat in the economic sphere is corruption, which distorts the economic space of the

46

F. Venislavskyi et al.

state and creates unfavorable conditions for economic entities. This leads to disproportionate enrichment of a limited group of enterprises connected with corrupt networks and an inability to develop small and medium-sized businesses. A. Balanda notes in this regard that the “shadow” economy is the main resource factor of corruption. On the other hand, corruption is a decisive sociopolitical factor in the shadowing of Ukraine’s economy [5]. Undoubtedly, at the same time corruption is also a political threat. It de facto destroys the entire system of public administration, reorienting it from defending human rights and freedoms to serving oligarchic and financial clans. According to A. Artishevskii, “corruption is a total destruction of the principles of statehood, state and society in general” [6]. Moreover, corruption can be both external and internal in nature, when government officials take bribes for the right decision, either from transnational corporations and groups or from domestic oligarchs and financialindustrial groups. Political threats are also manifested in the efforts of oligarchic circles to concentrate power in their hands, promoting their own “pocket” parties in parliament or funding parties, their leaders, majority candidates and demanding that they vote in the interests of these oligarchs. Corruption causes a deformation of power, which is reborn as kleptocracy, lutocracy or plutocracy. Kleptocracy, according to L. Heveling, can be defined as the use of power to rapidly self-enrich and strengthen key positions in society (typical for the presidency of Viktor Yanukovych); lutocracy, by contrast, is the use of “negative economy” as a means of creating convenient form of government (typical of the period of Prime Minister P. Lazarenko); and plutocracy is a complete synthesis of wealth and power (typical of the presidency of Poroshenko) [6]. Corruption contributes to the spread of poverty, the growth in the socio-economic differentiation of society, which is already one of the key humanitarian threats to our country [7, 8]. M. Baiuk states that today threats to state security in the humanitarian sphere of the state are spreading for both internal reasons and external factors. This is manifested in the lack of attention of government agencies to the development of culture, science, education, historical memory, residual principle of financing these areas [9], since the humanitarian sphere today is becoming a system-forming and strategically important factor in the development of the state. Ensuring national security, development and implementation of state security policy in the humanitarian sphere requires constant adherence to certain democratic principles, paying attention to the level of trust or alienation of population in power, the level of development of political and legal consciousness, national and demographic factors of social development, and the present-day international situation [9]. Ethno-national and ethno-confessional processes can also attain the level of external, internal and hybrid threats (for example, influence of the Ukraininan Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate on Ukrainian believers and its in the process of granting Tomos to Ukraine and actual failure of this potentially unifying phenomenon). At the same time, ethno-national movements may take the form of separatism (the activities of political organization of Subcarpathian Ruthenians, for example [10]) or open disapproval of the official state policy of Ukraine, for example in the language issue. Let us recall the cancelation of the language law of

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

47

Kivalov-Kolesnikov by the Verkhovna Rada. This became the impetus and formal reason for events in the Crimea and Donbass, which ended with annexation of part of the territory of our state by Russia). Environmental threats can be either external (problem with destruction of the ozone layer of the planet’s atmosphere, natural disasters, floods, typhoons, etc.) or internal (the Chernobyl accident, pollution of rivers by industrial enterprises, etc.) [11–15]. Threats of a regional or sectoral nature are characterized by disparities in regional or sectoral development, which can be both economic and demographic (for example, residents of Donetsk region accounted for more than 10% of the population of Ukraine, and the combined economic potential of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk and Kharkiv regions exceeded the potential of 20 less developed regions). This situation allows regional elites to expand central government, and to impose their “rules of the game” on other regions. It leads to socio-political aggravations, political crises and imbalances and stability of the public administration system in the country. Some Ukrainian experts, in particular such well-known doctors of sciences as G. Sytnyk, D. Nelipa, M. Orel, L. Strelbytska and M. Strelbytsky, state that the real threats to the Ukrainian state include not only hybrid war, loss of territories, political and power corruption, but also external interference. This is manifested, for example, in the existence of supervisory boards of key institutions and areas (National Bank, Ukroboronprom, Naftogaz, Ukrzaliznytsia, etc.). There the decisive role or direct leadership is played by foreign nationals, such as the US and the EU. Thus, scientists from Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv indicate “involvement in political processes and formation of public administration non-state (non-national) and global elements” as one of the reasons for the actual incapacity of the system of public authorities in Ukraine. This poses a real threat to state sovereignty and thus national security, especially in conditions of institutional weakness of the specified system [16]. L. Strelbytska and M. Strelbytsky say that “today threats to the national security of the young state shifted mainly from internal to external” [17]. In our opinion, the systemic threats listed above for modern Ukraine can be systematized and specified. We have highlighted the most important (see Fig. 3.2). Next, let’s describe key threats to Ukraine’s national security which were not described in detail above. Inefficiency of international security systems, for example, the UN Security Council is a key factor that contributed to the possibility of military aggression by the Russian Federation in the Donbass and the annexation of Crimea. The inability of the Potsdam international security system to carry out its functional tasks is now acknowledged by many scholars and politicians. Various structures of the United Nations (Security Council, OSCE) or even NATO are currently unable to ensure peace not only in the world but also in Europe. A well-known expert in the field of national security, G. Sytnik rightly noted that the destruction of the bipolar system transformed the problem of making any decisions in the field of national security from a two-dimensional to a multidimensional task. One of the consequences of geopolitical and geoeconomic

48

F. Venislavskyi et al.

Fig. 3.2 Key threats to Ukraine’s national security

transformations in recent decades was the significant complication of finding optimal solutions to ensure international stability and national security [18]. We see that the condemnation by the international community of the aggressive actions of the Russian Federation and the imposed sanctions have not yielded the expected results. The old security system is also less effective in dealing with manifestations of terrorism. Today, even the strongest countries in the world, including the United States, are unable to effectively counteract. Obviously, the establishment of a new global conference is essential. This should both establish and consolidate a new world order and outline new rules of international security, capable of reducing threats to the world and securing the national security of all countries. The territorial claims of our neighbors for a long time in the recent history of Ukraine has not bothered our independence. They were expressed mostly by marginalized layers or influential radical nationalist organizations in Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Russia. However, a number of deep political crises in Ukraine led to obvious weaknesses of power in our country. This has been exacerbated by the global instability outlined above as well as the inability of international institutions to preserve peace and stability. This led to Russia’s open annexation of part of Ukraine. After that, politicians and nationalist organizations on the western border began to express similar ideas. Yes, from time to time there are territorial claims against us by Romania. Recently, the UN International Court of Justice made a ruling against Ukraine regarding the water area around the island of Zmiiny. This immediately aroused the Romanian authorities’ desire to redraw the fairway near the Maican island.

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

49

The Polish public movement Restitution of Kresy collects legal documents on pre-war property of Poles in Lviv and other territories of Western Ukraine. If Ukraine proceeds to joined the EU, this property will be given to Poles without any compensation being paid to modern Ukrainian owners. According to a recent famous Polish law banning “propaganda of Bandera’s ideology” Ukrainian Galicia was officially called “Lesser Poland”. Tensions between Hungary and Ukraine have also been apparent. These are caused, in particular, by the adoption of the latest version of the Ukrainian Law on Language, as a result of which Hungary began to distribute its passports to Ukrainian Transcarpathians. The Ukrainian side regarded this as posing a territorial claim [19]. In addition, Hungarian authorities officially stated that they will attempt to slow down any progress of Ukraine becoming a member of the EU. Information wars are one of the most striking examples of hybrid threats to Ukraine’s national/state security. Today, it is obvious that annexation of Crimea and Russia’s armed aggression in Donbass were preceded by many years of purposeful information warfare. This included broadcasting on Ukrainian territory on television channels and in radio programs. This inspired separatist citizens, thereby causing socio-political problems and crises in Ukraine. Information wars raised the acute issue of the cybersecurity of the state and, more broadly, the information security of the state as the state’s ability to control and regulate information flows outside state in order to comply with Ukrainian laws, rights and freedoms, guarantee national security [20]. O. Kosogov notes that “sources of threats and challenges to Ukraine’s national security in the information sphere may be international criminal groups of hackers, certain criminals trained in the field of IT, foreign government agencies, terrorist groups, non-governmental organizations, political structures and informal associations, extremist, transnational corporations and financial-industrial groups, etc. The threat of using cyber means against Ukraine’s interests from within the state and abroad is growing. Also there is a threat of Ukraine’s informational infrastructure use for attacks on third-party information resources. It can be considered by leading countries as actions by the state with corresponding consequences for political, economic, legal, and in the long run, not excluded military actions” [21]. The civilizational division of Ukrainian society is the social structure which feeds separatism and directs all hybrid forms of its aggressive policy, including the largescale information war of the Putin regime. Yes, our politicians and state leaders have consistently argued that “Ukraine is united”, but this message is a goal rather than the reality on the ground. In fact, Samuel Huntington, an American political scientist and long-time adviser to US presidents, was one of the first to speak about the civilizational division of Ukrainian society. In his well-known work Clash of Civilizations in 1996, he substantiated three possible scenarios for the further civilizational development of Ukraine: 1. preservation of the current state and balancing between the two civilizations under the influence of Russia and in close contact with it;

50

F. Venislavskyi et al.

2. division of the country into two parts, one of which will go to Europe, and other of which will lean toward Russia; 3. war with Russia (as the least likely option, in which violence will be less than in a similar disintegration of Yugoslavia, but more than in the disintegration of Czechoslovakia) [22]. However, the division of civilization does not look like an “incurable disease”, as Ukraine shares common values across all regions. This was confirmed by the 2019 presidential election, when, for the first time in the history of our country, the winner won the majority in almost all regions except Lviv. The existence of a system of social values capable of uniting the whole of Ukraine was defended in 2010 by Professor O. Radchenko [23]. G. Sitnik demonstrates an important factor in overcoming ideological divisions. He emphasizes the need to form a new institutional and civilizational paradigm of national security and outlining ways to find an adequate response to the number of modern challenges to national security, including: how to correlate geopolitical changes with the smallest losses for the state security (first of all, how to preserve state sovereignty, which was seen as a prerequisite and tool for protection and promotion of these interests); and how to maintain achieved level of economic development and welfare of the population (which was a prerequisite for ensuring internal political stability). These problems are becoming increasingly difficult to solve even for the world’s leading countries, with the increasing role of resource, military-political, environmental and other constraints, as well as socio-cultural, political and economic interdependence between nations and groups belonging to different civilizations [18]. Doctors of Public Administration V. Pasichnyk and O. Parkhomenko-Kutsevil advanced a thesis on overcoming the civilizational division of Ukraine through the formation of a national idea. It should be “expressed in a strategic goal that will direct the actions of Ukrainian citizens to prevent corruption, civic awareness, responsibility for their actions and inaction. Through the formation of a national idea it is possible to solve the issue not only of preventing corruption in Ukraine, but also to establish civil control over public authorities and local governments” [24]. Separatism is not only one of the key threats to the national security of our state, but also became the cause of Russian aggression in the Donbas. However, separatism in Ukraine is not confined to the eastern regions. Some manifestations of it are observed, for example, in Bukovyna and Zakarpattia. However, the Deputy Director of the Ukrainian Institute for Extremism Studies B. Petrenko notes the statements of right-wing Hungarian politicians to grant the Transcarpathian region the status of autonomy. He claims that there is a problem of fueling separatist sentiments among the Hungarian minority and using this factor to influence Ukraine. A. Karpets analyzes the social components of separatism in Ukraine and points to the existence of class conflict that could have been expected a long time ago due to the catastrophic property stratification. According to this analysis, this social and class conflict is objectively and deliberately hidden by mental-territorial and national-linguistic contradictions, as well as by the Kremlin’s imperialist aggression. A large social stratum of the very poor has emerged in Ukraine since the collapse of

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

51

the Soviet Union. This threatens the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is obvious that the problem is not only and not so much in Moscow’s propaganda as in public relations. This gives rise to a potential mass “fifth column” of the neighboring imperialist state. This is the fault of the actions of the oligarchs and the government who have caused the rise in the current socio-economic system [25]. Oligarchization of the state is defined by many researchers as the main factor in most of the economic, political and social problems of our state. Excessive concentration of economic, political and state power in the hands of several oligarchs leads to: – a monopolization of the economy, where development of medium-sized and small business is impossible; – total corruption of public authorities, which neglects the national interests, rights and freedoms of citizens and concentrates on serving the interests of oligarchic circles; – a collapse in the social functions of the state, growth of poverty and critical social stratification of society, when most national wealth is concentrated in the hands of a small handful of oligarchs; – “privatization” of the national media space and concentration of leading TV channels, print and online media publications by oligarchs; this effectively destroys freedom of speech in the country and the entire media space becomes an instrument of manipulation of public consciousness in the interests of oligarchic circles. All of this leads to social and political instability and an increase in the number of protests. This has resulted in social and political crises, with two revolutions in the past 15 years (or three, according to Eugene Golovakha, who called the election campaign for President of Ukraine in 2019 an “electoral Maidan” [26]). This has seriously undermined the national security of our state. Unfortunately, the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi creates only the appearance of fight against the oligarchs. Sanctions applied by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (NSDC) (the President’s advisory body) are openly selective in the extrajudicial massacre of opposition. The widely publicized so-called “anti-oligarchic law” introduced by Zelenskyi in parliament as anti-oligarchic allows the NSDC to “appoint” individual citizens as “oligarchs” at its own discretion. In fact, it does little to affect the real interests of oligarchs because it does not impose proportional tax encumbrance bills. Therefore, this will be transferred onto the shoulders of consumers. Both pro-Russian and pro-Western opposition forces oppose this approach. In particular, Oleh Tiahnybok (the head of the Svoboda party) claims that “the main changes introduced by this bill do not concern oligarchs at all. The main changes concern wide range of ordinary Ukrainians!” [27]. Political crises and social conflicts pose a serious threat to the national security in political, economic, cultural and other spheres of life of Ukrainian society on a scale that is close to critical. This undermines the stability of the state power system, leading to the formation of an atmosphere of total distrust on the part of citizens in the institutions of public power and state institutions and bodies, along with the

52

F. Venislavskyi et al.

growth of corruption. A. Petrov states that the impact of corruption on the administrative and social environment of civil servants, the transformation of their moral norms and values, and the corporate culture of the civil service today is very significant [28]. Therefore, we observe a very significant weakening of the state both domestically and internationally, and an inability to defend the national interests of society and maintain its own sovereignty. Migration (the mass departure of working-age Ukrainians abroad to work) is one of the most worrying factors taking into account the outflow of “brains” and “working hands” who improve the economy of other countries, and distort the demographic balance of workers and retirees in their own country. Therefore, the state becomes unable to perform its social security function and provide its citizens with a decent pension. In his inaugural speech, President Volodymyr Zelenskyi stressed the need for workers to come home [29]. The tax revenues from the solidarity system are unable to fill the state pension fund in conditions when the number of employees is actually equal to the number of socially vulnerable citizens. This will inevitably lead to an increase in poverty and the social differentiation of our society. Poverty and excessive social differentiation are serious factors threatening the national security of Ukraine where today there is one of the world’s largest gaps between the richest and poorest sections of the population. At the beginning of 2019, Ukraine was officially recognized as the poorest country in Europe [30]. In terms of poverty, we are already giving way to seemingly eternal outsiders: Romania, Albania and even Moldova with its troubled Transnistria. A. Balanda states that “interdependent impact of poverty and national security is based on the fact that poverty poses a number of specific threats as a result of disharmony of the economic system. Thus, criminalization of the economy and society leads to realisation of criminal interests which do not have anything common with interests of legally acting subject. As a result, all subjects suffer besides corrupted officials. Stratification, social differentiation, and social instability are obvious threats to proper functioning of a country’s economy—in the face of total poverty, no economic agent can feel protected. In turn, state of insecurity of the socio-economic system exacerbates poverty of the population and produces factors that exacerbate poverty” [5]. E. Vdovychenko puts forward a controversial thesis that protests and offenses are caused only by poverty. In our opinion, it is a crude and untrue simplification. First, poverty is a relative, largely subjective concept because it is determined not so much by the level of well-being as by the subjective assessment by its individuals. What one sees as poverty, the other considers wealth or luxury. Therefore, the essence of poverty concept is not easy to define [31]. However, it remains a fact that poverty is exacerbated by corruption and this significantly limits the possibilities for democratic state-building, because the more corrupt a country is, the slower it is likely to develop economically [32]. Corruption and organized crime are closely related phenomena, especially in Ukrainian conditions where organized crime and the state apparatus merged into corrupt networks. This phenomenon itself has “pandemic and kleptocratic character”

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

53

[33]. Among the main slogans of the Revolution of Dignity was the cleansing of power from total corruption. Immediately afterwards, the Euromaidan idea of lustration arose. It was implemented in special law. However, the implementation of this law only led to the fact that lustration only cleared the way “for a new generation of insatiable corrupt officials” [17]. A. Sakhan notes that the business and political elite of Ukraine perceives the state as a large corporation, dealing mainly with the distribution of state power levers and the redistribution of budget segments. At the same time, merging of the state apparatus with business and commercial structures leads to formation of their business relations outside the legal field and penetration into the power and management structures of organized crime. This increases the dependence of legislative and administrative activities on the narrow group and corporate interests of certain criminal circles. Profits from illegal business, obtained mainly through tax evasion, often under guise and assistance of corrupt tax officials or by creating numerous satellite firms, one-day firms to “scroll” huge money transactions are used by criminal groups to pay for the services of government officials. The destructive effects of corruption lead to a decline in the prestige and authority of power at all levels, the deformation of the moral foundations of society, reduced respect for the law, a loss of social solidarity, the spread of political apathy and cynicism, legal nihilism, and rising crime. The merging of the corrupt part of civil servants with shadow criminal circles is a direct threat to the national security and constitutional order. It leads to a decrease in the capacity of civil society institutions and human rights violations, and also discredits the state at the international level [34]. We identify threats to the global information space in a separate block. It has no national or state borders, being virtually devoid of state control and influence. Attempts at censorship are offset by the instantaneous dissemination of information and the presence of hundreds of bypass channels, including hiding the IP address of the consumer’s computer. The global information space has proved to be an attractive infrastructural environment for all kinds of fraudsters, criminals and ill-intentioned individuals, leading to mass human rights violations, information theft, industrial and other espionage, hacking attacks on official websites of government and financial institutions, the theft and sale of information about politicians and ordinary people, and the spread of illegal immoral and malicious content that threatens the mental health of individuals, especially young people [35–37]. I. Sopilko notes in this regard that “information progress became an instrument of human enslavement by information technology. In fact, in information society there is absorption of personality by information technology where people lose spiritual freedom and personality in general for material benefits. Moreover, person can become an appendage to information technology and information resources with such accelerated information progress. Progressive increase in information consumption leads to loss of human freedom, loss of purpose and subordination of their goals to the preservation and increase of information resources” [38]. Processes of globalization and the formation of a global information society raises to a fundamentally new level the issue of information security for people, communities, the state and society at both national and global levels [39]. L. Dorosh notes

54

F. Venislavskyi et al.

that “aggression of modern mass media on the consciousness of the individual in society, large number of poorly controlled contacts, invasion of environmental, demographic and other problems, preservation of remnants of totalitarian attitudes in the mass consciousness of citizens of post-Soviet societies, formation of psychological insecurity of the population became main prerequisite for susceptibility to professional pressure of stakeholders/groups, lack of effective public social institutions. All these factors threaten information and psychological security of the individual and society” [40]. There are two main classes of existing threats in the global information space: information-psychological and information-technological. The first are aimed at a person and his psychological state, value system, worldviews, etc. Today, there are a large number of different technologies for influencing public and personal consciousness, from hypnosis and neurolinguistic programming (NLP) to propaganda and viral information (“fakes” and “memes”). Their use makes it possible to disorient people’s moral and psychological states, and to challenge established views and values. These threats can be either personified (targeted at specific person) or depersonalized, mass-scale approaches. Threats of the second include possibility of damaging, distorting or destroying information on media and databases, installing spyware, installing various viruses, “worms” and “Trojans”, disabling servers, computer hardware and software, damage to government and military lines, etc. A. Golovka proposes four groups of information threats, which correspond to four specific areas: (1) value (influence on public opinion); (2) technological (impact on cyberspace); (3) legal (absence/imperfection of the legal framework governing legal relations in the information sphere); (4) socio-political (censorship, restriction of access to public information) [41]. In turn, A. Turchak speaks about the internal and external sources of threats. In his view “internal source—is lack of historical, political and social practical skills of living in state governed by the rule of law. It affects process of practical implementation of constitutional rights and freedoms within the information sphere and increases organized crime”. Insufficient coordination of work of the top state leadership, government agencies and military groups in the implementation of unified state policy of national security can also be attributed to the following sources. Here we can observe the lag of our country when compared with the more developed ones. Sources of external character include “foreign political, military, economic and intelligence structures of the information sphere; the policy of domination of certain states in the information sphere; the work of international terrorist groups; development by various structures of the concept of information wars; cultural fascination with specific countries” [42]. K. Molodetska underlines social internet services (SIS) which are extremely popular among people of all ages and professional categories, races and strata of the entire globe. However, she notes, “their positive communication characteristics can be used by attackers to distribute destructive content. Such content can be inaccurate, incomplete or biased and pose threat to information security of the state. It is known that SIS played a key role in organizing actors for operational

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

55

interaction and governance during the ‘Color Revolutions’, ‘Arab Spring’, ‘hybrid war’ in eastern Ukraine and other protests” [43]. Researchers from the Military Institute of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv claim peculiarities of information threats. They are an independent class of threats on the one hand and the implementation basis of other types of threats at the information level on the other hand. Their studies provide the following definitions of information threats: – informational influence (internal or external), which creates potential or actual (real) danger of changing direction or pace of progressive development of the state, society, individuals; – danger of harming vital interests of the individual, society, state through information impact on consciousness, information resources and the infosphere of mechanical systems; – set of factors that hinder development and use of the information environment in the interests of the individual, society and the state [44]. Summarizing these approaches, we will try to visualize the “threat tree” of the global information space, classifying various threats by target, territorial jurisdiction, sphere of influence and addressee (see Fig. 3.3). According to I. Bodnar, “[the] main information threat to national security is threat of the other party’s influence on the country’s information infrastructure, information resources, society, consciousness, subconscious, in order to impose on the state desired (for the other party) system of values, views, interests and decisions in vital spheres of public and state activity, manage their behavior and development in the desired direction for the other party. In fact, this is a threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty in vital spheres of public and state activity, implemented at the information level” [45].

3 Conclusions We can conclude that, in terms of national security, modern Ukraine is in very unfavorable global environment. It is faced by the declining effectiveness of United Nations security institutions, the actual refusal of signatories to the Budapest Memorandum to fulfill their obligations guaranteeing territorial integrity of Ukraine and using and an artificial “heating up” of existing problems in our country (poverty, collapse of the system of public power, social stratification, political crises and social protests, etc.) The Russian Federation openly set out to destroy Ukraine as an independent state, annexed Crimea, unleashed armed aggression in the Donbass and continues to use all possible forms of hybrid war against our state. All this requires the establishment of national security at the forefront of political agenda of the new Ukrainian government, the primary focus of Ukraine’s international and domestic policy on countering the aggressor, strengthening the army and

56

F. Venislavskyi et al.

By adresser

Informational wars

Legal

Internal

Program

Social and political

Valueworldview

External

Information and psychological threats

Depersonised

Network By impact shpere

By territorial jurisdiction

By target object

Internal

Informational wars

Personised

External

Information and technological threats

THREATS OF THE GLOBAL INFORMATION SPACE

Fig. 3.3 Tree of threats to the global information space

law enforcement agencies, developing new the National Security Doctrine and implementing its provisions in the daily activities of all involved state institutions.

References 1. Koval, Z. (2021). The system of state stability and national security: Information and psychological aspect. Current Issues of Public Administration, 1, 107. 2. Korzh, I. (2012). Principles of governance in the field of state security of Ukraine. Economics and Law, 20, 176–177. 3. Berezovska-Chmil, O. B. (2021). Theoretical foundations of national security research. Creative Space, 2, 147. 4. Dzoban, O. P., & Zhdanenko, S. B. (2020). Human rights and national security: Philosophical and legal aspects of the relationship. Information and Law, 2, 18. 5. Balanda, A. (2008). Social determinants of national security of Ukraine: Theory, methodology, practice. Instytut demohrafii ta sotsialnykh doslidzhen NAN Ukrainy. 6. Artishevskyi, A. (2018). Corruption in public authorities as a factor in the delegitimization of political power. Gileya: Scientific Bulletin, 130, 408. 7. Hubanova, T., Shchokin, R., Hubanov, O., Antonov, V., Slobodianiuk, P., & Podolyaka, S. (2021). Information technologies in improving crime prevention mechanisms in the border

3

The Systematization of Main Threats to the National Security of the. . .

57

regions of southern Ukraine. Journal of Information Technology Management, 13, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.22059/JITM.2021.80738 8. Ostapenko, R., Herasymenko, Y., Nitsenko, V., Koliadenko, S., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Analysis of production and sales of organic products in Ukrainian agricultural enterprises. Sustainability., 12(8), 3416. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083416 9. Baiuk, M. (2018). Humanitarian component of state security policy: Concepts, principles. University Notes, 65, 190. 10. Vlasiuk, O. (2016). National Security of Ukraine: The evolution of domestic policy problems. Selected Scientific Papers. NISD. 11. Koval, V., Mikhno, I., Udovychenko, I., Gordiichuk, Y., & Kalina, I. (2021). Sustainable natural resource management to ensure strategic environmental development. TEM Journal, 10(3), 1022–1030. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM103-03 12. Biletskyi, V., et al. (2017). Research into the process of preparation of Ukrainian coal by the oil aggregation method. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(5–8), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2017.104123 13. Popov, O., et al. (2021). Effect of power plant ash and slag disposal on the environment and population health in Ukraine. Journal of Health and Pollution, 11(31), 210910. https://doi.org/ 10.5696/2156-9614-11.31.210910 14. Shvets, V. Y., Rozdobudko, E. V., & Solomina, G. V. (2013). Aggregated methodology of multicriterion economic and ecological examination of the ecologically oriented investment projects. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu., 3, 139–144. 15. Yatsyshyn, T., Mykhailiuk, Y., Liakh, M., Mykhailiuk, I., Savyk, V., & Dobrovolsky, I. (2018). Establishing the dependence of pollutant concentration on operational conditions at facilities of an oil and gas complex. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2(10–92), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126624 16. Sytnyk, H. P., Nelipa, D. V., & Orel, M. H. (2020). Political, public and public administration in the field of national security in the context of public and state policy. Scientific Journal of the Academynational Security, 1-2, 18. 17. Strelbytska, L. M., & Strelbytskyi, M. P. (2020). Methodological and organizational and legal principles of formation and functioning of the system of state management of national security of Ukraine. Information and Law, 2, 115. 18. Sytnik, H. (2017). Institutional-civilization paradigm as a basis of public administration methodology in the field of national security. Scientific Journal of the Academy of National Security., 1–2(13–14), 14. 19. Hopko: Hungary has territorial claims to Ukraine. https://prm.ua/en/vengriya-imeetterritorialnyie-pretenzii-k-ukraine-gopko/ 20. Radutnyi, O. (2016). Orientation of the content of national and information security, state and information sovereignty. Information and Law, 1(16), 87. 21. Kosohov, O. (2014). Priority areas of state policy to ensure the security of national cyberspace. Collection of Scientific Works of Kharkiv University of the Air Force, 3(40), 127. 22. Khantynhton, S. Clash of civilizations. http://loveread.ec/view_global.php?id¼44377 23. Radchenko, O. (2009). The value system of society as a mechanism of democratic state formation: A monograph. HarRI NAPA “Master”. 24. Parkhomenko-Kutsevil, O. (2018). Formation of the national idea as a basis for preventing the development of corruption in Ukrainian society. Democratic Governance: A Scientific Journal, 21. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/DeVr_2018_21_9. 25. Karpets, A. Separatism in Ukraine and its social causes. Online edition of “Economic News”. https://enovosty.com/uk/politika-ukr/full/706-separatizm-v-ukraini-ta-jogo-socialni-prichini 26. Pypych, A. The choice is made, or how not jokingly people are experimenting with their own elite. https://www.pravda.com.ua/columns/2019/06/13/7218008/ 27. Tiahnybok, O. Zelensky and the oligarchs against the Ukrainians. https://blogs.pravda.com.ua/ authors/tiahnybok/60f552f0dcbcd/

58

F. Venislavskyi et al.

28. Petrova, A. (2015). Corruption as a socio-legal phenomenon (Vol. 4, p. 99). Bulletin of Luhansk State University of Internal Affairs. 29. Inaugural speech of Vladimir Zelensky. https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-polytics/2703883inavguracijna-promova-volodimira-zelenskogo-povnij-tekst.html 30. Kramar, O. The poorest country in Europe. https://tyzhden.ua/Economics/228323 31. Vdovychenko, Y. (2016). The essence of corruption, its principles and properties (philosophical context). Current Issues of Philosophy and Sociology, 9, 17–18. 32. Damage from corruption. https://sites.google.com/site/korupciavukraieni/home/skoda-vidkorupciie 33. Poroshenko appeared on the main page of the “Archive of Kleptocracy”. https://ukrainian. voanews.com/a/arhiv-kleptokratii-poroshenko/3334106.html 34. Sakhan, A. (2015). Corruption in modern Ukraine as a source of destructive power. Bulletin of the National University “Yaroslav the Wise Law Academy of Ukraine”, 4, 113–120. 35. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 36. Tsaras, K., Papathanasiou, I. V., Vus, V., Panagiotopoulou, A., Katsou, M. A., Kelesi, M., & Fradelos, E. C. (2018). Predicting factors of depression and anxiety in mental health nurses: A quantitative cross-sectional study. Medical Archives, 72(1), 62–67. https://doi.org/10.5455/ medarh.2017.72.62-67 37. Shytyk, L., & Akimova, A. (2020). Ways of transferring the internal speech of characters: Psycholinguistic projection. Psycholinguistics, 27(2), 361–384. https://doi.org/10.31470/23091797-2020-27-2-361-384 38. Sopilko, I. M. (2015). Information threats and security of modern Ukrainian society. Legal Bulletin, 1(34), 78–79. 39. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2019). Application of augmented reality technologies for preparation of specialists of new technological era. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2547, 181–200. https:// ceur-ws.org/Vol-2547/paper14.pdf. 40. Dorosh, L. (2013). Information and psychological security of the individual, society and state: The latest challenges to international security. Ukrainian National Idea: Realities and Prospects of Development., 25, 111–112. 41. Holovka, A. (2016). Information threats in a globalized world: Economics, politics, society (experience of Ukraine). Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 2(3), 44. 42. Turchak, A. (2019). The main components of information security of the state. Aspects of Public Administration, 7(5), 51. 43. Molodetska, K. (2016). Social internet services as a subject of information security of the state. Information Technology and Security, 4(1), 13. 44. Zharkov, Y. M., Dziuba, M. T., & Zamaruieva, I. V. (2008). Information security of the individual, society, state. Military Institute of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Vydavnycho-polihrafichnyi tsentr “Kyivskyi universytet”. 45. Bodnar, I. R. (2014). Information security as the basis of national security. Mechanism of Economic Regulation, 1, 69.

Part II

Informational Security Phenomenon

Chapter 4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as Infrastructure Medium and Factor for Actualization of the State Informational Security Yaroslav Chmyr , Anastasia Nekryach Аllа Dakal , and Lilia Strelbytska

, Larysa Kochybei

,

Abstract Global information integration of mankind in the vast majority of spheres and areas of its life beyond any political, economic, racial, and cultural differences is an integral part of globalization. At the current stage, such socio-humanitarian phenomenon led to the creation of single global information space. Characteristic features of the information society are revealed. Level of stability and protection of political, socioeconomic, military defense, spiritual-cultural, and other spheres of society from each of the six identified groups of dangerous, destabilizing negative destructive threats is characterized by the information security in the global information space of society. All these harm national interests of the state, sustainable development of society, well-being, and health of every citizen. It is substantiated that successful entry of states into the global information space presupposes orientation of the state information policy, clearly formulated in conceptual documents in terms of its strategic goals and formation of new information culture of society. Keywords Global information integration · International security · Information society · Domestic · Integration framework

Y. Chmyr (*) · L. Strelbytska Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Nekryach Poltava State Agrarian University, Poltava, Ukraine L. Kochybei Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts, Kyiv, Ukraine А. Dakal Shupyk National Healthcare University of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_4

61

62

Y. Chmyr et al.

1 The Problem Statement The last third of the twentieth until the beginning of the twenty-first century is characterized by active development of globalization and resulting fundamental sociopolitical, economic, and industrial transformations. Globalization brought information to the forefront of technological progress and turned it into important source and strategic resource in economics and geopolitics and special component of power and potential of the state. In fact, the “Fourth Information Revolution” took place before our eyes, which “came to us together with the Internet and brought information into cyberspace as a virtual reality.” “Skype,” “Viber,” and “Facebook” appeared, and we suddenly had the opportunity at any moment to see and talk to a person who is at the same time on the other side of the planet. We were able to choose what and when to watch and what news to listen to and to communicate with classmates. There is no need to even leave the house—to have the Internet at hand [1, 2]. Globalization in a historically extremely short time led to the creation of a single planetary information space capable to provide instant and full exchange of information. Information and communication technologies and processes began to become comprehensive and gradually became systemic factor in the life of the human community and basis of a new high-tech and computerized way of life. It led to paradigm of awareness of the place and role of information in the modern world and information society [3]. This on the one hand inevitably led to global universalization and formation of common ties and relations at the planetary level but on the other hand to deepening of “digital divide,” uneven access to the benefits of the global information space, and the progressive lag of the rest of the world from the developed countries of the “gold milliard.” There is a fairly rapid transition of humanity to the era of global information society as a result of globalization. This can be represented as society of fundamentally new type where information and knowledge became major producer of public resources and goods due to qualitatively new opportunities for information and telecommunication technologies which already covered almost all spheres of personal and social life. V. Zagurska-Antoniuk notes “global entry of civilization into the information stage of its development in the social dimension is manifested in the improvement of structure of nations and states. In this process information parameters of development will play an increasing role” [4].

2 Main Material Presentation The emergence of the so-called information society was a result of rapid development of information and communication technologies. This is a new stage in development of human civilization in terms of linear history (prehistoric hunting and gathering society, agrarian, industrial, postindustrial information, information,

4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as. . .

63

and anthropogenic). The new production system is characterized by change in the key resource of civilizational development (in prehistoric times, such resource was hunting prey, in agriculture, grown crops; in industrial, industrial technology; in postindustrial, information). Today, information technologies and services increasingly dominate over agricultural and industrial products and/or play an increasing role in their production in the structure of objects of industrial production and consumption [5]. A. Kolodiuk notes “information society itself embodies information and technological changes of the new millennium and is an essential characteristic of modern human life” [6]. Information and technologies based on it become strategically defining characteristics of a new social civilization—information society (some researchers also use definition of “postindustrial” or “postindustrial information society”) with increasing intensity of information consumption in all spheres of human life. This understanding from standpoint of socio-philosophical analysis, in particular, gave possibility to V. Danilian to propose definition of the information society as “qualitatively new stage of socio-technological evolution of society, formed as result of long-term trends of previous socio-economic development, formation and consumption of information resources in all spheres of society through development of information and communication technologies operating in a global scale” [7]. There are following characteristic features of the information society [8–12]: – High level of development of information and information communication technologies and their mass application in production processes, public administration, education and training, and human life. – Transformation of information into the same key type of resources of the universe as energy and matter (matter). – Availability and intensive circulation of significant arrays of information resources, united in the global information space. – Formation of information industry on the basis of computer, information and communication, mass media, multimedia, etc. – Ability of the vast majority of people, public organizations of economic entities, and public authorities and local governments to quickly and relatively evenly and freely receive variety of information resources, including the full amount of public information, not limited by state borders. – Formation of information and communication networks, social and information services and groups, and new mass media channels without spatial, temporal, and other restrictions. – Rapid development of innovative developments in technical and applied sciences, genetic engineering, biotechnology, and robotics which is gradually replacing man as a workforce. – Physical and psychological inability of a person to understand and process the entire flow of information that comes from hyperbolic exponent and leads to the syndrome of information overload of the psyche and “information fatigue.” – Growth of geopolitical, economic, ideological competition in the global information space; this leads to increased aggression, more targeted targeting, and

64

Y. Chmyr et al.

personalization by collecting large databases for each potential consumer of information. At the same time, for example, I. Sopilko offers a number of other features inherent in the information society, in particular [8]: – Creation and development of the market of information and knowledge as factors of production in addition to markets of natural resources, labor, and capital. – Increasing role of information and communication infrastructure in the system of social production and other spheres of society. – Formation of single information and communication space of the country and system of information networks that provide communications between government agencies. – Increasing level of information education, scientific, technical, and cultural development by expanding the capabilities of information exchange systems at the international, national, and regional levels. – Creation of effective system of ensuring rights of citizens and social institutions to freely receive, disseminate, and use information as the most important condition for democratic development. It should be noted that integral part of globalization is the global information integration of humanity in the vast majority of spheres and areas of its life beyond any political, economic, racial, cultural differences. This determinant at the present stage of socio-humanitarian phenomenon led to the creation of single global information space. “Information society shapes fundamentally new conditions for existence of nations,” says the famous British professor Anthony Smith. In his opinion, creation of the global information space as “backbone of modern civilization” leads to increase in the interaction of national cultures, emergence of worldview and value conflicts, and the so-called information syndrome caused by a number of threatening factors. These are the following: differentiation of society which entails the need to develop dialogue between management and subordinates, danger of infocracy (power of information owners), contradiction between universal tasks of democracy and needs of development of traditional society, contradiction between global and national values, and difficulties in overcoming monopoly on information by democratic means and ensuring public control over activities of media and formation of appropriate legislation [13]. According to H. Sytnik (Chairman of the Academy of National Security), “circulation of information in social systems is a basic prerequisite for their living conditions, as it has always been an important source of power and therefore public administration. Thus, information component is crucial in reflecting interaction of social systems, so systematic analysis of this component should be basis for solving problems of human life (individual), social groups and social institutions. In this case, certain information influences on social system. It can dramatically change structure of its interests and motives for behavior, which suggests that if we consider information in the context of social interactions, the message acquires status of

4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as. . .

65

information when it affects interests of man (individual), social group or social institutions” [14]. The global information space consists of national, corporate, and private information spaces and has virtually same features as information society itself. The global information space nullifies the notion of borders, boundaries of national legislation, and also destroys the state’s monopoly on political, social, economic, etc. influence and control of its own society. As a result, global interstate competition is intensified. It has signs of aggressive confrontation where tools of information and political, economic, and military interventions are increasingly used. At the same time, the global information space “does not have such institutions of protection of state interests as border and customs services; there are no ways and means to control value and importance of information resources transported across the border. Not state border is transparent for informational resources” [15]. V. Furashov notes “information space is a form of coexistence of set of tangible and intangible objects and processes aimed to meet information needs of all living beings on Earth” [16]. V. Torianyk says that information space is “an environment where information is formed, collected, stored and disseminated. The information space of Ukraine is an information space where jurisdiction of Ukraine is extended.” Main subjects of global and national information space are supranational international bodies and institutions and transnational corporations, states and their governments, economic entities and financial-industrial groups, political parties and civil society organizations, religious organizations, fundamentalist and terrorist groups, some politicians and public figures, journalists and publicists, bloggers, and ordinary citizens—all those who are able and willing to collect, process, receive, store, transform, and disseminate information through any of the available communication channels. The object in environment of global information space is always information and information relations between subjects, information and communication channels, and individual human psyche and public opinion of political and economic elites, certain social groups and segments of population, nations, and peoples. Cross-border nature of modern information and telecommunication technologies raised a problem of information security of the individual, community, and society as well as violation of their interests, rights, and freedoms in the global information society to a new level. Unprecedented availability of planetary information space led to huge scales of offenses and abuses in information sphere: spreading fakes and unreliable information, manipulation of public consciousness, interference in foreign elections, hacking of official websites, organization of technological failures in e-government mechanisms, data theft, and distribution of illegal, harmful content that directly threatens human health, breaks their psyche, and disorients in sociopolitical realities of life. Indeed, each individual in the global information world is a carrier of certain set of personal, including confidential, data. This set of personal information in modern conditions can no longer be securely protected by safes, hardware, or software. Attackers can steal such data and use it against the owner, causing financial, reputational image damage. N. Fedorova and V. Smiesova define “negative impact

66

Y. Chmyr et al.

of the information space, formed with the help of modern information and communication technologies on personality is carried out in various ways, including misinformation, intimidation, emotional suppression, initiation of aggressive emotional states, demonstration, manipulation. Mass media are the most effective for implementation of information and psychological influence on large masses of people. It allows them to be considered as a part of strategic forces of information confrontation. They are often used to implement information and psychological influence on individual, group and mass consciousness for realization of interests of individual social groups” [17]. So, there are problems of ensuring personal information security. O. Panchenko characterizes information security of a person as a protection of psyche and consciousness of individual from dangerous information actions: manipulation, misinformation, suicide, and contempt. The scientist notes that information actions are dangerous (or useful) not so much in themselves as those capable cause powerful processes [18]. Thus, the whole set of information and communication relations and systems of their regulation play a systemic role in the life of human communities, in information society, and in global information space of information flows. They exert decisive influence on the state and dynamics of political, socioeconomic, military defense, spiritual-cultural, and other components of sociopolitical life of man and the whole system of public administration of each country. This means that in each of these components an important role is played by information security in relevant field. Information security itself is increasingly coming to the forefront of overall national security, and this trend will only continue to grow. After all, information is the main resource of the postindustrial information society. Therefore, information security is also the basis of national security. Inevitability of further growth of threats in the field of information security was emphasized by Doctor of Science in Public Administration Iu. Nesteriak. He obviously noted “that technologically advanced countries tries and will continue to increase political, economic and military advantage by achieving advantages in the level of informatization; as a consequence they will establish and conduct global information control over less developed countries, conducting ideological and cultural expansion in the common information space” [19]. O. Zavadska says “peculiarity of threats in communication and political space is that everyone is more successful in mastering innovative mechanisms proposed by scientific and technological information progress, using them in a negative way. These skills and knowledge are directed not on life and health of citizens. They are destructive and transform behavior, thoughts in negative direction, destroy moral and spiritual principles. This activity is based on the latest hybrid socio-information technologies of human consciousness manipulation. We are dealing with the postindustrial period war where hybrid and social information technologies are used. Such technologies are based on information, intangible assets and intellectual capital” [20]. Measures to ensure information security of human society and state can be divided into several relevant groups in response to emerging threats: (1) openness and accessibility of information, (2) relative completeness and integrity of

4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as. . .

67

information, (3) protection of confidential information, (4) network security, (5) technical infrastructure, and (6) software. From this point of view, information security of society and state characterizes the level of stability and protection of political, socioeconomic, military defense, spiritual-cultural, and other spheres of society from each of the six groups of dangerous, destabilizing negative destructive threats. They can harm national interests of the state, sustainable development of society, well-being, and health of every citizen. In support of this thesis, we give the opinion of Associate Professor of Theoretical and Practical Psychology of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic” M. Hnatko, who noted that state is the information sphere of society: its functioning of information space of society (state); contents that circulate in it; dynamics of processes of this functioning; trends prevailing in this space; factors of influence on it essentially determine information security of society, nation, state [21]. Information security is closely related to the concept of “information sovereignty” where concept of “sovereignty” implies “independent of all forces, circumstances, and individuals rule and independent of the state in foreign and internal affairs” [22]. In our case, it is the rule in information space of the state—“exclusive right of the state and society to formation, proper possession, use, and dissemination of the entire array of information circulating in information infrastructure of the state.” V. Torianyk defines “sovereignty of the state is inextricably linked with information sovereignty. It is possession and disposal of national information resources, which include all state-owned information infrastructure, information regardless of content, form, time and place of its creation, and provided by the exclusive right of the state on the formation and implementation of national information policy, ownership of information resources formed at public expense, the creation of national information systems, the establishment of access to other states to information resources of Ukraine” [23]. At the same time, O. Solodka emphasizes that “if state sovereignty is inextricably linked with territory then information sovereignty is associated with the information space because it is environment of subjects of information sphere of activities related to creation, collection, obtaining, storing, using, disseminating and protecting information belonging to the national information resources of Ukraine, as well as the functioning of the national information infrastructure. The information space is object of information security protection” [24]. The following are the main manifestations of this: – Information sovereignty is an unconditional feature of the modern state and the legal basis for ensuring its information security. – Object of ensuring information sovereignty of the state and information security of the state are the national interests of Ukraine in the information sphere. – Information sovereignty is realized through sovereign right of the state to ensure information security and is the basis for its implementation. – In fact, all measures aimed at maintaining information sovereignty are at the same time measures aimed at ensuring information security; so, information sovereignty of the state is a condition of its information security.

68

Y. Chmyr et al.

– Information sovereignty of the state determines its independence in the global information space and thus ensures independent participation of the state in the system of international information security [24]. Thus, problem of protection of information sovereignty arises due to the fact that national information spaces of each state coexist in single global information space. All they try to promote and defend is their own national interests as effectively as possible. It threatens information space of other countries. Nowadays, such threatening influence is inexorably increasing. This allows experts and scholars to say that “protection of information sovereignty, an effective strategy for existing and future information wars is one of Ukraine’s national security challenges at the current stage of Ukraine’s integration into the European community” [15]. Description of global information space of information society would not be complete if we did not touch on such phenomenon as information culture. Since people from ancient times entered into information exchange and communication, they somehow formed certain culture of information relations. It was part of general culture of social relations and social-power interaction and its information component. Information culture can be represented as a set of human skills, abilities, and information worldview in general. This determines daily purposeful activities of the individual in the information environment to meet their own informational spiritual and cultural needs. Historically, the importance of information and culture of its operation has grown with growth of the information space of society. Global information society that emerged as a result of the “fourth information revolution” raised role and importance of information to unprecedented heights. Accordingly, the role of information culture increased. It absorbs necessary knowledge in the field of information and communication technologies, ability to use information infrastructure (computer, information networks, and services), optimal methods and ways to search and operate information, and certain ethics of information relations. However, speed of information society covering all countries and segments of the population does not give grounds to say that information culture of global postindustrial society is already fully formed. O. Sosnin emphasizes that “information worldview” became fundamentally a new phenomenon that does not have analogues in our historical past. It can only be said that this is due to the transformation of information and communication not only in the most important economic category but also in uncertainty of many political and legal issues regarding communication procedures in information exchange and saturation of life with innovations [25]. Yu. Nesteryak defines the following important issue—“humanitarian dimension of information security, i.e. protection from information and information vulnerability of the individual, society, civilization. Use of new advanced information technologies in public life, production and management, possibility of rapid exchange of scientific and technical, economic, educational and other information

4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as. . .

69

is confirmation of information importance as a system-forming social phenomenon” [19]. Indeed, everyone constantly feels the influence of information flows which always leave their mark at least at subconscious level. Information gradually and latently changes our consciousness and influences changes in our worldview as a whole without distinction. We take active or passive part in information and communication relations—information is accumulated in human consciousness, and sooner or later, its quantity can cause qualitative jump. It can be both positive and negative depending on information content that comes from the part of global information space where individual is integrated. This gives grounds to claim that the level of human information culture is directly related to information security. I. Parfeniuk has the same opinion. He notes that information security of individual and state largely depends on state of cultural space which is a kind of “filter” for harmful content in the process of social communications. The task of maintaining security involves not only monitoring of open and closed sources of information inside and outside the country, studying information attacks, public opinion research, forecasting sociopolitical processes, and improving information and cultural legislation but also “developing theoretical foundations for restoring cultural space and disseminating quality national information products” [26]. Man is daily exposed to harmful content in the information space. The ability to understand it is an important component of information culture. The higher this level is, the easier it is for a person to weed out true information from misinformation and to recognize fake information and other attempts to manipulate their own consciousness. “Fake news,” “memes,” and purposeful distortions of information easily “come” to inexperienced person, because their creation is fully consistent with the laws and principles of mythology, inherent in human consciousness since ancient times, and is widely used by modern media, television, and information networks. M. Gnatko states: “we have every reason that political myths play a significant role in establishing and strengthening informational national security of the state and society, naturally divided into positive in this sense and negative. It often has polar formats of relevant information constructs-axes. Preservation and strengthening of national security (in particular, information) requires active dissemination in the social psyche of society of adequate positive political myths and the same active liberation of this psyche from relevant negative political myths” [21]. Thus, it is important to form an appropriate information, informationcommunication and information-worldview system of education of citizens, the formation of modern information culture of society as a whole to ensure information security of individual, society and the state. This should be fundamentally new type of information culture because for the first time in human history the main thing in information and communication relations is not acquisition and assimilation of knowledge but the ability to use information, i.e., not knowing something necessary today and now (which is impossible in the information space), and the ability to find today and now just the right information and separate it from “spam” and other information garbage. V. Torianyk notes “information security of Ukraine is an

70

Y. Chmyr et al.

important component of national security. It involves systematic preventive activities of public authorities to provide information security guarantees to individuals, social groups and society as a whole and aims to achieve sufficient statehood and social progress at level of spiritual and intellectual potential of the country” [23]. The importance of information culture of man and society as a humanitarian component of information security of the state is determined by professors E. Manuilov and Y. Kalinovskyi. They note that “axiological basis of information security of Ukraine is quintessence of mental, civilizational, political, legal, cultural and historical values and traditions. Important component of ensuring information sovereignty of our state is reproduction of universal and national values by both state institutions and civil society actors, legal and economic conditions for activities of civil society in this area” [27]. O. Kyrychenko, Director of the Research Institute of National Security Problems of Ukraine, defends this position in detail and widely argued: – ensuring protection of information and constitutional rights of citizens in the information sphere; – creating conditions for country’s integration into the world information space; – improvement of domestic legislation in the field of information protection in order to bring domestic regulatory framework in ensuring information security to international norms and standards; – protection of intellectual property and intellectual property products; – formation and development of information society and intellectual economy in the country; – implementation of measures to effectively combat crimes in information sphere, cybercrime; – development of Ukraine’s interaction with the world community in the information field and ensuring transparency of relevant information flows; – creating conditions for development of transparent and effective information and information-analytical support of state, scientific, educational, economic and other structures, institutions and organizations; – systematic implementation of effective state means of combating piracy and infringement of intellectual property rights. [28].

3 Conclusions After the analysis, we found that the main characteristic of modernity is deep penetration of information systems and information and communication technologies in all spheres of human life, community, society, and state and growing influence of information society on public relations and processes, especially implementation of personal, public, and national interests. The information revolution led to dependence of man on computer and smartphone—at work, at leisure, in communication, and in learning about the world [29]. Wide possibilities of access to information, its use, and its use for their own purposes open previously unseen opportunities and abuse of it, fundamentally new forms of crime, such as hacking, theft of confidential information, burglary of

4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as. . .

71

the banking system to steal funds, electronic industrial espionage, theft from networks of institutions of public power of state secrets, telephone conversations of the first persons of the state, and implementation by means of electronic networks of separatist, extremist, and terrorist activity. Thus, information space of the state as an integral part of the global information space of mankind is an important system-forming factor of modern state formation and regulation of social and power relations. It comprehensively affects the state and development of defense, political, economic, social, spiritual, cultural, and other components of national security of the state. So, it plays a growing importance and role of information security of man, society, and the state as a central element of national security. Inclusion of the state in the globalization process and successful entry into the global information space imply the following: orientation of state information policy, clearly articulated in conceptual documents in terms of its strategic goals; development of open information space, including through integration into the global information space; development of the information society; improvement of the national information legislation, including taking into account the international tendencies; formation of new information culture of society, which provides conceptual vision and strategic planning, enshrined in law (e.g., in the Doctrine of Information Security of Ukraine); the formation on this basis and implementation of state information policy in general and state information security policies in particular; formation of fundamentally new state policy of information security of man and society with appropriate level of information culture, which determines the place and role of the country in the global information space and allows to identify and neutralize threats and risks of negative impact of harmful content of national and world information space meeting information needs of man and society; and realization of the national interests of the state in the global information space to effectively protect the national information space and information sovereignty of the state.

References 1. Bukhtatyi, O., Radchenko, O., & Holovchenko, H. (2015). Media Ukraine: On the threshold of the information revolution: Monograph. SVS Panasenko. 2. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Application of augmented reality technologies for education projects preparation. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2643, 134–160. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2 643/paper07.pdf 3. Dutchak, S., Opolska, N., Shchokin, R., Durman, O., & Shevtsiv, M. (2020). International aspects of legal regulation of information relations in the global internet network. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues., 23(3), 1–7. 4. Zahurska-Antoniuk, V. F. (2020). Political and information security mechanisms in the Ukrainian state system in the context of geopolitical changes. Public Administration: Improvement and Development, 2. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Duur_2020_2_10

72

Y. Chmyr et al.

5. Ostapenko, R., Herasymenko, Y., Nitsenko, V., Koliadenko, S., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Analysis of production and sales of organic products in Ukrainian agricultural enterprises. Sustainability., 12(8), 3416. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083416 6. Kolodiuk, A. V. (2005). Information society: Current status and prospects for development in Ukraine. Instytut derzhavy i prava im. V. M. Koretskoho NAN Ukrainy. 7. Danilian, V. (2006). Information society and prospects of its development in Ukraine (sociophilosophical analysis). Kharkivskyi un-t povitrianykh syl im. Ivana Kozheduba. 8. Sopilko, I. M. (2015). Information threats and security of modern Ukrainian society. Legal Bulletin., 1(34), 76. 9. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2 879/paper04.pdf. 10. Pogodayev, S. E. (2013). Marketing of works as a source of the new hybrid offerings in widened marketing of goods, works and services. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 28(8), 638–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2012-0069 11. Zinovieva, I. S., et al. (2021). The use of online coding platforms as additional distance tools in programming education. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012029. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012029 12. Nitsenko, V., Kotenko, S., Hanzhurenko, I., Mardani, A., Stashkevych, I., & Karakai, M. (2020). Mathematical modeling of multimodal transportation risks. In R. Ghazali, N. Nawi, M. Deris, & J. Abawajy (Eds.), Recent advances on soft computing and data mining. SCDM 2020. Advances in intelligent systems and computing (Vol. 978, pp. 439–447). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36056-6_41 13. Smith, A. (2013). Nations and nationalism in a global era. Wiley, 11. 14. Sytnyk, H. P. (2020). Conceptualization of “information security” in the context of the properties of information as a specific substance. Public Administration: Improvement and Development, 3. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Duur_2020_3_10 15. Panfilov, O. Y. (2019). Socio-humanitarian sphere of Ukraine in modern discourses: Monograph. KhIF KNTEU. 16. Furashev, V. M. (2012). Cyberspace and information space, cybersecurity and information security: Essence, definitions, differences. Information and Law, 2, 168. 17. Fedorova, N. Y., & Smiesova, V. L. (2020). Information security and ways to ensure it at the stage of information technology revolution. Black Sea Economic Studies, 57, 15–16. 18. Panchenko, O. A. (2020). Information security in the context of challenges and threats to national security. Public Administration and Local Self-Government., 2, 59. 19. Nesteryak, Y. V. (2014). International criteria of information security of the state: Theoretical and methodological analysis. Public Administration: Theory and Practice, 1, 64–65. 20. Zavadska, O. (2020). Communicative political reality in terms of information security. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 29, 178. 21. Hnatko, M. M. (2018). Information national security of the state and the role of political myths in it. State and Law. Series: Political Science, 82, 119. 22. Shakhov, V. A. (2004). Sovereignty. Political science encyclopedic dictionary. Emphasis. VP Gorbatenko (2nd type. ext. and rework). Genesis. 23. Torianyk, V. M. (2016). Information security as a component of national security. The role of the media in ensuring the information sovereignty of Ukraine. Law and Society, 2, 152. 24. Solodka, O. (2020). Information sovereignty and information security of Ukraine: The dialectic of concepts. European Political and Legal Discourse, 7(6), 234. 25. Cosnin, O. V. Some problems of ensuring the resilience of society to the challenges of the information and computer age. https://lexinform.com.ua/dumka-eksperta/deyaki-problemyzabezpechennya-stijkosti-suspilstva-do-vyklykiv-informatsijno-komp-yuternoyi-doby/ 26. Parfeniuk, I. (2019). Tools of information warfare: Traditional and modern tools. Bulletin of the Book Chamber, 1, 10.

4

Postindustrial Society and Global Informational Space as. . .

73

27. Manuilov, Y. M., & Kalynovskyi, Y. Y. (2016). Axiological dimension of information security of the Ukrainian state. Bulletin of the National University “Yaroslav the Wise Law Academy of Ukraine”. Series: Political Science, 2, 25. 28. Kyrychenko, O. S. (2018). Conceptual principles of forming a system of information security of the state. Scientific notes of KROK University. Series: Economics, 49, 22–23. 29. Semerikov S.O., et al. (2022). 3rd International conference on sustainable futures: Environmental, technological, social and economic matters. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1049, 011001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1049/1/011001.

Chapter 5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information Security” in the Age of Information Society Larysa Hren , Nadiia Karpeko , Olena Kopanchuk Mykola Strelbitsky , and Violeta Tohobytska

,

Abstract State, nation, and individual merged into a single subject of information and national security for the first time in the history of mankind at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Ontological essence, content of societal phenomenon “information security” as a certain state of institutions of the state and society, and forms of national interests’ protection are revealed. They are considered as a state of protection of the information space and the level of protection of important spheres of human life and society, as a function of the state and the institution of legal protection, as a process of purposeful actions, and as a system of appropriate measures of the state. Model of the state information security system is proposed. It includes a number of subsystems (political information, psychological information, and technical information). Its main elements are public institutions as key subjects of state policy in the field of information security and tasks for this policy implementation. Generally, it is protection of information sovereignty and national interests of the state. Keywords Ontological essence · Information sovereignty · National interests · State information security system · Principles

1 The Problem Statement The main feature of the postindustrial information society is a new way of life of human communities where knowledge and information are transformed into production tools and where most processes of management, communication,

L. Hren National Technical University “Kharkiv Polytechnic Institute”, Kharkiv, Ukraine N. Karpeko · O. Kopanchuk · V. Tohobytska (*) National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine M. Strelbitsky Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_5

75

76

L. Hren et al.

production, and other spheres of human life pass into the information communication plane of e-government, management, accounting, and control. N. Averianova and T. Voropaeva noted that “modern society is characterized by total increase in influence of information component on human existence, society and universal civilization” [1]. This is applied even to ordinary life. Technology “smart home” or “smart city” is not a surprise now. There under control of computers in your home doors are opened, lights are turned on, coffee is brewed, purchases are made in online stores, and more. Our children are already addicted to gadgets and the Internet, and we are increasingly concerned about protecting them from harmful social media content. After all, our information society is nothing more than infrastructural environment for global information space formation with its multidimensional threats to information security of individuals, social groups, peoples and hopes, states, and all mankind. In today’s world, everything from the ordinary existence of ordinary citizens to geopolitical struggle of superpowers is placed in the global information space with its uncontrolled networks, social services, and unlimited freedom, along with the same unlimited opportunities to “throw” misinformation into the information space. These problems and threats began to receive increased attention as a result of the development of globalization and the beginning of the information revolution in scientific and public circles. This was accompanied by separation information security concept from the integral concept of national security. In the first quarter of the twenty-first century, the problem of information security came to the forefront of scientific, military, political, psychological, and sociological research. State, nation, and individual merged into a single subject of information and national security for the first time in the history of mankind. Everything that can simultaneously affect each individual citizen automatically affects the whole society and the entire state system. V. Zagurska-Antoniuk says that processes of globalization of information space fundamentally changed vectors of influence on the system of public governance of individual states and the entire international community, which is manifested in the following: 1. Information flows of domestic and foreign origin that are not under its control began to appear in the national information space of the state. In particular, ordinary citizens can post information materials on the Internet, bypassing traditional methods of control. 2. Authorities of countries with more powerful information potential have the opportunity to expand their influence at the expense of population of other states. It is worth emphasizing that such expansion of audience can be both arbitrary— due to access to the satellite network—and targeted when government of one state exerts pre-designed, clearly targeted information pressure on the population of another state, and this is becoming real “information war” [2]. Understanding of this by the world community led to the fact that in 2000 leaders of developed countries adopted the Okinawa Charter of the Global Information Society. It expressed deep concern over development of negative trends in the global

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

77

information space and called for the creation of national and global information security systems as a mechanism of such state provision of the global information space which minimizes possibility of influence and violation of human rights, society, and the state [3]. All this requires scientific understanding of the essence and components of the societal phenomenon of “information security” in the age of information society.

2 Main Material Presentation Information is a key resource of the modern era. It exists and disseminated through information and communication technologies of channels and networks and creates national information spaces and at the same time global information space where levels of states try to defend their national interests and state information sovereignty by the use of information as a weapon. This creates the need for security and protection of information sovereignty of the state from threats and risks that exist in the global information space. States try to combat it by the implementation of hierarchically structured elements. These are national, state, information, and cybersecurity. They are designed to provide the state, society, territorial communities, and individual citizens with safe opportunities for free development and satisfaction of all material, communicative, and spiritual needs of life. O. Zolotar has an opinion that “human information security is based not only on its protection from information threats, but also on provision of man ability of man to develop and achieve desired results in the information society.” At the same time, “human information security cannot be studied in isolation from information security system of society, state, and the global information security of mankind” [4]. Definition of a common understanding of the concept of “information security” does not exist in scientific discourse due to the relatively “young age” of this societal phenomenon. A. Nashynets-Naumov states that “information security is mentioned in hundreds of regulations, dozens of documents directly dedicated to its protection for 15 years, including the Security Information Doctrine, presidential decrees, several NSDC decisions, international documents on cooperation within the Commonwealth of Independent States. None of them has definition of this concept” [5]. Thus, first of all, there is the task to determine ontological essence and content of societal phenomenon “information security.” Absence in scientific discourse of generally accepted definition presupposes existence of many quite different scientific points of view on this phenomenon (see Fig. 5.1). We see from Fig. 5.1 that information security issues in diverse discourse space are considered as follows: – Public relations: According to V. Hurkovskyi, information security of Ukraine is public relations related to protection of vital interests of man and citizen, society, and the state from real and potential threats in the information space. It is a necessary condition for maintaining and increasing spiritual and material values

78

L. Hren et al.

Fig. 5.1 Modern approaches to understanding information security of the state in the Ukrainian scientific discourse

–

–

– –

of the nation-building, its existence, self-preservation, and progressive development of Ukraine as a sovereign state. All this depends on purposeful information policy of guarantees, protection, and defense of its national interests [6]. State function: According to U. Ilnytska, information security is an integrated component of national security. It is considered an important function of the state. Information security provides quality assurance of comprehensive information to citizens, free access to various sources of information, preservation of information sovereignty, counteraction to negative information and psychological propaganda influences, and protection of the national information space from manipulations, information wars, and operations [7]. Condition of the state institutions: According to V. Bondarenko and O. Lytvynenko, information on national security of the state is conditions of institutions of the state and society, which provides reliable protection of national interests of the country and its citizens in the information sphere [8]. State of information space security: According to V. Torianyk, this is state of security of information space which ensures the formation and development of this space in interests of individual, society, and the state [9]. Level of vital interest protection: According to V. Furashev the level of vital interests protection of man, society and the state which prevents harm is through: negative informational impact via unauthorized creation, distribution, use of

5

–

–

–

–

–

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

79

deliberately aimed at defined purpose of incomplete, untimely, unreliable and biased information, negative consequences of information technology use, unauthorized violation of access to information with its subsequent dissemination and use [10]. Directed actions (according to O. Zolotar, it is process of human protection from information threats and challenges, which provides ability of man as a biological organism and social being to function, develop, meet their needs, and achieve desired results in the information society [11]. Certain conditions set: According to A. Golovka, it is a set of conditions under which protection of vital interests of the state, society, and individual in the information sphere is performed. It is reflected in four aspects: value (no negative impact on public opinion), technological (cybersecurity), legal (development of legislation governing legal relations in the information sphere), and sociopolitical (lack of political censorship, free access to public information [12]. Institute of legal protection: According to B. Kormych, information security acts as protection of rules established by the law according to which there are information processes in the state providing conditions of existence and development of the person, all society, and the state guaranteed by the Constitution [13]. State measure system: According to A. Turchak, information security of the country on national scale is defined as a system of measures aimed at preventing unauthorized access to information resources, their modification, and destruction [14]. Form of national interest protection: According to I. Gromyko, T. Sakhanchuk, and O. Zinoviev, information security of Ukraine is protection of state interests. It ensures prevention, detection, and neutralization of internal and external information threats and preservation of information sovereignty of the state [15].

We can talk about “information security system” highlighting national information space as substantial basis for state information security concept and defining person, territorial communities, society as a whole, and state, embodied by public authorities as main subjects of information space and information security. Thus, under the system of information security, we will define capable complex of interconnected elements (subsystems, legal norms, subjects, objects, infrastructure, and software) capable to efficient use of inherent mechanisms, tools, means, technologies, forms and methods of activity to ensure the possibility of unimpeded realization of personal, public and national information rights and interests, favorable conditions for information space development of the state through prevention, identification, protection idea and neutralization of external and internal information threats, manifestations of information aggression [14–17]. Information security itself is an integrated component of national security. Therefore, it is an important integrated component of the national security system. Professor O. Sosnin (Academician of the Ukrainian Academy of Political Sciences) emphasizes that context of national security involves the study of two aspects of

80

L. Hren et al.

Fig. 5.2 Comprehensive model of the state information security system

“information security” concept. According to “the first concept, it is independent element of national security in any country, and according to the second one, it is an integrated component of any other type of security, for example, military, economic, political, etc.” [18]. In this perspective, U. Ilnytska considers information security as priority function of national security. The researcher argues that “information security, on the one hand, provides quality comprehensive information to citizens and free access to various sources of information, and on the other controls spread of misinformation, promotes integrity of society, preserves information sovereignty, counteracts negative information-psychological propaganda influences and protection of the national information space from manipulations, information wars and operations. Solution of the complex problem of information security will allow to protect interests of society and state and guarantee rights of citizens to receive comprehensive, objective and quality information” [7]. Information security system of the state includes a number of subsystems (political information, psychological information, and technical information) and components (Fig. 5.2). We do not claim exhaustiveness of the presented model. It is noted that there are other views on the components of the model of information security of society in modern scientific discourse. Thus, O. Andreeva believes that “simplified model of information security of society is characterized by the presence of two main components: awareness of all social actors (public policy in this area should address

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

81

problem of equal and free access to information) and presence of these entity opportunities to take an active part in information exchange and to serve as “sources of information” (state policy in this case is twofold, on the one hand, ensure pluralism in society, and on the other, ensure information security, as well as prevent the spread of political and religious views on stability of society)” [19]. L. Kochubei emphasizes that “concept of state information security should also be considered in the context of creating secure conditions for information technologies. It includes issues of information protection as an information infrastructure of the state, information market and creating safe conditions for existence and development of information processes” [20]. Ie. Manuilov and Iu. Kalinovsky include into information security system “not only protection of information resources of society, state and man, but also preservation of valuable aspects of historical memory, cultural traditions, specific national and ethnic way of life of the Ukrainian people” [21]. Despite some differences in views here, we should note the existence of a common general vision of information security system of the state and its components is a relevant societal phenomenon. This phenomenon exists in the information space of the state and contains the following: integrative set of information, tools, and technologies for its production, processing, distribution, and storage, information communication and information technology infrastructure of information functioning of its “life cycle”, social-communicative and public power information relations and their subjects and objects, and regulatory framework for state regulation of such relations [22]. Presented complex model is largely theoretical construction, and it does not reflect real current situation—actual absence of information security in Ukraine. This is emphasized by scientists of the Central Research Institute of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, V. Bogdanovych, B. Vorovych, and E. Marko. They note that “today in the state and in the Armed Forces of Ukraine there is no integral systemically structured and functioning system of information security provision (SISP) with all necessary subsystems that would perform all functions of information security and information warfare; scientific and methodological apparatus for construction and operation of information security (SISP) in general system of national security is still in the process of formation; there is no legal basis for establishment and operation of single national SISP; Ministry of Defense of Ukraine has not fully formed current departmental legal framework for construction and operation of SISP in military sphere; there are no regulations at the state level for single definitions of state information security” [23]. Similarly, integral political information, psychological information, and technical information subsystems are formed. It in our opinion is system-creating to ensure information and national security of the state as a whole. Information and political subsystems are designed to provide external and internal protection of national information interests, information sovereignty of the state, country’s competitiveness in the global information space, and legitimacy and stability of existing state system and political system and to neutralize hostile

82

L. Hren et al.

destabilization, disorganization of public administration system, and destruction of the state as a whole. Above functional components of information and political subsystem are related mainly to foreign policy sphere. Disclosure of these subsystem features in internal information and political space of the state can be found in representatives of the University of State Fiscal Service of Ukraine, A. Iafonkin and V. Shevchuk. The researchers note that “in conditions when almost all media are concentrated in the private ownership of oligarchic groups, clans, associations and individual oligarchs, the lack of reliable information due to its limited or closed plays negative role in further understanding of citizens ways and directions of development the state, the uncertainty of the prospects of their dignified existence and selfimprovement, causes a sense of insecurity” [24]. In turn, information and technical subsystem is designed to ensure integrated functioning of technical, technological, and software tools for viability of state information space in global information space of the planet [25]. This includes preventive and reactionary measures to protect technical channels that contain information with elements of state secrets; prevention of unauthorized access to information with limited access, confidential information, and databases of public authorities; protection against hacker attacks on closed networks of government agencies and financial institutions; and counteracting encroachment of male factors and hostile states on the failure of servers, hardware and software of government agencies and organizations, etc. Such measures for state information space protection in terms of information and technology are distinguished by O. Kyrychenko. It is “potential and existing actions to fully or partially destabilize information sphere functioning of the country; potential or implemented actions leading to misappropriation of data and their unauthorized use or integrity violation of information sphere, modification of information in information systems, destabilization of information flows, destruction, damage, irrelevant transfer of information in networks and damage to databases, data banks. All this leads to significant financial losses as separate business entities, citizens, and the state as a whole” [26]. Extremely important and much broader in scope and scale than listed above is information and psychological subsystem of state information security. Internal structure of such subsystem is mostly revealed by E. Laniuk. He identifies the following main components: “(1) information-psychological; (2) sociopsychological; (3) moral-psychological; (4) political-psychological; (5) individualpsychological; (6) ethno-psychological; (7) power-psychological; mental health of individual citizens, individual social groups, certain social strata, etc.” [27]. This subsystem is designed to protect citizens, their groups, strata, and society as a whole from chaotic and purposeful open and closed information and psychological impact on individual and social consciousness. At the same time, open purposeful psychophysical influence consists of massive flow of propaganda, one-sided biased information, conscious distortion and tendentious selection of facts, and various fakes [28]. It poses threat to the value of individual and social consciousness and

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

83

spread of negative and depressive states, undermining moral and ethical, spiritual, and ethnocultural values, guidelines, beliefs, and nation genetic code as a whole. Hidden psychophysical influence consists in the use of various psychophysical weapons and manipulative zombie technologies aimed at human subconscious. It is not even obvious for human. After such influence, person begins to think and act within the limits of content programmed by malefactors remaining confident. A person considers it as independently defined thoughts and actions. There is an extremely large array of influence of chaotic, defragmented, and uncontrolled, so-called “white noise of the Internet” in parallel with the open and lost purposeful psychophysiological influence. Its essence is daily mass dissemination by information networks of various nonsystemic information and misinformation of completely unrelated actors-producers and distributors of information containing socially unacceptable and openly harmful information that promotes ideas of admissibility of immoral behavior, intolerance, intolerance, and violence. It undermines fundamental human rights, social and power relations, and the value foundations of the state. Structuring of the state information security system proposed by A. Turchak is somewhat different from the proposed one. The scientist identifies political, economic, social, military, scientific, and technical subsystems and their scope. Thus, political subsystem contains system of public administration, system of preparation of political decision-making, electoral systems, and special purpose telecommunication systems. Economic subsystem contains the following: decision-making system, banking infrastructure, management of economic situation in emergency situations, economic communications management system of economic nature, and corporate wars and industrial espionage. Public subsystem contains threats to the system of public opinion; system of mass media; structures of political parties, social movements, and religious organizations; and structures for ensuring fundamental human rights and freedoms. Military subsystem contains information resources of armed forces, troop management systems, systems of constant control and supervision, and channels for receiving information of strategic, operational, and intelligence nature. Scientific and technical subsystem contains know-how accumulation systems, intellectual property objects, structures of basic and applied research, structures of analysis and forecasting of tendencies in the scientific and technical sphere, and databases of a confidential nature [14]. Next step in determining factors and components revealing of information state security system in the context of public administration science is to identify actual factors of system actualization and main threat protection that are functionally relied on this system). Thus, V. Bohdanovych, B. Vorovych, and Ye. Marko distinguish the following among the main factors: The most powerful influence on ensuring military security of Ukraine is information. It is carried out through global information networks. Information security is a system-forming factor, combining all other areas of military security in a single information space. So,

84

L. Hren et al. information security should occupy prominent place in overall military security. Its security system is one of the places in system of state military security. Much of external media is actually kind of military threats and these threats are among the most dangerous for military security of the state. Modern information tools are systematic and highly organized, can cause significant damage to national interests in the field of military security. So, it is also possible to counteract them only systematically. In the world’s leading countries information security is considered only from standpoint of systematic approach. Their information security systems have hierarchical structure with existing subsystem of active actions in the information space [23].

There are main threats to the information security system of the state: – Unauthorized access to information that is confidential and constitutes trade secret. – Disclosure of confidential information. – Illegal possession and use of confidential information by persons who do not have the right to access it. – Change in the structure of information and violation of its integrity. – Violation of access regime to information and possibility of its use. – Destruction of information for the purpose of causing direct material damage. – Damage to networks and information systems and software and hardware for processing, transmission, and storage of information. – Uncontrolled use of information systems. – Lack of proper control and necessary conditions for compliance with information security [26]. Disclosure of ontological essence of societal phenomenon of “information security’ would be incomplete without defining principles of activity and functions of the information security system of the state. The large academic explanatory dictionary of Ukrainian language defines principle as “main ascending position of any scientific system, theory, rule, which is the basis of any organization”. Principles of information security are starting point for the formation and functioning of information security as a system-forming factor of all components of national security, norms and rules of conduct citizens, state and public institutions of Ukraine in relation to information security as a relevant scientific theory and tasks of public authorities in part of their activities to ensure information security of the state [29]. In our opinion, basic principles can be defined as follows: – – – – – –

Principle of national interests’ observance in the information sphere. Principle of ensuring human rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests. Principle of social significance and preservation of social order. Principle of humanity, universal values, and morality. Principle of publicity, accessibility, and democracy of government. Principle of responsibility of public authorities to society and citizen.

O. Oliinyk supplements above list of principles of information security with the following provisions:

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

85

– Principle of the rule of law, equality of all subjects of legal relations before the law. – Principle of integrated approach to solving problems of information security; – Principle of unity and interconnection of information security areas. – Delimitation principle of spheres of responsibility and powers of state bodies and local self-government bodies on issues of information security. – Principle of participation in international and regional information security systems. – Principle of efficiency, timeliness, prevention, and adequacy of measures to prevent and protect against external information threats and neutralize sources of internal information threats [29]. If principle is a rule that underlies activities of particular organization, the main objectives of such activities are defined as functions. In particular, I. Korzh notes that “information activity of the state on implementation of relevant tasks mediates its information function, which is complex. In general information function of the state can be distinguished such integral component as information and security function. It means direction and side of the state’s activity that expresses its essence and social purpose in ensuring security of the state (organization and provision of system for obtaining, using, disseminating and storing information related to security of the state)” [30]. O. Kyrychenko defines the following main functions of the state in ensuring information security: – Formation of actions aimed at providing information resources. – Regulation of processes of information resource formation. – Adoption and implementation of the state legislative regulations that create regulatory framework for information security of the state. – Development and implementation of principles of state information policy and regulation of information security processes of the state. – State registration of information resources. – Creating conditions for safe and efficient use of information resources. – Creating conditions for regulatory, logistical, production, and technological security and development of information processes in Ukraine. – Providing conditions necessary for creation and promotion of information technology and information infrastructure and efficient use of information resources. – Implementation of state programs for creation and development of information society and security of its functioning. – Mechanism creation to ensure security of information resources. – State regulation in the field of information cooperation in the use of information resources within the state and in international information space. – Formation and implementation of information and communication policy of the state, information, and analytical support in the field of information resource management. – Staffing in the field of information resource management [25].

86

L. Hren et al.

Scientists of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv propose their version of functions necessary for the effective functioning of the information security system of Ukraine. In their opinion, there are four groups with the following functions: 1. Creation and maintenance of state body activity, elements of maintenance system of information security, including creation of legal bases of construction, development and functioning of the system; organizational structure formation of the system and its individual elements; definition and rational distribution of their functions; comprehensive support of system elements, personnel, financial, material, technical, information, and others; preparation of system elements to perform tasks assigned to them by functions according to the purpose. 2. Management of information security system, which includes development of strategy and planning of specific measures to ensure information security, organization and direct management of the system and its structural elements, assessment of effectiveness of actions, cost of information security measures and their consequences. 3. Implementation of planned and operational activities to ensure information security, which includes determination of national interests and their priorities in the information sphere; forecasting, identifying, and assessing possible threats; destabilizing factors and conflicts in information sphere, causes of their occurrence, and consequences of their manifestation; prevention and elimination of the impact of threats and destabilizing factors on national interests in information sphere; localization, de-escalation, and resolution of information conflicts; consequence elimination of information conflicts or impact of destabilizing factors. 4. International cooperation in the field of information security includes regulatory framework development of governing information relations between states and their interaction in the field of information security; joining existing and forming new bilateral and multilateral structures (organizations), whose activities are aimed at joint solving information security problems; participation in work of management, executive, and support units of these structures, joint planning, and operational activities [31]. In turn, functions of any system, body, and institution are detailed in the relevant functional tasks. Since, the main subject of the information security of the state are public authorities, so main tasks of ensuring information security of the state are entrusted to them. Such tasks in the conditions of modern Ukraine are the following: – Legislative definition of the essence of the state information policy of Ukraine on the basis of clear and correct conceptual apparatus and clarification of directions of its implementation. The main of them should be information security of the state (P. Snitsarenko, Iu. Sarychev and V. Tkachenko [32]). – Development of regulatory framework that would regulate solution of all tasks related to information protection.

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

87

– Creation of system of structures that would be responsible for maintaining information security and addressing issues related to information protection and automation. – High-quality information of people and free access to information databases, with possibility of controlling actions on non-dissemination of classified information. – Maintaining society intact and protection from any negative information impact. – Organization of training of specialists in the relevant specialty (A. Turchak [14]). – Balance of the state policy of information security of Ukraine on principles of democratic state governed by the rule of law and development and implementation of relevant national doctrines, strategies, concepts, and programs in accordance with current legislation (O. Nishchymenko [33]). – Consistency and continuity of organizing process of the state activities to ensure information security, aimed at developing and implementing legal, organizational, technical, and other measures in this area (L. Kochubei [20]). – Subjectively, expediently, consciously, consistently, and purposefully to influence the level of national security of the state through appropriate tools and activities to establish high level of informational national security of the state and increase it (M. Hnatko [34]). V. Torianyk provides comprehensive and detailed list of tasks of Ukrainian public authorities to implement function of ensuring information security of the state. He considers such tasks as: – Legislative formation of the state information policy. – Creation of opportunities to achieve information sufficiency for decision-making by public authorities, citizens and associations of citizens, and other legal entities in Ukraine in accordance with the laws of Ukraine. – Guaranteeing freedom of information activities and right of access to information in the national information space of Ukraine. – Comprehensive development of information structure. – Support for development of national information resources of Ukraine, taking into account achievements of science, technology, and peculiarities of spiritual and cultural life of Ukrainians. – Creation and implementation of secure information technologies. – Protection of property rights of all participants in information activities in the national space of Ukraine. – Preservation of the state ownership right to strategic objects of information infrastructure of Ukraine. – Protection of state secrets, as well as information with limited access, which is the object of property rights or object of only possession, use, or disposal of the state. – Protection of the national information space of Ukraine from the dissemination of distorted or prohibited for distribution, by the legislation of Ukraine, information products; – Creation of general system of information protection, in particular protection of state secrets and other information with limited access.

88

L. Hren et al.

– Establishment of foreign states’ access mode or their representatives to the national information resources of Ukraine and procedure for these resource use on the basis of agreements with foreign states. – Legislative definition of the distribution order of information products of foreign production on the territory of Ukraine [9]. In generalized form, these functions and tasks of information security reveal the national interests of the state in the information sphere. Modern states make significant efforts to protect their national interests in the information sphere. O. Nishchymenko notes “Ukraine should take care of its information security, as does the strengthening of Ukrainian statehood while protecting its information interests.” It should be noted that the national interests of Ukraine in the information sphere are clearly defined in the Doctrine of Information Security of Ukraine dated on February 25, 2017. Such national interests are defined by the law: 1. Vital interests of the person: ensuring constitutional human rights and freedoms to collect, store, use, and disseminate information; ensuring constitutional human rights to privacy; protection from destructive information and psychological influences. 2. Vital interests of society and the state: – Protection of Ukrainian society from the aggressive influence of destructive propaganda, primarily by the Russian Federation. – Protection of Ukrainian society from the aggressive informational influence of the Russian Federation, aimed at propaganda of war, incitement of national and religious enmity, change of the constitutional order by force, or violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. – Comprehensive satisfaction of needs of citizens, enterprises, institutions, and organizations of all forms of ownership in access to reliable and objective information. – Ensuring free circulation of information, except as provided by law. – Development and protection of national information infrastructure. – Preservation and increase of spiritual, cultural, and moral values of the Ukrainian people. – Ensuring comprehensive development and functioning of Ukrainian language in all spheres of public life throughout Ukraine. – Free development, use, and protection of national minorities languages and study promotion of international communication languages. – Strengthening information ties with the Ukrainian diaspora and promoting preservation of its ethnocultural identity. – Creation, taking into account the international law norms, system, and mechanisms of protection against negative external information and psychological influences (first of all propaganda). – Development of media culture of society and socially responsible media environment.

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

89

– Formation of effective legal system to protect individual, society, and the state from destructive propaganda influences. – Development of strategic communication system of Ukraine. – Development of information society, in particular its technological infrastructure structures. – Safe functioning and development of the national information space and its integration into the European and world information space. – Effective interaction of public authorities and civil society institutions during formation and implementation of the state policy in the information sphere. – Ensuring development of information and communication technologies and information resources of Ukraine. – Protection of the state secrets and other information and protection requirements established by law. – Positive image formation of Ukraine in the world, bringing prompt, reliable, and objective information about events in Ukraine to the international community. – Development of the foreign broadcasting system of Ukraine and ensuring availability of foreign language Ukrainian channel in cable networks and in satellite broadcasting outside Ukraine [35]. At the same time according to experts, this Doctrine very poorly prescribes mechanisms for their protection and defense, as a result of which the Information Security Doctrine of Ukraine looks like an empty declaration [36] rather than a strategic state document. It determines activities of public authorities and society in this area. This necessitates strengthening protection of national information interests and information sovereignty of the state from the threats and risks that exist in the global information space during the formation and implementation of the state information and security policy.

3 Conclusions After summarizing the ontological essence, content, components of societal phenomenon of “information security”, principles and functions of the information security system in the context of global information space, we note that information security in today’s globalized information society plays a key role in further civilization development. Issue of information security nowadays means not only and not so much technical and technological measures to protect information systems and networks, identify and neutralize various threats to the information environment, but it also includes protection of national information sovereignty; information interests of society and man ensuring functioning in information space of sociopolitical, spiritual-cultural, moral-ethical, and other interests of citizens; and stability of the state system and political system of the country.

90

L. Hren et al.

Ensuring information security of the state is relied on relevant system of information security of the state. Its main elements are public institutions as key actors in public policy in the field of information security. They are entrusted by functions and tasks of implementing this policy and in general protection of information sovereignty and national interests of the state.

References 1. Averianova, N. M., & Voropaeva, T. S. (2020). Information security of Ukraine: Sociophilosophical aspects. Young Scientist, 10(2), 298. 2. Zahurska-Antoniuk, V. F. (2020). Political and information security mechanisms in the Ukrainian state system in the context of geopolitical changes. Public Administration: Improvement and Development, 2. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Duur_2020_2_10 3. Okinawa Charter of the Global Information Society. Official web portal of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine: legislation of Ukraine. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/card/998_163 4. Zolotar, O. O. (2018). Human information security: Theory and practice: A monograph. Research Institute of Informatics and Law Nat. acad. right. Sciences of Ukraine. ArtEk. 5. Nashynets-Naumova, A. Y. (2017). Information security: Issues of legal regulation: Monograph. Universytet Borysa Hrinchenko. Helvetica. 6. Hurkovskyi, V. I. (2002). Information security in Ukraine as a component of national security. Collection of Scientific Works of UADU., 2, 10. 7. Ilnytska, U. (2016). Information security of Ukraine: Current challenges, threats and mechanisms to counter negative information and psychological influences. Humanitarian Vision, 2(1), 29. 8. Bondarenko, V., Lytvynenko, O. Information security of the modern state: conceptual reflections. http://www.crime-research.iatp.org.ua/library/strateg.htm 9. Torianyk, V. M. (2016). Information security as a component of national security. The role of the media in ensuring the information sovereignty of Ukraine. Law and Society, 2, 153. 10. Furashev, V. M. (2012). Cyberspace and information space, cybersecurity and information security: Essence, definitions, differences. Information and Law, 2, 164. 11. Zolotar, O. O. (2021). The concept and content of the category “information security of man”. Information and Law, 1, 77. 12. Holovka, A. A. (2019). Civil society as a subject of counteraction to threats to national security in the information sphere. Natsionalnyi instytut stratehichnykh doslidzhen. 13. Kormych, B. (2008). Information security: Organizational and legal framework: A textbook. Condor. 14. Turchak, A. (2019). The main components of information security of the state. Aspects of Public Administration., 7(5), 48–49. 15. Hromyko, I., Sakhanchuk, T., & Zinoviev, O. (2008). State dominance of information security of Ukraine in the face of threats. Law of Ukraine., 8, 130. 16. Gurieiev, V., et al. (2020). Simulating systems for advanced training and professional development of energy specialists in power sector. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2732, 693–708. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2732/20200693.pdf 17. Pogodayev, S. E. (2013). Marketing of works as a source of the new hybrid offerings in widened marketing of goods, works and services. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 28(8), 638–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2012-0069 18. Sosnin, O. V. Information policy of Ukraine: problems of development. http://www.niisp.gov. ua/vvdanna/panorama 19. Andreeva, O. (2015). The specifics of the information component of the concept of national security. European Political and Legal Discourse., 2(2), 139.

5

Substantive Essence and Components of the Societal Phenomenon “Information. . .

91

20. Kochubei, L. O. (2015). Information security of the state: Tools to protect the Ukrainian information field (on the example of features of information and communication technologies in modern Donbass). Scientific notes of the Institute of Political and Ethnonational Studies., 3, 222. 21. Manuilov, I. M., Kalynovskyi, I. I. (2017). Axiological dimension of information security of the Ukrainian state. Bulletin of the National University “Yaroslav the Wise Law Academy of Ukraine”. Series: Philosophy, philosophy of law, political science, sociology, 3, 17. 22. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics., 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 23. Bohdanovych, V. Y., Vorovych, B. O., Marko, Y. I. (2018). Information security as the basis of military security of the state and society. Collection of scientific works of the Center for Military Strategic Studies of the Ivan Chernyakhovsky National University of Defense of Ukraine, 3, 47. 24. Yafonkin, A. O., & Shevchuk, V. A. (2017). Information war against the state and information security of Ukraine. Law Forum., 5, 467. 25. Popov, O. O., et al. (2021). Immersive technology for training and professional development of nuclear power plants personnel. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2898, 230–254. http://ceur-ws. org/Vol-2898/paper13.pdf 26. Kyrychenko, O. S. (2018). Conceptual principles of forming a system of information security of the state. Scientific notes of KROK University. Series: Economics, 49, 21–23. 27. Laniuk, Y: The phenomenon of political myth: the theoretical aspect. http://zgroup.com.ua/ article.php?articleid¼4516 28. Tsaras, K., Papathanasiou, I. V., Vus, V., Panagiotopoulou, A., Katsou, M. A., Kelesi, M., Fradelos, E. C. (2018). Predicting factors of depression and anxiety in mental health nurses: A quantitative cross-sectional study. Medical Archives, 72(1), 62–67. https://doi.org/10.5455/ medarh.2017.72.62-67 Academic explanatory dictionary of the Ukrainian language: in 11 volumes. http://sum.in.ua/s/pryncyp. 29. Oliinyk, O. V. (2016). Principles of information security of Ukraine. Legal Bulletin. Air and Space Law., 4, 77. 30. Korzh, I. (2016). The main criteria of information - the subject of the information function of the state as security. Law and Society., 5, 111. 31. Zharkov, Y., Dziuba, M., & Zamaruieva, I. (2008). Information security of the individual, society, state. Military Institute of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Vydavnycho-polihrafichnyi tsentr “Kyivskyi universytet”. 32. Snitsarenko, P., Sarychev, I., & Tkachenko, V. (2018). General theoretical prerequisites are necessary improving the current legislation of Ukraine on information security of the state. Collection of scientific works of the Center for Military Strategic Studies of the Ivan Chernyakhovsky National University of Defense of Ukraine., 1(66). 33. Nishchymenko, O. (2016). Information security of Ukraine at the present stage of development of the state and society. Our Right., 1, 22. 34. Hnatko, M. (2018). Information national security of the state and the role of political myths in it. State and Law. Series: Political Science., 82, 121. 35. Doctrine of Information Security of Ukraine of February 25, 2017. http://www.president.gov. ua/documents/472017–21374 36. The doctrine of information security of Ukraine is only a declaration - experts. https://www. radiosvoboda.org/a/28336852.html

Chapter 6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status, Trends, and Problems Oleksandr Radchenko , Serhii Bielai , Valeriia Kovach Nataliia Hrabar , and Ihor Yevtushenko

,

Abstract Phenomenon of information security appeared in the transition era of significant number of information and communication processes of political, economic, and social life in the global information space. Intensification of interstate competition and confrontation in this space acquires all signs of the fundamental needs of the individual, community, state, and society as a whole. Information security in modern conditions is an important objective prerequisite for successful functioning and progressive development of the state, nation, and civilization. The work established that Ukraine lags far behind the world’s leading states in terms of creating an information security system and ensuring its effective functioning. This requires our state to intensify efforts for defending national information sovereignty, intensify measures aimed primarily at combating Russian aggressive propaganda, reduce “digital divide” with the world’s leading powers, develop and disseminate effective cybersecurity programs, and so on. Keywords Security system · Trends · Legislation governing · Fakes · Misinformation · Fact manipulation · Modern society

O. Radchenko (*) Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland S. Bielai National Academy of the National Guard of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine V. Kovach National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine Center for information-analytical and technical support of nuclear power facilities monitoring of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine N. Hrabar National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine I. Yevtushenko Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Kharkiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_6

93

94

O. Radchenko et al.

1 The Problem Statement Global information space formation of the modern world led to radical changes in the nature of social communications and information relations at the interstate, national, and local levels, in particular. It exacerbated ethno-national and cultural self-identification, socialization, self-determination, self-affirmation, and selfpresentation. There was largely spontaneous formation of information society. On the one hand, it is actively involved in the latest information and communication systems and social services. On the other, it is still unprepared to distinguish true information from “fakes,” propaganda, and manipulation. It makes possible to feel responsible for everything published in the “World Wide Web.” M. Castells states that information society is characterized by cognitive dissonance of self-consciousness (identity) [1], inability to adequately perceive information and communication world processes, and the role of individual states, social groups, and various actors in transnational business and civil society. All these decisively affect the overall strategy of civilization. That is why such cognitive dissonance of self-awareness is inherent in world institutions in conditions when “now the world map is full of hybrid confrontations, both small conflicts and largescale wars; there is a need to develop asymmetric, hybrid response. Developed international law after 1945 cannot respond to the threat of a new challenge today. Leading world organizations, such as the UN, build their work guided by doctrines adopted after World War II” [2]. In modern conditions, the importance of information security and protection of information sovereignty of the state is growing. Information struggle becomes “one of the main forms of resolving conflicts between states when information relations and technologies permeate absolutely all spheres of society and actually destroy borders on the way of spreading any ideas, meanings, narratives, and thoughts” [3]. Therefore, the urgent problem of each state is institutionalization of information security management. It includes the formation of state structure that could be key subject of monitoring and regulation of information relations and formation and implementation of state information policy aimed at protecting and strengthening national information sovereignty. After all, “states that are unable to ensure their own information security become uncompetitive. Then they lose the ability to fight for markets and resources” [4]. Based on the above, V. Nesterovych emphasizes that “strategic task of the state in preventing and counteracting real and potential threats to information security is to create and operate mechanism for information security. It provides consistent systemic activities, set of measures, state and legal institutions created to guarantee unimpeded realization of the national interests of the state in the information sphere, relevant interests of man and society, prevention of information conflicts and their prompt resolution” [2]. In this scientific study, we will analyze the formation and development of approaches to the formation and operation of national information security systems of the world’s leading countries and comparison with them of Ukrainian practice.

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

95

2 Main Material Presentation The fundamental orientation of our state toward integration into the European political, administrative, and information space is fixed in the Constitution of Ukraine. It involves studying, analyzing, and identifying opportunities to adapt the best practices of Western European civilization in our country, including information security. Authors of the monograph “Social and Humanitarian Sphere of Ukraine in Modern Discourses” state that the global information space has already covered our entire planet. 169 countries from 200 countries in the modern world actively use the Internet. 50% of countries have their own websites, while 36 countries have only single portals. Leaders of the modern information space are the United States, Austria, New Zealand, Canada, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany. Each of these countries has its own specific features and advantages in the formation and functioning of the national system of information security of the state. They are determined by historical, cultural, mental, political, socioeconomic, and other factors of nation-building. Thus, O. Zolotar in his monograph “Information Security: Theory and Practice” notes that “for example, the United States is focused on technological aspects, Europe on social dimensions. All EU member states have their own national policy programs on building of information society and cybersecurity. They also have common EU directives on the issues under study. Japan begun active building of its own model of the information society after World War II but lost momentum at the beginning of the new millennium. Instead, the information technology market in Asian countries, such as the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, began to grow rapidly. The United Kingdom consistently pursued policy of maximizing information and services provision to citizens by the state via the Internet” [5]. The United States is our strategic partner and pioneer and undisputed world leader in the information society (the American model of information society development is used as a basis for the national models of most developed countries) and in development of the country’s information security system [6]. In this section, we first consider the problem under study through the prism of the American experience. O. Busol states that the state policy of the United States in the field of information security undergone long evolutionary path from its inception in 1939 to active development and radical improvement. At the same time “the United States pursues policy in the field of information protection. It assumes that the interception of open information circulating in government and commercial telecommunications networks by foreign states can harm the state. Processing of this information, comparing and aggregating disparate information can lead to open of state secret Therefore, in the 1980s the protection of communication lines and automated systems became the main task of the competent US government agencies. The US Congress in 1987 passed the Law on Computer Security Mb HR-145. It established priority of national interests in addressing information security, including private” [7].

96

O. Radchenko et al.

Doctor of Science in Public Administration Iu. Nesteriak says that beginning of the development of information security standards was laid in 1983 by the so-called Orange Book of the US Department of Defense. The book is called “Criteria for assessing reliable computer systems” [8]. It is known that the first strategic report of the American government entitled “Agenda for Action” on the development of the infrastructure of the national information space was published back in 1992. This report laid the foundations for further development of the US information security system based on the following guidelines: – – – – – – – – –

Encouraging of private investment. Concept of universal access. Assistance in technological innovations. Providing interactive access. Protection of privacy, security, and reliability of networks. Improved radio frequency spectrum management. Protection of intellectual property rights. Coordination of state efforts. Ensuring access to state information [9].

A. Gore is the Vice President of the United States, a Nobel Peace Prize winner. He introduced into public discourse the concept of “information superhighway” in 1993. It was later adopted by American scientists and politicians. A. Gore’s concept of building an “information superhighway” in the United States as a key infrastructure for the further development of the information society provided a number of fundamental novelties of the time. They include: – Higher education institutions and their teaching potential become available to all students, regardless of geographical conditions, distance, and resources. – Maximum possible potential of art, literature, and science becomes available not only in libraries and museums but also online. – Medical and social services become available online. – Every citizen of the country gets opportunity to fully work through electronic highways, go to the store and bank, and receive government information directly from home. – Government agencies and businesses can share information electronically, reducing paperwork and improving the quality of services [9]. An important milestone in the formation of the American information security system was adoption by the United States Parliament in 2003 of the Home Security Act. The US Department of Homeland Security was established in 2004 in pursuance of this law. One of its main activities was to coordinate activities of public authorities and various business and private entities in the context of information security. The next step was the adoption of the National Strategy for Secure Cyberspace and the National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures. These documents provide creation of single national system for combating cyberterrorism. It initiated creation of territorial, departmental, and private centers for countering, defining their functions and procedures [10].

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

97

In 2009, President Obama declared US digital infrastructure as a strategic national value, and protection of that infrastructure is a national priority because “cyber threats are one of the most serious economic and national security challenges facing the nation.” He also identified key areas of state bodies and institution activity in the information space, including the following: development and adoption of effective strategy for ensuring security of information and communication networks, deployment of cyberattack warning and response systems, expanding dialogue and partnership between the state and private sector, increasing investment in innovative technologies, and launching of large-scale national campaign to strengthen society’s readiness to counter cyber threats. The next 10 years were marked by significant revival of the US government’s efforts to strengthen information sovereignty of the state and strengthen the US information security system. This unites more than 40 national institutions, research centers, laboratories, and more. Significant funds in the implementation of the National Information Security Strategy were allocated for technical and technological rearmament, research in the field of information impact on public consciousness and information warfare technologies, and encouragement of civil society to establish and operate various monitoring and analytical centers. All key US government agencies have their own information security departments. A. Demartino says that today special “rapid response group” is created in the US State Department. Its tasks are the following: 1. Monitoring of foreign media with extensive use of information and computer networks and modern information technologies to ensure dominance in the external information space. 2. Measures to promptly counter anti-American publications, involving employees of diplomatic missions around the world and the establishment of regional “rapid response teams”. If necessary, it is planned to send PR specialists to crisis areas. Speaker of the US State Department called them “special information unit.” Its main goal is to provide “prompt and decisive response to information that the United States considers biased or untrue” and to form positive image of the United States in the world [11]. It is generally accepted that the United States is one of the world leaders in theoretical, technological, and practical information security of the state and transfer of the state apparatus as a whole to effective functioning in the global information space. This experience is invaluable for Ukraine especially in the context of the development of open information war against our state [12]. Canada and the European Union work actively together with the United States to establish and strengthen national information security systems. Main tasks of information protection and information security were first set out in 1986 in such document as “European Technology Security Evaluation Criteria.” According to S. Buchyk, the “security levels in the European Criteria” were used to characterize degree of system security. In particular, three were identified: basic, medium, and high. Security is considered basic if protection means are able to withstand individual accidental attacks while medium if protection means are able to resist attackers

98

O. Radchenko et al.

who have limited resources and capabilities. Security can be considered high if “there is confidence that protection means can be overcame only by high-skilled attacker, whose range of capabilities and resources is beyond the scope of the known” [13]. Martin Bangemann is one of the heads of the European Commission’s Commission for the Development of the Global Information Society. In 1994, at his initiative, the Council of Europe considered the Commission’s report entitled “EU Recommendations and the Global Information Society” [14]. It became basis for action plan “European’s Way to the Information Society.” This action plan envisaged four key areas of EU countries’ activity in the global information space: 1. Creation of legal regulation system of information space. 2. Promoting development of information and telecommunication systems, classification of basic services in the information field, and standardization of equipment. 3. Research of various social and cultural aspects of the information society. 4. Promoting concept of information society forming among the population in order to gain public support. In 1996, the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation was developed by experts from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, and the Netherlands. They developed the plan which immediately became a recognized component of international regulation of the global information space. The CIA triad model is used to characterize main criteria of information security according to Iu. Nesteriak, according to the Unified Criteria. This provides three main characteristics of information security: confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Possibilities of unauthorized access to information are considered threats to confidentiality. They are referred to the criteria of integrity if there are requirements to limit possibility of modifying the information. At the same time, threats related to the possibility violation of using computer systems or processed information are threats to accessibility. Identification and control of user actions and controllability of the computer system is subject of observation and controllability. Information systems are analyzed in three main sectors, hardware, software, and communications, to identify and apply industry standards of information security as protection and prevention mechanisms at three levels: physical, personal, and organizational [8]. The next important step in building of European information security system was the adoption of the report “Network and Information Security: A European Policy Approach” in 2001 by the European Commission. This set out basic principles and directions of EU policy on information security in the global information space. In particular, such areas included the following: – Development of international cooperation on information security. – Creation of European warning system in the field of information security and informing about new threats.

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

99

– Strengthening information security by introducing effective and compatible information security tools and encouraging the use of electronic signatures by EU member states in the provision of public online services. – Assistance in awareness-level raising of citizens-users of communication networks about possible threats in the information space. – Regulatory and legal support of information and communication relations in the global information space (their properties are protection of personal data, regulation of telecommunications services, and combating cybercrime) [15]. There are certain national differences in the context of individual European countries. For example, a fairly strong government information security system was established in the United Kingdom with significant powers for government agencies to control the information space and take strong measures to combat cyber threats. According to R. Aliamkin and M. Fedorin, the legislation of this state provides not only protection of information rights and freedoms of citizens and public organizations. It also establishes their significant restrictions in the interests of national security. The laws “On Protection of Information,” “On Preservation of State Secrets,” and “On Telecommunications” and the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information are operated. In particular, the abovementioned Code regulates procedure for restricting access to confidential information owned by the state. The law “On Information Protection” is adapted to the requirements of the EU Directive “On Information Protection” [10]. Germany also has one of the most developed and modern information security systems of the state, created on the principle of “active defense tactics.” In this system, the key role is played by the Federal Information Security Service (established in accordance with the German Law on the Federal Security Information System) and such central public authority (equivalent to the Secretariat of State) as the Cyber Security Council. The last one coordinates all state, private sector, and civil society institutions in the field of information security of the country. The Federal Information Security Service performs the following functional tasks: risk assessment of information technology implementation; development of criteria, methods, and test tools for assessing the degree of security of national communication systems; checking degree of information security systems and issuing appropriate certificates; issuance of permits for information system implementation in important government facilities; implementation of special security measures for information exchange in state bodies, police, etc.; advising industry representatives on information security issues; and conducting activities to promote the need for information security [16, 17]. T. Tkachuk [18, 19] states that “the Federal Bureau for the Protection of the Constitution (and the Office for Information Operations, established in 2009 in the Bundeswehr due to massive attacks on the computer networks of German state structures) also take care of Germany’s information security.” The formation of the Information and Computer Network Operations Unit was completed on April 5, 2017. It is operating as the “German Cyber and Information Space Force.”

100

O. Radchenko et al.

The tasks of this unit include: – Development of new methods of cyberattacks. – Penetration into computer networks of foreign states and organizations in order to obtain intelligence. – Carrying out operations of destructive influence on networks and automated systems or blocking of their work [20]. It is worth noting that the Cybersecurity Strategy for Germany was created and approved in 2011. The main functional purpose of the Cyberargue Center is to monitor the global information space to prevent, to detect, and to counteract promptly dangerous threats, hacker attacks, and other harmful interferences in the technical and software and technological equipment of the information sphere. Germany has a significant experience in protecting of information space and seeks to spread its positive experience. Thus, Germany announced to enter the group on the development of an international document at the OSCE Summit in 2011. The document would regulate activities of states in cyberspace and enshrines principles of increased confidence, transparency, and security [21]. Experience of our closest neighbor and consistent partner (the Republic of Poland) in upholding Ukrainian interests in our European integration desire is valuable for Ukraine. Poland is close to Ukrainian conditions. In particular, it has recently started building an integrated security system for the state’s information space. One of its fundamental elements became adopted in the 1990s. These are “The Law on Post and Telecommunications,” “Law on Television and Radio Broadcasting,” and “Law on State Relations with the Roman Catholic Church in the Republic of Poland.” It defines directions of information policy and establishes technological policy, information communication standards, forms of attraction of foreign investments (33%–49% of foreign capital), and licensing of information activity. Rights of the church to information activity are written separately taking into account significant influence of clerical information on political priorities and morality of Polish society [22]. Main state institution responsible for providing information sovereignty and counteracting the threats of the information space of Poland is an analogue of the Security Service of Ukraine—the Internal Security Agency of Poland (Agencja Bezpieczeństwa WEWNętrznego (ABW)). There are following main functional tasks of ABW: identifying, preventing, and combating all fashionable threats to internal security of the state and its constitutional order, sovereignty and international status, independence, and inviolability of its territory and of the state; fulfillment of the tasks of the State and National Security Service in the field of information protection within the limits of its competence; fight against corruption in higher echelons of power; etc. [23]. 2013 was a determining year for the formation of modern system of prevention, counteraction, and fight against information threats in the Polish information space of the hundred. There a special unit of prompt response to computer incidents (CERT), and the Crith Center at the Ministry of National Defense were created in the structure of the Poland Internal Security Agency of Poland. These two

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

101

institutions were defined leading in the field of information protection and cyber offensive and cyber operation [24]. In the same year, the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Poland established the “State Policy of Cyberspace Protection.” This document contains concept of cyberspace management system and rationally defines relationship between individual state bodies, institutions, and their specialized units responsible for ensuring the proper security level of ICT in the country’s information space. In the same year, the Poland’s cybersecurity strategy was approved. It overlays the key threats to the state’s information security: – Spread of information aggression and violence, manipulation of human and society consciousness, and information and psychological operations in the information space. – Intensification of cyberbership, cyberterrorism, cybercrime, and cyberattack on critical infrastructure. – Discrediting Polish international policy and formation of negative image of the country in the international arena, including among NATO and EU allies. – Formation of Poland image as a country of xenophobes and anti-Semites. – Provocation of Polish-Lithuanian conflict against the background of the Polish minority in Lithuania. – Incitement of Polish-Ukrainian conflict based on historical background with possible use of terrorist attempts [25]. Increased attention of Polish society to information threats caused fact that two Russian prankers made a “humorous draw.” They called and talked on behalf of UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres with the Presidents of France, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and Poland (the Polish side confirmed authenticity of the call). The joke turned into a scandal because it found serious gaps in the information security system of the head of state. Online edition “Cyber Defenses 24” wrote about this “joke.” They stated that government and military institutions are not ready for information threats and cannot cope with them. Such things should be treated seriously and being an incentive to increase the information security of the Polish President. Intelligence representatives of foreign state could be instead of two YouTube jokers [26]. It should be noted that development of the Polish information security system was held in accordance with the provisions of the European Union Cybersecurity Strategy: Open, Safe, and Protected Cyberspace 2013. According to it, the EU Member States pledged to accept the national network and information security strategy. It should be strategic goals and specific political and regulatory measures aimed at achieving and maintaining a high level of network and information security. Formation of competent national bodies in the field of network and information security with sufficient financial and human resources for appropriate actions and response in the event of incidents and threats in the field of network and information security were among the obligations [27]. Such central body in Poland was the Bureau of National Safety. It coordinated the development of the Cybersecurity Doctrine of the Republic of Poland during 2015–2018 with the participation of

102

O. Radchenko et al.

representatives of public administration, scientific circles, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector. In May 2020, the Polish Parliament and President of Poland A. Duda approved and signed new national security strategy according to this doctrine. The strategy is very widely covered by cybersecurity and information space. It is devoted to individual departments and emphasizes their importance. Thus, there is a separate section on cybersecurity and information space within the first section. In the “Information Space” Section, the main purpose is to ensure safe functioning of the state and citizens in the information space. The strategy indicates the need to take measures in the following areas to achieve this: – Increasing the ability to protect information space (including systematic fight against misinformation) at the strategic level. Information space is understood as interpenetrating layers of space: virtual (systems, software, and applications), physical (infrastructure and equipment), and cognitive (cognitive). – Creation of unified system of strategic communication of the state. Its task should be to forecast, plan, and carry out consistent communicative activity using wide range of communication channels and media and using tools of recognition and influence in various fields of national security. – Active counteraction to misinformation. This activity should be achieved by increasing the potential and introducing cooperation with news and social media with the involvement of citizens and nongovernmental organizations. – Promoting increase of public consciousness on the dangers of manipulating information through training in information security [28]. The Ministry of Information Policy (now the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy) in Ukraine became the main state institute in the field of information security since the beginning of annexation by Russia of part of the territory of our countries has become established on December 2, 2014. Its main task was to formulate and implement state policy in sovereignty of Ukraine, state foreign language, and information security. In accordance with the Regulations adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on January 14, 2015, №. 2 “Issues of activity of the Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine,” the Ministry of Information Policy should carry out the following statutory tasks: – Formation and implementation of state policy on the spread of socially important information in Ukraine and abroad. – System development of the state strategic communications in Ukraine. – Studies on impact organization of the results of the media activities on the public consciousness. – Observance promotion of speech freedom in Ukraine. – Popularization and formation promotion of positive image of Ukraine in world information resources and national information resources of foreign states in order to protect its political, economic, and sociocultural interests, strengthening national security, and restoration of territorial integrity of Ukraine.

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

103

– Information reintegration provision of the temporarily occupied territory of Donbass and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. – Organization and conduction provision of information, communication campaigns, and public events in order to inform the population about reforms and to support national-patriotic education; promotion of healthy lifestyle, physical culture, and sports; development of unity; consolidation of Ukrainian society and interaction with the public; etc. – Methodological and practical assistance provision to the press services of executive bodies, training organization of civil servants on matters within its competence, etc. [29]. However, 7 years of existence of this Ministry with these tasks proves the absence of systematic work. The Ministry of Information Policy quickly received a nickname “Minstets” (by the name of the head of the Ministry, Yu. Stets) in the public discourse who wrote quite quickly. Yu. Stets wrote a letter of resignation which was not accepted by the Parliament. Actually, he was removed from the organization of the Ministry. The Ministry was filled with more than half of 57 vacancies. Vast majority of experts, political analysts, and journalists negatively evaluate activities of the ministry. So, specialists of the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Unity claimed that “one of the main threats to information security lies in the field of public authorities: non-performance or improper execution by public authorities powers in the information sphere” [30]. Another well-known expert, S. Gordienko, PhD, emphasizes that “Ukraine today lacks signs of information security policy although there is a lot of theoretical-applied and scientificallybased theories. That is why the government at its own court accepts legal provisions without any theoretical reasoning. It should be carried out before the appearance of appointed ministries (Ministry of Information Policy and other offender—the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy) and eclectic legal acts” [31]. However, the Ministry itself has completely different assessment of its activity. There is a total dominance in the Ukrainian society which thought that our state as a whole loses the information war of Russia. Information in the form of the most characteristic and significant questions and answers is presented on the website of the Ministry of Information Policy in the “Toloka” Section. There “Minstets” convinces Ukrainians that “We will win this war on the contrary, because the whole world knows that Russia is an aggressor that has started aggression against Ukraine in its territory. Fakes and manipulations of Russia are exposed internationally. Sanctions of Ukraine’s partners on the Russian Federation have been applied for the 3 years. Pro-Ukrainian coalition of the countries of the world would not exist if we would lose this information war of Russia” [32]. Thus, the merits of others seem to be their own. The disclosure of Russian fakes at the international level and the formation of a pro-Ukrainian coalition are not the result of the Ministry, but only the result of a conscious information security policy of our Western partners. This is evidenced by the following “merit” which the Ministry also attributes to itself: “What is done by the Ministry of Information Policy at the international level to counter Russian propaganda? Back in 2014,

104

O. Radchenko et al.

Russian propaganda channels spoke freely almost everywhere in Europe and beyond, but today in many countries in Europe, these channels are banned” [32]. Website analysis of the Ministry of Information Policy convincingly shows that almost all activities of the key institution of the Ukrainian state to protect national information sovereignty were reduced to extremely limited quantitatively and territorially primitive one-time actions and PR projects: educational festival “Language Market,” spherical video “Ukraine 360,” music fest “Your Country,” photo exhibition “Ukraine: Unique and Diverse” in Tokyo, thematic exhibition “Ukraine-NATO Security Formula,” project “Ukrainian Amazons” (a unique ethnic show with women participating in hostilities in eastern Ukraine, volunteers, and military journalists), lectures, workshops, presentations of language schools, job fairs, concerts, and other activities [32]. In fact, all activities are self-presented by the Ministry on its website in “Toloka.” These actions and projects are positive and have the right to be implemented but not as a dominant component of the Ministry. This completely replaces its main function. After all, all of the above does not constitute systemic components for the development of Ukraine’s system of state strategic communications, formation and implementation of state policy on the dissemination of socially important information in Ukraine and abroad, information reintegration of the temporarily occupied territory of Donbass and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and training of civil servants, and methodological and practical assistance to the press services of the executive authorities in terms of protection of information sovereignty of Ukraine. At the same time, the Ministry justifies its inaction by that almost all TV and radio stations in the country belong to the oligarchs who use the media for their own interests. It does not actively pursue the state information security policy in “world information resources and national information resources of foreign countries in order to protect its political, economic and sociocultural interests, strengthen national security and restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity.” Therefore, we cannot control activities of commercial TV and radio stations. Under such conditions, most of the measures to counter information threats are taken by civil society and its institutions, primarily volunteers, journalists, and artists. Thus, the activists of the Confederation of Journalists’ Organizations of Ukraine under the leadership of Doctor of Public Administration O. Bukhtatyi in April 2017 launched the project “Reformed Press: Ukrainian Army” to support morale and inform the military units of the anti-terrorist operation [33]. During this, a system of battalion press was created. Then own newspaper appeared at almost every battalion on the Eastern Front with its own support, layout, and organization of printing and delivery (at the beginning of hostilities in Donbass in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, there was only one newspaper). This project significantly strengthened confrontation with information threats in the war zone and was extremely well received by Ukrainian soldiers. Thus, Nadiia Zamryha (lieutenant, press officer of the 14th separate mechanized brigade) said: “Finally we have started to confidently conquer internal information space! Gradually, within one brigade. It will be powerful information breakthrough if each military unit will have its own publication! Guys want to read! About themselves,

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

105

about colleagues from other units, about brigade achievements. Imagine if the hero of the publication sends home copy of this brigade newspaper. is the audience that needs to be involved in our content. After all, the country needs to know its heroes!” [34]. Activities of the public organization “Information Security” is another example of nongovernmental organization doing more than the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy. The organization since 2015 has been working to establish effective interaction between the media, NGOs, and government, to create mechanisms of cooperation with Ukrainian and international organizations in the direction of exchange and dissemination of information, to draw the attention of the international community to society political issues in Ukraine and exchange of experience on relevant issues with representatives of public organizations around the world, and to disseminate information in Ukraine and the world with the involvement of experts, media and civil servants, etc. [35]. We can conclude that in modern Ukraine in the institutional dimension the key subjects of information security and protection of information sovereignty are civil society (represented by volunteers and NGOs) and the state (represented primarily by the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy and the Ministry of Defense). It is designed to monitor and analyze national and global information space as an environment for threats to information security, to develop and implement mechanisms and technologies to effectively combat, and to minimize or localize existing damage content, manifestations of information warfare, etc. At the same time, it is widely believed that “today in Ukraine there is no clearly organized system of development and implementation of unified state policy in the field of information security, which determines the priorities for the development of a single information space” [36]. O. Panchenko notes the following reasons for the unsatisfactory state of the information security system in Ukraine: – – – –

Unsystematic development of legislation governing of information sphere. Low level of legal and information culture of citizens and society in general. Unsatisfactory financing of information security activities. Insufficient development of information and communication technologies in the field of public administration, unwillingness of public authorities to use effective management technologies, and organization of interaction with citizens and business entities; – Insufficient level of training in the field of creation and use of information and communication technologies [36].

We conducted an expert sociological study in the period from 1 to 28 April 2020 in order to summarize the Ukrainian vision of information security and the national system of prevention and protection from threats to the global information space. Scientists from following higher education institutions took place: the National Academy of Public Administration under the president of Ukraine, National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine, National Academy of State Border Guard Service of Ukraine named after Bohdan Khmelnytsky, Interregional Academy of

106

O. Radchenko et al.

40 35 30 25

25

20 15 8

10

3

5 0 It is an extremely important and top priority

It is important along with other aspects of the nat. security

It is one of the usual functions of the state

0

0

It is not a priority of the state

It is not important, now the main thing is the economy

Fig. 6.1 Experts answer for the question “How important is it for Ukraine in the current conditions of the state information security policy and the implementation of active actions of public authorities to protect the information sovereignty of the state?”

Personnel Management, and National Aviation University. Their research interests include state information policy, national security, and information security states. Totally, 36 scientists and experts from Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Khmelnytskyi took part in the expert survey. 16 of them were doctors of science, and 20 were candidates of science. The first question was about how important it is in the current state of information security policy. Answers of the experts were almost unanimous in understanding that for Ukraine this is now one of the urgent and main problems that need to be addressed as a matter of priority (Fig. 6.1). The second question was to find out how real actions of the Ukrainian state to protect national information sovereignty correspond to the urgency and importance of this issue (Fig. 6.2). Diagram shows that experts underestimate the actions of public authorities of Ukraine to pursue an effective state information security policy. The third question was aimed to find out how much the citizen, society, and the state are integrated into the global information space through the daily use of certain technical information and communication devices (Fig. 6.3). It is worth noting that in answering this question, respondents were given the right to choose three options and evaluate them as a percentage. Analyzing the answers to this question, we note that given social status and peculiarities of life of respondents, scientists belong to the middle class. Picture does not show the state of Ukrainian society. It largely shows its active working part. We can see from Fig. 6.4 that active part of Ukrainian society is in fact fully integrated into the global information environment and can no longer do without work and home without a computer and especially a smartphone. The biggest difference is the role of the TV. It still dominates at home while computer dominates at work. The

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

6

107

25 20

16

15

11

10

5

4

5

0

0

They are efficient and fully meet the requirements

They are more efficient and sufficient

They are not effective enough

They are inefficient and do not meet requirements of the time

They do not withstand any criticism

Fig. 6.2 Experts’ answers for the question “How effective are actions of public authorities of Ukraine to protect the information sovereignty of the state?”

%

At home

100 88

90 80

92

At work 74

74

70 60

54

50

43

40 30 16

20 10

10

8

12

0 Computer, laptop

Smartphone, tablet

Fax, telephone

TV

Radio

Fig. 6.3 How is it possible to do at home and at work without the specified technical information and communication devices?

fourth question was to identify the main sources of information to the person (Fig. 6.4). We can see in this segment that traditional sources of information today are much inferior to the channels of the information society (with the exception of television, which still remains undisputed leader of influence). The next question is concerned on the existence of fakes in the information space, misinformation, and the ability of experts and ordinary citizens to distinguish true information from manipulation of consciousness (Fig. 6.5). We can see from the chart below the experts’ rate (perhaps overestimating) their own ability to distinguish between fakes and truth and rather low—such is the ability of ordinary citizens.

108

O. Radchenko et al.

Official websites of public authorities

10

Ukrainian newspapers and magazines

27 1

Russian newspapers and magazines Local publications

30 87

Ukrainian national TV channels Ukrainian local TV channels

17

Russian TV channels

7 12

Ukrainian radio

72

Ukrainian Internet media

24

Russian Internet sites

32

Internet blogs

81

Social Internet services, Facebook

66

Youtube, Telegram channels, Google

3

Advertising banners and billboards

13

From colleagues at work during

12

From relatives and friends during

0

10 20

30 40

40 50

60 70

80 90 100

Fig. 6.4 What sources are the main to receive information about current events? (Respondents had right to choose up to four answers with their priority ranking on a 100-point scale)

40

30

34

32

35 29

25 20 15 10

7 4

5

2

0 Too much

No more than in ordinary life

Are there too many fakes, misinformation and other threats to the information security of our state in the information space?

Personally, I Even I am am mostly sometimes capable incompetent

Citizens are mostly capable

Citizens are mostly incompeten

Are you personally and ordinary citizens able to distinguish misinformation, manipulative biased facts and fake information from true?

Fig. 6.5 Are there too many fakes, misinformation, and other threats to the information security of our state in the information space? Are you personally and ordinary citizens able to distinguish misinformation, manipulative biased facts, and fake information from true?

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

109

9

Official websites of public authorities Ukrainian newspapers and magazines

27

Russian newspapers and magazines Local publications

48 11 42

Ukrainian local TV channels 17

Ukrainian local social channels Russian TV channels

63 96

Russian aggressive propaganda Ukrainian Internet media

47

Russian Internet sites Internet blogs

73 32 81

Social Internet services, Facebook You Tube, Google Telegram-WhatsApp channels

24 66

Speeches of politicians to voters Rumors and gossips transmitted in the conversation

34 13 0

10 20 30 40 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Fig. 6.6 What channels of communication and to what extent do information threats to the national information sovereignty of Ukraine? (Respondents had the right to choose up to four answers with their priority ranking on a 100-point scale)

At the same time, expert survey showed understanding of the high level of threats to the information security of our country in the global and national information space. Logical continuation of the expert survey was identification of communication channels that spread the main information threats to the national information sovereignty of Ukraine and assessment of the level of information threats posed by such channels (Fig. 6.6). As expected, the biggest threats of respondents are seen from the Russian Federation. At the same time, the fourth place in terms of the level of threats of such widespread messengers as Telegram and WhatsApp channels was quite unexpected. However, closer examination of the domestic political discourse makes it clear that the vast majority of political gossip, rumors, outright fakes, and misinformation in Ukrainian politics “merge” through these channels. It often serves as a source for publication in online media and traditional media of Ukraine. The last question of the expert survey was to identify which threats to the information security of our country pose the greatest danger. According to scientists and experts in the field of national security, the five biggest such threats include Russian aggressive propaganda; “Digital Gap”—Ukraine’s lagging behind the world’s leading countries; lack of quality cybersecurity programs; and hacking into state databases and hacker attacks on official sites (Fig. 6.7). Figure 6.7 shows that four from five of the most relevant threats to Ukraine are related to cybersecurity. This concept is used to denote security of objects directly

110

O. Radchenko et al.

81

Russian aggressive propaganda The "digital gap" is Ukraine's growing gap with the world's leading nations

69 59

Lack of quality cybersecurity programs Hacker hacks of state databases

54 51

Hacker attacks on official sites Telegram- WhatsApp- channels

47

Low computer literacy of staff

45 40

Unauthorized remote aocess to the PC 34

Theft of confidential data of citizens

32

Electronic industrial espionage

26

Computer viruses and "Trojan worms"

23

Stealing logins, passwords, hacking mail Theft of funds from payment cards and

13

"Black PR", the onslaught of "compromising"

12 11

Dirty election technology Prejudiced information from bloggers

11

Software crashes

8

Spam

8 0

10 20

30

40

40

50

60

70

80 90 100

Fig. 6.7 What are the most harmful information threats for the national information sovereignty of Ukraine? (Respondents had the right to choose up to four answers with their priority ranking on a 100-point scale)

related to information and computer technology, digital networks of the global information space, network hardware, hardware, gadgets, and their software.

3 Conclusions Phenomenon of information security appeared in the modern era of transition of a significant number of information and communication processes of political life, economic life, social life, etc. It takes peculiarities of individual, community, state, and society as a whole [37]. This need is manifested in the creation of national and international information security systems designed to ensure the ability to withstand at the individual, group, and national levels global, external, and internal destructive harmful effects of the information environment, aggressive disinformation flows aimed at sociopolitical, financial and economic, and moral and psychological damage, undermining public self-identification and national unity, defragmentation of society, and destabilization of the sociopolitical system as a whole. The study showed that information security in modern conditions is an important objective prerequisite for successful functioning and progressive development of the

6

Formation of Information Security Systems of the State: Current Status,. . .

111

state, nation, and civilization. The most countries pay considerable attention to building national information security systems. The United States, Canada, Germany, and other developed countries showed the greatest success. It was also established that Ukraine lags far behind the world’s leading states in terms of creating an information security system and ensuring its effective functioning. Decreasing of “digital break” with the world’s leading countries, development and dissemination of effective cybersecurity programs with simultaneous mass training of public administration staff in computer and media literacy, and strengthening resistance to hacker attacks, hacking of databases and official websites of government agencies are highly important now.

References 1. Kastels, M. (2000). Information age: Economics, society and culture. Vyshcha shkola ekonomiky. 2. Nesterovych, V. F. (2020). Ensuring information security as a function of states in today’s challenges and threats. Philosophical and Methodological Problems of Law, 1, 136. 3. Panchenko, O. A. (2020). Information security in the context of challenges and threats to national security. Public Administration and Local Self-Government, 2, 59. 4. Across Europe? Nations Mold Cyber Defenses. http://www.defensenews.com/ 5. Zolotar, O. (2018). Information security: Theory and practice. ArtEk. 6. Dutchak, S., Opolska, N., Shchokin, R., Durman, O., & Shevtsiv, M. (2020). International aspects of legal regulation of information relations in the global internet network. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 23(3), 1–7. 7. Busol, O. US Information Security: Legislation and Prospects for Cooperation for Ukraine. http://nbuviap.gov.ua/index.php?option¼com_content&view¼article&id¼2988: informatsijna-bezpeka-ssha-zakonodavche-regulyuvannyata-perspektivi-spivpratsi-dlyaukrajini&catid¼8&Itemid¼350 8. Nesteriak, I. (2014). International criteria of information security of the state: Theoretical and methodological analysis. Public Administration: Theory and Practice, 1, 63. 9. Nowa Strategia Bezpieczeństwa Narodowego z podpisem Prezydenta. Szczególna rola cyberprzestrzeni oraz przestrzeni informacyjnej. https://www.cyberdefence24.pl/nowastrategia-bezpieczenstwa-narodowego-z-podpisem-prezydenta-szczegolna-rolacyberprzestrzeni-oraz-przestrzeni-informacyjnej 10. Aliamkin, R., & Fedorin, M. (2013). Legal support of national information security. Scientific Notes of the Institute of Legislation of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 4, 93–94. 11. Demartyno, A. P. (2019). Resources of information warfare in the military-political strategy of the United States and China. State and law Series: Political Science, 84, 60–61. 12. Hubanova, T., Shchokin, R., Hubanov, O., Antonov, V., Slobodianiuk, P., & Podolyaka, S. (2021). Information technologies in improving crime prevention mechanisms in the border regions of southern Ukraine. Journal of Information Technology Management, 13, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.22059/JITM.2021.80738 13. Buchyk, S. (2015). Analysis of the main approaches to creating a classifier of threats to public information resources. Collection of Scientific Works of ZhVI, 12, 130–139. 14. Chappell, L. (2012). Germany, Poland and the common security and defence policy: Converging security and defence perspectives in an enlarged EU. Palgrave Macmillan. 15. Cyber-und Informationsraum: http://cir.bundeswehr.de/portal/a/cir/start 16. Agencja Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego (ABW). https://antykorupcja.gov.pl/ak/import/ instytucje-zaangazowane/3417,Agencja-Bezpieczenstwa-Wewnetrznego-ABW.html

112

O. Radchenko et al.

17. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2 879/paper04.pdf 18. Tkachuk, T. Y. (2018). Ensuring information security in terms of European integration of Ukraine: Legal dimension: Monograph. ArtEk. 19. Tkachuk, T. (2019). Legal support of information security in terms of European integration of Ukraine. Uzhhorod National University. 20. Information Superhighway. (1995). An overview of technology challenges. Report to the USA Congress. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED381176.pdf 21. Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on advances in information and telecommunications in the context of international security (A/65/201). (2012). United Nations. 22. Communication from the European Commission: Network and Information Security: Proposal for a European Policy Approach.://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/2002/ news_library/ pdf_files/netsec_en.pdf 23. Biuro Bezpieczeństwa Narodowego. https://en.bbn.gov.pl 24. Act on the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI Act—BSIG). https://www.bsi.bund.de/ DE/DasBSI/Gesetz/gesetz.html 25. Bangemann, M., et al. (1994). Recommendations to the European council: Europe and the global information society. Korfu. 26. Remarks by (he President on securing our nation’s cyber infrastructure). https://www. whitehouse.gov/ 27. Boiko, V. D., Vasylenko, M. D, & Kukharenko, S. V. Cybersecurity in the EU and member states: genesis and problems of its increase. http://www.academy.ssu.gov.ua/en/page/page_1 581426437.htm 28. Prezydent Duda ofiarą pranksterów, czyli jak rosyjski żart obnażył luki w systemie bezpieczeństwa kancelarii. https://cyberdefence24.pl/bezpieczenstwo-informacyjnewiadomosci/prezydent-duda-ofiara-pranksterow-czyli-jak-rosyjski-zart-obnazyl-luki-wsystemie-bezpieczenstwa-kancelarii 29. Panfilov, O. Y. (2019). Socio-humanitarian sphere of Ukraine in modern discourses: Monograph. HIF KNTEU. 30. The activities of public authorities threaten information security. https://helsinki.org.ua/articles/ diyalnist-orhaniv-derzhavnoji-vlady-zahrozhuje-informatsijnij-bezpetsi/ 31. Gordienko, S. Doctrinal provisions of information security of Ukraine in modern conditions. https://lexinform.com.ua/dumka-eksperta/doktrynalni-polozhennya-informatsijnoyi-bezpekyukrayiny-v-umovah-suchasnosti/ 32. Turchak, A. (2019). The main components of information security of the state. Aspects of Public Administration, 5, 45. 33. Kalinichenko, N. Reformed press - the Ukrainian army. http://sumypost.com/sumynews/ obwestvo/nataliya-kalinichenko-reformed-press-ukrayinskij-armiyi/ 34. Bukhtatyi, O. (2019). Ye.: Public communications of a democratic state: A monograph. VADNDU. 35. NGO “INFORMATION SECURITY”. http://inform-security.com/ua 36. Issues of activity of the Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine. (2015). Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of January 14, 2014 № 2. Official Gazette of Ukraine, 6(124), 36. 37. Shvets, V. Y., Rozdobudko, E. V., & Solomina, G. V. (2013). Aggregated methodology of multicriterion economic and ecological examination of the ecologically oriented investment projects. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu, 3, 139–144.

Part III

Strategic Communications

Chapter 7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of State and Society in the Context of National Security Oleksandr Radchenko , Fedir Venislavskyi , Оlenа Krutii Oleksandrа Marusheva , and Oleksii Kriukov

,

Abstract Five mechanisms of information exchange with society are identified based on the analysis of the evolution of public participation in social communication processes. These are dictation, propaganda (one-sided public information), advertising (publicity), two-way asymmetric information, and two-way symmetrical dialogue. Modern model of information and communication interaction between the state and society is proposed. It has a three-level nature of modern communication channels and also contains such fundamental innovations as a “trust filter” and “value filter of communication channel.” The use of information, communication, and psychological tools of strategic communications is designed to ensure public support or at least loyalty of critical mass of citizens to official public policy and institutions of government as an important internal factor of national security. The current level of public policy in Ukraine in the field of public communications is assessed as not only far from optimal. It also loses to modern systems of developed countries. Keywords Trust filter · Value filter · Information exchange · Dictation · Propaganda · National security O. Radchenko (✉) Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland F. Venislavskyi Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine О. Krutii Educational and Scientific Institute “Institute of Public Administration” of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine O. Marusheva National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Kriukov National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_7

115

116

O. Radchenko et al.

1 The Problem Statement Global information space fundamentally changes existing models of information and communication interaction between public authorities and civil society. It is manifested in significant loss of state power as the dominant subject of such interaction. The power was indisputable throughout human history. Hyperdynamic changes in information and communication technologies, their widespread distribution, significant simplification of access conditions, their use and growing needs of individual for information available to public authorities, and possibility of alternative views and alternative access to public information created favorable conditions for human formation of new type—“Homo-Communicatees.” Special difference of which is not physical strength or financial wealth, but the ability to actively and widely communicate in public. Individual citizen or ordinary blogger today is able to compete in information and communication interaction with the entire state apparatus of the country. Undoubtedly, information and communication activity is an important element of modern individual socialization. It is associated with its social nature. Level of communicative activity of the individual is able to objectively reflect readiness of society as a whole to move into the world of information society. At the same time, unification and standardization processes of the atomized individual are typical for the modern information society. It increasingly complicates managing task of social and political behavior of people. Today, special place in the information and communication policy of the state is occupied by methods of covert information and psychological influence. They are designed to legitimize actions of official power, emphasize its effectiveness for political regime stability of political institutions, and ensure proper level of national security [1, 2]. All listed above forces ruling political elite to look for new political technologies that can provide mass public support for activities of the country’s public authorities. It is no coincidence that the latest model of information and communication interaction between the state and society—strategic communications—appeared at the “junction” of national security, defense, and public administration. Iu. Shlapak notes that “in developed countries it is necessary to modernize public administration and informative influence on the target audience. There is a constant search for new forms and ways to achieve goals by such countries through the information space. This process can provide strategic communications systems of public management of strategic goals” [3]. In the future, we will consider the historical evolution of information and communication interaction models of the state and society in the context of national security.

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

117

2 Main Material Presentation Each stage of civilizational development of society is characterized by certain inherent models and mechanisms of information and communication interaction of power subjects with citizens. Such interaction is continuous and, in fact, infinite. Its necessity was internal security nature of ensuring proper level of legitimacy of the current state power in order to avoid popular uprisings, revolutions, and other attempts to forcibly change ruling elite. The nature of such interaction ranged from hard coercion to flirting with masses. But the goal was always the same—to continue domination. We can most broadly identify five mechanisms used in the relevant stages of gradual democratization if turn to evolution of understanding of public authorities’ participation in the processes of social communication and information exchange with society [1, 3–8]: – Dictation mechanism when the state proved relevant information about its activities by order, without being interested in citizens’ reaction. – Propaganda mechanism (one-sided public information) when public authorities selectively and purposefully informed public about certain public administration decisions, using elements of neurolinguistic programming and zombie population. – Advertising (publicity) mechanism when public authorities in accordance with philosophy of relations “service provider (government)-client (citizen)” advertise their activities, using forms and methods of business advertising characterized by one-sided manipulative approach. – Bilateral asymmetric information mechanism when the state studies main preferences and requests of society in order to adjust or change them. Feedback in such system plays an indicator role of public consciousness manipulation effectiveness through which public authorities try to form public opinion in a favorable light. – Bilateral symmetrical dialogue mechanism when public authorities renounce dictation, propaganda, and manipulation and enter into an equal partnership dialogue with society and its components up to ordinary citizens on principles of partnership and consensus (Fig. 7.1). At the same time, the first two technologies of information pressure and one-sided information are characteristic of patriarchal, totalitarian, and authoritarian countries. They are destructive for society. They give only temporary positive effect but in the future inevitably lead to decline in confidence, growing protest, illegitimacy, and inefficiency of government. New institutional models are appeared with gradual transition of humanity to democracy. They should be considered through the prism of classical theories of democracy with focus on management content and features of information and communication interaction of their state and society. Classical liberal democracy is based on the Anglo-Saxon tradition which considers democracy as a responsible and competent government in free society. Main principles of liberal democratic model are the following:

118

O. Radchenko et al.

Models of communicative interaction between state and civil society Propaganda, information pressure of state on society

One-sided informing without feedback

Mechanism of

Mechanism of commandadministrative management

total public coercion

Informing and

Bilateral

information

informing

manipulation

with feedback

Mechanism of political and administrative manipulation

mechanism of patronage social interaction

Communicative dialogue on the principles of partnership

Mechanism of social dialogue and partnership

Mechanisms of relationship between state power and civil society

Falling trust, growing protest, illegitimacy and inefficiency of government

Temporary growth of trust with its inevitable subsequent decline

Growth of trust, legitimacy, stability and efficiency of power

Fig. 7.1 Political technologies of communicative interaction between government and society

– Constitutional liberalism—legal and social, political, economic, religious, and other rights and freedoms of citizens. – Clear division of power and effective system of checks and balances. – Limited competence of executive branch and its accountability which is provided by parliament, independent judiciary, and ombudsmen. – Free, regular competitive elections, result of which is uncertain. – Rights protection of cultural, ethnic, religious, and other minorities. – Presence of permanent channels of expression and representation of interests and values of citizens in the form of parties, associations, and independent media. – Rule of law, which protects citizens from arbitrary arrest, terror, torture, and unjustified interference in their personal lives by not only the state but also organized antisocial forces [4]. Actually, the process of establishing principle of democracy depends on general level of society development, on type of political culture that dominates it. Values of the liberal democratic political regime are self-worth of autonomous individual, its freedom to determine forms, scope of its energy, and choice of activity, i.e., the idea of individualism and humanism. Liberal democracy is not characterized by grand coalition existence. It to some extent limits participation of certain political groups in parliament. This phenomenon is justified, as there is a possibility that grand coalition will upset balance of relations between branches of government. Principle of responsibility dominates over the principle of complicity in liberal model of democracy. High degree of each segment of government autonomy has negative impact on policy pursued in liberal democratic regime. This is explained by the fact that constitution enshrines powers that people delegate to their elected officials. It follows that each segment has the right to make decision that meets represented

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

119

Mechanism of information and communicative interaction: elements and content essence Leading Subject of interaction

Statement of strategy, goals and objectives

Forming a policy agenda

lmplementat ion of policy and

Parity central

Central public authority in accordance with constitutional norms, powers and competence

Each public authority within the limits of

With respect for non-intersection of competencies and mutual noninterference in management

and regional authorities

its competence with a high degree of independence

Political responsibility

Responsibility of the authorities to society for creating conditions for the freedom of realization of the individual

Fig. 7.2 Mechanism of information and communication interaction of public authorities in liberal democracy

group. However, when each group sees solution of issues related to the whole society in the use of different ways, it only increases chaos and confrontation. The role of information component in the liberal model of democracy was clearly highlighted by Kenneth Minogue, who noted that “political reality runs through relationships, not through individuals who are in that relationship” [5]. Liberal democracy ideology in information and communication interaction of government bodies presupposes guiding principle of decentralization, as no state “will ever be able to reproduce diversity of individual activity” [6]. According to this principle, the scope of government should be limited. Its main function should be to protect freedom, maintain law and order, enforce private agreements, and promote market competition. Therefore, in this model, there is no comprehensive hierarchy of interaction between authorities. There is a significant separation of functions and relevant relationships. Local and regional authorities have high degree of autonomy and information independence. Central bodies act as coordinators rather than main subjects of information and communication interaction (Fig. 7.2). Another important principle is state power dispersal because “government should exercise power better in county than in state and better in state than in Washington. The great tragedy of centralization pursuit is that it is run by well-meaning people which will be the first to regret its consequences” [6]. This means sufficient degree of local authorities’ independence in policy-making and implementation, in information interaction, and in political responsibility. Participatory democracy provides active participation of citizens in discussion and decision-making on the most important issues of public life and public administration and conscious and active participation in political processes, including elections. This concept and the term “participatory democracy” (from the English term participate) were proposed in 1970 by K. Peitman [9]. In participatory society, citizens are well informed and interested in their own involvement in processes of public administration and elections. Thus, participatory concept treats democracy as full self-government of citizens. In this case, political participation is interpreted not as means to end but as direct end in itself.

120

O. Radchenko et al.

According to the authors of this theory, public administration should promote participation of citizens not only in democratic elections, solving the most important issues of state development in national referendums, but also participation of citizens directly in political decision-making and monitoring their implementation. To this end, participatory concept emphasizes power decentralization principle and broad development of self-government and municipal government. Iu. Bigunov and A. Ponedilko note that participatory approach “ensures maximum consideration of people interests in decision-making, increases its activity in public life, strongly legitimizes power in people eyes, excludes its alienation from public administration” [10]. Participatory model of information and communicative interaction provides implementation of such organizational and legal measures in public administration, which provide the following: – – – – – – – – –

Stimulating development of civil society institutions. Openness and transparency of public authorities. Wide involvement of citizens’ majority in public administration. Introduction of state-power mechanism where all officials are accountable to ordinary voters. Legislative consolidation of effective mechanisms of public control over adoption of political decisions by public authorities and their implementation. State stimulation of broad public initiatives. Use of referendums, public hearings, and other mechanisms to express public opinion to adjust both state and local policies. Development of state mechanism on principles of decentralization and deconcentration of power and broad development of local self-government. Improving system of territorial organization of power, redistribution of powers of government bodies so that public administration is as close as possible to people, and broad sections of society and public associations were involved in public administration.

Participatory mechanism of information and communication interacts from previous one in that, in addition to a wide range of leaders of civil society institutions, it creates opportunities for active participation in preparation and adoption of public administration decisions and directly in public administration for ordinary citizens. Such participation is chaotic and does not always contribute to the development of a balanced most effective solution (Fig. 7.3). The need for political participation of citizens’ majority is conditioned by the authors of the participatory theory. Political passivity and reduction of participation of ordinary citizens in public administration decisions will inevitably lead to “minority tyranny,” when political elite can impose any decisions on the people and democracy becomes a symbiosis of aristocracy with oligarchy [11]. The theory of “elite democracy” originates from such reservations. If “masses” are not interested in politics; do not have appropriate knowledge, skills, and information; and do not know how to make right political decisions, then the most effective state mechanism will be one where the right to make political decisions

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

121

Mechanism of information and communicative interaction: elements and content essence Forming of

Leading interaction entity

Statement of strategy, goals and objectives

policy agenda

Central and regional authorities with the participation of political leaders

Parliament in accordance with public consensus after broad discussion

Is in the hands of political leaders of the active part of the political system (party and public figures)

lmplementation of policy and management

With the broad participation of citizens in public administration processes

Political responsibility

Responsibility of authorities to society and citizens of the "maidan" type

Fig. 7.3 Mechanism of information and communication interaction of public authorities in participatory democracy

belongs to competent professionals—the elite. Founder of this approach J. Schumpeter called its concept “theory of competing leaders,” but the most widespread is the name “elite democracy.” Schumpeter actually overturns democratic pyramid “citizen-elections-public authorities.” According to him, “election of representatives is secondary to primary goal of democracy, namely to empower voters to make political decisions. We will change roles of these two elements and make problems solution of by voters secondary to choice of decision-makers. We will assume that role of people is to create mediating body. It in turn forms executive body or government” [12]. The elitist model of information and communication interaction involves implementation of the following organizational and legal measures in public administration: – Democracy performs purely technical function as a mechanism by which members of the elite “gain power to make decisions by competing for votes of voters” [13]. – Movement of management information occurs from top to bottom both vertically of public authorities and vertically of public party activity. State, political, and party elites should receive primary information from cities, but lower bodies and structures hardly take part in the development and adoption of management decisions. – Party-political structuring of society takes place around certain number of political leaders. The highest positions in the state are won by personalities, not by political parties or blocs, and the government is not formed on a coalition basis, but is selected by the prime minister. – Executive vertical (together with its regional leaders) is formed “under the leader” according to the principles of centralization and concentration of power, and in case of change of the president (prime minister), the government and regional heads of executive bodies mostly change. – The state tries to control information space and pursue an active policy of spreading elite views in society.

122

O. Radchenko et al.

Mechanism of information and communicative interaction: elements and content essence Leading interaction entity

Statement of strategy, goals and objectives

policy agenda

Professional

Behind closed doors, a popular plebiscite is allowed and public discussion

It is in the hands of political elite and the state bureaucracy at their discretion

political or hereditary elite

Forming of

lmplementation of policy and management

Hierarchical link of public administration bodies without people participation

Political responsibility

Responsibility to the top political leadership, to people only during elections

Fig. 7.4 Mechanism of information and communication interaction of public authorities in elite democracy

– The state does not promote political activity of population, because “voters should respect division of labor between the elite and society and understand that they should not engage in politics until the next election” [14]. The elitist model creates all conditions for state “oligarchization”—corporatization of power, its separation from the population, secrecy and control of information, strengthening centralization, and administrative methods of government in conditions where there is virtually no responsibility of voters for political decisions and elite omnipotence. The elitist mechanism concentrates all levers of political governance, development, and adoption of public administration decisions in hands of small stratum of the political and administrative elite. In applying this mechanism, the role of plebiscite adviser remains in the people’s state, and its participation in public administration processes is reduced to the selection procedure among competing elites during elections (see Fig. 7.4). Thus, elite democracy removes all responsibility for political decisions from citizens and transfers it to elite shoulders. However, it has no mechanisms to counterthreat of “minority tyranny” and does not offer effective mechanisms for elite to abuse their power. Plato’s warning that “there is no human soul that will resist temptation of power” is ignored by the authors of the elite theory [15]. Creators of another pluralistic concept of democracy (in particular G. Lasky, D. Truman, R. Dahl, R. Merton, and G. Eckstein) tried to get rid of such contradictions. On the one hand, they still remain on positions of elitism, considering democracy not as people power, but as power with people consent. However, this consent is given not to a limited number of elites, but to a much larger number of interest groups that are constantly in conflict in society. None of interest groups can dominate in society. Moreover, the same person has not one but much more interests. So it belongs to different interest groups; therefore, “minority tyranny” is impossible. Political legitimization is got to population majority in the course of reaching political compromise.

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

123

Mechanism of information and communicative interaction: elements and content essence Leading interaction entity

Statement of strategy, goals and objectives

Professional politicians, pressure groups, big business

Behind closed doors, a popular plebiscite is allowed and public discussion

Forming of policy agenda

It is carried out by the parliament and the government under the influence of pressure groups taking into account their interests

lmplementation of policy and management

Hierarchical link of public administration bodies without people participation the

Political responsibility

Responsibility to senior political leadership and party owners (sponsors)

Fig. 7.5 Mechanism of information and communication interaction of public authorities in pluralistic democracy

Pluralistic concept occupies mediocre position in a man understanding as an individual and people as a whole. According to this concept, people belong to various interest groups, which in different configurations are united in struggle for power (or making certain political decisions). Interest balance of different social groups and constant search for compromises between them is a dynamic process that should restrain power monopolization. Information and communication interaction in pluralistic democracy is open and competitive. Any social group can express its point of view in diversity of mass media, and public authorities must react to it. Information policy nature of state bodies is aimed at broad dialogue with society, active use of public hearings, and other forms of taking into account the point of view of society in development and adoption of public administration decisions. Websites of official public authorities have interactive elements for citizens, as well as sessions of these bodies, important meetings, etc. There are broadcast online on the Internet [16]. Pluralistic mechanism of forming state policy and political environment by several powerful centers of influence (dominant parliamentary factions) is built on coordination within framework of state policy of diverse corporate and group interests. It involves co-opting representatives of corporate structures (unions, financial-industrial groups) and small business, cultural and other civil society organizations, etc. through parties and elections, legitimizing lobbying and pressure groups, and creating special institutional structures such as tripartite commissions on employers, trade unions, and the state (see Fig. 7.5). Today, the most perfect concept of democracy is polyarchy. Translated from the Greek words polis which means numerous and archi chief or senior, polyarchy is “many chiefs”—power of many institutions of civil society. This term was proposed to define institutional decisions in public administration by R. Dahl. He was one of the founders of classical pluralistic model, which was modernized into a polyarchy. Dahl noted that “polyarchy is a political order with two large-scale characteristics: civil rights are granted to relatively large number of adults, and these rights

124

O. Radchenko et al.

themselves allow to disagree and by voting to remove the highest officials in public administration” [17]. Control over government decisions on the political course is constitutionally assigned to elected officials under polyarchic model. Universal suffrage is complemented by the same right of adult population to run for elected office in government. Elected public authorities and officials are elected through frequent and fair elections, during which coercion is relatively rare. Election campaign takes place in conditions of association freedom, freedom of speech, and availability of legally protected alternative sources of information. Citizens have the right to express their views without threat of severe punishment on the widest range of political issues, including criticism of officials, government, regime, socioeconomic order, and dominant ideology. Polyarchy provides one precaution. According to Adam Przeworski, the main weakness of electoral democracy is “certainty of procedures for uncertainty of results” [18], i.e., there are no (and cannot be) any mechanisms in this system that would protect it from authoritarian or totalitarian groups coming to the power. Therefore, polyarchy presupposes the existence of democratic deliberation—constant process of discussion by political community of the most important problems of public administration, search, evaluation, and reassessment of management decisions and their alternatives and thus the correction of the political course. Polyarchic mechanism of state policy and political environment formation is based on various differentiations of society and wide participation in public power of various ethnocultural, political, professional, spiritual, and civil society organizations and small and medium business. Their representation in public authorities is so wide that none of the interest groups (pressures) has decisive control over the government. It requires decisions to be made only on consensus basis. In fact, there is a mechanism of democracy, as J. Schumpeter’s definition is widely known where democracy is actually recognized as a mechanism of public administration: “democracy is just a method, certain type of institutional arrangement to achieve legislative and administrative policy decisions” [13]. Pluralism of various organizations and decision-making centers does not exclude freedom and political participation of the individual under the polyarchy. In contrast to classical liberal democracy (which by its nature is individualistic), modern democracy is more socially oriented, and democracy is not only of free individuals but also of political parties, interest groups, associations, and others. Polyarchic mechanism of public administration, according to R. Dahl, consists of following main institutions which “emerged as at least partial response to requirements of full participation of citizens in political life” [19]: – – – – – –

Election of officials. Free, fair elections held regularly. Freedom of speech. Access to alternative sources of information. Autonomy of associations. General civil rights.

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

125

Mechanism of information and communicative interaction: elements and content essence Leading interaction entity

Statement of strategy, goals and objectives

Wide range of political and public leaders, deputies

After wide public discussion and finding public consensus

Forming of policy agenda

Carried out by parliament and government under the influence of civil society leaders

lmplementation of policy and management

In partnership with public administration and civil society

Political responsibility

Real responsibility of public authorities to the society represented by their leaders

Fig. 7.6 Mechanism of information and communication interaction of public authorities in polyarchic democracy

Polyarchic model of information and communication interaction between state and public authorities provides for creation of public administration system where sociopolitical institutions aimed at full democratization of society and public administration, freedom of speech, and alternative sources of information should function successfully. Powers of government are redistributed so that public administration is as close as possible to the people, and broad sections of society and public associations are involved in public administration in the system of territorial organization of power (see Fig. 7.6). Polyarchy ensures and legally and judicially protects free functioning of alternative sources of information and citizens’ right to express their views without threat of severe punishment on the widest range of political issues, including criticism of officials, government, regime, socioeconomic order, and dominant ideology. State, subject to priority observance of information rights and freedoms of the individual by legal and organizational methods, ensures the most active information interaction; in particular, it ensures the right of citizens to freely create relatively independent associations or organizations, including independent mass media. The format of “public dialogue” is widely used in polyarchic model [20]. This point of view is shared by T. Andriichuk. He notes that “main feature of communicative support of public policy as a component of strategic communications is dialogue and interaction with stakeholders—entities whose interests are influenced by public policy or who may participate in it. In this context communicative support of public policy is closely linked to democratic processes in particular processes of discussion and public participation which is underlied in deliberative (advisory) and participatory (participatory) models of democracy. Connection with society is important for the democratization of political governance. Accordingly, it should be an important component of strategic government communications” [21]. It is obvious that establishment of feedback between government and society affects quality of information transmission to the audience, because of exact ideas of governing body about management object and not only fundamental “in general.” It is also detailed, operational, and associated with particular situation and is an integral

126

O. Radchenko et al.

part and condition of effective management. Under the influence of modern information and communication technologies, the nature of public administration is changed its character: state coercion on the one hand is transformed into the form of expert management of society; on the other, it becomes kind of episodic communication based on political choice. Effective system of communication relations ideally solves two most important tasks of public policy. At the international level, it contributes to the formation of state positive image and is key to its security information in the formation of the information society and risks of information wars. At the domestic level, it provides necessary level of public trust (derived from trust of public support for government action) and is key to effective public administration, making optimal management decisions and establishing feedback from the public. At the same time, even in countries with developed democracies, the use of indirect or covert mechanisms to influence political behavior of citizens is expanding. Covert influence technologies should include indirect technologies of political influence and manipulation (third model in Fig. 7.1). One of the universal models of covert (i.e., indirect) control was developed by V. Sheinov. In this model, covert management of person (addressee of influence) means such leading influence on it by governing subject (initiator) where on the one hand the true purpose of initiator is hidden from addressee. On the other, it advertises another goal (attractive for recipient). Manipulation is seen as covert control of addressee against its will where initiator (manipulator) receives unilateral advantage or benefit at expense of addressee (victim) and fraud is manipulation of victim in illegal ways under criminal law. Deception on the other hand is deliberate and dishonest message to addressee (victim) of deliberately erroneous information with dishonest purpose. This is the easiest way to manipulate. This is a form of fraud if it is used to inflict property damage on the victim [22]. It should be added that deception committed by politicians in order to attract the votes of voters is often hidden under the most decent names such as “candidate’s election program.” The latest analytics of portal “Slovo i Dilo” counted a number of fulfilled and unfulfilled election promises of President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky during 2 years of his rule. Picture is turned out to be quite disappointing: only 8 were fulfilled out of 34 promises. Unfulfilled key ones were chosen: ending the war in Donbass, overcoming poverty era, reducing utility tariffs, preventing persecution for criticizing the government, etc. [23]. Consideration of information and communication interaction models between public authorities and civil society would be incomplete without disclosure of logical and technological chain of the information message from the government to its recipient—citizen. In European scientific discourse, a two-stage communication model of P. Lazarsfeld and cybernetic model of K. Shannon and W. Weaver are classic in this respect. P. Lazarsfeld’s two-level model identifies the leader of public opinion (LPO) as a key element of information and communication chain (Fig. 7.7). It relays primary message as certain moderator who directs already adjusted the flow of information from its source to recipient on the basis of his own values.

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

Sourse Message Channel

Initial flow

Public opinion

Secondry flow

leaders (moderators)

127

Secondary channel Recipient

Fig. 7.7 P. Lazarsfeld’s two-level model of mass communication

Source (output signal)

TRANSMITTER

CHANNEL

RECEIVER

Recipient (output signal)

Information NOISE (interference) Source (feedback signal)

RECEIVER

CHANNEL

TRANSMITTER

Recipient (reactive signal)

Fig. 7.8 Cybernetic model of communication between K. Shannon and W. Weaver

In turn, cybernetic model of K. Shannon and W. Weaver takes into account the existence of mass communication channels, which at their discretion can correct input information and introduce concept of “information noise” which can also distort original message (Fig. 7.8). We propose to move to a more effective modern information model of communicative interaction of the state and society combining these models and taking into account restructuring of communicative space of the state in information society in particular the three-tier nature of modern communication channels, as well as such fundamental innovations as “trust filter” and “value channel communication filter” (Fig. 7.9). We determined the formation of positive perception of individual unfiltered feedback considering proposed model of official information passing and state information messages (carried out by “state spokespersons”—high-ranking officials, politicians, their spokesmen, expressing official position of government) to recipient –citizen. In modern conditions, the vast majority of state information messages and its bodies are not transmitted through direct communication channel between state spokesman and citizen as information consumer. In our opinion, this process takes place in three hierarchical levels. Main actors of the first (national) level of information and communication interaction are state and its central bodies represented by a set of state spokesmen and a set (1 to N ) of communication channels of the first level (where we include many central media—traditional media, news agencies, and Internet resources of the national sphere of distribution (∑MCM11-N ). It receives information directly from state spokesmen in the form of the primary message—ideas, opinions, and action plans that the state wants to convey to citizen in least distorted form).

128

O. Radchenko et al.

Sstate as a source of information

(head of state)

Authorized speakers a public authority

Initial message

Initial message Gatekeeper (separator)

K1-n value filter (channel editor 1)

Value filter Kn (channel editor N)

Reflection of message according to channel 1

Reflection of message according to channel N

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION CHANNEL OF FEEDBACK

Set of national information and communication channels ∑ZIKK1-N

Trust filter

Trust filter

Reflection 1-N

MK1-n value filter (local channel editor 1)

MKn value filter (local channel editor N)

Reflection of 1-N message according to local channel 1 policy

Reflection of 1-N message according to local channel 1Npolicy

Set of regional and lkocal information and communication channels ∑ZIKK1-N

Trust filter

Trust filter

Reflection 2-N

Own value filter of Leader of public opinions LPO1 (beliefs, attitudes)

Own value filter of Leader of public opinions LPO N (beliefs, attitudes)

Reflection of 2-N message according to LPO1 values

Reflection of 2-N message according to LPO N values

The public opinion of the territorial community is emboided in the values of the Leaders of Public Opinions ∑LPO1-N

Personal trust filter CITIZEN

Personal trust filter

Fig. 7.9 Three-level model of information and communication interaction of state and society

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

129

Characteristic features of communicative interaction at first-order communication channel level are: – Wide range of possible forms and use of interaction between government and the MCM both in institutional terms and in informal (legal, administrative, economic, personalized, etc. interaction). – Direct communication of state spokesmen with representatives of MCM. – Relative targeting of recipients of official information (usually accredited journalists). – Close relations between MCM owners and state authorities (both in positive plan—“pro-government media” and in the negative—“opposition media”). – Availability of central sources of unofficial information within public authorities where there is greater awareness of processes and decisions in public administration. Main actors of second (local) level of information and communication interaction are regional public authorities (repeaters of official information of the state), communication channels of the first level, and set of (from 1 to N ) communication channels of the second level (where we include many regional and local MCM— traditional mass media and Internet resources of local sphere of distribution (∑MCM 21-N ). It receives information from the MCM of the first level in the form of their own reflection of primary official information (reflection 1) and from repeaters of official state information in the form of primary message) [24]. Characteristic features of information and communication interaction at level of second-order communication channels are: – Lack of direct communication between media and state spokesmen and insignificant communication with repeaters of state opinion and unaddressedness of official information recipients. – Chaotic nature of influence and forms of interaction between government and the MCM (from full control of MCM by local authorities with possibility of newspaper censoring to MCM actual independence from local authorities). – Much higher level of citizens trust (for first-level communication channels). – Lack of opportunities for local media to have their own “unfiltered” information through communication intermediaries on processes and decisions in public administration. Third-level communication channels are fundamentally different from previous ones. They are not institutionalized in the form of certain media, but represent certain individualized environment of civil society elite. Main actors of the third (interpersonal) level are the so-called leaders of public opinion, passionate citizens who receive reflected information from the first and second order channels and form average individual attitude to it. Characteristic features of information and communication interaction at the communication channel level of the third order are:

130

O. Radchenko et al.

– Absolute absence of direct communication with state spokesmen or repeaters of state opinion and maximum independence from central and local authorities. – Maximum level of trust of ordinary citizens. – Tendency to critically perceive any “filtered” by communicative intermediaries’ information about processes and decisions in public administration and to form their own point of view on each pressing sociopolitical issue. Exactly how information will pass through each mass communication channel depends on channel value filter embodied on the first and second levels by the editor in chief. The channel value filter is decisive at the first national level of information and communication interaction. Yes, pro-government neither channels will provide the closest possible to original message reflection of information on their channels. Opposition channels will severely criticize initial information and try to find (and reflect) possible shortcomings, miscalculations, and weaknesses of the state message or distort it altogether. Thus, information from state spokesmen will be more or less corrected and in the future will go to the general public in the form of “reflection 1” having passed value filter of first-level communication channels. Moreover, this information is disseminated to public audience (an indefinite number of people) as well as to second-level communication channels—mass media of local sphere of distribution. Passage of official information and transformation of its meanings takes place through appropriate “Value filter K2-n (channel editor)” [25]. Second-order communication channels receive official information from primary sources (first-level communication channels). At this level, the nature of information and communication interaction is determined by value filters of individual channels and trust filter of information source. Psychologists are well aware that distrust of information source automatically turns into distrust of content of information. Meanwhile, it is well known that local media enjoy more trust from citizens, especially public opinion leaders, than central national media. Therefore, despite the rapid pace of development of the latest information and communication technologies, the most effective and efficient means of communication for the Ukrainian society is still the traditional media. They provide feedback: – First, between indefinite circles of persons, which forms audience for which “filtered” official information is intended. – Second, between audience and media. – Third, between audience and state. – Fourth, between state and traditional media. This is the fundamental difference in the functioning of second-level communication channels. Local media and Internet resources exert more effective media influence on certain social groups, primarily on communicatively active individuals who are leaders of public opinion due to the greater trust of the target population, Second-order communication channels receive certain “information mix” in the form of messages from local high-ranking public opinion repeaters and various

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

131

“level 1 mirrors.” They finally defragment information content by passing information flow through editor’s own trust filters and value filters. Therefore, information that evokes the highest level of institutional trust (to source and the message itself) reaches society already in the form of “second-level reflection.” It can differ significantly from original state message and come in large number of different interpretations and cause a “spam effect.” But such information is still not a real source for own opinion of forming of the average citizen who, according to social psychologists {due to the effect of the “spiral of silence” (E. Noel-Neumann [26, 27])}, is not inclined to take responsibility for forming their own political position. Such citizen prefers to join point of view of public opinion leaders. In turn, own point of view of public opinion leaders is formed as a result of defragmented information content passage through their own “Value Filter LSD1-N.” Mandatory element of communicative activity of public opinion leader is the ability to find and disseminate information through various sources, official resources, press, television and radio, and Internet, and the ability to use it effectively. An important aspect is mastering basics of analytical information processing. It involves the ability to work with different information and its sources. It should be noted that the average individual receives a certain amount of official information through the first- and second-level communication channels. Due to the low level of trust in these channels, their direct effectiveness is much inferior to effectiveness of direct communication with public opinion leaders in which opinion is taken as own (in case of individual personal trust to the given leader of public opinion) or categorically rejected by citizen (in case of personal distrust to the leader of public opinion). It is no coincidence that James Curran notes among key trends in the development of modern information and communication space: increasing mediatization of public policy, increasing interaction between media and society, growing influence of innovative media and the Internet, and focusing on the latest media, especially electronic on much more targeted delivery of information (up to technological personalization, when computer on the analysis basis of your appeals to search engine independently determines your information interests and at next inclusion already offers news on this hardware-defined topic) [28]. That is why the state should build its new communication strategy not on the dominance of informing first-level communication channels (as it is happening now), but on strengthening communication and information interaction with second-level channels and personified with public opinion leaders. An important element of communication process is that feedback channels are formed. Through them, the state as a source of official information receives information about its perception by the set ∑MCM1-N (national) and ∑MCM21-N (local), as well as from leaders of public opinion and individuals (in the order of implementation of the Law of Ukraine “On citizens’ appeals,” publications of letters from newspaper readers, speeches during public discussions, “round tables,” etc.). Availability and effectiveness of such feedback channels provide opportunities to adjust initial message of the state in the case of its rejection by general public and opportunities to improve the efficiency of public policy in general.

132

O. Radchenko et al.

However, in Ukrainian conditions, this fundamentally important tool also does not work, because source of state opinion (president, prime minister, head of central government, etc.) society does not come in “pure form.” It comes through another filter—“gatekeeper or separator”—an adviser or press service representative of the statesman. Such person carefully filters received information and submits news to the “patron” taking into account their own political interests and assessments or taking into account the state’s psychological perception of information (yes, it is known that Viktor Yushchenko did not like negative messages; therefore, they tried not to include them in documents for reading by the president. In the same way, the Office of President works now. At the beginning of his term, V. Zelensky held a large-scale press conference (the so-called supermarathon), but now he communicates only with a limited circle of “court” journalists. For comparison, in the United States, the president receives three alternative reports on recent events in the country and the world—from three competing institutions in terms of information (CIA, FBI, and the administration itself). In the same time, “smoothing” and “embellishing reality” is not allowed. It creates opportunity for the head of state to have all necessary information, to rely on real and reliable facts and phenomena when understanding the situation, to choose urgent problems of sociopolitical development and setting tasks for the state apparatus on strategy and directions of state policy in various spheres and industries, and therefore to make better and more effective government decisions.

3 Conclusions Thus, we found that the use of information, communication, and psychological tools of strategic communications is designed to ensure public support or at least loyalty of a critical mass of citizens to official public policy and public institutions as an important internal factor of national security. However, assessing the current level of public policy in Ukraine in the field of public communications, we should state that it not only is far from optimal but also loses to modern systems of developed countries. In modern Ukrainian political practice, features of an elitist, corporate model of state information and communication policy with pronounced tendency to oligarchization are dominated. After all, analysis of formation and implementation of state communication policy in Ukraine shows that it is based mainly on primitive one channel (in understanding of information channel typology) mostly one-sided informing population of briefing, PR, and propaganda (when society the authorities have questions about this discourse). This is the outdated model of information and communication relations, which was used in the Soviet Union. In our opinion, Ukraine needs to implement unified, coordinated state communication policy of dialogue type to establish effective mechanism of interaction between the state and individual with involvement of wide range of media and with the potential of “public opinion leaders.”

7

Theoretical Models of Information and Communication Interaction of. . .

133

References 1. Shytyk, L., & Akimova, A. (2020). Ways of transferring the internal speech of characters: Psycholinguistic projection. Psycholinguistics., 27(2), 361–384. https://doi.org/10.31470/23091797-2020-27-2-361-384 2. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2021). Formation of the scientist image in modern conditions of digital society transformation. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012039. https://doi.org/10. 1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012039 3. Shlapak, I. (2021). Strategic communications as a phenomenon: A scientific definition. Scientific Works of the National Library of Ukraine named after VI Vernadsky., 61, 28. 4. Lebedeva, T. (2004). Liberal democracy as a guide for post-totalitarian transformation. Polis, 2, 77. 5. Minogue, K. (2002). Anatomy of liberalism. Liberalism: An anthology. Smoloskyp. 6. Fridman, M. (2002). The role of government in a free society. Liberalism: An anthology. Smoloskyp. 7. Shvets, V. Y., Rozdobudko, E. V., & Solomina, G. V. (2013). Aggregated methodology of multicriterion economic and ecological examination of the ecologically oriented investment projects. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu., 3, 139–144. 8. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Application of augmented reality technologies for education projects preparation. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2643, 134–160. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2 643/paper07.pdf. 9. Peitman, K. (1999). Participation and democratic theory. Aspect Press. 10. Bigunov, I., Lukashev, A., & Ponedilko, A. (2002). 13 theories of democracy. Izdatelskyi dom “Byznes-Press”. 11. Bortnikov, V. I. (2007). Political participation and democracy: Ukrainian realities: Monograph. RVV “Vezha”. 12. Shumpeter, J. (2005). Elite democracy and the theory of competitive leadership. Democracy: an anthology. Smoloskyp. 13. Shumpeter, J. (1995). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Economica. 14. Melvyl, A. Y. (2002). Categories of political science. MGIMO ROSSPEN. 15. Plateau: State. (2002). History of the doctrines of law and the state: A textbook. Contributed by ed. Prof., Dr. History. Sciences G. Demidenko. Legas. 16. Dahl, R. (2005). Dilemmas of pluralistic democracy. Democracy: An anthology. Smoloskyp. 17. Dahl, R. (1968). Power: International encyclopedia of the social science. 18. Przeworski, A. (1999). Democracy and the market. Political and economic reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. ROSSPEN. 19. Dal, R. (2000). On democracy. Aspect Press. 20. Radchenko, O. V., & Krutii, O. M. (2018). Fundamentals of partnership between the state and the private sector. Efficiency of Public Administration, 1(54), 72–79. 21. Andriichuk, T. (2019). Communicative support of public policy as a component of strategic government communications in a democratic society. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 27, 57–58. 22. Sheinov, V. (2001). Psychology of deception and fraud. OOO “Yzdatelstvo AST”. 23. Zelensky’s rhetoric before taking office: what now with these promises. Internet portal “Word and deed” (2021). https://www.slovoidilo.ua/2021/03/29/stattja/polityka/rytoryka-zelenskohovstupu-post-prezydenta-zaraz-cymy-obicyankamy 24. Latysheva, O., Rovenska, V., Smyrnova, I., Nitsenko, V., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Management of the sustainable development of machine-building enterprises: A sustainable development space approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 34(1), 328–342. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-12-2019-0419 25. Burinska, Z., Runovski, K., & Sehmeisser, H. J. (2006). On the approximation by generalized sampling series in Lp-metrics. STSIP, 5, 59–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03549443

134

O. Radchenko et al.

26. Noel-Noiman, E. (1996). Public opinion: Opening the spiral of silence. Progress. 27. Dutchak, S., Opolska, N., Shchokin, R., Durman, O., & Shevtsiv, M. (2020). International aspects of legal regulation of information relations in the global internet network. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 23(3), 1–7. 28. Curran, J. (2012). Media and power: Communication and society. Routledge.

Chapter 8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System Tomash Michalski , Tetyana Syvak , Svitlana Dombrovska Valentyn Stanishevskiy , and Ivan Servetskiy

,

Abstract Strategic communications are important and effective tool for establishing comprehensive internal and external communications of public authorities. They are able to ensure coordinated interaction of public administration on the adequacy of national-state “agenda” and the validity of fundamental meanings, guidelines, values, principles of social life, and activities of social institutions. This is especially important for modern Ukraine. There is a “clash of civilizations” both in the form of open military aggression and especially in the form of information warfare on the part of the Russian Federation. Conceptual model of strategic communications adapted to the field of public administration is proposed. There most communication activities take place at the tactical level of informational influence, involving direct interaction with target audiences and dialogue using multiple channels of information and information products. Keywords Strategic communication · Public management system · Social institutions · Information influence · Target audience

T. Michalski Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland T. Syvak Scientific Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine S. Dombrovska National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine V. Stanishevskiy (✉) · I. Servetskiy Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_8

135

136

T. Michalski et al.

1 The Problem Statement The global information space daily produces new challenges to the national public space and national security of modern states. As E. Garkavyi notes, “in modern conditions of comprehensive globalization and informatization, boundaries between ‘correct,’ ‘permissible,’ and ‘unacceptable’ social behavior are blurred”. It is virtually impossible to reach public consensus without the use of specific tools. Single complex mechanism and preservation of favorable conditions for promotion of national interests, policies, and goals of the state are a system of strategic communications [1]. Therefore, an important task for public authorities in the near future is to establish variety of internal and external communications and find effective tools that will enable organization of coordinated interaction of public administration on goalsetting, forecasting, and planning of socioeconomic development. One of such effective tools is strategic communications. They are used to ensure adequacy of the national-state “agenda,” historical choice, and validity of fundamental meanings, guidelines, values, ways of action, and interaction of citizens and institutions. Also, we can use them to develop “collective political will” and public consent on the principles of public life and the activities of social institutions, primarily state [2, 3]. Strategic communications are a new management approach to demonstrate intentions, build trust, and support different groups of public institutions. As an important component of public administration, strategic communications change view of communications essence in management processes. They were assigned a supporting role and provide transition to model of “management through communication.” It forms new integrated field for research.

2 Main Material Presentation Any state is a social institution. Its main task is to regulate society life and protect society from threats to national security and fullest realization of citizens’ interests. All public policy should be revolved around these basic requirements. It requires public authorities to maintain constant communication with society. Such political communication provides public authorities with information about real interests and needs of citizens and allows to explain activities of the state to society in order to perform its functions and to convince citizens of correctness and effectiveness of the state apparatus, regime, and stability of social development. In the context of global information space formation, many states lose their dominant role in formation and filling of the national information space. As a result, traditional forms and mechanisms of political communication with civil society lose their former effectiveness. Thus, according to Iulia Shlapak, “in developed countries it is necessary to modernize public administration and informative influence on target audience. There is a constant search for new forms and ways to achieve

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

137

goals (strategic goals) by such countries through the information space and tools of the of public management system of strategic goals” [4]. This is especially important for modern Ukraine, where there is a “clash of civilizations” in the form of open military aggression and especially sharply in the form of information warfare on the Russian Federation part. Oleh Voroshylov says “in our country new social relations have emerged. It necessitated the search for new tools that enable organization of coordinated interaction of public administration and civil society institutions on goal-setting, forecasting, planning and social programming and economic development of the state. Such adequate comprehensive toolkit of public administration in context of new challenges actualization to the information and communication space is a system of strategic communications” [5]. Thus, the modern era is characterized by growing role of strategic communication. It causes increased scientific interest in elucidating the essence of this societal phenomenon and its role and place in the system of public administration. In particular, this role growth of is evidenced by L. Budahiants and V. Osodlo, who believe that “ensuring sustainability of democratic society as citizens matter, their governments and military organizations in current moment and in the near future should primarily deploy networks of national and international strategic communications synchronized and guided by fundamental meanings of democracy culture and corresponding principles of creation and interpretation of messages” [2]. Domestic and foreign scientific sources have accumulated a lot of different views on definition of “strategic communications” and their diversity and inconsistency, due to the difference of approaches and subjects: state, intergovernmental organization, individual government, business corporation, and more. One of the first attempts to systematize ideas about strategic communications was made in 2007 by K. Halahan, D. Holtshausen, B. Ruler, D. Vercic, and K. Sriramesh who in their famous work “Defining Strategic Communication” focused on the strategy concept and argued that being strategic does not necessarily mean being manipulative. Practitioners often decide that being comprehensive and cooperative is more strategic and effective than being propagandistic or manipulative. They provided a generalized definition of strategic communications as “the purposeful exchange of information to advance a mission (organizations), where people will be involved in balanced practice of communication in the interests of organizations, individual cases and social movements” [6]. However, the best-known official definition today is NATO’s Strategic Communications Policy. It defines strategic communications as coordinated and appropriate use of NATO’s communications capabilities and activities—public diplomacy, public relations, military public relations, and information and psychological operations where necessary to support Alliance policies, operations, and activities and to advance NATO’s objectives [7]. In fact, this definition in its literal translation is used in such official Ukrainian documents as the Military Doctrine of Ukraine [8] and the Doctrine of Information Security of Ukraine [9]. For the first time in Ukraine, the term “strategic communications” was proposed by G. Pocheptsov, who characterized their differences from communications of the tactical level. He noted that they work with future time cycle, while tactical

138

T. Michalski et al.

communication—with present; work with objects that will be formed at a certain point in time, including through strategic communications, tactical—with existing objects; transforming, first of all, information space, result should be given in other spaces (military, diplomatic, economic, social); act taking into account activities of the opponent, in some cases trying to control its actions; aimed at narrow target groups that are able to make changes to the desired types of objects [10]. In this definition, the key is connection of strategic communications with national and information security of the state. In modern sense, this is the key characteristic of strategic communications. In particular, in 2011, the experts of the Royal Institute of International Affairs P. Cornish, K. York, and J. Lindley-French in the report “Strategic Communications and National Strategy” analyzed the role and potential of strategic communications as a tool for foreign and security policy and stressed that understanding of strategic communications can be considered as one the of guiding factors of national security strategy, as strategic communications, explaining intentions or actions of international actors, will promote the use of communicative influence in both security and foreign policies, i.e., strategic communications are an integral part of strategic planning and implementation of international policy [11]. We grouped and summarized specifics and differences in the interpretation of the concept of “strategic communications” by activity, process, system-synergetic, object-oriented, subject-oriented, technological, and resource approaches [12–20]: – According to the activity approach, strategic communication is a type of communication activity of public administration subjects, set of mutually agreed actions, messages, images, and semantic forms carried out by public authorities with other stakeholders at strategic, operational, and tactical levels to influence beliefs, change, or support of certain type of behavior of target internal (national) and external (foreign) audiences taking into account their interests and values in order to achieve certain strategic goals and protect national interests. – According to the process approach, strategic communication is a process of coordination of communication activities of public administration entities focused on establishing long-term relationships with target audiences (objects) and strengthening their strategic effect; synchronization by subjects of goals, actions, meanings, ideas, and narratives, in order to project into the mass consciousness of state strategic values, interests, and goals; implementation of the mission and development strategies; constant information interaction with stakeholders and target audiences in order to measure behavioral and social changes; and making corrective actions to achieve a certain strategic goal. – According to the system-synergetic approach, strategic communication is coordinated and proper use of communication capabilities of public administration entities and components of strategic communications aimed at promoting state goals; words, actions, meanings, and symbols to influence mass consciousness and behavior; and achievements of various sciences and scientific directions (psychology, linguistics, law, communication, political science, etc.), which ensure the effectiveness of communication process and impact on target audiences to achieve a strategic goal.

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

139

– According to the object-oriented approach, strategic communications are communications and actions aimed at changing behavior of target audiences by using narratives, actions, images, or symbols to influence mass consciousness and taking into account perceptions of individual audiences to create, to strengthen, and to maintain favorable conditions for national interests and goal promotion [12, 13]. – According to the subject-oriented approach, strategic communications are purposeful and coordinated activity of subjects of public administration, which provides development and implementation of development strategy of social subject by means of communication resources and tools, set of measures aimed at managing target audiences both within country and abroad, and separate strategic direction of public policy, which purpose is to ensure high efficiency of public administration decisions by introducing a comprehensive system of external and internal communication interaction between public authorities and society [14, 15]. – According to the technological approach, strategic communications are product of scientific and technological revolution and globalization, and their further development will depend on these two phenomena and the ability of people to respond in time to questions posed to humanity by information technology progress and the world situation. – According to the resource approach, strategic communications are the distribution (reorientation) of influence resources, i.e., realization way of strategic goals of social subject by intangible resource transfer of influence on the object. The purpose of strategic communications in this approach is to impact on motivational structures of target audiences and result: subconscious, consciousness, and behavior of target audiences. So, result is manifested in physical (real) sphere— behavior. Function of strategic communications is to distribute benefits in physical space through conversion of influence resources. They are closely related to mission, vision, and value of social subject and contribute to strategic positioning [16, 20]. Thus, it is obvious that strategic communication is a complex concept, which according to O. Tereshcheni “includes local, regional, state and interstate levels. Their main task is to increase industrial efficiency, achieve economic and political stability, increase culture level by achieving high-quality interaction between the state leadership and its people through promotion of relevant ideas. Information policy, public relations, public diplomacy, psychological manipulation, information activities - all these are elements of strategic communications. Their main purpose is to expand audience to more active promotion of national ideas in accordance with adopted strategy” [21]. Summarizing these interpretations, we will try to provide the most universal definition. In our opinion, it can be applied in different areas, industries, social organizations, and intergovernmental organizations. We understand this concept as a way to persuade and motivate target audiences to understand and accept certain goals, policies, or direction of development: allies and supporters, to act together;

140

T. Michalski et al.

neutral audiences, to accept new “rules of the game” or to remain neutral; and opponents and rivals, to convince that there is an opportunity and strength to defeat them. It is a tool for legitimizing policy and goals of strategic communication subject. We can define general characteristics of strategic communications as a tool capable of making regime, institutional, macrostructural changes in the state and changes in social atmosphere and social attitudes. Therefore, strategic communications have the following characteristics which are aimed at [20–23]: – Achieving planned strategic effects, i.e., strategic labeling—creation of new symbols and meanings. – Behavioral pattern consolidation (stereotypical behavioral reactions), i.e., behavior management to support constant activity of target audiences. – Long-term development strategy implementation, i.e., strategic communications should be part of development strategy in the form of developed communication strategy. – Stakeholders’ integration, i.e., involvement of all parties interested in the planned changes. – Stakeholders’ coherence and synergy, i.e., synchronization of actions, narratives, and messages in space and time of all subjects of communication process. Strategic communications create a “conceptual umbrella” that allows to implement coherent activities by a variety of actors in different areas of activity. – Integration with actions, i.e., strategic communications transmit information not only as messages but also by actions, i.e., there is communication by actions, decisions, or inaction. Strategic communication’s purpose is persuasion, consolidation of behavioral patterns, behavior management, and influence and belief in strategic goals. They should not be seen only as a tool of struggle or counteraction. Their main goal is to minimize potential risks and crises in achieving certain strategic goals. In general, strategic communication is an influence technology, which spectrum varies from “informing” as an indirect form to “coercion”—the most direct form of influence. Such definitions give grounds to derive communications from auxiliary function of management and characterize them as an important component of management process. It is institutional basis of civilized systems of public administration. They can make regime, institutional, and macrostructural changes in the state and society, i.e., legitimize complex social phenomena. Similar view is shared, in particular, by Anna Sashchuk. She interprets strategic communications in public administration as “coordinated actions in the field of public communications to influence perception of reforms (in line with national goals), portals, websites of public authorities, pages of public managers in social networks, and in form of e-petitions and e-appeals of citizens, open data, etc.” [24]. Confirmation of this approach is justification of strategic communications’ role in ensuring success and state development taking into account the increasing role of information. It gives them status of one of the four instruments of national power that should be used by national authorities together to achieve goals in diplomatic,

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

141

economic, informational, and military spheres [25], where strategic communications play an integrative function, i.e., provide process of achieving them. Thus, we can say that strategic communications are important management activities as a special type of state activity designed to ensure “professionally organized state promotion in national and foreign information space values, interests and goals through agreed and planned actions of all socio-political process subjects. It is even main component of the public administration process” [26]. The most general definition is given in the dictionary “Strategic Communications.” It states that strategic communications have five components that combine, coordinate, activate, and use resources and opportunities of politics, public administration, marketing, journalism, sociology, psychology, business, and advertising. They are defined as [27, 28]: 1. Government-coordinated efforts to understand target audience in order to create, strengthen, and maintain favorable conditions for promotion of national interests, policies, and goals through the use of agreed concepts, strategies of doctrines and programs, plans, themes, messages, products, and combination and synchronized with actions of all subjects. 2. Coordinated use of communication capabilities of institutional structure—public diplomacy, public relations, military relations, information and psychological operations, and measures aimed at state goal promotion. 3. Coordinated actions, messages, and images designed to inform, influence, or persuade target audiences in order to promote and realize national interests in accordance with national values. 4. Strategic interaction and mutual influence in information environment between separate subjects (state or intended for performance of state purposes). It consists in full involvement of possibilities of each separate component of strategic communication. 5. Process of integrating research on perception of the audience and stakeholders and taking into account results obtained during implementation of policy and planning activities at each level and many different activities (e.g., political process, public relations, information operations, etc.), each of them affects support national goals. Strategic communications mean exchange (during communication) of meanings/ideas in support of national goals (i.e., strategically). Thus, in scientific sources, strategic communications are characterized as basis of management process, as a special type of government activity, and as management technology. In general, the essence of strategic communications in public administration can be proposed as follows: component of public administration process which purpose is to establish strategic link between public administration bodies (entities) and target audiences (objects) by transferring intangible resources for implementation strategic goals and ensuring strategic positioning. Main specificity and difference of strategic communications from other types of communications are that they are focused on long term, i.e., long-term result and operate with concepts and images that do not yet exist in physical space. Therefore, in order to implement measures to achieve certain goals, strategic tools and means

142

T. Michalski et al.

should be used as much as possible. It allows to gradually and systematically influence beliefs of recipients which require development of appropriate plans (communication strategies). At the same time, development of strategic communications should include communication of strategically important ideas for the state and development of strategy of external and internal communications of the state. Christopher Paul rightly pointed out that effective strategic communications will allow us to create international support required to do good and to build the broadest possible consensus. Another important characteristic of strategic communications is coherence of actions—coordination of all subjects’ efforts of the communication process/processes. It is provided for a single center for development of strategic goals, narratives, and synchronization of actions. Coherence is a state focus as well as its bodies on ongoing communication with target audiences in order to create, strengthen, or maintain conditions for national interests’ promotion using coordinated programs and plans that are synchronous with actions of all institutions of public authority. So, it is important to coordinate and synchronize communication activities of public administration to achieve state goals and attract target audiences. Their needs and response should be based on implementation of public policies and development strategies. In public administration, it is expedient to define them in two aspects: as a component of public administration process (which should be implemented at all levels of formation and implementation of public policy) and as a technology of public administration (component of public administration), i.e., a certain set of actions that should be consistently and properly using specific tools and techniques implemented by the subject of public administration. Thus, according to T. Andriichuk, “process of creating conditions for proper political participation highlights importance of establishing communication between authorities and other actors of the system, which should ultimately ensure the legitimacy of a democratic political regime” [29]. Therefore, the main priority of modern public policy is introduction of strategic communications. Their use is aimed at solving such problems as inefficiency of state information and lack of communication policies, imperfection of legislation on public relations in the information sphere, inability of ruling elite, and unpreparedness for dialogue with society. That is why strategic communications “are increasingly recognized as an integral part of national security: development of strategic communications is part of strategy of national security of the United States and other developed countries” [30]. Substantiating the essence of strategic communications in public administration, it is necessary to refer to original source, i.e., basic conceptual document that defines their specifics and features. Based on this concept in “Understanding NATO”s Strategic Communications” [25], we can portray them as a theater, where the orchestra is the components and activities of strategic communications under the leadership of the leader and the audience is a variety of defined and undefined target audiences (Fig. 8.1). Strategic communications are universal process that can yield results in all spheres of public life and can be used to achieve foreign and domestic policy goals. The main condition for this is time distance of desired state of the projected

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

Culture, art MCM

Reverse effect

Communicative actions

143

Vision, development Components strategy Informational safety

LEEDER ACTIONS PLAN naratives, actions, images, senses

Informational influence

Abroad media

Native media Internal audience

Opponents

Partners

Reverse communications

8

Neutral

Targeted audience

Not defined

Fig. 8.1 Strategic communication concept (improved by the authors [31])

object and action synchronization in information space of all subjects of communication process. They do not need to be identified with other types of communication, such as political, state, public, marketing, anti-crisis, social, interpersonal, etc., because they are integrated and use other types of communication to solve specific problems in forming appropriate behavior in target audiences to achieve strategic goals. We can refer to the experience of the NATO Center for Strategic Communications as the founders of the concept to determine the place of strategic communications in the public administration process [25]. Scientists of the Center identify four main areas of their use: diplomatic, economic, informational, and military. This approach logically determines the place of strategic communications in the field of public administration. Public policy is aimed at realizing national interests in the above areas. It provides the so-called “national power.” Thus, we can schematically depict the place of strategic communications in the management process of public administration, aimed at ensuring national strength, and identify its most important areas (Fig. 8.2). The figure shows main areas of public administration. Their development will contribute to formation and demonstration of national strength. Strategic communications as a component of the management process use capabilities and potential of other areas of public administration and therefore contribute to their development. Fundamental difference between strategic communications in public administration

T. Michalski et al.

144

Reverse impact

Diplomatic sphere

Public policy

Economic sphere Informational sphere Military sphere Diplomacy

Strategic communications

PUBLIC SPHERE

informing argumenting communication influence

Society targeted audiences

Reverse impact

Fig. 8.2 Strategic communications place in management process (adapted and developed by the authors [25])

and other types of communications is planned involvement of large number of actors in interaction with target audiences in order to influence their behavior. So, strategic communications can be defined as formative effects on the relevant objects where information action is directed. In public administration, strategic communications (taking into account their multifunctionality, versatility, and diversity) can be used for different purposes. Thus, according to M. Shkliaruk, strategic communications are used to promote dialogue; fulfill development tasks; effectively interact with target audiences, society; support management processes; strengthen democracy; improve transparency; facilitate interaction with the media; and increase respect for human rights [15]. This list can be supplemented with such goals as increasing confidence in the authorities, ensuring effectiveness of public administration decisions, improving interaction of public authorities with each other, counteraction to external information aggressions, popularization of Ukraine in the world, and creating conditions for promotion of state policy and goals. Thus, strategic communications in public administration is an institutionally designed structurally complex institution of state regulation of an important social need—meeting interests of population in development and defining a strategic direction. Subjects of strategic communications are mainly public administration bodies. They carry out relevant current, purposeful, and organized activities. Public policy in the field of strategic communications should ensure interaction between different segments of communication environment through series of consensus, i.e., convention, meaningful agreement in society, or certain segment. Content of conventionalization is a deliberative process, i.e., dialogue in the field of public policy based on collective work with the communication space.

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

145

Fig. 8.3 Model of strategic communications in public administration

The main purpose and task of strategic communications in public administration is to legitimize public recognition of current government. This is reflected in communication strategy (and short-term communication plans, campaigns, projects). It is aimed at the internal audience—society. Legitimation is the main goal of government where an arsenal of strategic communications is used. Legitimacy (Latin legitimus—legal) is a recognition by society or its overwhelming majority of power, rights, and powers of two bodies of state power and their ability to make decisions in favor of society, which citizens should perform [32]. Legitimacy can be partial and inconsistent due to differences in values, interests, and priorities of certain segments of society. So, only clearly defined communication channels, characterized target audiences (association based on common values, interests, and preferences of a group of people), and the corresponding developed information products can significantly reduce these inconsistencies. Thus, we can say that strategic communications of the state are aimed at interacting with its own society (aimed primarily at increasing level of power legitimacy). After all, legitimation enshrines politics and power in minds and perceptions of citizens; explains and justifies political decisions, changes, and vectors of development; and so on. Quite different goal and objectives of strategic communications of the state are aimed at external (international) societies (target audiences). First of all, it consists in establishment of certain image of state in perception of international community and assistance in the realization of state foreign policy and economic goals. Therefore, we can propose such a conceptual model of strategic communications (Fig. 8.3). It in our opinion is more acceptable for the field of public administration. Separate target audience is in the center of the communication process in implementation of strategic communications. It has the appropriate informational impact, for each level of strategic communications offered its own tools of appeal and direction. Broadcasting (transmission) of information products, directly and indirectly, is carried out through MCM and communications with the use of auxiliary components, such as the involvement of a key leader and so on. In the model, the abbreviations denote the components of strategic communications, namely, involvement of a key leader (ICL), public diplomacy (PD), public relations (PR), information (IS), psychological operations (PO), relations with nongovernmental

146

T. Michalski et al.

Vision – meta narrative

Public policy (strategic goals)

Humanitarian sphere

National development strategy

Economic sphere

Informational sphere

Military sphere

Diplomatic sphere

Planning

National communication strategy

Sectoral, territorial development strategies

Departmental, territorial communication strategies, programs Programs, development plans

Communicative infrastructure

Communicative system

Resources

Strategic Communication components

Strategic Communication principle

Realization

Communication plans, projects (campaigns)

Communication potential of public administration

PUBLIC SPACE Synchronicity of communications

ACTIONS, NARRATIVES (informing, argumenting, communication, influence,

Target audiences, targeted groups (society)

Trust, support, participation

Public policy goals (strategic goals)

Fig. 8.4 Model of strategic communications in public administration T. Sivak

organizations (RNGO), and business structures (BS); the up arrow indicates the process of analyzing and evaluating the implementation of the strategy. The largest number of communication activities takes place at the tactical level as can be seen from the proposed model (i.e., at the level of informational influence, which involves direct interaction with target audiences and dialogue). Many channels of information products should be involved for effective function of such system. It can only be achieved through effective functioning communication system. In our opinion, model of strategic communications in public administration proposed by T. Sivak, which related to strategic public management and the processes of formation and implementation of public policy as a component of the public administration process (Fig. 8.4), looks more attractive. The proposed model depicts overall process of public policy implementation, which in essence is in development of national, sectoral, and territorial strategies,

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

147

programs, and development plans; determines their relationship with communication strategies, programs, and projects; and indicates their simultaneous use in achieving public policy goals (strategic goals). The most important goal of strategic communications in public administration is joint activities of its subjects in building of strong powerful state. This is determined by general objectives of public policy. Therefore, in the model, we reflected this process and identified main areas that contribute to the common goal: diplomatic, humanitarian, military, economic information. An important place in this model is given to communication potential of public administration. It is availability and rational use of all human, technical, administrative, financial, and other resources needed to achieve strategic communication goals. We can also include the appropriate level of knowledge of strategic communications in public servants into communication capacity of public administration in the process of strategic communications. This is to adhere to principles and choice of components of strategic communications depending on the goal.

3 Conclusions Currently in Ukraine, there is a transition from traditional system of public administration to a new type of national state formation—public administration. An important feature of public administration is to ensure significant increase in the efficiency of management activities due to high level of public support and consolidation of society around common, agreed goals. It is associated with democratic principles and values, and so on. The strategic goal is focused on values of public administration. This is basis on which activities of public authorities are focused. Thus, public administration has two dimensions: joint development of public policy taking into account interests of all stakeholders and division of responsibilities in the implementation of agreed strategic development goals, both state as a whole and individual industries and territories. Tools and technologies of strategic communications should be actively involved. This is provided for mutual strategic influence of public policy-making subject and implementation on other stakeholders, as well as their joint activities in achieving agreed goals at international, national, and local levels. The purpose of strategic communications in public administration is to create favorable conditions for the implementation of public policy by preventing and timely detection of external and internal threats to information space and by the rational use of communication potential of state to involve public in public policy, strategies, and programs. However, the status of strategic communications in Ukraine has not yet been determined. There are no official documents that would regulate state policy on them; there is only a declaration of intent. Key problems with introduction of strategic communications in the activities of public authorities, in our opinion, are legal and structural-functional plane. In view of this, strategic communications in public administration should be considered in

148

T. Michalski et al.

three aspects: (1) as a direction of a unified public policy, (2) as a single expertanalytical center of strategic communications, and (3) as a direction of training of relevant specialists in strategic communications in the field of public administration. Implementation of these tasks will contribute to the formation of managed highquality communication space of public administration to meet needs of public administration bodies and civil society institutions in expert-analytical support and support of the adoption and implementation of socially significant management decisions. Therefore, the main tasks of strategic communications in public administration in Ukraine, in our opinion, are improving public administration process and information and communication activities of public authorities, establishing a dialogue and establishing consensus between institutionally different subjects of public administration, assistance in achieving national strategic goals, and ensuring purposeful communication activities and coordination of actions of public administration bodies. System of public administration will function as a single integrated mechanism in interaction with society with the help of strategic communications.

References 1. Harkavyi, Y. M. (2019). Genesis of institutionalization of strategic communications of defense forces in the conditions of modern information confrontation. Gileya: Scientific Bulletin., 146(3), 41–46. 2. Budahiants, L. M., & Osodlo, V. I. (2018). Strategic communications as a model of consensus in post-modern democracies. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Luhansk. Pedagogical sciences., 6, 19–26. 3. Shvets, V. Y., Rozdobudko, E. V., & Solomina, G. V. (2013). Aggregated methodology of multicriterion economic and ecological examination of the ecologically oriented investment projects. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu., 3, 139–144. 4. Shlapak, Y. (2021). Strategic communications as a phenomenon: A scientific definition. Scientific Works of the National Library of Ukraine Named After VI Vernadsky., 61, 28–39. 5. Voroshylov, O. (2020). The role of strategic communications in combating information aggression. Scientific Works of the National Library of Ukraine Named After VI Vernadsky., 58, 69–81. 6. Halahan, К., Holtshausen, D., Van Ruler, B., Verсiс, D., & Sriramesh, К. (2007). Defining strategic communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication., 1(1), 3–4. 7. Welch, D. (2019). Propaganda, power and persuasion: From World War I to Wikileaks. 8. On the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine of September 2, 2015 “On the new version of the Military Doctrine of Ukraine”: Decree of the President of Ukraine of September 24, 2015, № 555/2015 (2015) http://www.president.gov.ua/documents/5552015-1 9443 9. On the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine of December 29, 2016 “On the Doctrine of Information Security of Ukraine”: Decree of the President of Ukraine of February 25. 2017 № 47/2017 (2017). https://www.president.gov.ua/documents/472017-21374 10. Pocheptsov, H. H. (2008). Strategic communications: Strategic communications in politics, business and public administration: Textbook. Alterpress.

8

Place and Role of Strategic Communications in Public Management System

149

11. Cornish, P., Lindley-French, J., & Yorke, K. (2011). Strategic communications and national strategy. A Chatham House Report. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/r0911 stratcomms.pdf. 12. Huzenko, T. A., Fedoriv, T. V., Rudenko, O. M., & Sviatnenko, V. V. (2013). Information support of social initiatives of the president of Ukraine: Teaching method materials. NAPA. 13. Konyk, D. (2016). Strategic communications: A guide. For the state. Services. LLC “OBNOVA KOMPANI”. 14. Havra, D. P. (2015). Category of strategic communication: Current status and basic characteristics. The Age of Information, 3(4), 228–239. 15. Shkliaruk, M. H. (2018). Strategic communications in the system of public administration of Ukraine. MAUP. 16. Paul, C. A. (2011). Vision for strategic communication. Perspectives, III, 8. 17. Gurieiev, V., et al. (2020). Simulating systems for advanced training and professional development of energy specialists in power sector. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2732, 693–708. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2732/20200693.pdf 18. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics., 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 19. Pogodayev, S. E. (2013). Marketing of works as a source of the new hybrid offerings in widened marketing of goods, works and services. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 28(8), 638–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2012-0069 20. Steyn, G., & Bütschi, B. (2006). Theory on strategic communication management is the key to unlocking the boardroom. Journal of Communication Management., 10(1), 106–109. 21. Tereshchenia, O. V. (2020). Strategic communications in scientific and theoretical discourse. Communications and Communicative Technologies., 20, 116–121. 22. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2021). Formation of the scientist image in modern conditions of digital society transformation. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012039. https://doi.org/10. 1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012039 23. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2 879/paper04.pdf 24. Sashchuk, H. (2020). Implementation of strategic communications in the security and defense sector of Ukraine. European Political and Legal Discourse, 7(5), 178–183. 25. Understanding NATO Strategic Communications. https://www.stratcomcoe.org/about-strate gic-communications 26. Zakirov, M. (2019). Strategic communications in the modern world. Scientific works of the National Library of Ukraine named after VI Vernadsky., 52, 24–34. 27. Lipkan, V., & Popova, T. (2016). Strategic communications: Dictionary. FOP O.S. Lipkan. 28. Popov, O. O., et al. (2021). Immersive technology for training and professional development of nuclear power plants personnel. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2898, 230–254. http://ceur-ws. org/Vol-2898/paper13.pdf 29. Andriychuk, T. (2019). Communicative support of public policy as a component of strategic government communications in a democratic society. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 27, 55–62. 30. Rohovchenko, A. M. (2020). On the problem of clarifying the concept of “strategic communications”: Terminological aspect. Gileya: Scientific Bulletin., 152, 247–250. 31. Teleshun, S. (2009). Effective governance and public policy as a direction of political power in a crisis. Political Management., 2, 35–45. 32. Radchenko, O. V., & Radchenko, O. O. (2019). Legitimacy as a leading category of public administration. Decentralization of power in Ukraine: Humanitarian and socio-political aspects: Monograph. ORIDU NADU.

Chapter 9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System of National and Informational State Security Tetyana Syvak , Maryna Shkliaruk Оlenа Postupna , and Olena Fendo

, Volodymyr Kopanchuk

,

Abstract Ensuring of proper state of national and information security of the state requires creation of appropriate structure of the system of strategic communications at the national level and definition of clear range of functional powers of the relevant state bodies. Components of strategic communications are informational and valueideological prerequisite for the formation of both informational and national selfidentity and preservation of national, cultural, and informational identity of Ukrainian autochthony, political, security, and information nation. Together, they form holistic dimension for practical implementation of communication strategy. Peculiarities of strategic communications in the public administration system are described. In particular, they are defined as a process of coordination and synchronization of narratives, themes, messages, individual activities, and actions within the whole hierarchical communication system of public administration entities to interact with target audiences and certain groups of society. Such groups are influenced by information in order to achieve strategic goals. Keywords Strategic communications · Self-identity · National security · Democratic state · Decision-making process · Dialogue · Government · Society

T. Syvak Scientific Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine M. Shkliaruk Department for Documentary Provision, Office of the President of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine V. Kopanchuk Khmelnytskyi University of Management and Law, Khmelnytskyi Oblast, Ukraine О. Postupna National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine O. Fendo (✉) National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_9

151

152

T. Syvak et al.

1 The Problem Statement In true democratic state, ensuring and guaranteeing public participation in decisionmaking and decision-making processes and dialogue between government and society are basic constitutional norms and principles of further democratic social development. Phenomenon of democratic public administration system largely depends on the effectiveness of strategic communications implementation. It on the one hand is a link between public authorities and society and on the other is a powerful barrier to usurpation of power and monopolization of narrow circle of public figures of imperative law on the processes of making managerial decisions. In most democratic developed countries of the world, the search for new forms and ways to achieve public policy goals is carried out through space of strategic communications. This process is continuous and consists in accumulation of resources of competence of state bodies and the public. In this aspect, uniting all key actors in the field of information relations, subjects of formation, and implementation of public policy in order to have positive impact on development of the state and each individual member of society creates mechanism which we consider as a segment of strategic communications. Thus, taking into account problems of Ukrainian democratic state-building, we can assume that largely existing difficulties in approving and implementing various concepts, strategies, and doctrines in all spheres of public life are caused by the lack of hierarchy of guiding documents and awareness on lack of their differences from other regulations. An unstable and unbalanced system of state policy formation and implementation in all spheres of public life and the lack of strategic approaches to public relations significantly reduce effectiveness of public administration mechanism in information and security spheres and in politics in general. In our opinion, modern state institutions of democratic governance should have certain standardized and regulated competencies and tools. Their powers include functions related to implementation of strategic communications. First of all, they should have sufficient functionality to formulate policy and monitor status of implementation of national strategic goals. It is obvious that these conditions can be met only if systemic mechanism of strategic communications is created, in particular if central executive body in this area is determined and a system of horizontal relations at all levels of government is introduced. One important characteristic of such institutional mechanism is its ability to establish interdepartmental communications with other relevant authorities in order to form and implement unified and coherent state policy in various spheres of public life. It still lacks a comprehensive system of strategic documents despite the number of various concepts, doctrines, programs, and approved plans adopted during the years of independence aimed at streamlining the information sphere. Today in Ukraine, there are no strategies, and only security issues are doctrinally defined. This problem is part of a larger issue of lack of a structured (at the legislative level) hierarchy of governing documents of public policy where an array of guiding documents is

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

153

devoid of general logic (e.g., when identical documents are applied differently and no mutual subordination of different types of documents) [1]. Analysis of strategic documents that regulate issues of information and communication relations in the public administration system reveals the fact of fundamental misunderstanding at legislative level. Policy guidelines are not limited to programs and plans but also include doctrines, concepts and national projects, and strategic planning and are embodied in the relevant mechanisms. They consist of coherent system of strategic communications, integrated, in turn, in the system of information and national security of the state. Let’s try to outline the main features, functions, and structural components of such system.

2 Main Material Presentation Gene L. Cohen and Andrew Arato emphasize that all stakeholders can have “truly equal opportunity to play their part in the dialogue” if there is a mutual binding which is not caused by forced recognition of any of the two parties. But dialogue should have character of completely public communicative process that does not feel political or economic pressure in order to obtain real result. It should also be public in practical sense: everyone who is able to speak and act, each potentially related to the discussed norm individual should be able to participate in discussion on equal rights [2]. It is obvious that implementation of this task requires creation at national level of appropriate structure of strategic communications and definition of clear range of functional powers of relevant state bodies. First of all, implementation of this task requires formation of appropriate legal framework on which system of strategic communications will be based. Taking into account practice of democratic statebuilding, it is possible to determine certain structural hierarchy of legal framework (Table 9.1). We realize that this is idealized model. Therefore, we propose to consider such approach which will allow to form specific structure of domestic system of strategic communications with clearly defined functions, priorities, and competencies of relevant central executive bodies. Listed in Table 9.1 is not exhaustive, but it is sufficient for further analysis of regulation processes of system of strategic communications by types of guiding documents of domestic public and highlights the following conclusions: 1. There is no strategy for development of communication interaction in system as a whole and its parts. 2. Current doctrine as a declaration of the official position of the state is aimed at vector of national security and defense. Other documents of the highest level (concepts and basic principles) cover only areas related to development of informatization, information technology, and telecommunications in their various forms: management, social, technical, and technological.

154

T. Syvak et al.

Table 9.1 Structural hierarchy of legal framework of strategic communications 1. Doctrinal level (norms-principles) Doctrine Basic provisions (basic principles) of strategic communications, according to which the most important issues of existence and development of the state or international relations are solved 2. Conceptual level (norms-principles) Concept Set of legal norms that form basis that determines communication strategy at the national level 3. Level strategic (defining and constitutive norms) Strategy Set of legal norms that define system of strategic communications 4. Program level (norms-rules) Regulations Set of legal norms and rules that directly regulate activities of state bodies in specific conditions of strategic communications 5. Planned level (norms-rules of behavior) Plan Detailing activities of subjects of communication relations in processes of formation and implementation of strategic communications

3. Conceptual documents on implementation of strategic communications in space and time are not approved. 4. State regulation of state body activities in this area is mostly declarative and short and medium term in nature. 5. In general, analysis of guiding documents array of public policy is devoid of general logic of formation. In addition, no mutual subordination of different types of documents has been established. At the doctrinal-conceptual level in Ukraine, there is no understanding that strategic communications are designed first of all to defend our national interests. According to P. Bogutskyi, national interests arise and exist exclusively as basic principles of state-organized life. This requires appropriate recognition and protection. Such legal recognition and protection of national interests is received in law of national security. National interests are basis and at the same time necessary social infrastructure for human life security with its vital needs for their own and coexistence with others in society. At the same time, according to the scientist, national interests are more clearly manifested in public relations. They affirm common social needs and aspirations, which are subject of state attention and provided by the entire mechanism of the state. Therefore, national interests are formed and realized in strategic communications due to vital for man and society material, spiritual, and intellectual needs that ensure the secure existence and development of society and individual social entities and allow to create safe living conditions [3]. Models and mechanisms of strategic communications should be built at the strategic and program level, taking into account their main properties and key characteristics. In particular, such characteristics by O. Tereshchenia include: – The main goal being to identify and achieve interests of the state at the national and international levels.

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

155

Table 9.2 Main communicative strategies for building public confidence in public authorities in modern society Form of communication strategies Institutional Public Conventional

Means of implementation Message Interaction Dialogue

Presentational

Letter

Effectiveness of trust building Manipulation of public consciousness Structuring of communicative environment Parity interaction of public authorities and public in processes of public policy implementation Informing public through media (monologue form of interaction based on trust)

– Effective interaction and fruitful cooperation between politicians and activists to achieve common goal. – Establishing trusting relationship with audience, providing information, and providing feedback. – Ability to take into account audience needs and study reactions to certain events and messages. – Ability to interpret actions as information and feedback. – Establishment of activities between institutional organizations. – Purposeful use of organization in order to fulfill its mission. – Coordination of communications between subjects of different organizations to strengthen strategic effect. – Improving positions of main actors. – Formation of information environment [4]. President of the Association of Doctors of Science in Public Administration Ye. Romanenko believes that prediction of strategy of state development effectiveness is possible only if effectiveness of certain communication technology is carried out at the planning and implementation level which provides its support. Having carried out a theoretical and methodological analysis of the communicative policy of the state, the researcher proposed identification of communicative strategies [5] (Table 9.2). According to the researcher, key functional components of implementation process of strategic communications are government’s understanding of society interests; informing and engaging of society to promote interests and goals through influencing perceptions, guidelines, beliefs, and behavior; and coordination of actions and statements in support of policy and planning in order to achieve comprehensive strategic goals. Accordingly, it is proposed to consider communicative essence of public policy through the prism of its functional load which is reduced to “pragmatic synthesis” of public policy as a reality focused on exclusive realization of needs and interests of the public [5]. Based on this, we see the existence of three structural models of communication, which are as follows:

156

T. Syvak et al.

– Establish level of public policy compliance with public interests, encouraging the latter to participate in its formation and implementation (optimizes its role in the formation and implementation of public administration). – Teach public to participate in the processes of formation and implementation of public policy. – -Determine the level of public involvement in the processes of formation and implementation of public policy (insufficient level of citizens’ awareness about content of public policy or even inadequate understanding of it). In turn, T. Andriichuk offers other models and their inherent areas of communication: 1. Information model – (coverage) access to information on current government activities. By this, we mean prompt provision of information to various target audiences about public events of government agencies, activities of officials, and government decisions. 2. Model of communication to strengthen public policy instruments. This direction makes more effective application of legal regulation, fiscal, and other financial instruments (taxes, benefits, subsidies, etc.) and implementation of infrastructural changes as it is aimed at achieving necessary behavior of citizens. An example is the role of communication campaigns in explaining procedure for providing subsidies, encouraging citizens to enter into contracts with family doctors, etc. 3. Model of communicative support of public policy. This is the establishment of communication at all stages of development and implementation process of public policy: identification and analysis of problems, consideration of alternatives for their solution, development and decision-making, their implementation, monitoring effectiveness, and evaluation of policy. Communicative public policy support provides ongoing feedback to the public. This is an important component of strategic government communications. It is communicative support that becomes basis for achieving strategic management goals as it comprehensively affects quality of policy, its legitimacy, and effectiveness of further implementation [6]. Based on considered communication models, we will try to reveal functions of strategic communications in more details. Thus, according to O. Dzioban, “function of strategic communications (according to all interpretations) is to manage target audiences in order to change their behavior and convey to them values or information needed by the state that uses strategic communications” [7]. G. Sashchuk calls that main function and task of strategic communications is creation of civil society values that will meet state’s strategic interests. It should be noted that this formula is applied only in democratic societies where success of citizen and social community is inextricably linked with state development. The researcher notes the implementation of strategic communications in security and defense sector of Ukraine is an important component of state information policy. It ensures achievement of strategic goals of state development, promotes tasks, and measures to ensure national security of Ukraine and lobbying national interests in the international arena [8].

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

157

In turn, A. Rogovchenko says that the main function of strategic communications is support for national security strategy and national defense strategy by promoting preservation, protection, and achievement of national interests and goals of the state. It in turn is divided into different types of periods (peace, crisis, war): – In peacetime: to achieve balance and strategic monolithicity in the international system. – In a state of crisis: to gain credibility in international system. – In a state of war: to achieve internal and external legitimacy in international system in order to obtain freedom of action [9]. The authors of communicative trend study in international relations distinguish function of strategic planning in strategic communications. Its basic requirement is to coordinate overall program goal and individual goals for each group, i.e., specific target audience and management to develop strategy that can achieve desired result [10]. In our opinion, it is worth to agree with conclusion of V. Rubtsov and N. Perynska that any decision support system (regardless of its purpose, internal structure, and adopted approaches to construction) should provide such functional characteristics as interactivity, integration, power, accessibility, flexibility, reliability, and controllability. Interactivity means that system responds to various actions, process of which solving can be influenced by person in a dialogue mode: Integration is an ability to ensure compatibility of components of the system in the decision support process. Power is an ability of the system to answer the most important questions. Availability is an ability to provide responses to user requests in required form and at required time. Flexibility is an ability of the system to adapt to changing requirements and situations. Reliability is an ability of the system to perform required functions for a specified period of time. Controllability is an ability of the user to control the actions of the system and intervene in the solution of the problem. Number of general principles of creation (architecture) of such systems is implemented in perfect decision support system [11]. Ukraine began to take only the first steps toward implementation of strategic communication principles in practice of public administration. This was often accompanied by ignorance of problem magnitude, misconceptions, and superficial knowledge. Starting this process in 2014, newly created Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine proposed such structure of the state system of strategic communications (Fig. 9.1) [12]. However, the analysis of the proposed structure of system of strategic communications makes it possible to identify (in our opinion) some inconsistency with objectives. This significantly complicates achievement of positive results. It concerns firstly to block of regulatory support and secondly to introduction of

158

T. Syvak et al.

Top-level interdepartmental communication Strategic level Crisis communications Government communication (public relations) Operational level

Public diplomacy Special information operations System of training and professional development

Auxiliary functions level

Means of content production and information support Research and analytical capabilities

Fig. 9.1 Structure of the state system of strategic communications, proposed by the Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine (adapted by [12])

Public Relations

Information and

Promotion of

psychological operations

state goals

Military

STRATEGIC

Public

communication

COMMUNICATIONS

diplomacy

Fig. 9.2 Structure of strategic communications, defined in the Military Doctrine of Ukraine

government communications (public relations) at operational level. In our opinion, it significantly limits the ability of strategic communications to ensure effectiveness of public policy information. Their implementation is studied not only by government agencies but also by other state bodies (president and his administration, state committees, services, agencies, etc.). In current practice of public administration, “strategic communications” are mostly considered from the standpoint of national security [7]. Another version of strategic communication structure is proposed in the Military Doctrine of Ukraine, approved by Presidential Decree of September 24, 2015, № 555, which defines components of стратком. It is the proper use of state’s communicative capabilities – public diplomacy, public relations, military relations, information and psychological operations, and measures aimed at promoting goals of the state (Fig. 9.2). Christopher Paul (well-known specialist in the field of strategic communications) proposes to divide the construct of “strategic communications” into five components: (1) organizational level of strategic communications; (2) processes of planning, integration, and synchronization of strategic communications; (3) developed communication strategies and topics; (4) ability formation to communicate, inform,

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

organizational level of strategic communications formation of ability to communicate, inform and influence

processes of planning, integration and synchronization of strategic

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS

159

developed communication strategies and topics knowledge of human dynamics, ability to analyze and evaluate

Fig. 9.3 The structure of strategic communications according to C. Paul

and influence; and (5) knowledge of human dynamics and ability to analyze and evaluate [13] (Fig. 9.3). There are a number of other views and options for structuring subject of our study. It is explained by relative novelty of strategic communications in the field of public administration and unsystematic study of this phenomenon in domestic science. After all, the field of strategic communications in world science is constantly evolving. It primarily concerns improvement of components and technologies. In particular, A. Frolova developed a model of state system of strategic communications. She presents it on two levels: strategic (top-level interdepartmental coordination, crisis communications) and operational levels (government communication, public relations, public diplomacy, special information operations). M. Shkliaruk considers the system of strategic communications, follows similar approach, and defines components of public diplomacy, public relations, and information operations. Scientists D. Dubov, V. Petrov, and S. Soloviov also are focused on the most common definition of strategic communications and their components. In addition to the above components, they also define military public relations and psychological operations. Components of strategic communication systems are more fully presented in the dictionary, but the authors only reveal their content and do not define links between them. Currently, there is an active scientific discussion on components of strategic communications. They are enshrined in a number of official definitions: management of diplomacy, information, armed forces, and the economy, covering all “international actors” and containing systematic assessment of strategic communication importance in foreign and security policy; investing in public diplomacy in various fields to establish contacts between foreign policy and citizens and to better inform partners about pursued policy; and public diplomacy, public relations, military public relations, and information and psychological operations. There is an official approval of the term “strategic communications.” This is shared by most researchers and is the basis of state concepts and doctrines, as well as “military” origin of strategic communications. There are different views on the number and nature of components that need clarification and generalization. After all, strategic communications as a central element of public policy implementation (which should be understood, supported, and agreed between all actors of public administration) require unification of approaches to their interpretation. For security sector, the main

160

T. Syvak et al.

COMPONENTS OF STRATEGIC

Open part

Closed part

Information and psychological block

Technical block

Information operations

Cyber security

Psychological operations

Counteracting in electromagnetic space

Special operations Military block Interactionist block Involvement of key leader Connections with massmedia Connections with society

Military colaboration Civil-military cooperation Operations security Active influence actions

Connections with public authorities

Military measures in support of public diplomacy

Public diplomacy

Physical impact on information infrastructure

Internal communication

Documenting events

Fig. 9.4 System of strategic communications according to V. Lipkan (adapted by the authors according to [14])

goals, objectives, and format of cooperation have already been developed in accordance with the Strategic Communications Partnership Roadmap between the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine and the NATO International Secretariat. In our opinion, one of the most successful approaches to structuring system of strategic communications was proposed by well-known Ukrainian specialist, Academician Volodymyr Lipkan. He proposed to systematize main components of strategic communications into four blocks: interactionist, informationpsychological, technical, and military blocks [14] (Fig. 9.4). Let’s consider in detail content of each component.

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

161

Interactionist Block This block contains those components of strategic communications that involve “interaction.” It is a process of individuals’ interaction in group and society by various means: symbols, signs, and language. Information-psychological block provides separate actions directed on the perception of individuals and groups and change of their understanding and behavior. These are separate information campaigns, psychological pressures, and cognitive attacks. Technical unit provides technical support for information security, databases, stability, and development of information, communication, and digital technologies. Military block is the largest in terms of components and involves the use of information and communication environment in the military sphere, i.e., information and communication measures that should contribute to effectiveness of hostilities and sometimes to replace them. Public diplomacy/soft power: The content of activity is to inform international community in order to create positive opinion about the country and to maintain contacts with other peoples in various spheres of life. Taking into account complexity and multifaceted nature of this component of strategic communications (which in general involves external communication), we will reveal in detail its essence, content, and types separately. Involvement of a key leader: Systematic and organizational personal interaction between public entities and key influential figures in order to obtain expected effect through their impact on particular social group, area, and organization or a specific information event in the interests of public administration. Key leaders are those who make decisions that affect certain groups in society. Main tasks of key leader are its interaction with subject of strategic communications and target audience. In our study context, such function is given to representatives of cultural, scientific, artistic, political, administrative elites. They act as a kind of mediator in communication process between authority and target audience. Media relations is a special type of activity. Its content is formation of controlled system of information relations through purposeful formation of certain public opinion in the media. This also includes activities aimed at establishing mutually beneficial relations between the state (public authorities) and the media, on which the success of its operation depends. Public relations (PR) is a special type of activity, which content is purposeful formation of favorable state (authority) of public opinion in particular target audience; a system of actions to create, maintain, and transform the image as a process of managing the channels of its dissemination and a set of purposeful contacts with society within overall image concept; and a social support for activities of public administration bodies and their representatives. Relations with the authorities (government)/lobbying involves formation and maintenance of relations with government officials and is special social practice which is purposeful, systematic activity of strategic communications subjects (social groups and business and public organizations) to build long-term, effective, and mutually beneficial relations with public authorities at all levels in order to influence

162

T. Syvak et al.

socioeconomic and political processes in society and adoption of desirable for interest groups political and administrative and economic decisions. Government relations (GR) is a special (independent) social practice that differs from lobbying, public relations (PR), and corporate communications (Public Affairs, PA). Internal communication is communication channels through which public authorities interact with each other and with internal target audiences. Internal communication may concern public authorities, local governments, government agencies, organizations and enterprises, or other organizations authorized to act on behalf of the state. Internal communication involves the transfer of information to units, individuals, or information to authority as a whole. Depending on this, all internal communications are divided into printed, technological, and personal. As there is no single universal means of communication that would cover all target audiences and solve all tasks, their comprehensive application should be ensured taking into account various aspects of perception by all target audiences.

Information and Psychological Block Information operations (special) is planned use of means, forms, and methods of information dissemination for certain impact on human behavior and the use of means aimed at demoralizing and disorienting the opponent. Also, information operations are considered as a set of measures carried out on information environment by public administration entities in order to form its positive image and counteract negative informational influence and disorganization of dishonest or illegal behavior. Psychological operations is a set of coordinated special measures aimed at influencing of psychological (mental) state, perception of influence object through nonviolent methods; planned operations to transmit selected information in order to influence its emotions, motives, process of thinking of organizations, groups, and individuals; and a system of purposeful measures for the formation of certain psychological state of people, social groups, people, and the world community. Special operations is a set of agreed and interconnected purpose, tasks, place, and time of special information actions of public administration entities. They are carried out according to single plan or in cooperation with other entities to perform special tasks aimed at creating conditions to achieve strategic, tactical, and operational public policy goals. This block concerns tactical level of strategic communications, namely, implementation of information influence and its use in security and defense in the field of public administration. These components should be defined as implementation of individual communication campaigns, image, other activities, and objects of public administration, aimed at establishing trust and long-term connections. Totality and sequence of these activities and quantity and quality of information products are determined by a separate communication strategy. They are formed on the basis of the analysis of target audiences.

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

163

Technical Unit Cybersecurity is a state of protection of vital interests of man and citizen, society, and state in cyberspace. This allows unimpeded creation, collection, receipt, storage, use, dissemination, protection, and protection of information. Confrontation in electromagnetic space is rivalry of social systems (countries, blocs of countries) in information sphere to influence various spheres of social relations and establish control over the sources of strategic resources.

Military Block Civil-military cooperation is the process of establishing friendly and constructive relations between civilian population and military. It contains system of informational, political, economic, and military measures aimed at improving efficiency of public administration system and state as a whole. Event documentation is continuous and systematic collection and processing of recorded information for storage, classification, retrieval, use, and transmission of data. Documentation of management information involves creation of official documents. Their content is management information [15, 16]. Security of information operations is a set of unmasking measures to prevent leakage of information about preparation, planning, and other details of special events. Information (cognitive, semantic, hybrid) wars are wars using state’s global information space and infrastructure to conduct strategic military operations and strengthen the impact on one’s own information resource. The purpose of information warfare is to weaken moral and material forces of enemy or competitor and to strengthen one’s own. It is provided for measures of propaganda influence on the human consciousness in ideological and emotional spheres. Main task of information wars is manipulation of mass consciousness. Physical influence is a component of strategic communications, which consists in committing of a set of physical measures to realize national interests, and is any measure aimed at violating elements of information infrastructure in the sphere of state activity, obtaining confidential information, or placing misinformation in automated systems of state management or spheres of its activity. Thus, important meaning of combining components of strategic communications into certain system is that system has a purpose, not a separate component/factor. Purpose and plan are inherent in relationship between components, not the component itself. This is applied to various components of strategic communications, different in specifics, methods, and technologies of use in various areas of public administration, but has common plan and serves a common purpose – to protect national interests and national security through targeted shaping influence on internal and external target audiences.

164

T. Syvak et al.

It should be emphasized that problem of structure and functions of strategic communications is not only expert but also political. After all, speed of restoration of economic potential and its integration into the European community depends on implementation success of democratic norms and principles proclaimed by the modern Ukrainian state on implementation of dialogic model of interaction between public and state. In this aspect, S. Soloviov rightly emphasizes that institutional support of strategic communications should be aimed at implementing the following tasks: – Developing the capacity of authorities to provide advisory and practical assistance in the field of strategic communications. – Cooperation with experts. – Development of strategic communications culture. – Relations with nongovernmental organizations. – Ensuring public confidence in the state communication policy. Given this, the author identifies two main goals that do not belong to the functional range of strategic communications. The first goal is development of culture of loss, which can be interpreted as development of strategic communications. The second goal is to ensure public confidence in public policy [15]. The development of public dialogue system and dialogue interaction between public authorities and civil society institutions is also aimed at ensuring trust as a tool that “the most accurately reflects essence of joint action process of actors. Organizational support of the process of formation and implementation of public policy is one of the fundamental theories of modern social philosophy. If the government is unable to convince of the expediency of joint action and uses violence as the last argument, it indicates not so much its strength as its powerlessness or weakness” [17].

3 Conclusions System of strategic communications in public administration is formed by the public administration subjects and is coordinated by the goals and strategic priorities of activities of state and non-state institutions in the field of strategic communications on the basis of interaction information. It consists of goals, ideas, tasks, functions, principles, and methods. It is provided mainly by information tools and methods within the information and communication activities and in the information space. Also, strategic communications system has features of functioning mechanism of legal regulation in the information sphere, including formation, implementation, and control over implementation of state strategies, programs, and tasks. Peculiarity of strategic communications in public administration system (which has common tendencies to their use in other areas) is that they are defined as a process of coordination and synchronization of narratives, themes, messages, individual activities, and actions within the entire related hierarchical communication

9

Structure and Function of Strategic Communications in the System. . .

165

system of public administration subjects to interact with target audiences and certain groups of society which are influenced by information in order to achieve strategic goals [18–20]. Strategic communications components are informational and valueideological prerequisite for formation of informational and national self-identity and preservation of national, cultural, and informational identity of Ukrainian autochthony, political, security, and information nation [21]. Together, they form holistic dimension for practical implementation of communication strategy. Activities of strategic communications cover such main areas as in the field of information and national security of the state: public relations, public diplomacy, and military measures in support of public diplomacy, internal communication, relations with the MCM, information operations, psychological operations, informing about situation and documentation of events, intelligence support of information events, actions in cyberspace (including social networks), information events of international military cooperation, involvement of a key leader in information events, civilmilitary cooperation, demonstration of military actions, misleading security of operations, physical impact, and confrontation in electromagnetic space. Multifunctional toolkit for implementation of strategic communications is synthesis of techniques and methods of each component of strategic communications on the basis of interdisciplinary methodology taking into account its specifics and in accordance with the achievement of a common goal.

References 1. The structure of the guiding documents of state policy in the information sphere: Urgent problems and ways to organize. Analytical note (2011). Retrieved from http://www.niss.gov. ua/articles/572/ 2. Cohen, D. L., & Arato, E. (2003). Civil society and political theory. Izdatelstvo “Ves Myr”. 3. Bohutskyi, P. (2020). Objects of legal strategic communications of national security. European Political and Legal Discourse., 7(1), 105–111. 4. Tereshchenia, O. V. (2020). Strategic communications in scientific and theoretical discourse. Communications and Communicative Technologies., 20, 116–121. 5. Romanenko, Y. O. (2014). Communicative policy of the state: Theoretical and methodological analysis: Monograph. NAPA. 6. Andriichuk, T. (2019). Communicative support of public policy as a component of strategic government communications in a democratic society. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 27, 55–62. 7. Dzoban, O. P. (2018). Strategic communications: The problem of understanding the essence. International Relations: Theoretical and Practical Aspects, 2, 254–264. 8. Sashchuk, G. (2020). Implementation of strategic communications in the security and defense sector of Ukraine. European Political and Legal Discourse, 7(5), 178–183. 9. Rogovchenko, A. M. (2020). On the problem of clarifying the concept of “strategic communications”: Terminological aspect. Gileya: Scientific Bulletin, 152, 247–250. 10. Makarenko, Ye. A. (2016). Communicative trends in international relations: a monograph. In-t mizhnar. vidnosyn Kyiv. nats. un-tu im. Tarasa Shevchenka. 11. Rubtsov, V. P., Perynska, N. I., (2008). Public administration and government agencies. For the order. prof. Yu. P. Surmin. Open International University of Human Development “Ukraine”. University “Ukraine”, Kyiv

166

T. Syvak et al.

12. Frolova, A. Building a system of state strategic communications of Ukraine. Official website of the Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine. Retreived from http://mip.gov.ua/files/ documents/Stratcom_Report_2016_UKR_updated.pdf 13. Paul, C. (2011). Strategic communication: Origins, concepts, and current debates. ABC-CLIO. 14. Lipkan, V. (2016). The concept and structure of strategic communications at the present stage of state formation. Retrieved from https://www.lipkan.com/ponyattya-ta-struktura-strategichnihkomunikatsij-na-suchasnomu-etapi-derzhavotvorennya/ 15. Popov, O. O., et al. (2021). Immersive technology for training and professional development of nuclear power plants personnel. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2898, 230–254. http://ceur-ws.org/ Vol-2898/paper13.pdf 16. Gurieiev, V., et al. (2020). Simulating systems for advanced training and professional development of energy specialists in power sector. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2732, 693–708. http:// ceur-ws.org/Vol-2732/20200693.pdf 17. Krutii, O. M., & Lopatchenko, I. M. (2018). Strategic communications in public administration in the context of globalization. Derzhavne budivnytstvo., 2. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ DeBu_2018_2_4 18. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics., 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 19. Pogodayev, S. E. (2013). Marketing of works as a source of the new hybrid offerings in widened marketing of goods, works and services. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 28(8), 638–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2012-0069 20. Semerikov, S. O., et al. (2022). 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Futures: Environmental, Technological, Social and Economic Matters. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., 1049, 011001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1049/1/011001 21. Soloviov, S. H. (2016). Basic characteristics of strategic communications. Bulletin of the National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine. Series: Public Administration, 1, 165–170.

Chapter 10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their Functional Influence on Efficiency of State Management System Tetyana Syvak and Аllа Dakal

, Petro Vorona

, Yurii Nesteriak

, Viktor Paliukh

,

Abstract Communication infrastructure of public administration should be formed for the effective functioning of the system of strategic communications in the state. It is the framework of national information and communication space, consisting of a set of information, technological networks, MCM, humanitarian, educational, scientific, cultural institutions, establishments and organizations. It provides the establishment of effective communication activities between the public authorities and society and ensures the stability of the communication system. Th development of a strategic communications system in Ukraine should be aimed at developing of organizational capacity of public administration bodies to effectively perform their own functions and the functions of the state in the process of strategic communications. A number of priority measures aimed at building a system of strategic communications in Ukraine were identified. Keywords State management · Efficiency · Communication infrastructure · Public administration · Communication system

T. Syvak · Y. Nesteriak Scientific Institute of Public Administration and Civil Service, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine P. Vorona National Research Foundation of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine V. Paliukh National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine А. Dakal (✉) Shupyk National Healthcare University of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_10

167

168

T. Syvak et al.

1 The Problem Statement In the modern world, there is a rapid development of strategic communications. It happens due to a number of objective factors such as ever-increasing informatization of society; growing role of information confrontation to achieve military-political and economic goals; increasing power conflicts number in the world; terrorist attacks; formation of new national strategies of modern states; adjusting and changing of countries’ image in the international arena; emergence and development of new forms of diplomacy, such as public diplomacy, cyber diplomacy, etc. [1]. This problem is especially acute for Ukraine due to: 1. Active process of institutionalization of international strategic communications in Ukraine. 2. Continuation of a long hybrid war against Ukraine by Russia, accompanied by sharp information confrontation. 3. Aggravation of interest in Ukrainian history, spiritual and cultural heritage due to the unresolved problem of national self-identification of Ukrainians in the face of incessant globalization. 4. Task urgency of overcoming “gap” of Ukrainian society, consolidation of Ukrainians. It can be an effective tool for strategic communications aimed at the internal audience, using relevant narratives [2]. In order not to skip the world trends in our country for the effective functioning of the system of strategic communication should be formed communication infrastructure of public administration. It includes the framework of national information and communication space, consisting of a set of information, technological networks, MCM network, humanitarian, educational, scientific, cultural institutions, establishments and organizations. This issue provides the establishment of effective communication activities between public authorities and society and ensures stability of the communication system [3, 4]. Classic toolkit of strategic communications is used in the public sphere and consists of synchronization of communications and actions in the implementation of state, sectoral and territorial strategies, programs and plans. The subject of public administration achieves planned goals by such impact on target audiences (targeted groups of society) in order to obtain the appropriate level of support and trust. Due to the rapid spread of strategic communications use in the global information space, Marat Zakirov notes, modern approaches to public policy strategy, both domestically and internationally, involve use of traditional methods of political, economic or military influence. Today, information and communication technologies are increasingly used to promote geopolitical interests through social networks, which together with other technological advances in the information society and the latest means of communication are able to become strong means of cultural and ideological expansion. This will create preconditions for social and political and destabilization not only local or regional but also national scale and cause a split in civilizational foundations of the state [5].

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

169

Therefore, the creation of an expanded system of strategic communications from the definition of conceptual foundations is increasingly important for Ukraine. It in turn not only involves defining the issues’ scope and optimal ways to resolve them but also determines the central executive body which will be responsible for developing political policies and proposals in the field of strategic cooperation.

2 Main Material Presentation According to the majority of Ukrainian experts and specialists in the field of strategic communications, the real state of affairs on the formation and implementation of strategic communications in public administration of Ukraine is unsatisfactory and this poses a real threat to information and national security of our country. In particular, T. Andriychuk emphasizes that “formation of strategic communications in Ukraine is insufficient quality because it is difficult to call government’s strategic communications in Ukraine strategic.” Declared tools of such communications mostly belong to tactical and tactical-strategic levels. Communicative support of public policy belongs to the strategic level of interaction with society. It is not properly recognized in official documents governing tasks of strategic communications in certain areas of public policy or in the activities of specific ministries [6]. In the same way, T. Syvak notes, “inability of official structures of Ukraine to effectively resist information intervention” [7]. Among the reasons for the unsatisfactory state of the strategic communications system, G. Sashchuk defines the following: – Lack of a unified system of communicative management in the government. – Gaps in the current legislation and imperfection of most government procedures that do not reflect current needs. – Non-formed general function of strategic communications. Therefore, most of the functional responsibilities of specialists are reduced to tactical actions, which are more often reactive and aimed at solving current problems. – Ignoring forecasting and strategic planning, based on requests from the public by government agencies in the formation of public policy tools. – Lack or non-establishment of internal communication and cooperation between specialized departments with loss (some ministries do not even try to establish communication and cooperation with other ministries). – Orientation of ministries to deliver their messages, which sometimes do not correlate with government strategy or policy. This leads to low awareness of the latter. – Lack of knowledge and skills transfer system, unified databases—each team starts from scratch. – Imperfection of incentives and motivation system of staff which does not encourage the implementation of necessary changes [8].

170

T. Syvak et al.

% 100

70,0

Constitutional Court of Ukraine

The Supreme Court of Ukraine

National Anti Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU

Prosecutor’s office

Officials/state apparatus

69,0

80,0

The judicial system as a whole

69,0

77,5

Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine

68,0

76,0

79,0

73,0

Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine

68,0

Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecuto’s Office of Ukraine

70

71,0

National Agency for the Specialized Anti-Corruption

80

Supreme Anti-Corruption Court

90

61,5

60 50 40 30 20

President of Ukraine

10

Fig. 10.1 Level of citizens’ distrust of state institutions of Ukraine (formed by the authors according to the Razumkov Center data [10])

Our analysis of the current state of development of information and communication spaces, the effectiveness of Ukraine’s communication policy in general and strategic communications in particular shows the institutional inability of public authorities to such multi-vector activities. Let’s try to understand existing problems and outline possible options and ways to improve state strategic communications of Ukraine. First of all, let’s remember that the main purpose of strategic communications is to raise the trust level in state bodies and institutions, because trust is one of the main sources of power. Power over trust-generating thoughts is most important for the country’s sovereignty and national security. This was emphasized by C. Castells, who defined “knowledge and thinking can transform things and turn ephemeral power into permanent. This is achieved by framing public and individual consciousness through multimedia and mass communication networks that process knowledge and thinking to create and destroy trust (decisive source of power)” [9]. We should state that situation with citizens’ trust in public authorities in Ukraine over the past 10 years is critical. Thus, according to sociological research by such authoritative organizations as Razumkov Center and VoxUkraine, in 2021 Ukrainian citizens distrust key state institutions in the vast majority of them (Fig. 10.1).

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

171

Such critical level of public distrust in the country’s public authorities indicates the extremely low effectiveness of government action and its inconsistency with public expectations on the one hand and the lack of government strategic communications to explain the correctness of the chosen policy on the other hand. G. Sashchuk rightly notes, “trust is main construct of strategic communications, which allows to unite civil society around the national idea and national values” [8]. So, we have a surprising picture: public mood formed during the Revolution of Dignity is mostly aimed at European integration, and the country’s top leadership declares Ukraine’s strategic course to move to the European Union. It was even enshrined in the Constitution but opinion polls of last years show that the vast majority of Ukrainian citizens believe that the country is moving in the wrong direction! A study by the independent analytical platform VoxUkraine conducted in 2017 showed that only 14% of the population believed that events in Ukraine were moving in the right direction, while 74% of citizens were convinced otherwise. The latest survey of public assessment of situation in the country was conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology on January 22, 2021. It showed that these indicators have deteriorated. Yes, to question “In your opinion, are things going in the right or wrong direction in Ukraine now?” 74.3% of respondents say that things are moving in the wrong direction. And this figure can actually be much higher because 15.7% of respondents were afraid or did not want to give their answer at all. But a number of those who believe that the country is moving in the right direction for 4 years has decreased significantly—from 14% in 2017 to 10% in 2021 [11]. Low level of trust in public authorities and lack of proper and timely information of public by official institutions lead to introduction of strategic communications, which professional use can accumulate resources of public administration, civil society, business and international community to build trust in order to reach an agreement in the implementation of public policy. In our opinion, the main problems of the imperfection of the strategic communications system in Ukraine include the following: 1. At the legislative level in Ukraine, not enough attention is paid to field of communications. In fact, communication aspects of public authorities’ interaction with public remain unclear. There are only definitions of information interaction which does not involve mutual exchange of information. Sphere of communication policy of the state is regulated by only one normative legal act—the Concept of the Law of Ukraine “On Basic Principles of State Communication Policy,” approved by the Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated January 13, 2010, № 85-р. According to it, certain issues of establishing communication between public authorities, local governments with media and public are determined by the laws of Ukraine governing the information sphere. However, the authors of this Concept in 2010 acknowledged low level of legal regulation of

172

T. Syvak et al.

communication between public authorities with media and public. Those do not fully meet the level of development of Ukrainian society and global trends. 2. Strategic communications in Ukraine are presented only at the level of conceptual principles, i.e., number of strategies, concepts, doctrines and plans determine the need for their implementation. However, even at the conceptual level, the tasks for strategic communications functioning in Ukraine differ significantly: from the need to use tools of strategic communications in 2015—to create national and departmental systems of strategic communications in 2019. No clear definitions and lack of official consolidation of concepts of “strategic communication system” and “sphere of strategic communications,” introduction of new, purely Ukrainian realities and terms “government system” and “intergovernmental system” do not allow practical implementation of certain tasks. This substitution of concepts, in our opinion, is explained by vague understanding of strategic communications essence. Their extrapolation from the field of security and defense (NATO) to the national level led to uncertainty of responsibilities for their implementation and use in public administration. At the conceptual level, strategic communications are best regulated in the field of security and defense. The following documents were adopted: the Military Doctrine, the Strategic Defense Bulletin, the Information Security Doctrine and the Annual Program under the auspices of the NATO-Ukraine Commission. This is explained by significant support within the framework of the implementation of the Roadmap of the Partnership in the field of strategic communications between the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine and the NATO International Secretariat. According to the Roadmap, the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine approved the Concept of Strategic Communications in the Field of Defense. Strategic communications also received appropriate conceptual approval in the field of public administration (in particular the Strategy for Public Administration Reform and the Government’s Priority Action Plan). 3. Analysis of regulations in the field of “institutional conditions” revealed that in recent years in development direction of strategic communications in Ukraine was formed number of public authorities and public institutions, including the Ministry of Information Policy (reorganized in September 2019 in Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports, and from 2020 to the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy). This was entrusted by the important function of developing strategic communications, concept development, strategic narrative, reforming government communications and more. Functional bodies in the field of strategic communications include the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory, the state institution “Ukrainian Institute” and the Ukrainian Cultural Foundation (which will operate in the field of public diplomacy). Communications Council and the Coordination Council for Communications in the field of European integration were established within the structure of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. Their task is to ensure coordination of communication activities during implementation of strategy and improvement of public relations. Main Situational Center within the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine is of

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

173

great importance in the development of strategic communications. It provides operational collection, accumulation and processing of information for operational decisions in the field of security. However, in this direction, the issues of establishing effective communication with other public authorities in order to ensure policy of “single voice” in the Government and with territorial and local public authorities remain unresolved. 4. Instructional and methodological legal support for activities of public authorities in the field of strategic communications focuses mainly on tactical measures and defines tasks of organizational units for communication, accreditation of journalists and more. There are following important issues in terms of strategic communications development: requirements developed by the Cabinet of Ministers for creation (modernization) of official websites of the authorities, their unification, procedure of publishing information on the Internet, creation of single web portal of the Cabinet of Ministers for integration of official websites and implementation of incentive “Open Government.” Oleg Voroshilov proposes the creation of a “comprehensive strategy for development of the national system of strategic communications in Ukraine” to overcome these problems. He also proposes to create extraordinary opportunity to unite disparate elements into single, consistent, vertically integrated system. In general, prospects for public administration to establish and develop a full-fledged effective system of strategic communications in Ukraine are reduced to the need for those formations of uniform purposeful state information and communication policy. Such a policy should be capable to adequately react and influence information and psychological threats and to promote the formation of international image of Ukraine [12]. Marat Zakirov agrees with him and emphasizes that. nowadays need to develop unified communication strategy is becoming more and more obvious. The strategy includes the whole arsenal of communication methods and tools aimed at achieving the country’s strategic goals in the international arena. Strategic approach to communications involves going beyond traditional set of categories such as “target audiences,” “messages,” “information products” and transition to influence on sociopsychological structures of society, as well as fundamental processes underlying security of the state and ensuring its national interests [5].

Therefore, first of all, there should be coordinated interaction between public authorities, local governments and civil society institutions on goal setting, forecasting, strategic planning and programming, transparency and openness of their activities, involvement of citizens in the state-building process, support of the international community and appropriate and use of communication capabilities of the state. There should also be a clear understanding that strategic communications are an integral part of democracy and good governance. In this case, state should change its approach to communication and pay attention not only to improving tools but also to involving the required number of stakeholders in policy development and strategy implementation and development programs.

174

T. Syvak et al.

In our opinion, effective measures can be implemented in the following areas [7, 13, 14]: – First—further securing of Ukraine’s citizens from possible interventions by ensuring constant communication of official institutions with the public, i.e., filling national information space with high-quality information product. – second—organization of interdepartmental coordinated communication activities, development of appropriate communication and creative content in the direction of counteracting external information influences. – Third—obligation of subjects of media information process to social responsibility, i.e., not only to have legal awareness and be law-abiding but also to understand consequences of their actions, deeds and decisions. – Fourth—important task for public authorities (especially at the local level) is to establish effective comprehensive internal and external communications and transition from model of “information” to concepts of “communication” and “influence,” i.e., establishment of bilateral mechanism of public dialogue and development of clarifications and beliefs. In our opinion, creation of modern system of strategic communications in Ukraine should be carried out in clear sequence of steps of key public policy actors. They can be represented as an algorithm-scheme mechanism for forming of strategic communications system in Ukraine (see Fig. 10.2). Proposed model provides four consecutive algorithmic steps to form a system of strategic communications. The first step involves defining conceptual framework, which in turn requires not only defining range of optimal ways of regulation but also defining central executive body. This body will be responsible for policy development in the field of strategic communications, coordination of other government agencies in this area, monitoring and analysis. Specific tasks for organization and implementation of such activities may be defined in the Annual Message of the President of Ukraine or in the program of activities of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. In this aspect, in our opinion responsibility for their implementation should be placed on relevant central executive body, whose powers include functions for state policy formation in the information sphere. In our opinion, the most rationally suitable central executive can be the Ministry of Information Policy of Ukraine. Their name (taking into account expansion of functionality and competencies) would be appropriate to change to “Ministry of Information Policy and Strategic Communications of Ukraine” (MIPSC). The next logical step in implementing this task can be its inclusion in an indicative plan of draft law for a certain year taking into account the practice of the modern system of public management. It should determine the list of draft regulations, deadlines for their preparation, responsible central executive bodies and more. In particular, one of the main tasks at this stage is approval of the concept of creation and development of strategic communications system in Ukraine. On this basis, next steps will be implemented. Thus, according to analysts of the National Institute for Strategic Studies, adoption of separate, holistic document on strategic

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

10

Step 1.

Conceptual principles

Mission definition. Definition of the responsible state body

Inclusion of task in approximate plan of bill work

Approval of the normative design task. Adoption of the Concept of development of the system of strategic communications

Adoption of a legislative act (Code of Strategic Communications)

Tools

Step 2.

Adoption of bylaws. Development of an action plan for implementation, control mechanism

Identification of sources of funding, staffing

175

Main subjects: President of Ukraine (Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine) Main subjects: Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine, state bodies Main subjects: Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine

Main subjects: Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Main subjects: Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine, state bodies Main subjects:

Realization

Step 3.

Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine

Main subjects:

Implementation of the action plan in accordance with the competence of state bodies

State bodies

Information campaign conduction

Main subjects: Ministry of Information Policies, state bodies

Implementation of advanced training system

Main subjects:

Monitoring

Step 4

National Agency for State Service

Introduction of monitoring of the implementation of the action plan

Main subjects: Ministry of Information Policies, expert medium

Development of proposals and recommendations for improving the system

Main subjects: Ministry of Information Policies, expert medium, state bodies

Fig. 10.2 Algorithm scheme of the mechanism of formation of the system of strategic communications in Ukraine

communications (“Concept/Doctrine of Strategic Communications of Ukraine” or under another name) remains theoretical and optimal solution to existing problems in this area. Such document can define narratives, operational themes in support of

176

T. Syvak et al.

them and system of relations between government agencies (as a system of strategic communications) [15]. The second step is to directly develop tools: development and adoption of the Code of Strategic Communications (legally approved set of rules and regulations on the interaction of government agencies and the public in the field of strategic communications). This act has the highest legal force in accordance with the action plan for its implementation. In addition, it is necessary to develop and adopt bylaws and internal regulations for strategic communications implementation. At this stage, one of the most important aspects is issue of financial and personnel support for the functioning of a strategic communications system at national level. The main task for the third step of implementation toward the development system of strategic communications is to ensure implementation of above-mentioned action plan by state bodies. This should be facilitated by appropriate infrastructure, which can be defined as the activities set by institutions of different organizational and legal forms to create conditions for the development of strategic communications. Given the functions of strategic communications in public administration and infrastructure (which contributes to their effective functioning), we can identify the following: financial security; organizational support; scientific and expert-analytical support; training, retraining and advanced training of public servants on strategic communications. An important aspect is the ability to conduct a broad and effective information campaign. The success of the proposed system of strategic communications depends not only on government agencies (organization of interdepartmental and interdepartmental communication) but also on the degree of public involvement in management development and decision-making procedures. In general, the first real signals about the success of strategic communications in society should be increase in the level of legitimacy of state power in Ukrainian society. It is achieved as a result of increasing level of citizens’ involvement in management processes. System of training and retraining plays an extremely important role in proposed algorithm. After all, actual change of the entire communication system in the structure of public administration will require a change of emphasis in civil service, strict compliance with deadlines for preparation and processing of official information, preparation of draft acts, response to public appeals and more [16–18]. The characteristic feature of the third phase is that it should be implemented in at least two contiguous planes—in plane of public relations (creating conditions for citizens not only to receive public administration services) and conditions for participation in public administration, as well as in information and communication plane and mass media space. The fourth step involves the introduction of independent monitoring system. This is a mandatory and integral component of the proposed algorithmic scheme because expert environment is necessary and consistent with democratic standards of state formation taking into account scale and novelty of task in its implementation involving relevant civil society institutions. In terms of public relations and institutions, we consider it most appropriate to create Center for Strategic Communications in structure of the OPU and the Office of

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

Prime Minister

President

Counselor

Head of VRU

Counselor

Counselor

Center

Coordination Communication Council

“StratCom

Top-level security consultations

Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine

Consultative support

CMU Strategic Communications Office

Communications units - offices and directorates for strategic planning and European integration of ministries and their subordinate bodies

Secretary NSDC Situational center of NSD National Security and Defense Council

Office of Strategic Communications

Top level consultations

177

Consultative support

NATO Strategic Communications

Subdivisions on information and communication activities and strategic communications of military power unit

Communications departments of the regional state administration and local self-government

Fig. 10.3 Scheme of interaction of the Center and the Office of Strategic Communications with public authorities and international centers

Strategic Communications in the structure of the CMU. It should be subordinated to the State Institution “Ukrainian Institute.” Expediency of creating two organizational structures is justified by need to use strategic communications in the field of security and defense as a way to counter hybrid threats and their neutralization. So, we have allocated military force unit with direct subordination of Center in OPU—in accordance with the Concept of Strategic Communications of NATO. Argument in favor of establishing an Office in the Cabinet of Ministers is that strategic communications are aimed at strengthening their own capacity to resist possible information interventions and communication and content aggressions and are tool for strategic development of the country. General scheme of interaction of the Office and the Center with authorities, international Centers for Strategic Communications and public authorities is shown in Fig. 10.3. Establishment of the Center for Strategic Communications in the structure of the Office of the President of Ukraine is an objective condition given status of the guarantor of state strategic course enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine. The Center interacts with main situational center of the National Security and Defense Council where operational information from number of central executive bodies in the field of security and defense is concentrated. The Center coordinates activities of the Office of Strategic Communications of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine as well as the vision and the national communication strategy. Leading place in proposed model is given to the Office of Strategic Communications of the CMU. It, in accordance with Art 48 of Chap. IX of the Law of Ukraine

178

T. Syvak et al.

“On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine” within the organization of activities, can create advisory, consultative and other subsidiary bodies [19]. Strategic Communications Coordinating Council should be established to consolidate efforts of all stakeholders: government, civil society, creative unions, expert community and business. Main task of the Coordinating Council is to determine development priorities, agree on vision for future of Ukraine, adopt national communication strategy for Ukraine, coordinate actions and monitor implementation. The council can be formed by merging two existing councils: Coordinating Council for the Implementation of the Communication Strategy in the Field of European Integration [20] and Council for Communications [21] which were formed by the relevant Cabinet of Ministers and duplicate separate functions. Government Office for Strategic Communications is the main target structure for coordination of communications of public administration bodies. It should be assigned by number of functions and responsibilities: implementation of general coordination of communication activities in the system of public authorities; coordination of activities with the Center for Strategic Communications of the Office of the President of Ukraine; development of a national communication strategy and its coordination with the Coordinating Council; coordination of communication strategies of central executive bodies, i.e., sectoral ones which provides horizontal synchronization of communications between ministries; coordination of communication strategies of local public authorities and providing methodological and organizational assistance for their development and implementation; synchronization of communications with ministries during implementation of communication strategies (projects, programs, campaigns), etc. It is recommended to differentiate tasks for the development of public policy in a particular area and control over its implementation—to entrust different subjects of power in order to ensure formation of a harmonious public administration system and prevent duplication of functions of public bodies. Therefore, in our opinion, it is logical to assign function of monitoring activities of public authorities in the field of strategic communications to leading advisory institutions such as the National Institute for Strategic Studies, other reputable expert organizations and institutions. On the basis of their analysis results and proposals, public authorities should make necessary adjustments in process of creating a system of strategic communications.

3 Conclusions Thus, we can determine that development of strategic communications system in Ukraine should be aimed at developing organizational capacity of public administration bodies to effectively perform their own functions and functions of the state in the process of strategic communications. After all, development of public institutions capacity is an activity of systematization and codification of organizational

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

179

knowledge through standardization of functional processes of government. This reflects existing knowledge about use of actions and shape behavioral processes. Thus, we can identify a number of priority measures aimed at building system of following strategic communications in Ukraine: – Reforming of communication units of public authorities. – Need to comply with principles of strategic communications in activities of public authorities. – Introduction of communication subdivisions of public authorities into practice during development and production of information products; need to use narrative approach/narrative strategy. – Active involvement in communication process as key leaders and opinion leaders of representatives of ideological, cultural and artistic elites, as main actors in creation of meanings, narratives and articulators of national values and ideas. – Approval of common requirements for development of communication strategies and need for their coordination with relevant development strategies. – Implementation of technological and technical updating of communication means of public authorities. – Active use of innovative communication technologies and opportunities of digital space through development and implementation of digital strategies. – Development of standards and regulations of communication interaction of subjects of strategic communications for formalization of communication process and possibility of maintenance of synchronicity of their actions. – Purposeful use of social advertising as one of effective tools for moral norms formation and stereotypes of behavior. – Unified system introduction of monitoring and evaluation of state communications effectiveness and their active use in process of strategic communications. – Development of interdepartmental cooperation and partnership principles with non-governmental organizations and promotion of development of their ability to carry out strategic communications in the interests of Ukraine. – Ensuring close cooperation with domestic and foreign research institutions, educational institutions and expert community with experience in the field of strategic communications, in particular in development and implementation of communication strategies. – Organization and holding of educational events (trainings, seminars) for highranking officials with involvement of Ukrainian and foreign specialists in strategic communications. – Increase competencies of public servants on strategic communications by providing their professional training, in particular on development and implementation of communication strategies, programs and projects, involvement of key leaders and opinion leaders, development of narratives. – Providing communication units of public administration bodies with necessary technical, technological and methodological means and resources for implementation of strategic communications, as well as providing analysis and monitoring of public opinion.

180

T. Syvak et al.

– Development of strategic communications culture at institutional level by developing standards and codes of communication ethics and information interaction between subjects of strategic communications. These measures and support of foreign partners in strategic communications will help develop Ukraine’s ability to communicate effectively, establish cooperation with all public administration entities (governmental and non-governmental) in the process of forming and implementing public policy and achieving strategic goals in various fields and areas. We can develop a number of practical proposals to its subjects based on international experience analysis and in order to ensure full cycle of processes of institutionalization of strategic communications in the system of public administration and their practical implementation: – The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine—to regulate issues related to improvement of normative legal acts regulating communication interaction of public administration entities by: adoption of the Law of Ukraine “On State Communication Policy,” Code of Ethics of Communications, Code of Journalistic Ethics, Information Code of Ukraine; strengthening responsibility for dissemination of false, fake, dishonest information in relation to the citizens of Ukraine; commitment of media entities to social responsibility. – The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine—to develop and approve regulations of communication aspects of interaction and standard of information exchange of public authorities with public; to make changes to the list of branches of knowledge and specialties in part: 05 Social and behavioral sciences specialty “Communications” (code 057). – The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine together with the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy of Ukraine, the Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Agriculture of Ukraine and the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine—to develop strategy for development of public diplomacy in Ukraine and its components. And also to make changes to the classifier of professions in parts: managers on strategic communications (code 14 Managers of enterprises, establishments, organizations and their divisions) and head of division on strategic planning and communications (code 1229 Heads of other basic divisions). – The National Agency for Civil Service of Ukraine—to develop model of educational and professional program for civil servants and local government officials on strategic communications and a plan for its implementation.

References 1. Dzoban, O. P. (2018). Strategic communications: The problem of understanding the essence. International Relations: Theoretical and Practical Aspects., 2, 254–264.

10

Current State of Strategic Communications in Ukraine and Their. . .

181

2. Zykun, N. I., Bessarab, A. O., & Ponomarenko, L. H. (2020). Narrative as a content basis of international strategic communications. State and regions. Series: Social Communications., 1, 4–11. 3. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2879/ paper04.pdf 4. Koval, V., Mikhno, I., Udovychenko, I., Gordiichuk, Y., & Kalina, I. (2021). Sustainable natural resource management to ensure strategic environmental development. TEM Journal, 10(3), 1022–1030. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM103-03 5. Zakirov, M. (2019). Strategic communications in the modern world. In Scientific works of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.I. Vernadsky (Vol. 52, pp. 24–34). 6. Andriichuk, T. (2019). Communicative support of public policy as a component of strategic government communications in a democratic society. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 27, 55–62. 7. Syvak, T.V. (2019). Problem field of formation and functioning of strategic communications. Collection of scientific works of the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine. 1, 51–60 8. Sashchuk, G. (2020). Implementation of strategic communications in the security and defense sector of Ukraine. European Political and Legal Discourse., 7(5), 178–183. 9. Kastels, M. (2016). The power of communication. HSE. 10. Assessment of the situation in the country, trust in the institutions of society and politicians, electoral orientations of citizens (2021, March). https://razumkov.org.ua/napriamky/ sotsiologichni-doslidzhennia/otsinka-sytuatsii-v-kraini-dovira-do-instytutiv-suspilstva-tapolitykiv-elektoralni-oriientatsii-gromadian-berezen-2021r 11. More than 70% of Ukrainians believe that the country is moving in the wrong direction. https:// www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-society/3178260-ponad-70-ukrainciv-vvazaut-so-kraina-ruhaetsa-unepravilnomu-napramku.html 12. Voroshilov, O. (2020). The role of strategic communications in combating information aggression. Scientific works of the National Library of Ukraine named after VI Vernadsky, 58, 69–81. 13. Tsaras, K., Papathanasiou, I. V., Vus, V., Panagiotopoulou, A., Katsou, M. A., Kelesi, M., & Fradelos, E. C. (2018). Predicting factors of depression and anxiety in mental health nurses: A quantitative cross-sectional study. Medical Archives., 72(1), 62–67. https://doi.org/10.5455/ medarh.2017.72.62-67 14. Shytyk, L., & Akimova, A. (2020). Ways of transferring the internal speech of characters: Psycholinguistic projection. Psycholinguistics., 27(2), 361–384. https://doi.org/10.31470/23091797-2020-27-2-361-384 15. Dubov, D. V. (2014). Cyberspace as a new dimension of geopolitical rivalry. NISS. 16. Latysheva, O., Rovenska, V., Smyrnova, I., Nitsenko, V., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Management of the sustainable development of machine-building enterprises: A sustainable development space approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management., 34(1), 328–342. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-12-2019-0419 17. Ostapenko, R., Herasymenko, Y., Nitsenko, V., Koliadenko, S., Balezentis, T., & Streimikiene, D. (2020). Analysis of production and sales of organic products in ukrainian agricultural enterprises. Sustainability., 12(8), 3416. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083416 18. Zinovieva, I. S., et al. (2021). The use of online coding platforms as additional distance tools in programming education. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012029. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012029 19. On the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine of 27 February. 2014 № 794-VII: with changes from 06.12.2018. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/794-18

182

T. Syvak et al.

20. On the Coordination Council for the implementation of the Communication Strategy in the field of European integration for 2018–2021: Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of July 18. 2018 № 577. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/ru/577-2018-%D0%BF 21. Regulations on the Communications Council: Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of October 16, 2014 № 544. https://www.kmu.gov.ua/ua/npas/247692545

Part IV

Legitimacy and Legitimation

Chapter 11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legitimation” and its Place in the Information Security System of the Modern State Oksana Radchenko , Oleksiі Stepanko , Stanislav Poroka , Oleksii Piddubnyi , Vasyl Omelchuk , and Svitlana Marchenko

Absrtact In the modern world, the issue of legitimacy acquired a new sound. It is extremely widespread due to serious political, social, economic and security shocks. Legitimacy is determined by the central, determining element of constitutional stability and functioning of political power and is one of the important factors of national security. Substantive and structural components of legitimacy are revealed. They include the following: ontological, value, normative-legal, resource, procedural, identification, communicative and manipulative. The concept of legitimacy exists in inseparable connection with the concept of “legitimation.” Such conceptual pair is a single governmental duality. It is the quintessence of the societal phenomenon of democracy understanding. It is noted that the legitimization of public authorities occurs in the process of effective information and communication interaction between state institutions and civil society. In their absence (or low level of efficiency), there is a communication vacuum. Such vacuum is quickly filled with various harmful information patterns. Thus, legitimacy is seen as an important factor and legitimation—as a key component of the information and national security system of the state.

O. Radchenko (✉) Educational and Scientific Institute “Institute of Public Administration” of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine O. Stepanko · S. Poroka National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine O. Piddubnyi National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine V. Omelchuk Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine S. Marchenko Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kiev, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_11

185

186

O. Radchenko et al.

Keywords Legitimacy · Legitimation · Information security · Modern governance · Duality · Information security system

1 The Problem Statement Legitimacy problem gained a new sound in today’s world. It is widespread due to serious political, social, economic and security shocks, which put into question and critically review a large number of theoretical postulates and concepts of the humanities of previous centuries. It is uneasy even in the “citadel of democracy”— the United States of America and the European Union. They actualize scientific search for new ways to legitimize the state and stabilize political development. The problem of legitimation of public power became important theoretically and practically in the conditions of the state-building process complicated by external military aggression in Ukraine. This is explained primarily by the fact that the key factor in state-building transformations is the legitimacy level of public authorities in the context of democratic reform. This largely determines the social stability of society and its willingness to engage in serious reforms. A high level of legitimacy of public authorities also contributes to stabilization of socio-political situation, increases the interaction level between government agencies and civil society and improves the social well-being of civil servants and quality of the state apparatus. At the same time, today in Ukraine there is rather low level of public confidence in various branches of government, which is due not only to certain assessment of public administration activities but also largely due to emotional perception of their image. The result is insufficient public support for actions and programs carried out by public authorities and the emergence of preconditions for social tensions, destructive processes and crises in society. All this poses a real threat to information and national security. As a societal phenomenon, legitimacy is a key condition for any state’s existence in any historical time. Even totalitarian and despotic regimes cannot last long enough despite the most brutal repression and use of force. They are forced to either fall under the pressure of inevitable revolution or seek means of securing their own legitimacy in the eyes of the subordinate people. According to S. Lipset, lack of legitimacy can nullify all efforts of cultural, economic and political activities of public authorities. Well-thought-out system in a relatively rich country cannot withstand crises if it is considered illegitimate by a large part of the population and elites. At the same time, legitimate regimes are able to cope with crises without much effort [1].

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legit. . .

187

2 Main Material Presentation Modern science determines legitimacy as a central element of constitutional stability and functioning of political power and is one of the important factors of national security [2]. As a scientific definition, concept of “legitimacy” is derived from a number of ancient Latin words such as “legitima,” “legitimorum” (legal rules, formalities, orders, statutes), “legitimus,” “legitimum” (lawful, legitimate, legal, proper, correct), “legitimare,” “legitimatus” (legitimize, legitimized) [3]. They in turn are created from the key political and legal concepts of ancient Rome: “lex” and “legis” (law, rule, legal norm, principle, law, power). However, modern meaning of “legitimacy” and its derivatives “legitimation” and “delegitimization” has significantly departed from the Latin purely legal interpretation of this societal phenomenon. It is not leading and decisive although the legal component of legitimacy understanding was preserved. Thus, P. Manzhola notes that “in ontological sense, legitimacy is conformity of political power to universal principles of human and social existence; socio-cultural dimension of legitimacy presupposes conformity of power to established traditional principles of social life; axioloical dimension is conformity to norms. In moral and ethical dimension legitimacy is the conformity of activity, its goals and means or social practice as a moral representation of society or its specific segment, postulates of ethical theories, concepts, teachings. Principles of law and justice are enshrined in legal acts of the state, or compliance with public ideas about natural law. This is ideal existing legal relations, ideal sphere of legal consciousness and associations of states in interests of particular society, its individual parts or humanity as a whole” [4]. Iu. Kalyuzhna claims that legitimacy is “a political-cultural imperative, a matrix, a pattern created on the basis of values, norms, meanings. Socio-political reality is modeled and reproduced by their means. It should be noted that colossal mobilization potential for legitimation of political power is coded in values; it is moral imperative that forms coordinate system to help individual to navigate in the world of modern politics” [5]. Similarly, according to A. Mishchenko, legitimacy is “a phenomenon of socio-cultural nature, which includes value aspect of political existence.” In his opinion, “legitimacy should be understood as recognition of power, justification of its mechanisms, trust in government institutions and political elite—real subjects of power” [6]. In turn, P. Petrovskyi and O. Radchenko define legitimacy as a certain characteristic of power side of managerial interaction. At the same time, on the social and civil side, it is defined as social trust, and the dynamism of this interaction causes constant tension—reduction or increase of social trust and corresponding changes in legitimacy [7]. In our opinion, legitimacy concept exists in inseparable connection with the concept of “legitimacy.” This conceptual pair is a single governmental duality, which is the quintessence of understanding the societal phenomenon of democracy. This duality contains the ratio of statics and dynamics, phenomena and processes, fixed state and social action where the “process of legitimacy acquiring signs by the

188

O. Radchenko et al.

government is called legitimation” [8]. Similarly, V. Kovalchuk defines legitimacy as a “result of legitimacy, i.e. process by which state power, its actions, norms, institutions acquire signs of justice, legality and expediency” [9]. I. Ovchar agrees with this position: “desire for legitimacy is inherent in political power, which requires favorable response from the object of government”. It determines purpose of legitimation of power. Its content is legitimacy of the political regime [10]. From the point of view of public administration, L. Iakovleva emphasizes that “legitimation of public administration is complex political process determined by such factors as trust of citizens, mutual recognition and ensuring rights and responsibilities of actors in public administration, mechanisms and forms of balance of private and public interests, democratization of vertical and horizontal political interaction, rule of law and constitutional means of making and implementing government decisions and policy implementation” [11]. Legitimation as a process has a pronounced information and communication nature. N. Luhman says that it is no coincidence that power appears as a symbolically generalized means of communication along with truth, money and love. “Power is controlled code of communication. This tendency becomes dominant in the modern understanding of power. Action of government is impossible to imagine outside communication. But outside communication there is a huge space for the deployment of violence” [12]. L. Diamond gives certain philosophical justification for this: “Democracy requires consent. Consent requires legitimacy. And legitimacy requires effective functioning. However, efficiency can be sacrificed for consent. Elected leaders will always be reluctant to pursue unpopular policies, no matter how wise or necessary” [13]. Similar point of view is held by L. Iakovleva: “legitimacy is impossible without consent, and justice as the basis of public institutions is impossible without legitimacy” [14]. Logical continuation of this approach is an assertion that without legitimacy and derived justice any state is threatened by extinction and disintegration, popular uprisings and revolutions, or can be easy captured by aggressive neighboring states. The latter will not be adequately repulsed because citizens do not want to defend the unjust government. Therefore, strategic communications and active work of public authorities should become an important component of national security to strengthen the legitimacy of state institutions and official political course and strengthen information security in general. Main tool for legitimizing public authorities is an open public dialogue between government and people. More common tools of propaganda or dictation, on the contrary, not only do not lead to the desired result. They actually only reduce the overall legitimacy of the state and its institutions. This pattern is revealed by the scientist of public administration Professor O. Radchenko. He studied information and communication components of public administration and determined that information and communication interaction between the state and society can be formed in the form of propaganda and dictation mechanisms (as one-way power communication), advertising (informing) (as a two-way asymmetric communication) and discourse and dialogue (as a corresponding two-way symmetrical communication)

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legit. . . Threats level for national security

Legitimacy high

189

Curve of state institutions legitimacy

low

medium medium

low critical propaganda

dictatio manipulation

advertising

one-sided power-social two-sided asymmetric communication communication

discours

dialog

bilateral symmetrical communication

Type of communicative interaction

Fig. 11.1 Relationship between legitimacy and format of communicative interaction (adapted by the authors according to [15])

[15]. The influence of these mechanisms on the level of formation of social legitimacy of power can be represented graphically (Fig. 11.1). According to L. Iakovleva, democratic legitimacy of power involves dialogue with society, establishment of partnerships between government and citizens, formation of space of mutual trust. At the same time, wave of populism is growing in the political field under the influence of radical movements rise (from right and left flanks). This contributes to rapid success of charismatic political leaders. After all, development of management decisions, implementation of political actions and positioning of populists are not based on rational discussion rules but in accordance with the media format. Under such conditions, power legitimization largely depends on media discourse, media scandals and effective use of communication technologies rather than on public agreement with rational reasoning about certain goals of political development and reasonable ways to achieve them. This threatens democratic legitimacy [16]. Thus, legitimization of public authorities occurs in the process of effective information and communication interaction of state institutions and civil society. In their (low level efficiency) there is a communication vacuum. It is quickly filled with various harmful information patterns that pose real threat to information security. In the future, we will move to consider substantive and structural components of legitimacy. We define first of all subjects and objects of the studied phenomenon as in any societal phenomenon. Because legitimacy is a key characteristic of both state power in general and public authorities. It is the state, its political and administrative institutions, public authorities at various levels and various representatives of these bodies—officials, civil servants have the status of legitimacy.

190

O. Radchenko et al.

Legitimacy of public power institutions is given by citizens and, more broadly, by civil society. In this case, it is obvious that the desire of public authorities to obtain the highest possible level of legitimacy (as a set of promotional activities, public relations, etc.) is aimed at society and individual citizens. They are objects of legitimacy as a societal phenomenon. G. Berezhanskyi notes: “measure of the state power legitimacy is not only recognition of such power as the majority of society, but also willingness of society to work with government officials” [17]. Subjects of legitimacy should also include numerous international supranational political organizations and their representatives, taking into account the current globalization trends highlighted in previous sections. These representatives actively influence public administration processes in many modern countries. We mention that legitimacy is the process of gaining legitimacy. So, legitimacy belongs to institutions of power; therefore, it is reasonable to say that all subjects of legitimacy automatically become objects of legitimacy. Separation of legitimation subjects should be based on the scientific work of A. Naumov, who meaningfully divided legitimation into three types: – Technological (specific political activity of the elite, which gained power or claims status of ruling) where we will single out legal. This means legalization of actions of the new ruling elite. – Situational (response to internal and external challenges, which is a test of effectiveness for the ruling elite). – External (recognition by authoritative for society foreign policy actors) [17]. This understanding logically brings us the possibility of talking about three levels of legitimacy—global (or macro-level), state (or meso-level) and personal (or microlevel) (see Fig. 11.2). The above division shows that various social actions are carried out by various political and social actors, who in this case acquire the status of subjects of legitimacy. Purpose and result of these actions should be acquisition of legitimacy. Subjects are international organizations, politicians and public figures of international level, foreign states, their governments and high-ranking officials in the case of external legitimacy. At the same time, a high level of legitimacy at this level significantly strengthens national security with the support of international organizations. Conversely, a critical decline in international legitimacy can lead, for example, to the introduction of UN peacekeeping forces and de facto overthrow. In the case of situational legitimacy (when there is an assessment by society and citizens of public authorities and officials), their political and managerial actions aimed at solving urgent problems of socio-political development, including responses to numerous internal and external challenges. In fact, it includes the assessment of effectiveness of the entire system of state public power and its individual institutions and representatives: citizens, civil society organizations, ethnic and social groups and strata are the subjects of legitimation of power and the state. For technological legitimacy, all producers and distributors of information and communication, advertising and propaganda materials designed to improve the

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legit. . .

MEZOLEVEL

MACROLEVEL;

MICROLEVEL

Legitimacy of global

Legitimacy of state

Legitimacy of

level

level

personal level

UN,

Institutional level

Procedure level

Monarch,

OSCE,

legitimacy

legitimacy

President, Head of Government,

Council of Europe, IMF, IBRD, The Hague tribunal, NATO, intergovernme ntal bodies,

191

State, the constitutional order, the parliment, the Cabinet of Ministers and the system of the Central Election Commission, the system of local

political

Minister, civil

regime,

servants, heads

legal system,

of local self-

electoral

government

system,

bodies, local

administrative

government

services

employees

SUBJECTS OF LEGITIMACY - OBJECTS OF LEGITIMACY

Fig. 11.2 Main levels and subjects of legitimacy of modern public power

image of government as a whole, its institutions and representatives should be included here [18, 19]. Thus, we can say that such subjects include certain politicians and officials (for example, speech of government official or People’s Deputy, briefing of head of regional state administration, article of the head of department of the ministry in newspaper). In this case, there is a self-identification, when a highranking official, politician, ordinary civil servant or elected official of local government acts as a subject of identification and as its object. At the same time, legitimation subjects include PR specialists, mass media, individual journalists, politicians and political parties, socio-political social movements, various experts and opinion leaders, representatives of human socialization institutions (primarily educators). All these persons carry out purposeful professional or motivated influence on public opinion with the ultimate goal of legitimizing public power in the state. Finally, subjects of technological legitimacy can be organized (political parties, public authorities) or self-organized citizens, for example, participating in referendums or mass rallies in support or protest. At the same time, legitimation often takes place “with a minus sign” and leads to delegitimization of power, but quite often government itself uses mechanisms of direct expression of will to assert itself in the eyes of society. O. Bilyi notes that in such cases, “idea of referendum becomes an instrument of struggle against society as sovereign”. The system of organized private interests is in institutions of representative democracy. This is why thousands of rallies of the Orange Revolution era are nothing but an outbreak of the legitimizing potential of Ukrainian society [20].

192

O. Radchenko et al.

In general, various legitimation technologies used by politicians and public authorities are designed to minimize the protest potential of society. They should create conditions according to S. Lipset when “society as a whole considers existing political institutions most acceptable, regardless of the opinion of individuals. currently in power” [1]. Tools of legitimation technologies are extremely wide, but Ukrainian researcher O. Sereda divides the technological chain of legitimacy into five successive stages: The first stage is foundations of worldview, building of objective reality picture, i.e. system of ideas about the world. The second stage is the separation of the constructed picture of the world as personal and the construction of theoretical models of the world comprehension. The third stage is the comparison of one’s own internally constructed model of the world with a really functioning model of a specific historical society (social subject acts as its element). The fourth stage is the establishment of an internal relationship (positive/negative/ indifferent); evaluation of a fixed relationship as a result of comparison; “explanation” and justification of a certain process or phenomenon. The fifth stage is the reaction to the obtained comparison of the world pictures [21]. Disclosure of the research task is impossible without clarifying the structural construction of the legitimacy concept. From the standpoint of general philosophy, S. Proleev offers the following types of structure of power legitimacy: – Transcendence of source of power: it is always based on impersonal universality. – Super-empiricism. – Justice: right to power should be based on the principle of “superiority of the best”. – Human dimension of right to power. – Intersubjectivity: basis of legitimacy is always based on public support, trust from community, population [22]. From the point of view of public administration, in our opinion, it is possible to define other structural components of legitimacy in a generalized form: ontological, value, normative-legal, resource, procedural, identification, communicative and manipulative (see Fig. 11.3). We will reveal these components, supporting the author’s position with references to foreign and domestic researchers. Thus, ontological components include the following: credit of political trust, belief in the inviolability of political life, sacredness and justice of state power and so on. In particular, V. Dudchenko defines the requirement of justice legitimation, because a legitimate or legal state is not any state, but only a state based on ontological social contract [23]. In turn, S. Lipset believes that legitimacy is a form of trust credit which allows to prevent the emergence of democratic crises or weaken their impact. It is important that the legitimate regime can gradually lose its legitimacy in a state of crisis while illegitimate regimes are likely to disintegrate [1].

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legit. . .

compliance of nature and actions of government with dominant moral and ethical norms and values in society, understanding of freedom,equality,common good

credit of political trust, sacredness and justice of state power, belief in inviolability of political life

efficiency of government actions, competence and management style of high-ranking officials, nature of providing public services to population

level of legal awareness, observance of constitution by public authorities, provision and judicial protection of fundamental human and civil rights and freedoms

Values components

Resource components

Ontological components

Procedural components

193

LEGITIMACY

Manipulative components

Communicative components

PR-technologies, populism, advertising and propaganda

deliberative consensus, open public dialogue between government and society

sacred, ideological, political, natural, human, material potential at disposal of power

Identification components

ethno-national and historical-cultural patterns of common historical destiny, authority/charisma of statesmen, etc.

Fig. 11.3 Legitimacy structure of public authorities

V. Kovalchuk also interprets legitimacy as a kind of “trust credit” of citizens to current government. It “includes three basic elements: justice, legality and expediency.” These elements are closely interrelated. From the author’s point of view, legitimacy is one of the fundamental properties of state power in a democratic state governed by the rule of law. This is manifested in recognition of citizens (subjects) of the constitution and functioning of the current government fair, lawful and appropriate, resulting in their willingness to act in accordance with the constitution and laws [24]. Value components include the following: observance by institutions and individuals of power of moral and ethical norms and values prevailing in society; compliance of nature and actions of authorities with dominant beliefs in society about freedom, equality, common good, etc. Iu. Kalyuzhna noted, “phenomenon of legitimation of political power becomes possible only if there is a normative consensus in community or value legitimacy. This means compliance with norms and values shared by majority in society: development and rooted in public consciousness; compliance of authorities themselves with values of ideological doctrine, which is

194

O. Radchenko et al.

official in the state; maximum possible compliance of general values of politics and specific values of the individual” [5]. Normative and legal components include the following: level of legal awareness, compliance with constitution and laws by public authorities, legislative support and judicial protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen and so on. According to S. Proleev, legitimation is the universal law of constitution and exercise of power regardless of whether it is power of the individual over individual, or public or state power. Any power exists as long as it is valid, as long as right to power is asserted, and how it is justified and recognized by all its participants is legitimacy [22]. J. Habermas also singled out the role of normative-legal components: “legitimation consists in interpretation (from narrative image or for example, in rational natural law, with systematized comments and purposes of argumentation). This law has dual function to show right” [25]. At the same time, Inna Mykhailova emphasizes that “power can be considered as legitimate as possible if: it procedurally complies with established and generally accepted rules; these rules can be considered acceptable to all parties in process of political interaction; there are real evidence of consent of subordinates to voluntary submission to the ruler” [26]. Resource components include the following: sacred, mythological, ideological, political, medial, natural, human, material potential. All this is at the disposal of public authorities [27, 28]. Sacred potential as an understanding of state power by the power of God (from God) was leading for millennia, but lost its significance, gradually becoming a mythological potential. Ideology as consolidating potential of power has dominated for the last two centuries, but in the modern world, there is more and more talk of “end of ideologies” replaced by “civic idea” embodied either in national idea or in another format, such as American Dream, etc. Political and media resources indicate that authorities have the communication potential to influence society, broadcast or impose certain ideas, messages, interpretations of socio-political phenomena and events. Natural potential such as rich oil reserves can sustain broad government social programs for long enough, despite its weak economic efficiency [29, 30]. Procedural components include the following: effectiveness of public authorities, competence and management style of high-ranking officials, nature of public services to public and so on. For example, N. Luhmann singles out procedural components of the legitimation process: direct political and managerial activities in coordinating individual programs (decisions) with each other. Therefore, proper management requires special education and specialization. This forms special professional logic that raises “rational question of legitimacy through symbolic implication of when/then—legitimacy through the process” [31]. Identification components include the following: ethno-national and historicalcultural patterns of common historical destiny, authority/charisma of statesmen, etc. Thus, T. Novachenko is convinced that “basis of legitimate authority is that this phenomenon provides special trust in relationship of power with community”

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legit. . .

195

[32]. O. White emphasizes that “great historical narratives do not invite dialogue, but impose it. They involve individual in whirlpool of identifications that their function is to determine kind of ballistics of imagination. Thus grounds are created for institutional system accustoming for establishment of symbolic order through reproduction of strategic symbols of history” [20]. Communicative components include the following—information, communication and media channels that enable deliberative consensus, open public dialogue between government and society [33]. Thus, the most famous researcher of this field, J. Habermas, argues that political legitimacy is reflected in its compliance with values established by the communicative community itself. It is on the basis of legitimacy in the understanding of perfect reasoning. According to the researchers, social integration is carried out, and therefore, consensus is possible, which is the main condition of legitimacy [34]. Manipulative components include the following: populism, PR technologies, advertising and propaganda. D. Bell’s legitimacy means justification of unsuccessful social actions through manipulation of meaning and/or use of concepts to change political behavior [35]; in J-L. Shabo it often results from a kind of temporary and historically determined or manipulative agreement between those who govern and those who rule [36]. Understanding and rational use of these components in the formation of processes of legitimation of public authorities is an important task of public policy. In this regard, the Ukrainian researcher A. Naumov identifies following components of legitimation policy in transitional society: – Legality (within the current legislation) or legalization (rapid adoption of a new basic law) of activity. – Ideologization (creation of state ideology). – Modernization of old (inefficient) or formation of new system of government (institutionalization) with simultaneous reform of all spheres of public life. – Popularization of new statesmen and priorities through propaganda in order to integrate society around them. – Symbolization (rituals, political language) and mythologization of political and managerial actions of the government (acquisition of charisma by effective state leaders, the cult of personality) [37].

3 Conclusion Summing up analysis of the essence and content of the governmental duality and its place in the system of public power we should note that conceptual pair “legitimacy”—“legitimation”—is a single governmental duality. It is the quintessence of understanding the social phenomenon of democracy. This duality contains the relationship between statics and dynamics, phenomena and processes. Fixed

196

O. Radchenko et al.

state and social action there can be described as a “process of acquiring signs of legitimacy by the government” and it is called legitimation. Structure of legitimacy of public authorities consists of the following components according to the author’s vision: – Ontological (credit of political trust, belief in inviolability of political life, sacredness and justice of state power). – Values (observance by institutions and personalities of power of moral and ethical norms and values prevailing in society). – Normative-legal (level of legal awareness, observance of constitution and laws by public authorities, legislative support and judicial protection of fundamental human and civil rights and freedoms). – Resource (sacred, mythological, ideological, political, medial, natural, human, material potential at the disposal of public authorities). – Procedural (efficiency of public authorities’ actions, competence and management style of high-ranking officials, nature of providing public services to the population). – Identification (ethno-national, historical-cultural patterns of common historical destiny, authority/charisma of statesmen). – Communicative (information-communicative and media channels that enable deliberative consensus, open public dialogue between government and society). – Manipulative (populism, PR-technologies, advertising and propaganda). Legitimacy is a key concept of political system stability of any state and effectiveness of its functioning and guarantee of public support for public institutions in crisis moments of socio-political development. This makes an important factor in national security. Legitimization of public authorities takes place in process of effective information and communication interaction between state institutions and civil society. In its absence (or low level of efficiency), there is a communication vacuum, which is quickly filled with various harmful information patterns that pose real threat to information security. That is why need to strengthen national security requires statesmen, politicians, high-ranking officials and ordinary civil servants to prove to society on a daily basis their professional and political suitability to perform their functions and powers to ensure fair conditions for state-organized society, meet its basic needs and interests, ensuring observance and, if necessary, protection of fundamental human and civil rights. This is a laborious work. Its neglect inevitably leads to delegitimization of the current government, popular protests and ultimately to change government as a result of legal procedures (elections) or illegal forms of popular expression (from mass protests to revolutions). Thus, legitimacy should be considered as an important factor and a key component of information and national security system of the state.

11

Essence and Content of State-Administrative Duality of “Legitimacy”: “Legit. . .

197

References 1. Lypset, S. Reflections on legitimacy. http://sbiblio.com/biblio/archive/lip_rasm/ 2. Bairachna, L. (2016). Legitimacy of power as an imperative for sustainable development of the state. Law and Society., 1, 8–13. 3. Dvoretskyi, Y. (2009). Latin-Russian dictionary: More than 200,000 words and phrases. Drofa: Russkiy yazyk-Media. 4. Manzhola, P. (2007). Interaction of government and citizens: The practice of legitimizing the institutions of power in the recent history of Ukraine. Strategic Priorities., 1(2), 58–65. 5. Kaliuzhna, Y. (2015). Legitimation of political power: Value-normative determinants. Modern Society., 2(1), 94–102. 6. Mishchenko, A. (2016). Democratic legitimacy: Concepts, means, contradictions. Gileya: Scientific Bulletin., 112, 287–291. 7. Petrovskyi, P., & Radchenko, O. (2019). Theoretical and methodological foundations of ensuring the legitimacy of public authority in modern Ukraine. Efficiency of Public Administration., 2, 29–40. 8. Bortnikov, V., & Chubaievskyi, V. (2015). Electoral legitimation of power in a democratic transformation. Studia Politologica Ucraino–Polona, 5, 55–64. 9. Kovalchuk, V. (2011). Democracy of participation as a source of legitimacy of state power. Elections and Democracy., 2(28), 25–33. 10. Ovchar, I. (2012). Technologies of legitimation of power: Legal mechanisms and social opportunities. Scientific notes of the Institute of Political and Ethnonational Studies. IF Kuras. 6, 120–130. 11. Iakovleva, L. (2015). Legitimacy of public administration: State, power, rationality. Current Issues of Public Administration., 3, 85–90. 12. Karashchuk, M. (2017). Legitimacy of political power: The specifics of modern thinking. Bulletin of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Politology, 2, 8–12. 13. Daimond, L. (2005). Three paradoxes of democracy. Democracy. Smoloskyp. 14. Iakovleva, L. (2020). Legitimacy of public authority in Ukraine: from ratings to identities. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 31, 212–220. 15. Radchenko, O. (2009). The value system of society as a mechanism of democratic state formation. HarRI NAPA “master”. Kharkiv. 16. Iakovleva, L. (2018). The concept of publicity and its impact on the theory of legitimacy of public authority. Bulletin of Mariupol State University. Series: History. Politology., 22-23, 302–310. 17. Berezhanskyi, H. (2015). The relationship between legitimacy and legality of state power: Theoretical and legal aspect. Bulletin of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine., 7, 36–42. 18. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics., 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 19. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2879/ paper04.pdf 20. Bilyi, O. (2013). Legitimation and the modern political regime. Scientific Notes., 1, 43–54. 21. Sereda, O. (2005). Legitimation of social inequality as a factor in the constitution of social order. Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. 22. Proleev, S. (2005). Metaphysics of power: A monograph. Naukova Dumka. 23. Dudchenko, B. (2005). Legitimacy and legality: The question of correlation. Current Issues of State and Law., 26, 58–64. 24. Kovalchuk, V. (2020). Legitimacy of power as a legal phenomenon and its manifestations in the conditions of democratic transformation. Bulletin of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”. Series: Legal Sciences., 7(4), 272–282. 25. Khabermas, Y. (2010). The problem of legitimation of late capitalism. Praxis.

198

O. Radchenko et al.

26. Mykhailova, I. (2019). Legitimation of state power in the context of international relations. Faces, 22(7), 72–80. 27. Koval, V., Mikhno, I., Udovychenko, I., Gordiichuk, Y., & Kalina, I. (2021). Sustainable natural resource management to ensure strategic environmental development. TEM Journal, 10(3), 1022–1030. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM103-03 28. Bogoslavska, O., Stanytsina, V., Artemchuk, V., Garmata, O., & Lavrinenko, V. (2021). Comparative efficiency assessment of using biofuels in heat supply systems by Levelized cost of heat into account environmental taxes. In A. Zaporozhets & V. Artemchuk (Eds.), Systems, decision and control in energy II. Studies in systems, decision and control (Vol. 346, pp. 167–185). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69189-9_10 29. Yatsyshyn, T., Mykhailiuk, Y., Liakh, M., Mykhailiuk, I., Savyk, V., & Dobrovolsky, I. (2018). EStablishing the dependence of pollutant concentration on operational conditions at facilities of an oilandgas complex. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2(10–92), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126624 30. Biletskyi, V., et al. (2017). Research into the process of preparation of Ukrainian coal by the oil aggregation method. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(5–8), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2017.104123 31. Luhmann, N. (1969). Legitimation durch Verfahren. Neuwied. 32. Novachenko, T. (2013). The concept of trust as the basis of the legitimacy of state power. Investments: Practice and Experience., 10, 159–163. 33. Zinovieva, I. S., et al. (2021). The use of online coding platforms as additional distance tools in programming education. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012029. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012029 34. Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society. Trans and with Introduction by Thomas McCarthy. Heinemann Educational Books. 35. Bell, D. (2002). Language, Legitimacy and the project of critique. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political., 27(3), 327–350. 36. Shabo, J. -L. Basic types of legitimacy. http://jim-11.narod.ru/stat/shabo.htm 37. Naumov, A. (2012). Some aspects of the legitimacy of the political regime in a transitional society. Panorama of Political Science Studies., 9, 130–137.

Chapter 12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation in Authoritarian, Democratic and Transitional Societies Oksana Radchenko , Anastasia Nekryach Tomash Michalski , and Yurii Berezhnyi

, Larysa Kochybei

,

Abstract The relationship between the legitimacy, effectiveness of public administration and stability of the political system is revealed. Comparative analysis of conceptual models of legitimation of power in authoritarian, democratic and transitional societies is proposed on its base. It is determined that legitimacy of authoritarian regimes is based on their functionality. Legitimacy of democratic regimes is based primarily on processes and procedures and only partially on functionality. Systematic model of legitimation of public authorities of transitional societies is proposed. It provides 10 areas of application of various technologies of legitimation of institutions and public authorities, as a certain socio-political engineering. It is concluded that nowadays new forms of legitimacy are emerged. They testify shift of the center of democracies and their complication. Movable concentration is replaced by the principle of distribution, separation, multiplication and existence of counterdemocratic forms and institutions of indirect democracy. Keywords Legitimacy · Authoritarian society · Democratic society · Transitional society · Conceptual model

O. Radchenko (✉) Educational and Scientific Institute “Institute of Public Administration” of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine A. Nekryach · L. Kochybei Poltava State Agrarian University, Poltava, Ukraine T. Michalski Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland Y. Berezhnyi Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_12

199

200

O. Radchenko et al.

1 The Problem Statement Legitimacy in public administration systems as a societal phenomenon is a guiding principle of social interaction mechanism of public authorities with civil society institutions and a determining condition for stability and efficiency of public administration and its ability to consolidate society in solving problems of socio-political development. Today, “improving the effectiveness of communication between citizens and political institutions is impossible to imagine the legitimacy of public authority without ensuring social trust and public support. It is about justifying and supporting activities of public authorities in terms of public morality, law (legality of public authorities). The latter means that public institutions can be replaced (as well as politicians) if they lose trust and support of society. Citizens are not their debtors and hostages. Regardless of whether we identify institutions as rules or as organizations, they should be legitimate” [1]. Legitimacy as a state of public support for the current regime is a desirable state for any country in any historical period. But conditions for gaining legitimacy can differ for different state entities depending on the nature of public power and features of government and political regime. Undoubtedly, authoritarian, transitional and democratic states demonstrate completely different models of their own legitimacy, different mechanisms and tools for gaining the support of the people. Therefore, it is important to highlight this difference in detail using a comparative analysis of legitimation models of authoritarian, transitional and democratic society.

2 Main Material Presentation Analyzing the legitimacy of authoritarian and democratic regimes, we take into account the fact that there is no country in the world where the entire population considers current regime to be completely legitimate. There are sections of population who are in power apathetically, there are peaceful oppositionists and armed terrorists. Between these extreme poles is majority, which partially recognizes claims to legitimacy of ruling entities. Therefore, it is important for us to consider a social basis of legitimacy on which totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic states rely from the standpoint of the research task. According to political psychologists, all people of the psychotype “homo politikus” in the socio-political space can be divided into six main types: hegemonic (its carriers are characterized by authoritarianism, rejection of other views and other types of political relations), conformist or pro-government (characterized by lack of their own political position and tendency to take for granted any dominant political views), conflict or protest (characterized by strong and committed to their social or political groups of individuals who are acutely aware of injustice and always ready to fight for victory), absenteeistic or apathetic (individuals of this type do not participate in political life, are not interested in politics and correlate their political

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

COMPONENTSCharacteristic type of political

201

Dominant type of identification

conformist or progovernment type "homo politikus"

characterized by lack of their own political position and a tendency to take for granted any dominant political views

conflict or protest type "homo politikus"

acutely feel injustice and are always ready to fight for the complete victory (in absolute terms - to annihilation) of their political opponents

absenteeistic or apathetic "homo politikus"

do not take part in political and administrative processes, are not interested in politics, do not go to elections and protest rallies

luralistic type "homo politikus"

recognize for others right to their own rights, their own opinion, their own system of values, prone to tolerance and search for consensus

civil or harmonious type "homo politikus"

set up for fruitful interaction with the state, are interested in and understand politics, participate in political and administrative processes

mobilization

prone to rejection of other points of view, seek to impose on all their own values, norms, traditions their own worldview

manipulative

Hegemonic type "homo politikus"

rationalist

Constant democracy

Transit democracy is

Totalitarianism Authoritarianism

Human psychotype Characteristic features of psychotype

Fig. 12.1 Human psychotypes and their relationship to identification type

self-identification with the social patriarchal-traditional value system), pluralistic (unites freedom-loving, outspoken people who recognize right to their own rights, their own opinion, their own system of values; they tend to participate in public governance on the basis of tolerance and consensus (civil)) or harmonious (as a combination of certain positive features of hegemonic, protest and pro-government types of pluralistic dominance). Such a person is ready for fruitful interaction with state, is active and conscious, interested and understands politics, participates in public events, discussions and elections, enters political organizations, and shares and defends the state (national) idea and social value system. Citizens of the harmonious type treat opposition not as an enemy or an opponent, but as a colleague who offers another solution to problems. This is the “social base of civil society and democracy” [2] (see Fig. 12.1). Figure 12.1 shows that totalitarian regime is inevitably reproduced in society dominated by a political elite with features of hegemony (which due to its psychotype seeks to suppress, first of all, counter-elite, any political opposition and the independent and politically conscious middle class as a social base of democratically minded citizens), and the vast majority citizens are conformists. Totalitarian government seeks to justify right to power by force. It tries to turn

202

O. Radchenko et al.

society into a silent mass and uses a mobilizing or ideological type of legitimacy. S. Kuznetsov notes in this regard “in tyrannical regimes, life is unfolded in permanent violence. This is practice of totalitarianism. It keeps society in tension of extraordinary situation (threat of war, natural disaster, etc.) which bring to fore violence and coercion” [3]. But totalitarian regime eventually self-destructs due to two fundamental flaws, revealed, in particular, by the Ukrainian researcher S. Proleyev even if it achieves its goal at a certain stage. He notes “regime of incessant violence inevitably destroys itself. Thus, ruler who relies on violence becomes hostage to his own repressive apparatus. Secondly, violence seeks to suppress any disagreement and resistance. It destroys principles of human self-determination and turns (if successful) people into inert mass, unsuitable for all forms of activity in general. This means deep erosion of diligence, initiative, creativity, morality, life-affirming feelings, and so on. So, foundations of society’s self-reproduction are destroyed. It leads to rapid reduction of resource over which violence reigns” [4]. At the opposite pole, we have a situation where the majority of society is made up of citizens with civic and pluralistic type of self-consciousness. In fact, these are the most typical characteristics of the middle class. According to F. Fukuiama, “democracy is always relied on the middle class” which prefers autonomy of free will. This allows the citizen to become a capable subject of public administration processes, an equal participant in government-social interaction [5]. That is why under such conditions, democratic political regime is formed. Such regime uses a rationalist model of legitimacy—legitimation by popular trust, conscious delegation of current political power by people of their natural law as the only source of power. At the same time, S. Lipset notes that there is a strong correlation between legitimacy and level of democracy in society: the more democratic a country is, the more legitimate is its political system. Indeed, high legitimacy of system means that a significant part of citizens will interact with authorities in order to pass indefinitely long periods of time until violations of the system. Legitimacy makes participants of public-power interaction more inclined to cooperation, which explains optimism about reform prospects within existing public institutions [6]. The difference is obvious. It is due to the course of historical development and appropriate model choice of power legitimation depending on the maturity level of society, political responsibility of ordinary citizens and their willingness to take on the burden of public administration. T. Kravchenko rightly points out that legitimacy in democracy is always internal and “matures in society,” while in authoritarian and totalitarian political regimes, legitimacy is almost always imposed on society. As a result, this legitimacy itself is transformed into a habit of obeying to any decision of the state without internal reflection on the expediency of such decisions [7]. Between these poles are transitional societies dominated by absenteeism, conformist and conflict psychotypes with a small share of hegemonists and a small share of pluralists—society dominated by apathy, lack of understanding of politics and mass reluctance to participate in public administration. Due to this, certain authoritarian or “transit” (conditionally democratic) regimes are formed in the country

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

203

(depending on the predominance of one or another psychotype among the political elites). Such regimes are afraid to be open to brutality. They declare allegiance to democratic principles, but they are unable to establish truly democratic socialpower relations due to the lack of a strong middle class. These regimes according to F. Fukuiama carry a “resource curse” [5], when governments receive huge revenues not in the form of taxes (not through effective regulation of economic space) but due to rich natural resources. Therefore, governments are not interested in the support and growth of the middle class, and rationalist models of legitimacy in such societies do not work. So inevitably politics tends to authoritarianism and goes in a vicious circle—use of manipulative models of legitimacy requires absenteeism and non-conformist electorate. It is more inclined to manipulative legitimation strategies. I. Krastev argues that ideology is necessary for such regimes and such governments as a source of extraordinary legitimacy and a certain legitimacy, along with natural resources. This gives these regimes some features of theocracy [8]. There is a “defective democracy” even if leaders of state demonstrate a desire (and attempts) to build democracy and given dominance of ruling elites of second- or fourth-type psychotypes. In such a state, personalization of power of leader and clientelism is institutionalized as a relationship of personal dependence (such as “patron—client”) according to A. Fisun. It grows out an asymmetric exchange of services and position of parties, each with different resources. There is a neopatrimonial political regime with the following number of fundamental defining features: main agent of political process is state; leading place in power is occupied by representatives of state-bureaucratic complex; all other components of political field (parliament, parties, interest groups, trade unions, etc.) are structurally underdeveloped or in their infancy; for the most part, there is no or limited alternative rule; representative bodies as a rule are excluded from resolving significant issues [9]. It is worth noting that under equal conditions, most regimes lose legitimacy over time depending on whether government makes certain socially expected choice, responds to pressing public demand, whether or not election promises are fulfilled, how quickly coalition that supports regime disintegrates. However, democratic regimes are being renewed through new elections, which allow new coalitions with new policies to come to power. For authoritarian regimes, renewal is a major threat. So, lack of self-renewal mechanism causes legitimacy crisis. There is an opinion in scientific literature that illegitimate regime cannot be considered democratic. This is what D. Beatham emphasizes, who is convinced that power can be legitimate under three conditions: (1) it should be exercised in strict accordance with established rules which are embodied either in officially adopted laws or unwritten norms; (2) these rules should be recognized as mandatory by all—both those who govern and those who govern; (3) on the part of society, there should be no signs that it fundamentally disagrees with this regime [10]. Legitimacy problem is not significant in conditions of undemocratic regimes built on coercion. For such regimes, discussion of their legitimacy is meaningless. These are poorest countries in Africa where in some regions total impoverishment of population is not associated with regime legitimacy because in people’s minds there is no

204

O. Radchenko et al.

such thing. People perceive their position in particular power of tyrants, as inevitability, destiny [11]. Authoritarian regimes rely neither on traditional legitimacy nor on the socially accepted procedure of forming a government and parliament on the basis of competitive elections. However, legitimacy problem is quite relevant for most authoritarian regimes. Thus, authoritarian-bureaucratic regimes’ fundamental question is how broadly they have the support of citizens. In such regimes, basic civil rights are partially respected and public administration is exercised by the military. We can cast certain features that depend on the historical epoch if we trace the genesis of the concept of the legitimacy of power in an authoritarian state. Thus, medieval absolute monarchies were based on religious legitimacy of “divine right” of kings. Modern authoritarianism is based on the ideological legitimacy of mostly nationalist orientation, provided by the availability of a strong image of the enemy, which would not cause distrust in society. Logical grounding for twentieth-century authoritarianism was provided by Marxism-Leninism. This concept proclaimed one-party dictatorship. However, even communist regime emphasized democratic elements in its ideology. It was widely believed that countries’ authoritarian form of government is optimal in the early 1960s of the twentieth century, when decolonization led to the emergence of dozens of new states. Practice showed that authoritarian regimes that are stable for more than 75 years (three generations) are extremely rare and are exceptions to the rule. French sociologist M. Dogan noted that starting with Xenophon and ending with Hume, philosophers already knew that even despots cannot endlessly build their power solely on violence. So, even dictatorships try to enter a general process of legitimation [12]. Most authoritarian regimes in the second half of the twentieth century had problems with legitimacy associated with previous democratic experience. Thus, countries of Eastern Europe with communism and one-party system could rely exclusively on ideological model of legitimacy, because nationalism was a factor in destabilizing authoritarian regime. Inefficiency of political system in economic sector led to the fact that ideological legitimacy could no longer ensure continued existence of such authoritarian regimes. One-party political systems (which were the result of traditional patriarchal political development) had more solid basis of legitimacy. For example, such system continues to demonstrate the combination of authoritarianism with economic miracle [1]. We try to illustrate generalized conclusions of these scholars on the relationship between legitimacy and efficiency of power. So, graphically it will be three different curves for totalitarian, authoritarian and democratic regimes (Fig. 12.2). During comparison of legitimacy models of democratic and authoritarian regimes, S. Huntington noted that in democracies legitimacy depends on how ruler meets expectations of key groups of voters. Legitimacy of power depends on procedures and ability of voters to elect rulers through elections. Loss of functional legitimacy by rulers leads to new assertion of procedural legitimacy of the system. In

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

205

Legitimacy Point of relative stability of the state political system

Stability curve of democratic state

High

Stability curve of an authoritarian state

medium

Stability curve of a totalitarian state

low low

medium

high

Efficiency

Fig. 12.2 Relationship between legitimacy and effectiveness of public administration with political system stability

authoritarian systems, it is impossible to distinguish ruler legitimacy from regime legitimacy [1]. Authoritarian regimes tend to build a simple structure of state power. However, the lack of counterbalance system and public debate undermines the already shaky public belief in the right of government to govern the country. This makes information about decision-making public. Quite often in such situations, leaders of authoritarian systems try to give the government formal signs of democratic legitimacy, in particular by building a so-called “closed democracy” which is a political system where democratic institutions and procedures are maintained but the ruling elite agrees on principles of power process. As a rule, strategically this decision does not give results. There is a more radical approach. For example, most authoritarian regimes were based on one-party system in South America in the 1970s. They claimed to restore democracy and sought to legitimize themselves through elections. In some cases, leaders were convinced that they would be able to win the election, but as a rule, this did not happen if opposition managed to achieve minimal unity. Thus, functionality problem was replaced by elections problem [1]. Interestingly, legitimacy problem in the context of elections became relevant for democracies, certainly in a different way. Interpretation of democratic institutions in classical theories remained stable from the end of the eighteenth century to the 1980s. It included such phenomena as representative government, direct democracy and separation of powers and guarantee of human rights. Since the 1980s, democracy has become more complicated, manifested in dualism formation between electoral and representative institutions of indirect democracy on the one hand and system of procedures and decision-making on the other hand. Fundamental incompleteness of democracy as a political form of organization of society requires new approaches to its understanding in the twenty-first century. Essential feature of modern democracies is distrust of people in power. This quickly

206

O. Radchenko et al.

abandons its election programs with declaration of service to common good. Crisis of modern representative democracy necessitates approach of state institutions to each individual. Principal features of power legitimation in the era of postmodernism include the following according to A. Onishchenko: – Presence of negative image of power and politics in public consciousness and information space. – Total individualism. – Departure from modernist rationalism in direction of creative search; legitimation through work with meanings, texts and images. – Rejection of concept of “patience for future sake” and transition to dominance of consumer society. – Requirement to meet needs “here and now” [13]. This approach is based on the postulates of L. Duguid. He in the last century noted that “public power cannot be legitimized by its origin, but only by services it provides in accordance with the law.” L. Duguid used the terms “bureaucratic decentralization” to emphasize the connection of new type of officials with the general interest tasks. It is transfer of highly qualified employees of public service tasks and “corporate organization”—system where the official is the manager of public service [14]. Formation of a real administrative power began during the twentieth century. Democratic regimes began to rely on universal suffrage and the state apparatus, which was formed based on equal access principle to public office. Such a basis of democratic regimes was combination of procedural and substantial legitimacy [15]. P. Rosenvalon notes that the last century’s end is characterized by latent reformulation of terms when democratic imperative of expressing social universality is perceived. Whereas aggregative definition of universality based on universal suffrage and idea of objective universality now dominate indirect ways of realizing public universality. This is consisted of identifying public authorities with state considerations and the common interest. New forms of legitimacy have emerged because of these processes. Each of them is associated with this approach to social universality: legitimacy of impartiality, legitimacy of reflectivity, legitimacy of intimacy. This evolution of legitimacy is a shifting center of democracies. Legitimacy now always remains unstable, depending on society’s perception of institutions actions. This is important because the mentioned forms go beyond usual typology, which distinguishes legitimacy as a product of public recognition and legitimacy as a point of conformity to certain norms [16]. In practice, the above forms of democratic legitimacy are realized through creation of independent bodies of power and regulation (realize legitimacy of impartiality) and constitutional courts (legitimacy of reflectivity). Legitimacy of intimacy is not tied to specific institutions and is a set of public expectations of certain behavior of the ruling forces. This is an unprecedented dimension of democracy—democratic art of government.

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

207

Also the most democracies have accelerated creation of independent institutions with oversight and/or regulatory functions. These functions were previously entrusted to administrative bodies in the last decades of the twentieth century. Phenomenon of these bodies is combination of executive functions with responsibilities of rule-making and arbitration. This does not coincide with traditional views on powers separation but is widely used in countries such as France, USA and UK. The main problem of such institutions’ existence is to determine obtaining possibility of common legal framework that would determine their role in democratic society. Independent institutions exist in a system of horizontal accountability, but vertical responsibilities fit into electoral mechanisms. Such vertical responsibilities create responsibilities between the government and the public. Horizontal responsibility has a different nature which is necessary compliance of various power structures to the public interest [17]. Another picture is observed in transitional societies—countries under the influence of so-called “third wave of democratization” (1974–1991). They proclaimed the beginning of democratic transit—development of modern democratic society. Processes in these countries at the end of the twentieth century fit perfectly into the well-known paradigm of “transit” associated primarily with such names as S. Huntington, O’Donnell, A. Leiphart, F. Schmitter, T. Carothers. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the same Carothers was forced to admit that paradigm of democratic transition (useful in the first stage) more and more does not correspond to desired model, because “certainly most third wave countries have not achieved relatively well-functioning democracy and have not deepened or advanced far enough to talk about existing democratic successes. Today most transition countries are neither clearly dictatorial nor clearly democratic they have entered certain ‘gray zone’” [18]. According to T. Carothers, most transitional societies quickly lose the euphoria of democratization; they begin to “suffer from a serious democratic deficit, have poor representation of citizens, low levels of political participation and political activity outside elections, face abuse of law by officials, elections low legitimacy and a very low level of public confidence in public institutions and the constant poor institutional efficiency of the state” [18]. It is clear that in such conditions, legitimacy of public power institutions of these transitional societies suffers significant blow and balances in crisis field on the verge of delegitimization. At the same time, M. Novikov notes “delegitimization due to loss of trust, reduction of social capital threatens smooth functioning of political system in stable mode as a whole. Restoring trust from the population is always more difficult and requires more material and ideological efforts. In order to expand ‘basic trust’ it is necessary for authorities to demonstrate step by step democratic content of each reform (which would not worsen the social and economic situation and reduce scope of political rights and freedoms). Also authorities should support social activity and provide feedback to citizens” [19]. As a result of “stuck” in many countries in process of democratic transition there are number of global economic and social upheavals, incitement of dozens of local bloody armed conflicts, migration crisis, etc. Therefore, scientific interest in finding

208

O. Radchenko et al.

effective ways to achieve social justice and legitimacy of public authorities has grown significantly. Only in the last decade appeared such well-known Western researchers as P. Lindset, M. Plattner, P. O’Neill, I. Krastev, W. Galson and a number of others who addressed this topic. Thus, given “huge gap between trust and legitimacy in real democracies,” P. Rosenvalon and A. Goldhammer in search of way out suggest focusing on restoring public trust (three ways to legitimize public authorities). According to researchers, trust “contributes to expansion of legitimacy, adds to the procedural attributes of legitimation procedural nature, embodies meaningful context of trust as a focus on concern for common good” [16]. According to P. Petrovsky and O. Radchenko, detailing modern models of legitimacy forming of public power by increasing social trust in it by the public allows us to capture following main factors of this process: – Integrative (consolidation on national, ethnocultural or civic principles). – Justice (compliance with citizens’ perceptions of appropriate level of organization of public relations). – Stability (stable and reproducible system of organization of state power). – Efficiency (meeting basic needs and interests of population). – Personal support (trust as support for personality of managers or staff of institution), etc. [20]. Based on the scientific achievements of legitimacy issue, researchers will try to present our own systemic model of legitimation of public authorities of transitional societies (see Fig. 12.3). This model offers ten main directions of various technologies application of institutions and public authorities legitimation, as certain socio-political engineering “which in one way or another influence political process. These are conscious, purposeful actions creating positive image of power using scientifically sound set of tools, methods and procedures” [21]. Thus, constitutional legitimacy provides approval of constitutional authorities and exhaustive consolidation of their powers in constitution norms and ensures independent full functioning of all public authorities of the state. L. Smorgunov notes “approval of constitutional authorities and their powers consolidation in norms of constitution is legitimation status because constitution is an act of highest legal force. New institutionalism in analysis of democratic processes is based on belief that political democracy depends not only on social conditions and composition of political institutions” [22]. The Constitution is not just the highest legislative act. According to M. Plattner, it is an institutionalized form of social contract. Through it, citizens are united in political community. The document separates public power from the public environment and is the only source for legitimate government. But most importantly that the constitution can be in force if its basic provisions are observed by all subjects of public power relations especially by the representatives of public authorities, from the President to a simple clerk of any local executive body. That is why A. Leiphart emphasizes that in transitional societies a great threat to the stability of political

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

LEGITIMACY

CHANGE OF LEGITIMACY PROCESSES

209

DOMINATING SUBJECTS

Constitutional legitimacy

Approval of constitutional authorities and exhaustive consolidation of their powers according to the constitution norms and ensuring their independent functioning

Parliament, President, CBSEP

Institutional legitimacy

Conduction of administrative reform, establishing of democratic institutions system of public power and democratic procedures, style and nature of their activities

Parliament, President, CMU, CBSEP

Ideological legitimacy

Proclamation and legislative consolidation of the national idea, creation of national pantheon of heroes and obligatory fulfillment of public governance values

Parliament, CMU,CBSEP, LBSEP, ICO

External legitimacy

Approval by the parliament and implementation of international measures set of state to strengthen the authority in the international arena, compliance with UN norms

Parliament, Ministry of International Affairs

Functional legitimacy

Decisive and real fight against corruption, competent implementation of public authorities of their functions and powers, effective implementation of public policy

Parliament, CMU, CBSEP, LBSEP, ICO

Legal legitimacy

Reform of judicial system in order to provide real judicial protection of human and civil rights and freedoms, opportunity to win lawsuits against public authorities

Parliament, court authority, advocacy

Participatory legitimacy

Encouraging active participation of citizens in public administration processes on subsidiary basis and in various forms of control of public authorities

CMU, CBSEP, LBSEP, ICO, CSI, citizens

Deliberative legitimacy

Making public administration decisions solely on the basis of prior broad public and expert discussion, analysis of alternatives and better choices

Mass-media, CSI, CMU, CBSEP, LBSEP, ICO

Media legitimacy

Approval and implementation in the media of the Concept of state information policy on the basis of open public dialogue, support of national media, language, etc.

Mass-media, CSI, Ministry of information

Social legitimacy

Development and implementation of the State program of inclusion of socialization institutes (education, media, labor collectives, family) in active legitimation processes

Educational institutions, Massmedia, CSI, citizens

Fig. 12.3 System model of public authorities’ legitimation of transitional societies

systems is extremely high role of popularly elected president figure, who represents a source of state authority in the eyes of society. This pushes the president to want to become above the laws and above the constitution. So, inevitable disappointment with the president figure entails inevitable delegitimization of the entire system of

210

O. Radchenko et al.

public power of such country. Therefore, S. Leiphart notes that it is best for transition countries to create or consolidate source of state power other than the bearer of this power—“for new democracies it means need to create a ‘liberal constitution’ as soon as possible to limit state power, political and economic rights. Most of ruling postrevolutionary coalitions after elimination of previous regime suffer from centrifugal tendencies. Therefore it is important to form constitution before such tendencies become dominant, and while mobilized and cohesive society is able to achieve common goals” [23]. Constitutional engineering of legitimation of public authority system of transitional state inevitably entails need for institutional legitimation. In such societies, new constitutional bodies of public power and public bodies coexist for a long time, continuing to function on old, pre-revolutionary principles, regulations as a rule. This not only introduces confusion and inconsistencies in the processes of public governance but also significantly reduces efficiency and legitimacy of the entire system of public power. D. Valades says “legitimate body loses its own legitimacy when enters into institutional relations with another illegitimate body” [24]. Therefore, the next step should be institutional legitimacy. It consists in radical restructuring of post-authoritarian state institutions, administrative reform, establishing system of democratic institutions of public power and democratic procedures, style and nature of their activities. Society should not only see new democratic institutions of public power, it should feel truly democratic nature of their activities, especially in relation to citizens not as subordinates but as partners or at least as consumers of management services. It is because all real legitimacy of state takes place at points of contact between the citizen and authorities. Institutional legitimacy is also understood as “legitimation through administrative, economic, military, educational and similar activities of power. In this case, power legitimacy is directly dependent on effectiveness of such activities. Their end result is stability in society and successful development of all aspects of public life” [3]. World experience shows that it is not enough to declare a course for democratization and to form new democratic institutions of public power by all external features. It is fundamentally important that internal administrative relations in these institutions is changed in order to change attitude of the employees to the citizens, to the practices and procedures of exercising their powers. Especially important is this change in the recruitment system, it will be worth to present a new one based on vertical and horizontal social and professional elevators. It is no secret that in many transition countries the old system of recruitment continues to operate not on the basis of professional qualifications, but on the principles of clannishness, personal devotion, loyalty, nepotism and so on. For “own” are written competition rules and even rewritten entire laws for positions in formally open competitions where for some reason only pre-appointed candidates win. This indicates imperfection of institutional model of legitimacy. Ideological legitimacy should be based on proclamation and legislative consolidation of state national idea, creation of national pantheon of heroes and mandatory implementation of public governance values. If value core of state life is not formed,

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

211

it will be replaced by ideas, ideologies and values in some places, far from proclaimed strategic course of socio-political development. The most dangerous ideologies, ideological and political constructs are various radical nationalisms, religious and other fundamentalisms and populism. Populism specificity according to prominent Canadian Ukrainian Bohdan Havrylyshyn “is to exaggerate, embellish, disturb passions and hopes of population. System becomes a political exchange where power can pass to those who offer the highest price. Roles are changed when opposition comes to power and process continues. Meeting expectations is much harder than generating them, resulting in frustration, increasing pressure on those in power, etc. In order to stay in power, popularity should be maintained among voters. Next actions are motivated by desire to win next election not by maximum public good. Time to make political decisions is shortening, long-term consequences are underestimated, rational measures are less used. Therefor main problems may remain unresolved. Current inability to cope with inflation is very bright. In such societies popularity is a necessary condition for change being in power” [25]. Similar situation exists not only in transitional societies. It is also in a seemingly peaceful Europe where nationalist and populist movements gained momentum over the past decade and reached a level of real competition with liberal democracy (recall elections in the United States where populist D. Trump was elected and presidential election in France where leader of the French nationalists M. Le Pen lost only in the second round). The main danger of ideological delegitimization is that “on the yeast of political populism, ratings of far-right and far-left parties are rising”. Democratic liberal values are being severely tested. Despite their Harlequin style, populists willingly parasitize on social ills, shamelessly exploiting simple social emotions, seducing society with easy ways to material well-being and justice. By its nature, it is incapable to constructive work. National and state interests are not native for it [26]. External legitimacy attaches special importance to state authority and its leaders in international community. According to Jan Hurd, the policy of legitimacy is central to international relations. If state regime is perceived by legitimate international organizations as legitimate, it begins to associate with authoritative foreign institutions, gaining in the eyes of its own people and part of the legitimacy of international institutions. Therefore, states often use authority and legitimacy, such as the UN or the Security Council for purpose of strengthening their internal rule [27]. External legitimacy involves approval by parliament and implementation of state measures set to strengthen state authority in the international arena, compliance with generally accepted international standards and norms. Professor of the University of Cambridge Jean Cohen put forward thesis of the modern sovereignty dualism by certain absorption of national sovereignty by international supranational institutions. Part of thesis still belongs to nation states and part is common heritage of international humanity as a civilized community [28]. Thus, part of legitimacy that belongs to influential international institutions also belongs to the national system of public authorities for countries associated with such a civilized community.

212

O. Radchenko et al.

External legitimacy also brings with it a number of cumulative factors that collectively contribute to the growth of public confidence in the current government despite the direct “transfer of authority” of internationally influential organizations to a political leader or statesman. These include grants and financial loans to stabilize economy and increase investment attractiveness index. All this contributes to investment inflows, economic recovery and growth of macroeconomic indicators, living standards and efficiency of public authorities in general. Functional legitimacy is based on the statement that “any political system must earn precious reputation through organization of good governance and demonstration of functional efficiency” [29]. Functional efficiency of public authorities involves decisive and real fight against corruption (it is no coincidence that Ukrainian researcher S. Kuznietsov calls corruption the most striking sign of illegitimacy, noting that institutionalized corruption, which affects almost all areas, is a sign of failure government [3]). Relationship between legitimacy and effectiveness of public administration systems is analyzed in previous sections. So, we give general opinion of I. Mezeria: “experience of modern democratic transits shows that the main threat to new democracies lies in low level of efficiency. There is a negative pattern: low efficiency of democratic system is caused by the ineffectiveness of political decisions made by the government, and lack of government legitimacy does not allow government to act effectively, avoiding populism.” T. Kravchenko emphasizes the same: “it should be recognized that legitimate state power in democracy is not only government that enjoys support of citizens and is rationally built, but also a necessarily effective government. That is system of state power in process of exercising its managerial functions (in various spheres of public life and social development) in democracy should act as effectively as possible in order not only to declare but also to ensure rights and freedoms of citizens, their fundamental needs and legitimate interests” [30]. Thus, we note that functional legitimacy is the most difficult to implement. It requires long time of stable development, stability of the political system and state regime, sustainability and professional competence of the staff of public authorities. All this together is unattainable for the most transitional societies. However, each state should try to maximize its implementation through the key importance of the functional efficiency of the public authority system to form a high level of its legitimacy despite inaccessibility of “ideal” implementation of this model. According to R. Bobochel, A. Kay, D. Olson and M. Zanna, legal legitimacy is a kind of strategic direction of legitimizing institutions of public power as the spread of “psychology of justice” in society [31]. Even in the medium term, it will lead to irreversible changes in state-power relations where everyone can achieve law and truth. Similarly, well-known Polish researcher W. Sadurski puts sign of equality between law, legality and legitimacy in a democratic system built on equality of all before the law [32]. P. Gottfried and K. Schmidt warned in the twentieth century that fatal tendency of modern democracy leaders is their tendency to confuse legitimacy and legality, relying on former and ignoring the latter. Giving priority to legality over legitimacy,

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

213

they sooner or later slide to authoritarianism when in fact legitimacy is primary over legality. Excessive legislative initiative and adoption of laws are intended to “protect everything,” but as a result, the state cannot properly protect even the lives and property of citizens. These laws try to regulate all possible aspects of communal life, even unforeseen circumstances. Such authority actions make the state regime defective and can lead to the collapse of this regime [33]. In general, we note that in transitional societies the legal legitimacy involves judiciary reforming in order to effectively ensure judicial protection of human, civil rights, freedoms and ability to win lawsuits against public authorities. Legitimacy will paradoxically increase when citizens finally feel protected in the legal field from the arbitrariness of power. Participatory legitimacy (from the Sidnei Verba term “participation”) is based on encouragement of society to active participation in public management on subsidiary base and to various forms of control of public authorities. O. Koval rightly stated that “state power is legitimate as it reflects will of people and protects interests of the people. But it can be realized as many when citizens as possible participate in political and legal processes” [34]. According to S. Prykhodko, “elections are leading means of legitimation. At the present stage such basis should be maximum proximity of citizens to various mechanisms of power. But it requires significant public initiative level of legitimacy” [35]. Indeed, civic participation presupposes joint interaction of civil society institutions, individual citizens and public authorities, during which common goals are formed, appropriate procedures are developed, relevant social actions are discussed and implemented and a lasting sense of common merit inevitably arises. Everyone has tendency to self-legitimation—to justify their actions as right and fair. This self-legitimacy is automatically transferred to public institution involved in joint activities, thereby increasing overall level of legitimacy of the entire political and administrative system. In the course of participatory legitimation, there is “coordination and expression of citizens interests; increasing level of political balance and stability of society; streamlining and regulating protest moods of citizens by controlling activities of public authorities; lobbying interests of society in decision-making, including law” [36]. Deliberative legitimacy can be counted as a part of participatory. But it is so important that it deserves to be singled out. It is focused not so much on the joint participation of civil society and the state as on joint discourse, setting “policy agenda” and developing key approaches to further public adoption. It is based on the statement that “theoretical core of the normative model of democracy and democratic legitimacy is concept of publicity or public. This is an ideal communicative space where theoretical and practical discourses unfold, legitimizing social institutions based on discursive-ethical way of forming citizens’ will” [37]. J. Habermas about deliberative model of legitimacy says that “institutionalization level of different types of communication is extremely important. Developed institutionalization of appropriate forms of communication helps to combine dialogical and instrumental forms of policy by means of public reasoning-combination. In their

214

O. Radchenko et al.

process the constitutioning of common will is happened not only by ethical selfconsent, but by balancing interests and reaching agreement, by choosing moral justification and checks for legal connectivity” [38]. All this according to T. Kravchenko requires “building of specific system of interaction between the state and civil society, which includes necessary institutions and procedures that allow citizens and their organizations to influence on actions of the state and on state—to implement state policy” [7]. First of all, this is applied to public administration decisions solely on the basis of preliminary broad public and expert discussion, analysis of alternatives, their public discussion and procedure for choosing best proposed options. Deliberative legitimacy appeals to public opinion which “by its functional purpose is one of the components of legitimizing power mechanism of field agent policy. It acts as a tool for explaining, reproducing and disseminating socially significant judgments and assessments of certain structures of any order, including political” [39]. It is necessary to reveal basic postulates of “democracy of discussion” or advisory policy (in the terminology of J. Habermas and J. Cohen). According to them, the “ideal procedure” of deliberative public discussion must meet following seven requirements: 1. Procedure should have argumentative form to take place through regulated exchange of information between parties. 2. Discussions should be open and public. In principle, no one can be excluded from discussion process. All relevant decisions should an equal right to enter and participate in the discussion process. 3. All participants are free from external coercion, limited only by the rules of communication and argumentation. 4. Everyone has equal opportunities to be heard, to bring up topics for discussion, to propose and criticize proposals. “For” or “against” position should be motivated only by the force of a “stronger argument.” 5. Political discussion should be summarized by majority decision taking into account need to make decision (while discussion purpose is generally rationally motivated consent. Discussion can last as long as desired and can be resumed at any time). 6. Political discussion concerns any matter that can be settled in equal interest of all. But this discussion is not about what traditionally belongs to “private” realm. 7. Political discussion also covers interpretation of needs, changes in pre-political guidelines and preferences. Here, consensual power of arguments is not limited to value consensus based on common practice and tradition [38]. Media legitimation is (to some extent) a continuation of deliberative, as it consists in development, approval and implementation of the Concept of State Information Policy in media on the basis of open public dialogue, support for national media, language and more. L. Bairachna notes “Today subjects of different levels power use media to achieve their goals actively, forming symbolic capital of power. Their theoretical basis is a source of knowledge and explanation of modern processes in

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

215

the political space. Symbolic capital of power largely depends on trust level in the government by the population. This is the reason for authorities to turn to media as an effective mechanism for legitimizing political disposition of certain political forces or leaders, influencing the mass consciousness, stimulating group activity” [40]. Principal role of media legitimacy is growing at the present stage. It is noted by the director of the Center for the Study of Democracy at Stanford University, L. Diamond. He emphasizes that modern decentralized but interconnected forms of digital communication (the Internet, mobile phones, online platforms of traditional media and new social media such as Facebook and Twitter) have an unprecedented ability to reach large numbers of people in the shortest possible time and are best suited to mass organization of society. At the same time, in stark contrast to radio and television, new online media are two-way and even multi-channel forms of communication. With such tools, desired message can instantly reach hundreds or even thousands of “followers” [41]. It is worth noting that in modern conditions, media legitimacy is increasingly mixed with manipulative, because in information space today are active thousands of so-called “bots” paid by politicians, businessmen or lobby groups of bloggers, “simple contributors”, “public activists”, etc. [42, 43]. They deliberately throw into the media space certain commissioned messages and patterns and create public opinion. In particular, there are whole “bot factorie” in Ukraine, which experts associate with such politicians as Iulia Tymoshenko, P. Poroshenko and V. Zelenskyi. We note that we deliberately do not consider negativist or “black” technologies of legitimation, which are sometimes found in the studied scientific discourse, e.g., propaganda, PR technology, mobilization, charismatic models. They are harmful and can bring legitimizing effect only for a short time, remaining, in essence, not legitimizing, but delegitimizing forms.

3 Conclusion Thus, new forms of above-mentioned legitimacy indicate shift of democracies center and their complexity. Key moment of the common will is the moment of elections. Concentration movement is replaced by principle of distribution, separation and multiplication. Real division of powers that modern democracy seeks is existence of counter-democratic forms and institutions of indirect democracy in their tension with the majority. Despite the innovations, it is fair to say that the legitimacy of authoritarian regimes is based on their functionality, while the legitimacy of democratic regimes (which is partly based on functionality) is also based on processes and procedures. Legitimacy of governments can depend on what they are capable of doing; legitimacy of the regime is given by electoral processes, as a result of which governments are formed. Functional legitimacy plays role in democratic regimes,

216

O. Radchenko et al.

but in authoritarian regimes, it plays a leading role. Stability of democratic regimes depends on the ability of major political elites to work to address pressing issues rather than to use them for their own benefit.

References 1. Khantynhton, S. (2003). The third wave: Democratization at the end of the 20th century. ROSSPEN. 2. Radchenko, O. V. (2008). Anthropological nature of the valuable system of supremacy. Theory and Practice of State Administration., 2(21), 275–282. 3. Kuznietsov, S. (2008). The process of legitimation of state power in Ukraine. Odes. nats. yuryd. akad. 4. Proleiev, S. (2005). Metaphysics of power. Naukova Dumka. 5. Fukuiama F. What society lies at the end of history? http://perevodika.ru/articles/24874.html 6. Lypset, S. Reflections on legitimacy. http://sbiblio.com/biblio/archive/lip_rasm/ 7. Kravchenko, T. (2013). The ratio of legitimacy and stability of public authority in modern legal science. Scientific Works of IAPM., 3, 116–120. 8. Krastev, I. (2011). Paradoxes of the new authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 22(2), 52–62. 9. Fysun, A. (2006). Democracy, neo-partisanship and global transformations. Constanta. 10. Liasota, L. I. (2015). Legitimacy of political power in modern Ukraine: Theoretical aspects and practical problems. State and law. Series: Political Science., 67, 12–23. 11. Herz, J. (1978). Legitimacy: Can we retrieve it? Comparative Politics., 10(3), 317–343. 12. Dogan, M. (2006). Erosion of trust in developed democracies. In Political science: Reader. Pyter. 13. Onishchenko, A. V. (2020). Features of legitimation of power for the good of postmodernism. Politology Bulletin., 84, 119–127. 14. Duguid, L. (1927). Traite de droit constitutionnel. Tome 2. Boccard. 15. Rosanvallon, P., & Goldhammer, А. (2011). Democratic legitimacy: Impartiality, reflexivity. Princeton University Press. 16. Rosenvalon, P. (2009). Democratic legitimacy. Impartiality, reflectivity, closeness Kyiv. Vyd. dim “Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia”. 17. O’Donnell, G. (1999). Horizontal accountability in new democracies. The self restraining state: Power and accountability in new democracies. Lynne Rienner Publishers. 18. Carothers, T. (2002). The end of the transition paradigm. Journal of Democracy., 13(1), 5–21. 19. Novikov, M. (2011). Trust as an important element of political legitimacy of socio-political modernization of Ukraine. Bulletin of VN Karazin Kharkiv National University., 949(18), 254–258. 20. Petrovskyi, P. M., & Radchenko, O. O. (2019). Theoretical and methodological foundations for ensuring the legitimacy of public power in the modern minds of Ukraine. Efficiency of State Administration., 2, 29–40. 21. Chubaievskyi, V. (2016). Theoretical and methodological aspects of the technology of legitimation of political power in Ukraine. Studia Politologica Ucraino-Polona., 6, 179–191. 22. Smorgunov, L. (2012). In search of manageability: Concepts and transformations of public administration in the XXI century. Izd. dom Sankt-Peterburhskoho hos. un-ta. 23. Leiphart, A. (2004). Constitutional design for devided societies. Journal of Democracy, 15(2), 96–109. 24. Valades, D. (2006). Control of power. Ideia-Pres. 25. Havrylyshyn, B. (2009). Before effective services: Roads in the future. Pulsary. 26. Sokolenko, N. (2016). A group of “first babies” about the threat to populism. http://blogs. pravda.com.ua/authors/sokolenko/57c5a31cee9ce/

12

Comparative Analysis of Conceptual Models of Power Legitimation. . .

217

27. Hurd, J. (2008). After anarchy: Legitimacy and power in the United Nations security council. Princeton University Press. 28. Cohen, J. (2012). Globalization and sovereignty: Rethinking legality, legitimacy, and constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press. 29. Yudhoyono, S. (2010). The democratic instinct in the 21st century. Journal of Democracy, 21(3), 5–10. 30. Kravchenko, T. (2013). Legitimacy as a factor of current sovereign-legal and managerial development. Science Practices IAPM., 1, 70–75. 31. Bobochel, R., Kay, A., Olson, J., & Zanna, M. (2016). The psychology of justice and legitimacy. Taylor & Francis. 32. Sadurski, W. (2008). Equality and legitimacy. Oxford University Press. 33. Gottfried, Р., & Schmitt, C. (1987, August 28). Legality, legitimacy. National Review, 52-53. 34. Koval, O. (2014). The importance of legal and moral factors to understand legitimacy and legality. In Bulletin of the Chernivtsi Faculty of the National University “Odessa Law Academy” (Vol. 2, pp. 32–44). 35. Prykhodko, S. M. (2016). Mechanisms of legitimation of power in the minds of electronic democracy (Vol. 112, pp. 291–294). Scientific Bulletin. 36. Kovalchuk, V. (2013). The role of the institutions of the hromada suspіlstvo in the process of legitimation of the state authorities of Ukraine. In Chasopys Natsional′noho universytetu “Ostroz′ka akademiya” (Vol. 2). Pravo. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Choasp_2013_2_19 37. Tur, M. (2007). Legitimation of social institutions: Socio-philosophical analysis. Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. 38. Habermas, J. (2001). Between facts and norms. Contribution to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Transl. by W. Rehg. The MIT Press. 39. Kiosse, L. (2015). Gromadska Dumka as a warehouse of legitimate political power. Actual Problems of Politics., 56, 227–233. 40. Bairachna, L. (2014). The legitimacy of sovereign power: The historiography of nutrition. In Sovereign life and mіstseve self-regulation (Vol. 28, pp. 28–29). 41. Diamond, L. (2010). Liberation technology. Journal of Democracy, 21(3), 69–83. 42. Dutchak, S., Opolska, N., Shchokin, R., Durman, O., & Shevtsiv, M. (2020). International aspects of legal regulation of information relations in the global internet network. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues., 23(3), 1–7. 43. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2019). Application of augmented reality technologies for preparation of specialists of new technological era. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2547, 181–200. https://ceur-ws. org/Vol-2547/paper14.pdf

Chapter 13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United Territorial Communities as a Modern Mechanism of Local Public Authorities’ Legitimation in Ukraine Serhii Chernov , Serhii Bogutskij , Tetiana Gogol Artem Koshelenko , and Oleksandr Zemlianskyi

, Olena Hafurova

,

Abstract The need for permanent participation of citizens in the executive bodies of united territorial communities is due to the high public need to legitimize government decisions in order to implement effective reforms to modernize the Ukrainian political, economic and social system. The structural-functional model of the formation of self-sufficient territorial communities in the conditions of administrativefinancial decentralization is offered. This provides optimal distribution of powers between local governments and executive bodies at different levels of administrative-territorial structure as an effective tool to ensure legitimacy of public policy and public authorities. Formal rule, the use of legitimate coercion and professional management are not enough in the formation of a modern mechanism of legitimation of local public authorities. It is necessary to use law and all social norms to regulate public relations to gain social recognition, i.e., legitimacy of the majority. Keywords Project management · Project approach · United territorial community · Local public authority S. Chernov LLC “Regional Center of Expertise and Project Management”, Odessa, Ukraine S. Bogutskij Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine T. Gogol National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Hafurova (✉) National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine A. Koshelenko Academician Yuri Bugay International University of Science and Technology, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Zemlianskyi Cherkassy Institute of Fire Safety named after Heroes of Chornobyl of National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine, Cherkassy, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_13

219

220

S. Chernov et al.

1 The Problem Statement The need for permanent participation of citizens in the executive bodies’ activities of united territorial communities is caused by the high public need to legitimize government decisions in order to implement effective reforms to modernize the Ukrainian political, economic and social system. Decentralization reform in Ukraine is one of the priorities which promote local self-government and economic development in general. It is possible only if requirements for rationality and efficiency of government decisions are met. They are also not possible without public confidence, active participation of citizens and decision-making. These actions should be supplemented by the need to legitimize power decision. The process of the head of local public authorities legitimizing should take place not only on its commitment to perform quality functions. It should be done on the basis of a high-level professional competence and morality in accordance with the needs and interests of citizens by accepting the results of their actions and responsibilities. Objective and subjective aspects component are significant for the position of the leader in the process of legitimation [1, 2]. The legitimation of the head confirms authority and justifies management decisions.

2 Main Material Presentation The institution of legitimation of power is an important mechanism for ensuring the stability and efficiency of the public administration system of any state. Z. Kravtsova states that legitimation of public power is a complex double-sided procedure from the constitutional and legal point of view. It is regulated by the norms of constitutional law and characterizes the position of the state body during other subjects due to political and legal factors (in particular, the form of government, place and field of the designated body or person in the system of public authorities, mutual relations and mutual relations). It includes the following elements: acquisition of legitimacy both officially and unofficially of the pleasant person among other affirmations of legitimacy before the state and civil society; legal objectivity; constitutional and legal responsibility [3]. Legalization and its legitimation by civil society are highly important for the effective exercise of public power. This is also because legalization corresponds to the law as the highest measure of social justice. Local public authorities do not have enough formal rule of law, legitimate coercion and professional governance in order to gain legitimacy. They should use law and all social norms to regulate public relations to gain social recognition, i.e., legitimacy of the majority of the population. The study of legitimizing public authorities’ criteria at the local level will make possible to clearly identify and solve related problems, as successful interaction between local population and local authorities is based on trust. It plays a leading role in legitimizing government in general and the political regime in

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

221

particular. D. Antoniuk states that the availability of developed infrastructure and the effectiveness of its management by local authorities primarily affects its legitimacy [4]. The ability of local authorities to maintain a proper state of infrastructure is usually assessed by the results of communal property management, maintenance of roads, parks, recreation areas, formation of proper water supply, transport, etc. Expenditures from district budgets and budgets of cities of regional significance include the following: preschool education, secondary schools of all levels, specialized schools, lyceums, gymnasiums, colleges, evening (shift) schools), educational complexes “preschool educational institution - general educational institution,” educational institutions for citizens in need of social assistance and rehabilitation, family-type orphanages, higher education, out-of-school education (district activities on out-of-school work with children); health care: primary health care, outpatient and inpatient care, health education programs (city and district health centers and health education activities); state cultural-educational and theatrical-entertainment programs (theaters, district (city) libraries or centralized libraries of the district (city) centralized library system, museums, exhibitions, palaces and houses of culture, schools of aesthetic education of children, including institutions and communal property institutions with status of national, zoos of national importance of state property); state programs for the development of physical culture and sports: maintenance and training of children’s and youth sports schools, activities in physical culture and sports and financial support for organizations of physical culture and sports and sports facilities of local importance. Indicators of local budget execution reflect the general socio-economic condition of the respective territory and its potential for sustainable development [5]. The availability of sufficient resources in local budgets is a guarantee that the local community has an opportunity to provide better and more diverse services to its residents, implement social and infrastructure projects, create conditions for business development, attract investment capital, develop local development programs and fund other activities for comprehensive improvement of living conditions of community residents [6]. Formation and development of social infrastructure involves the implementation of a wide range of local executive bodies and local government powers. Another criterion for legitimizing public authority at the local level is regular and effective cooperation of local authorities with civil society in the framework of measures to improve the welfare of the village or the whole region. It shows mutual trust based on common goals and values. The ability to submit electronic petitions is a significant factor in building trust in local governments through which citizens can safely indicate local problems that need to be addressed. Therefore, the involvement of new technologies in the local governance process in order to establish rapid interaction with the public can also serve as one of the criteria for legitimation. Public councils and public hearings are an effective mechanism of public control at the local level. This is a key tool for civic assessment of government performance and is one of the fundamental legal principles of legitimation. The imperfection of

222

S. Chernov et al.

domestic legislation can nullify the effectiveness of this mechanism. There is a risk that provisions on the organization of public hearings will not be included in the statutes of territorial communities. However, public control at the local level is not effective without direct participation of the media, i.e., ensuring the publicity of local authorities. So, the authorities need to establish a constant dialogue with society. Involvement of modern technologies for government coordination with society up to fruitful cooperation in the context of joint projects to improve the quality of local policy will be formed due to trust in local authorities. At the same time, it acts as a criterion for their legitimacy [6]. The introduction of a project-oriented approach and e-government systems in most spheres of society to increase transparency, efficiency, interactivity, receive feedback, improve service and more is relevant in Ukraine. T. Ivanova notes that the modern philosophy of municipal development management of Ukraine precisely needs to use the project approach as an effective means of achieving the end result and one of the main tools in the context of the European choice. She came to such a conclusion by analyzing the potential of project approach methodology applying to the implementation of strategic priorities of a service-oriented state [7]. O. Zinchenko also substantiates the impact of the project approach on a positive image creating of the region. He argues that the interest of investors and tourists depends on the activity of regional projects (especially in the infrastructure sphere). Project approach is important for realizing the potential of a certain territory. Implementation of regional projects affects the increase of interest in the territory of investors and tourists [8]. It is possible to diagnose problems of development of the territory, to define landmarks for future changes, to offer image strategies and means of promotion of the territory in the external environment due to the project approach. Regional image provides benefits to population, business representatives who are interested in attracting investment. This contributes to job creation, development of social infrastructure, improving the quality of life, implementation of entrepreneurial initiative, implementation of profitable business projects and tourism potential. These factors give an advantage to authorities in the region. They are developers of image strategy, targeted programs to promote the regional brand in the information space, monitor, evaluate the results of its impact and help legitimize the government. However, there are no principles of project-oriented approach to public management of regional systems, operating on the principles of E-Government 2.0 (E-Gov 2.0) in the activities of the executive bodies of the united territorial communities. Civil society will be able to see the whole process of development of the regional system of public administration, control it and participate in this process through the practical implementation of project-oriented management [9]. The development of approaches to program-targeted budgeting gradually entered the practice of local development management methods of project management along with the widespread use of approaches and technologies of strategic planning. Local development projects (or local self-government projects) are public sector projects. They are currently considered as the main means of implementing strategic priorities in local development strategies and are characterized by certain features.

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

223

One of the important areas of the introduction of project management in local selfgovernment is the assessment of relevant body employees’ readiness for project activities. It is possible to choose areas of project competencies of local managers. Models of project maturity of organizations are used for such purposes in project management. Local development projects have all hallmarks of classic project: clearly defined goals, unique content and conditions of implementation, limited time and resources. There are a set of interrelated works that require clear regulation and coordination during their implementation [10]. The project-oriented approach in the executive bodies’ activities of the united territorial communities can be considered as an effective tool for structural change, as a tool for implementing strategically oriented measures in the system of implementation of tools for economic development. Management body reaches a sufficiently developed level of project maturity in the conditions of local selfgovernment. Project approach application in the field of communal property management will promote not only efficient and targeted use of funds and other resources. It will promote also the attraction of initiative and investment of foreign and domestic business entities through various forms of public-private partnership. The implementation of investment projects for infrastructure development within the investment program is of strategic importance for socio-economic development of regions. It provides economic and organizational conditions that will attract investment in the region and efficient use of the property of territorial communities [11, 12]. Modern policy of local governments in the field of communal property management should be built on the implementation of fundamentally new approaches and methods. Project approach is one of them. However, A.P. Duka and G.V. Starchenko warn that simple transfer of the project method from the field of corporate projects to the state level without taking into account such specifics can eliminate the positive aspects of the project-oriented approach. Management functions and tasks at the national level from the corporate should be focused not on increasing profits. They should be focused on achieving of a certain social effect, the need to balance the political, economic and social interests of different social groups. Practical spread of the project approach led to the acquisition of state design of certain specifics of use. There are three main types of national project in the process of transition to the national system of public administration: national project as a strategic reform program in a particular area, as an intersectoral component of the national program and as an investment project that combines state, business and public efforts goals and objectives [13]. According to leading experts, decentralization should always be accompanied by strengthening the capacity of local communities and local governments. Project approach is a recognized methodological tool to strengthen the capacity of territorial communities in the context of decentralization [14]. Integration of strategic and project approaches to strengthening the capacity of local communities will ensure the management of the main risks of decentralization. A.P. Duka and G.V. Starchenko warn that simple transfer of the project method from the field of corporate projects to the state level without taking into account such

224

S. Chernov et al.

specifics can eliminate the positive aspects of the project-oriented approach. Management functions and tasks at the national level from the corporate should be focused not on increasing profits, but on achieving certain social effect and need to balance political, economic and social interests of different social groups. Practical spread of the project approach led to the acquisition of state design of certain specifics of use. There are three main types of national project in the process of transition to the national system of public administration: national project as a strategic reform program in a particular area, as an intersectoral component of the national program and as an investment project that combines state, business and public efforts goals and objectives [12]. Leading experts state that decentralization should always be accompanied by strengthening the capacity of local communities and local governments. Project approach is a recognized methodological tool to strengthen the capacity of territorial communities in the context of decentralization [14]. Integration of strategic and project approaches to strengthening the capacity of local communities will ensure management of the main risks of decentralization. In other words, the concept [15] provides optimal distribution of powers between local governments and executive bodies at different levels of administrative and territorial organization based on the principles of subsidiarity and decentralization. It takes into account human, financial, infrastructural potential and resources of local governments. The proposed model will ensure restoration of viable rural areas in the context of administrative and financial decentralization by optimizing the administrativeterritorial structure of Ukraine and improving territorial organization of power. It provides quality services to the population a formation of self-sufficient territorial communities in the conditions of decentralization of power. Characteristic feature is presented in Fig. 13.1. The model is a clear division of functions and powers between different levels of government. It will contribute to strengthening political stability, national unity and introduction of innovative forms of solving local problems. We believe that newly created modern ATCs should be developed taking into account measures developed in public policy. These measures are based on public administration decisions and provide solving problems of their own and delegated powers. In particular, regulatory framework provides guaranteeing of right to transfer certain functions and establishes responsibility for their implementation or provision of public services for local authorities, their financial and fiscal institutions. Territorial communities are informed about the cost of services, possible alternatives for their provision, available resources and sources of income. Local residents can express their views on policy priorities and ways to achieve them (systematically and objectively check the dynamics of the results and consequences of implemented decentralization programs, etc.) through introduced mechanisms. This motivates and involves population in the decision-making process. Decentralization gives an opportunity for every citizen to participate in solving problems of their territory. It increases the well-being of residents of united territorial communities, effectiveness of local economic development.

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

13

225

CIVIL SOCIETY - expert environment

CENTRAL BODIES OF GOVERNMENT - subjects of legislative initiative Directions and mechanisms of state regulation

Development of performance criteria and methods for calculating indicators

Ensuring legal basis for the functioning of territorial communities where local governments are formed and able to perform their own and delegated powers Introduction of subsidiarity principle which provides transfer of functions from territorial bodies of state power to the executive bodies of united territorial communities

Collection and evaluation of performance

Ensuring openness and accountability of ATC executive structures and their officials to territorial communities Duplication avoidance of powers, functions and tasks of local public authorities at different leveIs

Mission, purpose, purpose of ATC activity

Creation sufficient material and financial conditions to ensure implementation of local government tasks Introduction of mechanisms for control over the quality of public and other legally defined services provided to the population Promoting involvement of local communities residents in decision-making by local public authorities, promoting the further development of modern forms of direct democratic participation on the ground Reforming public authorities at the local and regional IeveIs on the principle of optimal provision of administrative and social services to the population. It reduces disparities in access to these services and their quality

EXECUTIVE BODIES OF THE TERRITORIAL COMMUNITY- subjects of public administration

Fig. 13.1 Model of self-sufficient territorial communities’ formation

Management of land resources, issuance of building permits, commissioning of buildings

Organization of public hearings and other forms of expression of

Organization of passenger transportation in the community

Provision of ghost ambulance service

Provision of primary ambulance services

Maintenance of communal property and provision of housing and communal services to the population of ATC

Ensuring local economic development (attracting investment, business development and small business. etc.)

Organization of fire protection system

Ensuring public safety by municipal guard

Development of local infrastructure, landscaping

Community development planning and budgeting

Maintenance and organization of cultural centers, clubs, libraries, stadiums and sports grounds

ATC own powers of public administration

Formation of a primary care network

Management of schools and preschool institutions

Administrative services through their ATC centers

Social assistance through territorial centers in communities

Delegated powers

226

S. Chernov et al.

Local governments are the most motivated bodies in a particular territory in the context of global cross-border, as well as regional and local competition. They should play a significant role in decentralization in order to achieve a competitive advantage over other communities and regions. O.P. Ignatenko states that investment climate in the context of decentralization will increasingly depend on local economic development. That is why the assistance of public authorities and international technical assistance projects should be aimed at developing instruments for attracting and supporting investment, small and medium business development, implementation of democratic governance, training and awareness of capacity processes [16]. Maintaining a proper level of social expenditures of local budgets remains an important task. They determine basic prerequisites for human development; significantly determine the level of social well-being. It is one of the main sources of life which greatly contributes to legitimizing public authorities at the local level. Legalized ATC is just beginning of forming a cohesive community of residents of the united community. Simple group of inhabitants of respective administrativeterritorial unit is not enough to unite ATCs. Most of the existing ATCs are now a union of territories rather than a union of people. In other words, the process of cohesion is taking place in some states through regional policy. Actually, speed is very slow. There are no “single” universal measures to promote cohesion according to the findings of the analyzed studies. It is important that local actors and communities make the most of their territorial features, even if these features are unfavorable [17]. The effectiveness of social policy can be determined based on the measurement of the level of social cohesion of society with the help of social indicators of social cohesion. Well-known Canadian scientists A. Jason and R. Brown were among the first to propose a list of specific social indicators that can be used to measure the level of social cohesion of society: – – – – –

Affiliation/marginality. Inclusion/isolation (degree of equality of access to social contacts). Participation/unclaimed. Recognition/rejection. Legality/lawlessness (settlement of social conflicts with the participation of social institutions) [18].

Basic features of cohesive community are revealed in the concept of the European Committee for Social Cohesion. It tested 20 key indicators for determining the level of social cohesion (harmony) of society (Table 13.1). The main factors of group cohesion often include: similarity of values of group members, clarity and certainty of group goals and objectives, democratic style of leadership, cooperative interdependence of group members in joint activities, its prestige. More attention is paid to groups-formations. They are subjects of activity and are united by a common need-goal. Such groups are able to make relatively independent decisions on the needs of consumption and production, for example, creation of certain material and information-ideal values of the environment values.

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

227

Table 13.1 Key indicators for measuring social cohesion recommended by the European Committee for Social Cohesion [22] Measured phenomena а) equality in the use of rights Income equality Equality in access to employment Equality in health care Equality in housing

Main indictors Equality in income distribution Equality in access to employment Life expectancy Proportion of homeless; provision of the population with quality housing

b) Dignity/recognition Men and women: Equality of Access to senior positions for women with multiple children recognition Cultural and ethnic origin: Ethnic and religious socially marginalized groups Equality of recognition Age: The dignity of older people Elderly people who receive a minimum old-age pension c) Autonomy/professional, family and personal development Sufficient income Proportion of excessively indebted households; percentage of the population receiving minimum guaranteed income Sufficient level of education Index of school leave without a certificate Social mobility Success of children from low-income social groups d) Participation/commitment Participation/consolidation Participation in voting at the age of 18–34 Obligations of state bodies Part of the budget allocated for social needs Liabilities of enterprises Proportion of disabled workers in the public and private sectors; participation of enterprises in financing education Obligations of citizens Share of jobs in the voluntary sector Family responsibilities Proportion of elderly people living in families Trust Trust in government institutions Loss of social ties Suicide rate General knowledge Knowledge of human rights and the right to justice Perception/satisfaction Subjective perception of health Values of tolerance and respect Murder rate (as well as the number of convicts per 1000 for other people inhabitants)

This approach makes possible to consider ATC as a large social group-formation, where the key factor of cohesion is the degree of its integration. It reveals the ability of the local population to work together as a group. The strategic development of the organization is cyclical. Therefore, project activities can be carried out through the implementation of a number of projects aimed at long-term growth and efficient operation based on maintaining existing and creating new competitive advantages. It is advisable to determine the stages of development of the project of strategic development of the organization given the use of project tools in strategic planning. Use of the design approach should be carried out according to a certain algorithm and logical block diagram. It should include the following elements [19–21]:

228

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

S. Chernov et al.

Formation of draft strategy concept of the organization. Square development to clarify the task. Drawing up of stakeholder relations map. Goals decomposition. Project structure determining. Choice of strategic analysis methods. Functional strategies development of organization by activity areas. Roles and responsibilities distribution of project participants. Optimal project drawing up of implementation plan.

The implementation of the proposed stages of project-oriented management will increase the flexibility and dynamism of management. It will decentralize responsibilities of functional managers and ensure readiness of system for organizational change. Interpretation of the future is the main difference between traditional long-term and strategic planning. Long-term planning system assumes that future can be predicted by interpolating existing development trends. Heads of the executive bodies of local self-government in this case assume that in the future results of the work will definitely improve compared to the past. This thesis is based on the justification of development strategy of the territory. Typical result of this practice is the planning of optimistic socio-economic indicators and obtaining actual results. They are usually quite lower than planned. It is not considered that the perspective must be better than the past in the system of strategic planning. It can be explored by extrapolation. Therefore, an important role in strategic planning belongs to analysis of territorial development prospects. Their task is to identify those dangers, opportunities and certain unusual situations that can change negative trends. This analysis is complemented by analysis of positions in the competition [23, 24]. United territorial community is one of the types of social organization of society in modern conditions. Original social institution provides an opportunity to implement integration policy in a given area to take into account common interests of local residents. Centers of united communities in their territories should introduce the latest technologies, the latest management standards and modern approaches to the organization of local economic life and provide quality social services. Each community should independently determine the strategy of its development. Such strategies should take into account economic, climatic, natural and human potential that exists in the community [25]. Monitoring and evaluation of priority areas of activity and state regulation of territorial development in Ukraine should be carried out in order to strengthen the capacity of central executive bodies to develop state policy in the field of territorial development, based on evidence and results of economic analysis. We propose to strengthen the analytical component of the reform process and help provide central authorities and society with relevant and reliable data on the process of state regulation of territorial development through the establishment of the Monitoring System of state regulation of territorial development in Ukraine, analytical and

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

229

academic research. Monitoring should be carried out in cooperation with government agencies, international and Ukrainian non-governmental organizations. Their representatives form the Steering Committee approves priority areas of Monitoring, and topics for the working groups on Monitoring of Territorial Development and other activities. The main products created as a result of the Monitoring should be: 1. Analytical notes on topics necessary for authorities to make decisions in the field of territorial development. The analyst takes into account the world experience and assesses the feasibility of its application in Ukraine. 2. Development which integrates all existing indicators on the state of territories, their use and the process of state regulation of territorial development. There is an active cooperation with the relevant executive bodies in order to implement the Monitoring. 3. Conducting expert discussions, presentations and publications in the media based on the results of analytical work and Monitoring. 4. Prospects for territorial development and studying of possibilities of its application at the request of government agencies in Ukraine. We identified the main elements of strategic development based on the defined principles and choice of priorities of socio-economic development in relation to the level of territorial development, analysis of needs and expectations of residents, achieved level of development and social infrastructure. It should be forecastanalytical document consisting of system of measures for strategic choice of goals and priorities of modernization of territorial development. All this takes into account various available resources and mechanisms for its implementation for a certain period of time. State strategic management contains its own main elements: mission, forecast, vision, goal, objectives, strategic documents, etc. The main purpose of the strategy is to identify priority areas of territorial development for the long term and implement systematic and consistent measures to bring living standards closer to European standards through the balanced use of internal and external resources and preservation of spiritual and cultural traditions. The strategy provides opportunities for systemic change in the community, legitimized by its residents for local governments. Most of those tasks are listed in Table 13.2 They are closely interlinked. It increases need for integrated strategic approach to territorial development. Therefore, the main task of strategic planning is to ensure integrated territorial development, which principles are: – Focusing on the needs and interests of citizens (constructive strategy requires an approach that puts citizens in the spotlight and ensures long-term improvement of the most vulnerable and marginalized groups). – Consensus on the long-term goal (vision) of territorial development (agreement of all stakeholders on long-term vision and deadlines for the implementation of tasks, when change of government and a new government would not consider specific strategy as a component of its predecessor’s policy).

230

S. Chernov et al.

Table 13.2 Main elements of the territorial development strategy as factors of the legitimation mechanism of local public authorities Basic components Purpose of the strategy

Main tasks

Means of implementation Principles

Strategic documents

Contents of basic components Ensuring high quality of life for the population; ensuring competitive advantages as decisive factors of development in the long run; strategic management is based on human potential as the basis of organization or on the territorial community as the basis of any territory, focuses their activities on consumer requirements, flexible regulation Identification of benchmarks which are base for all plans and actions of local governments, businesses and various groups of the population in order to increase the level of competitiveness of territories Territorial socio-economic integration and spatial development Effective public administration in the field of territorial development; one of the areas of implementation is maximum concentration of funds for state financial support for development within the state fund for regional development Organizational and managerial; financial and economic; motivational; legal; social Focusing on requests and interests of citizens, consensus on the long-term goal (vision) of territorial development, diversity and integrity; focus on clearly defined budget priorities, comprehensive analysis of development of territorial community, mandatory analysis and evaluation, responsibility and leadership at the local level; existence of influential central institution and significant willingness of authorities to adhere to commitments; development of existing mechanisms and strategies; active and effective participation; the relationship between national and local levels Local development strategies, spatial programs (master plans of settlements), annual programs of socio-economic development and cultural development of the territory, comprehensive socio-economic and sectoral programs

– Comprehensiveness and complexity (combination of economic, social, environmental objectives, reaching certain compromises); focus on clear budget priorities (ensuring compliance with planned activities aimed at achieving goals, available financial resources). – Conducting of comprehensive analysis of the state of territories development (priorities are determined on the basis of comprehensive analysis of current state, projected trends and risks and certain interdependencies between local, national and global problems). – Existence of responsibility and leadership at the local level, existence of an influential key institution and significant willingness of authorities to adhere to commitments (implementation of policy change and institutional reform, provision of financial resources and clear division of responsibilities for strategy implementation). – Development of existing mechanisms and strategies (coordination of mechanisms and processes, identification and elimination of potential contradictions, proper management of the strategy development process).

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

231

– Mandatory analysis and evaluation (allow to start necessary processes, track their progress, gain experience and timely identify the need to adjust the action plan to implement the strategy). – Active and effective participation (cooperation of decentralized governments, the private sector and civil society). – Communication between national and local levels (main strategic principles and directions are determined at the central level) (economic, financial and trade policy, legislative changes, foreign affairs and external relations, etc.), detailed planning, implementation and monitoring is carried out at the decentralized level; relevant resources and powers are transferred to it) [23]. Important issues resolving in determining modern mechanisms of legitimation of local public authorities in Ukraine is impossible without taking into account laws of the global integration process. The last few years there is a need for socially inclusive approach to generating economic growth. Main task of inclusiveness is to make tangible results of economic growth for majority of society members. It cannot affect living standards of citizens. Integral requirement of renewed state management of social development and its main link—human development should be inclusiveness, human inclusion in all aspects of social life. Inclusiveness is creation of opportunities for all contingents of population and fairer distribution of benefits from welfare growth. The Rockefeller Foundation conducted a review of academic developments and analysis of existing indicators in this area in order to provide set of recommendations on how to assess the degree of inclusive development. More than 30 key systems of indicators around the world are considered. They try to measure economic progress in different ways. These initiatives ranged from global efforts (such as the new Sustainable Development Goals (CSDs) developed by the United Nations) to regional initiatives such as the Asian Development Bank’s Framework of Inclusive Growth Indicators, the European Development Bank’s Union 2020 and the Economic Commission for Africa’s African Social Development Index, to national initiatives such as the Gross National Happiness Index. The last one is goal of government in the Constitution of Bhutan. Subnational efforts include the Fund for Our Economic Future of metropolises of the United States. Most of the studied initiatives use government sources for their data. Some of them are developed by non-governmental organizations, such as the European Anti-Poverty Network and PolicyLink. They can be based on academic institutions such as the International Institute for Social Research in Rotterdam or the Global Cities Institute in University of Toronto. Recommendations for inclusive economic indicators start with structure defined and developed by the Rockefeller Foundation. It describes five broad characteristics of an inclusive economy: equity, participation, growth, sustainability and stability (see Table 13.3). We will reveal these components in more detail. 1. Participation. It is explained by the need to involve people in the economic life of the state. Economy should be determined by access to the labor market,

232

S. Chernov et al.

Table 13.3 Inclusive economy: recommended indicators [26] INCLUSIVE ECONOMY (economics of inclusion) Enhancing opportunities for greater common prosperity, especially for those who face the greatest obstacles to their well-being

Justice (equality)

Participation

Growth

Stability

Sustainability

2.

3.

4.

5.

A. Opportunities for development of all B. Reducing inequality C. Equal access to public goods and ecosystem services D. People can access markets where they can participate as employees, consumers and business owners E. Market transparency and information symmetry F. Widespread technological infrastructure for social improvement G. Increasing employment opportunities H. Improving of material well-being I. Economic transformations for social improvement J. Socio-economic well-being for a long time К. Significant investments in environmental protection and reduction of natural resources L. Long-term investments in decisionmaking processes M. Confidence of the state and public in the future and ability to predict the results of economic decisions N. Members of society are able to invest in their future О. Resistance to economic shocks and stresses

consumers and the business sector. Transparency, quality of knowledge and norms allow people to start their own business and find a job. Equality (justice). Providing mobility opportunities for more people from different socially vulnerable groups. Access to public goods, infrastructure, education, water, etc. Growth. Economic development and transformation measured not only by aggregate growth indicators. It also includes indicators per capita income and other indicators of social development. Stability. Individuals, communities, businesses and governments must have a sufficient degree of confidence in their future and the ability to predict the outcome of their economic decisions. It is also about being able to invest in the future and secure your own financial situation. Sustainability. Gradual accumulation of economic and social capital in various forms (production, financial, human, social and natural) provides support for the

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

233

well-being of generations. Therefore, decision-making and development strategies should include long-term costs and benefits, not just short-term gains from the use of the asset base. There are cross-cutting issues in the five main thematic areas. Subcategories help to identify critical factors within each theme that contribute to an inclusive economy and provide specific context for categorizing measurable indicators [26]. The Rockefeller Foundation defines inclusive economy as one that provides synergies for common prosperity. From this starting point, three subcategories are derived for each of the five broad characteristics. Using these framework characteristics, 49 key indicators were recommended and 8 additional indicators were proposed. They are ideal for use but data are not available in different countries to be recommended as key indicators. Several key points should be considered before discussing specific recommendations on the defining elements in the formation of a modern mechanism for the legitimation of local public authorities. First, the five broad characteristics should be understood as an integrated whole, not as stand-alone dimensions. They should be considered as interconnected and have potential for more than one dimension. Next point we need to emphasize is that all indicators are imperfect. They are just indirect markers of a complex phenomenon. Consideration of subnational analysis in the overall picture is extremely important. Where possible it is necessary to determine both relative and absolute indicators to be able to take into account this trend [26]. The main purpose of the indicators is to measure the results of inclusive economy in contrast to the various processes that allow construction of inclusive economies. Finally, many of the recommended indicators for deeper understanding of the processes can be divided into different population groups, such as gender, race and age.

3 Conclusion Thus, formal rule of law, use of legitimate coercion and professional apparatus of government are not enough in the formation of a modern mechanism of legitimation of local public authorities. It is necessary to use law and all social norms to regulate public relations to gain social recognition, legitimacy of the majority. Criteria for legitimizing public authority at the local level are the following: availability of developed infrastructure and effective governance; regular, effective cooperation of local authorities with civil society in the framework of taking measures to improve the welfare of the settlement or the whole region; involvement of new technologies in the local governance process in order to establish rapid interaction with the public. Introduction of project-oriented approach in executive bodies’ activities of united territorial communities allows to diagnose problems of territorial development, identify benchmarks for future changes and offer image strategies and means of promoting the territory in the external environment.

234

S. Chernov et al.

Understanding of the social direction of OTG formation is a prerequisite for separating the main areas of influence and constructing community cohesion at the stage of decentralization, along with financial resources in the formation of affluent communities (growth of local budgets, subventions for infrastructure development). The main features of cohesive community of residents of the united community (equality of rights, dignity/recognition, autonomy/professional, family and personal development, participation/commitment) are formed by factors of group cohesion (similarity of basic values of group members, clarity and definition of the group goal, democratic leadership style, cooperative interdependence of group members in the process of joint activities, its prestige). Territorial development should be based on socially inclusive approach to the generation of economic growth and inclusion of man in all aspects of social life (man is seen as a goal and criterion of social progress, not as a means of economic growth). It is based on five broad characteristics of inclusive economy (justice, participation, growth, sustainability and stability). This provides opportunities for all contingents of the population and is a key element in the formation of modern mechanism of legitimation of local public authorities. At the level of executive bodies and local self-government bodies, the modernization of management system and the formation of self-sufficient territorial communities depend on coherence of strategic goals of territorial development and the principles of application of mechanisms.

References 1. Novachenko, T. V., & Petrovskyi, P. M. (2017). The process of legitimizing the head of public authorities in reflective and archetypal discourses. State and Regions. Series: Public Administration., 1(57), 9–15. 2. Leshchenko, M. P., et al. (2021). Development of informational and research competence of postgraduate and doctoral students in conditions of digital transformation of science and education. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012057. https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1742-6596/1840/1/012057 3. Kravtsova, Z. C. On the question of defining the concept of “legitimacy of state power”: Constitutional and legal aspect. Legal Scientific Electronic Journal. http://lsej.org.ua/1_2015/ 6.pdf 4. Antoniuk, D. I. (2020). The main criteria for the legitimacy of public authorities at the local level. Current Issues of Philosophy and Sociology., 27, 135–139. 5. Shvets, V. Y., Rozdobudko, E. V., & Solomina, G. V. (2013). Aggregated methodology of multicriterion economic and ecological examination of the ecologically oriented investment projects. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu., 3, 139–144. 6. Khokhol, T. V. (2019). Resource and functional capacity of communities as a basis for financial decentralization. Public Administration Studies., 2(13) http://studio.ipk.edu.ua/derzhavnoupravlins-ki-studii-2-13-2019 7. Ivanova, T. V. (2019). Methodology of the project approach in the implementation of strategic priorities of the service-oriented state. Investments: Practice and Experience., 11, 82–85. 8. Zinchenko, O. A. (2017). Project approach to creating the image of the territory. European Journal of Management Issues., 25(3–4), 176–183. 9. Havkalova, N. L., & Vlasenko, T. A. (2017). Application of project-oriented approach to improving regional public administration systems. Bulletin of the National Technical University

13

Project Approach in the Executive Bodies’ Activity of United. . .

235

“KhPI”. Series: Strategic management, portfolio management, Programs and Projects. 2, 58–63. 10. Bezuhlyi, D. H., & Sharov, Y. P. (2015). Approach to assessing the level of project maturity of local governments. Aspects of Public Administration., 11-12, 89–97. 11. Honcharova, Z. V. (2015). The feasibility of applying the project approach by local governments in the field of communal property management. Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanities University. Series: Economics and Management. 11, 173–176. 12. Koval, V., Mikhno, I., Udovychenko, I., Gordiichuk, Y., & Kalina, I. (2021). Sustainable natural resource management to ensure strategic environmental development. TEM Journal, 10(3), 1022–1030. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM103-03 13. Duka, A. P., & Starchenko, H. V. (2019). Project-oriented approach in the system of implementation of tools to ensure the development of Ukraine's economy. Efficient Economy., 11. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/efek_2019_11_4 14. Udod, Y. H. (2015). Project approach to strengthening the capacity of local communities in the context of decentralization. Aspects of Public Administration., 4, 6–13. 15. The concept of reforming local self-government and territorial organization of power in Ukraine: Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of April 1, 2014 № 333. (2014). Official Gazette of Ukraine. 16. Ikhnatenko, O. P. (2019). Application of investment instruments at the local level. Investments: Practice and Experience., 5, 74–79. 17. Mikuš, O., Kukoč, M., & Jež Rogelj, M. (2019). The coherence of common policies of the EU in territorial cohesion: A never-ending discourse? A review. Agricultural Economics., 65, 143–149. 18. Canadian Policy Research Networks. http://nhrccnrl.ca/en/hub/canadian-policy-researchnetwork 19. Vasiutynska, L., & Vyshnevska, V. (2019). Strategic planning in the context of the project approach. Current Issues of Public Administration., 4, 34–37. 20. Kovach, V., et al. (2020). Electronic social networks as supporting means of educational process in higher education institutions. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2588, 418–433. http://ceurws.org/Vol-2588/paper35.pdf 21. Zinovieva, I. S., et al. (2021). The use of online coding platforms as additional distance tools in programming education. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012029. https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012029 22. Concerted development of social cohesion indicators: methodological guide/Strasburg: Council of Europe. www.coe.int/t/dg3/socialpolicies/socialcohesiondev/guide_en.asp 23. Berdanova, O., & Vakulenko, V. (2012). Strategic planning of local development: A practical guide. Swiss-Ukrainian project “support to decentralization in Ukraine DESPRO”. Sofia-A. 24. Gurieiev, V., et al. (2020). Simulating systems for advanced training and professional development of energy specialists in power sector. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2732, 693–708. http:// ceur-ws.org/Vol-2732/20200693.pdf 25. Demchak, I. M., Orlatyi, M. K., & Kuibida, V. S. (2018). Formation of the passport of the rural united territorial community: Methodical recommendations. “Ukrahroproduktyvnist”. 26. Benner, C., & Pastor, M. Inclusive economies indicators–framework & indicator recommendations. Full Report. Rockfeller foundation. https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/report/ inclusive-economies-indicatorsexecutivesummary/

Chapter 14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of the System of Public Authorities of the State during the Formation of the Global Information Space Stanislav Dovgy , Oksana Radchenko , Oleksandr Radchenko Aleksander Kuczabski , and Maryna Kryvoberets

,

Abstract The issue of legitimacy came to the forefront of scientific research in the era of structural transformations of social systems since the beginning of the third millennium. It is accompanied by the awareness of the inevitability of democratic legitimacy for modern states and their public authorities and the growing of “legitimacy crisis.” The main factors of modern delegitimization of public authorities as a manifestation of the “legitimacy crisis” are identified. They include the following: loss of mass rationality; loss of economic and social efficiency of public administration systems; growing of social inequality; institutional corruption; populism and nationalism; use of political resources by the political and managerial elites and the information space of the state in general as a tool for mass manipulation of public opinion. The phenomenon of “legitimacy crisis” is characteristic not only of countries with democratic state-building but also of developed democracies. Even critical delegitimization of public authorities does not lead to the fall of the political regime during democratic elections. Keywords Legitimacy · Crisis · Public authorities · Stability of state · Global information space S. Dovgy Institute of Telecommunications and Global Information Spase of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine O. Radchenko Educational and Scientific Institute “Institute of Public Administration” of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine O. Radchenko (✉) · A. Kuczabski Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland M. Kryvoberets Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_14

237

238

S. Dovgy et al.

1 The Problem Statement The twentieth century was marked by the collapse of the most powerful authoritarian regimes. A large number of countries of so-called “third wave of democratization” announced the beginning of democratic transit—development of modern democratic society. These “transitional” states face institutional, value and social upheavals that accompany democratic change. It undermines the confidence of citizens in transitional authorities. So, legitimacy crisis today is inherent in transitional societies even more than in authoritarian and democratic countries. Reasons for this phenomenon are contained in the political systems’ transformation of transit countries and in transformation of democracy itself. This process has been taking place for the last 30 years. Accumulation of social, economic, political and environmental problems is subject to scientific understanding due to the complexity of modern everyday life [1]. The study of the legitimacy phenomenon is among the most important tasks of scholars and practitioners of public administration. From the beginning of the third millennium, the issue of legitimacy comes to the forefront of scientific research in the era of structural transformations of social systems. Under the pressure of globalization, all modern states, especially those in the process of democratic state-building, must give their own “answer.” The extraordinary surge of scientific attention to the issue of legitimacy of public power has been observed in the world for the last 10 years. It is associated with the alarming trend of “global retreat of democracy” (in Larry Diamond’s terminology [2]). This trend is clearly evidenced by annual measurements of the authoritative international organization Freedom House which record a steady 10-year decline in both the number and quality of democracies in the world. At the same time, Francis Fukuyama points out “problem of the modern world is not only that authoritarian states are on the rise, but also that things are not going well in many democracies. Many of countries that seem to be Turkey, Sri Lanka, and Nicaragua have successfully embarked on authoritarian practices, and many others, including such new members of the European Union as Romania and Bulgaria, remain vulnerable to corruption” [3]. According to recent publications, both tendencies are acute— authoritarian practices of public administration and total corruption. Modern Ukrainian society is characterized by an extremely low level of legitimacy of public authorities, which is potentially dangerous for the stability of socio-political development and the factors of the crisis of legitimacy of public authorities.

2 Main Material Presentation The paradox of our time is two parallel beliefs that are constantly circulating in the political discourse of the last few decades: on the one hand, there is almost no alternative to democratic legitimacy for modern states and their public authorities,

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

239

and on the other hand, there is almost total “crisis of legitimacy” which covered even established Western democracies of Europe and North America. Indeed, uncontrolled processes of globalization are spreading rapidly in the modern world. It brought with them not only internationalization and universalization but also increasing minimization of the role of individual and entire states. Sovereignty, as a comprehensive and key characteristic of nation-state and the people (as it was in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries) is subject to global constraints—in purely political and in legal, economic, informational, even social spaces. It is safe to say that there is a “crisis of national sovereignty.” Today states of the world do not have all fullness and authority to be full managers of the internal way of life, to do everything at their own discretion in accordance with their own sovereignty. Modern economic conditions are dictated by the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization (open common competitive market). Political and even social conditions (first of all, human rights, quality of life, human potential) are dictated by the United Nations together with a number of organizations like “Freedom House.” Health measures are dictated to states by the World Health Organization, information and communication conditions are dictated by the same UN, “Reporters Without Borders” and ubiquitous unmanaged Internet, etc. [4]. As a result, this grows a wave of new meanings of life, new living standards and new requirements for everyday procedures of the usual mechanisms of sociopolitical life. It leads to a certain loss of national or ethnocultural identity. Democracy, in the words of P. Rosanvalon and A. Goldhammer, “is becoming more and more complex, while before there was a tendency to simplify. Guiding principle of democracy has also changed” [5]. Since all this affects the genetic values of each individual citizen, ethnic group and people, it undoubtedly causes a backlash of psychological resistance, a sharp rise in nationalism and social movements for national identity, preservation of their own culture, language, and finally, national culture as a whole. Consequently, a state that postulates (and is forced or deliberately upholds) values imposed by globalization quite often comes into conflict with civil society (which is more concerned with national identity). As a result, legitimacy of the state and its organs in the eyes of society declines. Average citizen, disagreeing with certain new standards of globalization, increasingly feels unnecessary to authorities and distant from politics, and therefore, ceases to take any conventional part in public governance processes, even just to go to the polls. This is evidenced by L. Iakovleva, who states that “artificially established institutions (rules of the game that operate in democratic societies) are often simply not effective in the post-Soviet space and do not always contribute to power legitimacy. Generally ‘constitutionalization’ of the political process does not provide automatic establishment of democracy, overcoming the crisis of ‘transitional stage’ and legitimacy of public power” [6]. Tendency to reduce the legitimacy level of state power was evident even in “prosperous” Europe at the beginning of the third millennium. This led D. Geld to talk about a new model of modern legitimacy of public power when “democracy does not require high level of active participation of all citizens.” Political apathy

240

S. Dovgy et al.

reflects the “health” of a democracy [7]. This gave rise to researchers of democracy to talk about “consent through apathy.” In post-communist countries, mass pessimism and popular discontent against the background of complete irresponsibility of the government and continuous and no less fruitless reforms reached such a level that gave grounds to Habermas to claim the situation of long “legalization of the crisis” [8] in post-Soviet countries. Thus, we can argue about the logical chain of modern global processes: globalization brings with it crisis of sovereignty and crisis of identity. This in turn led to crisis of legitimacy of existing state formations. Therefore, we will try to analyze both actual state of “crisis of legitimacy,” its signs, forms of manifestation and development trends. In our opinion, the roots of legitimacy crisis are best illustrated in Walter Lippman’s book The Phantom Public where the famous American researcher, multiple winner of prestigious Pulitzer Prize in the first half of the twentieth century, analyzed in detail all deep theoretical principles and put forward a number of fundamentally new theses for the “democracy paradoxes” [9]. The first paradox is the problem of rationality. All theories of democracy state that real democracy requires certain rationality of ordinary citizens. It will allow us to understand the purpose of social development, tasks of government arising from this goal, procedures and mechanisms for their implementation. In other words, the voter should be a conscious citizen with appropriate level of political, economic and managerial culture that he or she can be able to evaluate and make effective decisions in the field of public administration. But Lippman argues that rationality of modern average citizen is limited by its private interests and calculations. In politics, people are more likely to act irrationally. In fact, citizen as a voter or participant in management processes simply does not have the necessary knowledge for good governance due to the significantly increased complexity of modern public administration processes and dynamic fleeting urgent problems of often crisis nature, beyond even highly qualified professionals. Thus, rationality as a fundamental “support of democratic theory” in the modern world does not work, because according to Lippmannaverage, voter is incapable of rational qualified management [9]. The second paradox is the public participation problem. In theory, for “correct” democracy, as many citizens as possible should be involved in the management of public affairs. Even theoretically such participation is not just impossible, but also undesirable, because mass inclusion in governance comes with irrationalism and incompetence. Public participation is quite effective in controlling public authorities. It is not only incompetent but also sometimes harmful, in matters of current public administration. O. Bilyi draws attention to this and states that “one of the main risks of democratic legitimacy is majority right. Decision-making by majority unequivocally indicates forceful nature of this universally recognized democratic mechanism. Public consent on majority right recognition as an institutional solution to the conflict was undermined throughout the history of such a right in all situations where it operates” [10].

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

241

The third paradox is the democracy subject’s problem. Who exactly should decide what is the most desirable result of socio-political development not in the form of an abstract of “common good” (concretization by spheres, branches, mechanisms of acquisition, etc). According to the general theory of democracy, it is people, the set of free wills of all citizens. According to Lippmann, there are no possibilities or real mechanisms for developing of “common goal by common will,” because even referendum mechanism is actually used only for consultative polling of the people. Referendum is asked by the political elite, which campaigns and “clarifies” in the course of which imposes necessary decisions on society, or resorts to manipulations of various kinds to obtain the desired result. W. Lippman is convinced that today it is not masses, but narrow social strata— experts, technocratic, political and economic elites (who only have enough knowledge to make politics sensible). They produce what is called “public opinion.” Expert medium is an authoritative leader of public opinion, and actually politics shapes agenda, topic of current political discourse and forms “own opinion” of majority of ordinary citizens. Thus, “if democratic process is effective, then its effectiveness is ensured only by radical anti-democrats—elite—qualified experts” [9]! Thus, there is a situation where three main ideal preconditions of democracy would be perfectly fulfilled. Whole nation would express its common will without any hints from outside at its own discretion, and based on its own rationality would directly take part in public administration processes. As a result, having fully fulfilled all democratic functions, democracy would have lost itself, because ideally “democratic procedures do not lead to democracy” [9] (it is easy to imagine what results such mass goal-setting and appropriate governance would bring). Thus, based on the concept of W. Lippman, it is necessary to conclude that rational legitimacy is a core construct of the democratic legitimacy of today. It is impossible in principle and we should look for other, working tools of legitimation, because in practice legitimation is manipulative under the guise of “rational legitimacy.” Modern challenges to democratic legitimacy according to L. Iakovleva are in the following: “firstly, in strengthening the bureaucracy, which now is under the guise of rational technocrats. It serves itself and not for the public interest. Secondly, there is emergence and rapid expansion of mediacracy. It imposes artificial order on society and political actors through communication networks. Third, there is growing wave of populism. It is forcing parties to make many promises to get as many votes as possible, and to adjust public policy to election cycles” [11]. Let’s come from theoretical grounds to analysis of modern factors and manifestations of legitimacy crisis of institutions and public authorities in democratic and transitional societies in their understanding by leading scholars and researchers in humanities. First of all, we note that from a scientific point of view, “crisis of legitimacy” is manifested in delegitimization processes as V. Volynets notes that power delegitimization is “a complex objective political process, when due to action or inaction of public authorities these authorities are perceived in society as those whose actions do not meet the public interest as well as through rejection of the of

242

S. Dovgy et al.

Efficiency loss of public administration during global crises

Institutional corruption use of state for its own enrichment

Populism and nationalism irrational emotional appeal to the impossible

Loss of mass rationality of modern average citizen

DELEGITIMACY as indicator of legitimacy crisis

Information "white media noise" use of manipulative political technologies

Social ineqauality widening gap between rich and poor

Humanitarian intervention imposition of "universal values"

Conflict of political participation of citizens widening gap between rich and poor

Fig. 14.1 Factors of modern delegitimization of public authorities as a manifestation of the “legitimacy crisis”

public policy goals. Way these authorities exist is conflict with functions they should perform in accordance with their constitutional status and tasks assigned to them by society. Main danger of power delegitimization is destabilization of system of public and political governance and political system as a whole” [12]. In our opinion, the most significant factors and factors of delegitimization of public administration institutions in the modern world can be systematized in the following eight clusters (see Fig. 14.1): – Loss of mass rationality due to avalanche-like growth of life complexity and growth of modern problems, which are no longer amenable to rational of average citizen. – Loss of economic and social efficiency of modern public administration systems during global economic and financial crises. – Social inequality increases the gap between social groups of the richest and poorest sections of population. – Humanitarian intervention—imposition on nation-states by leading international political structures of certain “mandatory set of universal values.” – Institutional corruption—use of structures and mechanisms of public governance not to ensure “common good,” but to enrich political and administrative nomenclature. – Conflict between the requirement to increase political participation and taking into account the interests of different social groups in the current public administration processes.

14

”Legitimacy Crisis“ and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

243

– Populism and nationalism—use of political rhetoric exclusively in non-rational emotionally expressive discourse, an appeal either to the past, which cannot be returned, or to the utopian future, which cannot be achieved. – Informational “white media noise”—use of political resources and political elites of media resources and general information space of state as a tool for mass manipulation of public opinion. Next, we analyze these factors in more detail. Today, almost hundred years after Walter Lippman wrote his famous “paradoxes of democracy,” the complexity of social life has grown incredibly. The level of average citizen education has increased significantly, but modern education, even higher, is not able to keep up with the avalanche of new problems as the latest progress, new technologies and more. Thus, modern voter is competent in the subtleties of good public governance, which are also not amenable to its rational understanding. De facto in democratic countries, there is a division of competent political participation of citizens on two levels. At the highest state level, political participation is encouraged only in the form of consultative opinions, mass polls or control over actions of political actors. In fact, citizens’ participation in public administration is almost entirely concentrated at the local level—in urban and rural governments. Thus, practice of forming solidary or “people’s” local budget is quite common in Europe when up to third part of city’s future expenditures are submitted for discussion by citizens. Proposals on what is the best way to spend the funds allocated next year are collected in course of such discussion followed by vote among the local community. Its results finally fix expenditures for community needs. But there are no means the whole budget. No municipality in any city in Europe risks doing so, rightly fearing that the selfish interests of residents will direct all their money to today’s short term. Not always mandatory costs and will leave nothing to maintain infrastructure, further strategic development of city and so on. Indicative in this sense is the example of Lviv garbage. Given the level of garbage pollution in Ukrainian villages (not even official landfills), it would be strategically, economically and even environmentally friendly for any settlement to build a modern waste processing complex. This would bring cleanliness to streets, improved infrastructure, especially roads, new jobs and significant revenues to local budget. It would seem that large and small territorial communities should compete for the right to build such complexes. In practice, on the contrary, in all villages, outraged residents are protesting with categorical rejection of idea that waste processing plant can be benefit. They believe that it might be even worse, do not listen to rational arguments of experts (including independent, foreign). They are convinced that they are making right choice, but this is not case, because they are simply not competent enough even in this matter, not to the issue of strategic development of state. Even ardent proponents of deliberative democracy idealize public debate and broad public consensus. They recognize that it is not discursive goal-setting but guiding directives that are the main content of administrative activity. J. Habermas argues that consensus decisions can be ineffective and threaten the stable functioning

244

S. Dovgy et al.

Legitimacy

high

low

B) USSR, China in the second half of the XX century

A) USA, Canada, Sweden, United Kingdom

D) Iraq in the late XX century, Modern Syria, Somalia

C) Germany, Spain in the early 30's of the XX century

low

high

Fig. 14.2 Relationship between legitimacy and efficiency of public administration systems according to S. Lipset [14]

of the entire political system. So, problems and environment dysfunctions should be solved by administrative force [8]. Thus, modern voters are increasingly unable to assess themselves for the correctness of economic, fiscal or social policies pursued by modern governments. This misunderstanding leads to rejection of certain really well-founded and correct measures of public authorities, and as a consequence building trust in public authorities, reducing their legitimacy level. The next cluster is associated with the loss of economic and social efficiency of modern public administration systems during global economic and financial crises. V. Chubaievsky insists on the direct connection between legitimacy and efficiency of state power: level of trust in them is caused by their inability to address urgent needs of socio-economic and political development of the country [13]. The direct connection between legitimacy and economic efficiency of public administration was studied by many researchers. Now we will dwell on the theory of one of the most famous researchers in this field—Seymour Martin Lipset. In his opinion, legitimacy and institutional efficiency of public authorities are two key concepts. Outside them is impossible to even talk about the stability of any political system [14]. S. Lipset considers four historically possible variants of combining these two key factors of state-power systems existence (see Fig. 14.2): (A) when positive dynamics of political legitimacy is superimposed on the same positive dynamics of public administration; (B) when positive legitimacy coexists with low efficiency of the political system; (C) when the regime demonstrates its effectiveness with low legitimacy; (D) when negative dynamics of legitimacy is superimposed on the same negative dynamics of public administration efficiency. It is obvious that permanent democracy is possible only in quadrant “A.” In other words, positive dynamics of institutional efficiency inevitably entails

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

245

correspondingly high level of legitimacy. This allows these states to develop stable and overcome crises relatively painlessly. The situation in countries with low institutional efficiency with high legitimacy of the political system (quadrant “B”) occurs only when such legitimacy is the result of mobilizing type of legitimacy—ideological treatment of population by mass propaganda. History shows that states of this type cannot exist long enough (for all power of Soviet propaganda machine and the resource wealth of Soviet empire, it lasted only 73 years). However, if the government can use high legitimacy to focus state machine’s efforts on increasing its efficiency (like France in the early 1930s or modern China), so such state will eventually have a chance to move from quadrant B to quadrant A. According to S. Lipset, situation when regime demonstrates high efficiency with low legitimacy (quadrant “C”) is a short-term temporary structure that forces state to transform toward authoritarianism (to compensate lack of legitimacy). However, intensification of state regime will inevitably lead to decline in its institutional efficiency and transition to quadrant D, where countries are in process of disintegration. Its self-preservation is due to transformation into brutal totalitarian dictatorships. After all, mass repression and harsh state policy (even in conditions of maximum ideologization) cannot compensate efficiency lack of the political system and its legitimacy. Such states are either absorbed by prolonged civil war or destroyed by society or external factors. Thus, only option “A” is characterized by long-term positive dynamics from four possible options. All others face legitimacy crisis (it should be noted that countries in the first group are relative minority. Vast majority of modern states otherwise exist in systems with legitimacy crisis). Political, economic and social efficiency of public power systems is an important factor of legitimacy and “any legitimate power is a form of political government by which leaders successfully maintain claim that they govern by law, tradition, confirm its authority, proving population that it is the most in line with its interests” [15]. The next cluster defines growing social inequality as one of the main factors of delegitimization as a process of legitimacy loss by public authorities. In particular, leading scholars of socio-political psychology at the University of Cambridge, John Jost and Brenda Major studied psychology of legitimacy. They argue that person is most oppressed by inconsistency of constitutional formal equality of birth and real social inequality in society (racial, gender, etc.). This ultimately leads to corresponding delegitimization of public-power relations [16]. Social inequality and a widening gap between social groups of the richest and poorest sections of population is observed in the vast majority of both stable democracies and especially in post-colonial and post-communist countries. Accumulation of initial capital by new oligarchs of these states in the eyes of the whole people does not help to legitimize the political regime under the leadership of these oligarchs. It is no coincidence that authoritative German researcher Patrick Sachue is in significant work “Interpretation of the model of social inequality: perception and

246

S. Dovgy et al.

legitimacy of social privileges” [17] comes to paradoxical conclusion that it further upsets citizens and brings them directly into political system, undermining its legitimacy. But the most worrying factor according to A. Leiphart (especially for democratizing states) is that “sharp social inequality not only creates crisis of legitimacy, but can also undermine public confidence in democratization process itself, as they will no longer be perceived as unjust but also goals that were set for political system at the beginning of socio-political transit” [18]. Researchers define political globalization as another factor in legitimacy crisis. In fact, part of it is associated with “humanitarian intervention” (according to G. Kissinger). It is imposition on nation-states by leading international political structures of “mandatory set of universal values,” development of new public administration institutions of the Western type and the introduction of their inherent procedure. In particular, former US Secretary of State G. Kissinger defines aggressive intervention of the United States and its allies and influential international organizations as one of the causes of legitimacy systemic crisis of modern nationstates. These organizations are controlled by leading democracies in the internal affairs of nation-states to spread democracy. However, no matter how noble authors of concept “general humanitarian intervention” are. No matter how effective democratic models of public governance are. Their success or failure depends largely on type and level of political and civic culture of each society. Competitive principles of state-power relations contradict the age-old traditions of solidarity and do not take root in societies of collectivist-identity type. Therefore, transitive type societies proclaimed goal of building democracy. They very often continue to flourish under facade of newly introduced form of democratic institutions, relations of the old patron-clientelistic type. Public authorities of such countries build negative formats of recruitment through loyalty, nepotism, sale of positions and so on instead of vertical social elevators system, professionalism and expertise (as is the case in Western European countries). As a result, society faces even greater loss of efficiency instead of expected efficiency of new democratic institutions equivalent to Western European models. This, in turn, leads to strong belief in public opinion about “democracy’s inadequacy for our society,” “unacceptability and inefficiency of democratic institutions.” S. Huntington called rise of revanchist views as “rollback of democracy to population disappointment by democratization course.” Illustrative here is Turkey example. This country since the first half of the twentieth century under the leadership of M. Ataturk took the course of Westernization. It, for a long time, tried to introduce European institutions and values, but never got rid of Sharia traditions, did not rebuild national mentality and, less than 100 years later, it actually returned to authoritarian state. It is clearly evidenced by the attempted coup on July 16, 2016 and significant subsequent aggravation of the Erdogan regime, when thousands of people were thrown into prisons, and state apparatus, judiciary, army and other key state institutions, including the media, were subjected to total cleansing. Important (and according to many researchers decisive [19]) factor in delegitimization of public authorities is institutional corruption, use of structures and

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

247

Fig. 14.3 Typology of corrupt states and impact of corruption on their legitimacy (adapted by the author according to S. Rose-Ackerman [20])

mechanisms of public governance not to ensure “common good” but to enrich political and administrative nomenclature. Corruption is an evil that destroys the effectiveness of state systems, widens the gap between rich and poor and exposes the “humanitarian intervention” of the world community. It cumulatively exacerbates other factors that lead to legitimacy crisis. Yale University professor S. Rose-Ackerman was one of authors who analyzed in detail corruption impact on the state and course of public administration processes on society development as a whole. She published the book Corruption and the State: Causes, Consequences, Reforms, which gave an interesting classification of studied phenomena. In particular, she identified four types of political corruption, which give rise to four corresponding types of state regimes using mass number of corruption subjects in the state and their distribution among the public authorities hierarchy as main indicators [20] (see Fig. 14.3). Thus, according to S. Rose-Ackerman, mafia state appears where main corruption links are formed at the local level by lower echelons of power—individual employees of local units of central executive bodies, local government officials with tacit consent or even assistance and local territorial communities. Such corruption model most often appear as an alternative to inability of existing public institutions to perform their functions effectively. It is loyally perceived by society, as it allows citizen, albeit illegally and for money, to receive necessary, proper and guaranteed management services that are legally legal. Public authorities are unable to provide such services. States of this type have low legitimacy level and generally have political will to eradicate corruption and build effective and efficient public authorities.

248

S. Dovgy et al.

In the case that vast majority of employees and heads of local public authorities are involved in such grassroots corruption, we have competitive and bribery state that balances on the verge of low legitimacy and full delegitimization. Such state has chance to overcome corruption administratively. Non-involvement of the highest echelons in criminal activities gives them chance to use strong political will and implement measures to eradicate corruption. Regime of “bilateral monopoly” balances on the same border, where corruption permeates all echelons of power. It has numerically limited monopolistic nature categories of CEO leaders and executors. However, in this case, gradual expansion of corrupt relations will be most likely. Involvement of the highest echelons of power in corruption will push them to centralize cash flows and build widespread corruption networks. The worst case of fully delegitimized state is when corruption not only pervades entire power vertical, but also has totality of corruption involving entire community of government officials and employees of local governments and society as a whole. Such regimes are called kleptocratic, they are unviable and their duration depends only on tolerance degree of their own people and level of external support. Unfortunately, the modern Ukrainian government is called “kleptocratic” by the official representatives of the US State Department [21]. V. Volynets notes that “corrupt and bureaucratized power is valued in public consciousness as one that cares exclusively for its own interests and uses state resources to meet certain corporate or individual needs. This, in turn, acts as a powerful factor in delegitimization of state power. It is beginning to be perceived by citizens not only as improper, unfair and ineffective, but also as criminal” [12]. The next factor in public authorities’ delegitimization is conflict between requirement to increase political participation and taking into account interests of different social groups in current public administration processes. It is an inability of the political system to fully take into account interests of various social groups seeking to gain participation in political proces [22]. Similarly, S. Huntington argues that the key aspect of public authorities delegitimization is inability of the latter to meet the requirement of increasing political participation. All social groups put this in modern period of modernization forward [23]. Modern societies are much fragmented than traditional ones. Literally several relatively homogeneous social classes and strata of past centuries (workers, bourgeois, peasants, aristocracy) today are replaced by hundreds of small self-identified ethnically, professionally, subculturally, religiously, social communities. They have completely different values and opinions, different aspirations and interests. These groups are also self-organized in the political sphere, create parties or other structures of political lobbying and try to get public authorities to ensure realization of their own needs and interests. Since such needs and interests of different groups are not only quite divergent, but also sometimes opposite. It is obvious that implementation of all of them in the current management is impossible despite theoretically possible desire of public authorities. As a result, some groups are always dissatisfied with official authorities’ action. As a result, the latter loses its legitimacy in their eyes. In this perspective, an important tool for maintaining appropriate level of legitimacy of state power are institution of public participation in public governance,

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

249

partnership dialogue and interaction between government agencies and civil society institutions. In particular, O. Krutyi and O. Radchenko note that “democratic legitimacy is born in the course of partnership between state, private sector and civil society institutions when such interaction is based on the principles of balance achieving of public and private interests, economic efficiency of ongoing projects, social orientation and mutual responsibility of parties for undertaken obligations” [24]. In turn, D. Antoniuk emphasizes “public control is a key tool for civil assessment of government performance and is one of fundamental legal principles of legitimation of power. Without outside supervision interests of local community is threatened, because power of high-ranking officials begin to work for their personal benefit. Authorities need to establish a constant dialogue with members of society in order to ensure legitimacy of their actions” [25]. Another cluster of factors of “legitimacy crisis” combines such socio-political phenomena as populism and nationalism. This have recently posed an increasing threat to democratic development, even in Europe [26]. Danger of populism in general and nationalism as a special ethnically defined form, according to researchers of the Ukrainian Institute of Political and Ethnonational Studies named after IF Kuras, is to promote and spread the following destructive trends: formation of oversimplified picture of socio-political reality; slowing down and subsequently blocking articulation of social groups interests, complicating possibility of their representation and protection (similarly, it affects definition and implementation of national interests); delegitimization of existing political and social order due to its constant criticism; conducting and maintaining of internal border, dividing society into “righteous” and “sinners,” which supports and nurtures in public consciousness a state of permanent confrontation; formation of two-dimensional (“people”—enemies“) picture of the world with simultaneous vulgarization (“simple” solution of complex problems) implementation of complex reforms; destruction of the meaning of Ukrainian politics due to the depletion of the real content of categories, concepts, plans and programs of the subjects of political relations [27]. In addition, as N. Rezanova notes “populist determinants of legitimation of political power are actualized in such circumstances when electorate is free to mobilize (which usually includes many lower classes of society). It is not sufficiently represented by political institutions, such as political parties, and thus is is deprived of organizational forms for articulating and defending their views in political arena. Nature of populist meanings always arises in institutional weakness where political leaders have opportunity to use undemocratic methods of coming to power and exercising power. It corresponds to such important democratic institutions as system of ‘checks and balances’, the rule of law and political pluralism” [28]. It is obvious that the use of political rhetoric exclusively in non-rational emotionally expressive discourse gives society not only a simplified picture of life, but also gives unfounded hope today. It appeals either to past and cannot be returned, or to utopian future, which cannot be achieved. When such an improvement does not occur quite naturally, citizens are exposed to feeling of deep disappointment. This is

250

S. Dovgy et al.

institutionalized in public authorities and is transferred to them by the same populists, delegitimizing entire political system of the state. The last group of factors outlines realities of the modern information society, the extraordinary opportunities for political and managerial elites to use media resources and state’s information space in general in the form of “fakes,” misinformation and so-called “information white media noise” as tools of mass manipulation of public opinion. Power of this tool is so great that it already provides opportunities for external delegitimization of political systems by rival states (as, for example, happened with Russian cyberattacks during the last US presidential election). It is no coincidence that in most countries of the world more and more attention is paid to creation of information security systems as an independent and quite important component of traditional national security systems. Well-known democracy researchers L. Diamond, M. Plattner and K. Walter emphasize importance of this group’s factors including China, Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, have developed new tools and strategies to curb the spread of democracy and challenged a liberal international political order. Authoritarian regimes aggressively throw into the socio-political discourse topics that discredit both individual achievements and the very idea of democracy using the latest forms of control over cyberspace and expanding their influence in the international media. They suppress own civil society, cover “smoke” own problems and spreading confusion in public opinion of democratic countries. These regimes are becoming more ingenious to strengthen their influence, their own legitimacy by undermining legitimacy of alternative forms of state and political regimes, especially Western democracies [29]. In future we will try to analyze how exactly the above factors influenced the statebuilding processes in Ukraine. It should be acknowledged that all 30 years of independent Ukraine’s existence from the democratic transition beginning, our country’s public authorities are constantly accompanied by permanent crises of legitimacy, outbreaks of public hope and credit of trust to the government. In fact, collapse of the Soviet Union and independent states’ (including modern Ukraine) uprising on its ruins occurred due to the critical delegitimization of the USSR, destruction of socialism value system, complete loss of confidence in power and belief that society is moving in the right direction. Thus, socio-political transformations in Ukraine were ripe, obvious in long run of gaining democratic status, but completely unobvious to overcome ways of transitional stage and temporary transitive state. Here we should fully agree with V. Volynets, who noted “in the context of political modernization in Ukraine, along with institutional and structural-functional changes, the development of a general state strategy of actions that would increase the legitimacy of public authority in general, and those new political institutions, without which the normal development of democracy as a political regime is impossible” [12]. It is general strategy lack for building democratic state and understanding of modern legitimation strategies due to the fact that Ukrainians from beginning failed to displace old party elite (the law on lustration in our country is 20 years late). This

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

251

actually ruled country more than dozen years, did not allow to form such system of institutions and public authorities, which would function according to democratic standards and principles. Instead, concern for people was replaced by the “gold rush of privatization” as an era of initial accumulation of capital, birth of new class of Ukrainian oligarchs. It slowed real development of democracy for many years, questioned ability of Ukraine’s political elite to fulfill its historic mission. Francis Fukuiama is world-renowned political analyst. He made clear his views on reasons for this situation in article “What society lies in the end of history?”. He notes that main problem of democracy in willing societies is their inability to give citizens what they want from the government: personal security, economic growth, provision of basic public administrative services (especially in the fields of education, health care and infrastructure). Democracy fighters, for obvious reasons, are focused on deterring tyrannical or predatory states. They prefer not to think about how to manage effectively. This is what ruined Ukrainian Orange Revolution of 2004, which overthrew Viktor Ianukovych for the first time. When Viktor Iushchenko and Iulia Tymoshenko came to power thanks to the protests, they drowned in inter-clan quarrels and dubious deals. If effective democratic government capable of tackling corruption in Kyiv and increasing confidence in government institutions came to power, it could secure legitimacy throughout Ukraine, including the Russian-speaking East (at time when Putin did not have strength to intervention) [3]. Existence of our country in state of permanent delegitimization led to attempts to explain this by Ukrainian national mentality and the special conditions of country’s historical development. In particular, T. Nagorniak and L. Stanislavenko state that “during years of independence, no Ukrainian government escaped such phenomenon as legitimacy crisis, i.e. loss of trust on the part of citizens. Political regimes that cease to be legitimate in the eyes of the population continue to exist according to their own laws in contrast to experience of past centuries and given hybridity of almost all modern political processes. Accordingly, government and citizens continue to coexist in one political system but with different values of its components” [30]. In turn, L. Liasota [31] also connects reasons for delegitimization of power institutions of Ukrainian society with heterogeneous trends of purely Ukrainian origin, in particular, such as [25, 31–33]: – General inefficiency of socio-economic system (lower living standards of various groups) and political governance. – Contradictions between universal values of democracy and socio-economic and political practice. – Escalation of conflict between values of social groups majority and narrow corporate values of ruling elite. – Destruction of unity and consensus among elite groups, including on strategic development issue of the state. – High degree of bureaucratization and centralization of executive power in society. – Increasing corruption of all institutions of power, merging with criminal structures.

252

S. Dovgy et al.

Table 14.1 Directions of legitimizing interaction of public authority with civil society institutions Areas of public authority activity Conceptually strategic Regulatory and legal Institutional functional Activitycompetence Public democratic Information and communicative

Correspondence scale Scope of dynamic coordination of government functions quality with expectations of citizens (from complete rejection—Distrust to positive approval—Trust)

Relevant expectations of public and its findings of the real situatio Identity of values and perspective Legality and justice Quality provision of administrative services Competence and professionalism of officials Involvement in management Openness to communication and transparency of information

– Non-recognition by citizens of authority of political decision-making process, due to its opacity, including inconsistency of these decisions with dominant notion of law and justice in society. – Lack of effective mechanisms and institutions in political system that articulate and reconcile the interests of different social groups and bring them to the authorities. – Aggravation of conflict of national, linguistic and ideological identities, which led to separatist regional tendencies and threatens the integrity of the state. – Restriction of democratic rights and freedoms of citizens. – Sharp increase in political protest of the population, radicalization of forms of protest, open forms of dissatisfaction with the regime, which are aimed at destroying the existing government. – Strengthening use of force in political processes by authorities. – Appeal of current government for support foreign states. In our opinion, specific level of legitimacy of public authority has systemic and interactive direction and is formed in the process of combining at least six areas of public policy: conceptual-strategic, regulatory, institutional-functional, activitycompetence, public-democratic and information-communicative. These areas have their continuation and reproduction in relevant areas (angles) of perception and approval of public policy at one level or another due to interactive nature of public governance by the public. Schematically, this interaction can be represented in the form of table (see Table 14.1). There is a strong belief among Ukrainian scholars that one of “root” problems of legitimacy low level of state and socio-political institutions is inefficient use of communication potential of public administration. Main causes and possible consequences of processes taking place in information and communication space of

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

253

Threat to national security and sovereignty of Ukraine

Decreased competitiveness of Ukraine

Increased information interventions and aggression

Reducing level of international support and investment attractiveness

Vulnerability of national information space and threat to information security

Reducing of state formation possibilities

Non-support of state institutions, illegitimacy of actions, reduction of authority and image of the state

Irrational and inefficient use of communication potential and opportunities of public administration

Lack of systematization in the field of international, interdepartmental interaction and internal communications and a unified system of communication management in public authorities

Uncoordinated communication activities of public authorities on dialogue relations with civil society

There is no forecasting, strategic planning and practice of forming government goals and based on public request

Inefficient use of financial, organizational, technical and human resources of communication activities

Lack of public policy understanding by citizens, low efficiency of interaction

Low quality of proactive communication activities - focus on tactical and reactive communications

Insufficient use of MMM in implementation of targeted communication and low efficiency of state humanitarian policy

Inconsistency of communication actions, events, images, meanings and narratives of public administration bodies between themselves and other

Ineffective information and analytical activities of public authorities - results are not taken into account in the formation of strategic goals

Lack of clear legal regulation of communication activities and information interaction of subjects of state policy implementation

Lack of single positioning of the strategic goal and understanding of the general function of strategic communications

Morally, materially and technically obsolete means of communication, focus on inefficient communication channels

Lack of strategic interaction between public authorities and subordination of communications to a single strategic goal

Inconsistency of national development strategy with sectoral and territorial strategies and programs and ineffective strategic management

Unwillingness of specialists to understand the concepts and formation of narratives and their use in communication

Lack of coordinated and synchronized communication activities of public authorities of Ukraine

Inconsistent use of communication strategies by public authorities and their inconsistency with development strategies

Low level of competence of communication specialists, lack of professionol training on issues and strategic communications

Fig. 14.4 Problems of irrational and inefficient use of communication potential of public administration

Ukraine can be presented in the form of following scheme (Fig. 14.4). This reveals causal analysis of problem of irrational and inefficient use of communication potential and public administration. Figure 14.4 shows that main reasons for problem of irrational and inefficient use of communication potential and opportunities of public administration are: lack of

254

S. Dovgy et al.

coordinated communication activities and synchronization of actions in information space of public administration entities at central, regional and local level; inconsistency in use of communication strategies and their inconsistency with development strategies; low level of competence of communication specialists and lack of professional training of public servants on issues of information-analytical activity and strategic communications.

3 Conclusion Thus, we have reason to conclude that need for social trust in the system of public power as key prerequisite for increasing the legitimacy of public power is public, not just institutional and state problem. In modern conditions, it is possible to continue Ukrainian state. After all country with social trust crisis will be easily destroyed by an external enemy or torn apart by internal strife. Analysis of essence and factors is inherent not only in countries that have embarked on the path of democratic state formation, but also in developed democracies. It causes legitimacy crisis of modern states. This in turn showed the phenomenon of “crisis of legitimacy.” At the same time, even the critical delegitimization of public authorities mostly does not lead to the fall of the political regime, limited to change of top leadership during the next democratic elections despite all the negative emotional perceptions of this phenomenon in the modern world. In authoritarian societies (especially built on traditional values and established traditions), very often even regime continues to function with a greater or lesser degree of stability. This regime does not enjoy trust of its own population and is insufficiently legitimate in its eyes. Moreover, delegitimization of one or another undemocratic political regime with its own ways and forms of organization of public relations, according to S. Huntington, just becomes nothing more than decisive impetus and at the same time cause of political modernization of the “third wave” [34, 35]. Thus, any crisis becomes impetus and tool for finding new ways of further social development, developing new strategies for further reproduction of human communities, civilization as a whole in its universal sense.

References 1. Semerikov S. O., et al. (2022). 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Futures: Environmental, Technological, Social and Economic Matters. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1049. 011001 https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1049/1/011001. 2. Diamond, L., et al. (2016). Authoritarianism goes global: The challenge to democracy. John Hopkins University Press. 3. Fukuyama, F. What society lies at the end of history? http://thekievtimes.ua/politics/383768frensis-fukuyama-kakoe-obshhestvo-lezhit-v-konce-istorii.html

14

“Legitimacy Crisis” and its Impact on the Stability and Security of. . .

255

4. Tsaras, K., Papathanasiou, I. V., Vus, V., Panagiotopoulou, A., Katsou, M. A., Kelesi, M., & Fradelos, E. C. (2018). Predicting factors of depression and anxiety in mental health nurses: A quantitative cross-sectional study. Medical Archives., 72(1), 62–67. https://doi.org/10.5455/ medarh.2017.72.62-67 5. Rosanvallon, P., & Goldhammer, А. (2011). Democratic legitimacy: Impartiality, reflexivity. Princeton University Press. 6. Iakovleva, L. (2019). Institutional and organizational dimensions of the legitimacy of public authority. Bulletin of the National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute”. Politology. Sociology. Right. 3, 207–213. 7. Kheld, D. (2014). Models of democracy. Delo dom. 8. Habermas, J. (2001). Between facts and norms. Contribution to a discourse theory of law and democracy. The MIT Press. 9. Lippmann, W. (2011). The phantom public. Transaction Publishers. 10. Bilyi, O. (2013). Legitimation and the modern political regime. Scientific Notes of Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of NAS of Ukraine., 1, 43–54. 11. Iakovleva, L. (2018). Democratic legitimacy: ideological sources and policy alternatives. Bulletin of Lviv University. A series of philosophical and political studies. 16, 232–238. 12. Volynets, V. (2008). The legitimacy of power as a factor in the political stability of society. Natsionalnyi universytet “Ostrozka akademiia”. 13. Chubaievskyi, V. (2016). Ways and means of political legitimation of power in Ukraine. Bulletin of Lviv University. A series of philosophical and political studies. 8, 115–123. 14. Lipset, S. (1988). Political man. The social bases of politics. The Johns Hopkins U.P. 15. Novachenko, T. (2013). The concept of trust as the basis of the legitimacy of state power. Investments: Practice and Experience., 10, 159–163. 16. Jost, J., & Major, B. (2001). The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations. Cambridge University Press. 17. Sachue, P. (2010). Deutungsmuster sozialer Ungleichheit: Wahrnehmung und Legitimation gesellschaftlicher Privilegierung und Benachteiligung. Campus Verlag. 18. Leiphart, A. (2004). Constitutional design for devided societies. Journal of Democracy., 15(2), 96–109. 19. Asch, R., Emich, B., & Engels, J. (2011). Integration. Legitimation. Korruption. Politische Patronage in Früher Neuzeit und Moderne. 20. Rose-Ackerman, S. (2010). Corruption and the state: Causes, consequences, reforms. Logos. 21. Radchenko, O. V., & Zadorozhnyi, S. A. (2018). Political corruption as a threat to national security. Public administration in the context of institutional change. IPKDSZU. 22. Lypset, S. Reflections on legitimacy. http://sbiblio.com/biblio/archive/lip_rasm/ 23. Huntington, S. (1977). The crisis of democracy. Report on the governability of democracies to the trilateral Comission. New York University Press. 24. Krutii, O. M., & Radchenko, O. O. (2018). Institute of public-private partnership as a tool for legitimizing public authorities of Ukraine. Theory and practice of public administration and local self-government. 2. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Ttpdu_2018_2_7. 25. Antoniuk, D. (2020). The main criteria for the legitimacy of public authorities at the local level. Current Issues of Philosophy and Sociology., 27, 135–139. 26. Galston, W. (2017). The populist moment. Journal of Democracy., 28(2), 21–23. 27. Zelenko, H. I. (2014). Institutional changes in the political system of modern Ukraine: Assessment and optimization: An analytical report. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of NAS of Ukraine. 28. Riezanova, N. (2016). Populist determinants of legitimation of political power in democratic societies. Humanitarian Bulletin of Zaporizhia State Engineering Academy., 67, 169–181. 29. Diamond, L. (2010). Liberation technology. Journal of Democracy., 21(3), 69–83. 30. Nahorniak, T., & Stanislavenko, L. (2020). The crisis of legitimacy of power in the mirror of the attitude of Ukrainians to state and public institutions. European political and legal discourse., 7(4), 49–57.

256

S. Dovgy et al.

31. Liasota, L. I. (2015). Legitimacy of political power in modern Ukraine: Theoretical aspects of practical problems. State and Law. Series: Political Science., 67, 12–23. 32. Dutchak, S., Opolska, N., Shchokin, R., Durman, O., & Shevtsiv, M. (2020). International aspects of legal regulation of information relations in the global internet network. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues., 23(3), 1–7. 33. Kovach, V., et al. (2020). Electronic social networks as supporting means of educational process in higher education institutions. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2588, 418–433. http://ceurws.org/Vol-2588/paper35.pdf 34. Khantynhton, S. (2003). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. ROSSPEN. 35. Hubanova, T., Shchokin, R., Hubanov, O., Antonov, V., Slobodianiuk, P., & Podolyaka, S. (2021). Information technologies in improving crime prevention mechanisms in the border regions of southern Ukraine. Journal of Information Technology Management., 13, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.22059/JITM.2021.80738

Part V

Informational Wars

Chapter 15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics and Factors of Actualization in the Modern World Roman Primush Yuliia Perehuda

, Yaroslav Chmyr , Maxym Kravtsov , and Andrii Koniushkov

,

Abstract Transition of mankind to the era of information society is characterized by the gradual movement of most geopolitical processes and relations in the global information space. It becomes the main environment of interpersonal, group and international contacts and the main place of conflict of national interests, information sovereignty and field of information wars. Use of information weapons is becoming more common in the practice of international relations in modern conditions. It provides opportunity to gain information advantage and dominance in the information space of the world. Thus, the need to intensify the actions of public authorities of Ukraine is sharpened. It is directed on national interests of the state in the global information space and effective protection of national information space and information sovereignty of the state, timely detection and neutralization of threats of negative impact of harmful content of national and world information space. It is especially important for Ukraine to confront the manifestations of hybrid warfare. This requires appropriate response measures. Keywords Information war · Historical analysis · Comparative analysis · Modern world · Information era

R. Primush National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine Y. Chmyr (*) · M. Kravtsov · A. Koniushkov Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine Y. Perehuda Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_15

259

260

R. Primush et al.

1 The Problem Statement The mankind’s transition to information society era is characterized by the fact that there is a gradual shift in the information environment of most geopolitical processes and relations between states, peoples or individual institutions and people. Interstate geopolitical struggle (diplomatic, political, economic, military, etc.) is increasingly shifted to the information plane in conditions when nuclear states accumulated potential of deadly weapons capable to destroy humanity and their own planet. The top leadership and leaders of the nation’s rival nation try to gain an advantage and promote their own national interests whereby actively influencing society and government. Information and information technology become the main weapon in the interstate conflict. It led to the emergence and extremely rapid development of such socio-political phenomenon as hybrid wars. Mastery level of information and communication technologies is already a determining factor in the level of any state development. Understanding of information as a special weapon is enshrined in the National Security Doctrines of leading countries because “those who have information owns the world” [1]. Role of information influences on the course of military and political events in the world is only growing with the entry of mankind into the post-industrial era of the “fourth information revolution” [2]. The global information space becomes the main environment for interpersonal, group and international contacts and the main place of conflict of national interests and battlefield for information sovereignty for the best geopolitical place in the global information society. Concept of “peace and martial law” is intertwined in cyberspace under such conditions. There local, interstate and global information wars are unfolding. According to V. Bogdanovych, B. Vorovych and E. Marko today “distances, borders, time and time other obstacles to the real world in cyberspace mean nothing, therefore, information weapons became a powerful weapon of the XXI century which is aimed at individual and humanity as a whole. Notion of peace became shaky, unstable and conceptually blurred. Wars in addition to real military action also moved to cyberspace, ‘military’ actions and events, battles for domination of the masses and their consciousness” [3].

2 Main Material Presentation Historically, attempt to gain purely military advantage of information and psychological influence was inherent in mankind since ancient times. Tasks, signs and methods of modern information wars – is a desire to weaken fighting spirit of the enemy, disorient him, bring confusion and panic into his ranks, to win military victory with the least losses. It has been used by mankind since the beginning of the active spread of civilization. The history of mankind is permeated with such examples. One of the oldest is the famous American researcher Samuel Kramer. He deciphered ancient Sumerian monuments and came across the memory of ruler of

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics. . .

261

the Sumerian city of Uruk for a long time spreading terrible rumors among the inhabitants of another rich in precious metals city – Aratta. Panic of townspeople was transferred to the city ruler. So, Aratta without a fight agreed to pay a large tribute to the disinformers [4]. Sun Tzu is classic of the Chinese art of warfare. He directly wrote that “the best war is the one that was won without a fight.” For this, it is necessary long before the military campaign to carry out the following measures of information and psychological influence in relation to the enemy: – – – – – – – – – – –

Denigrate all the good that is in the country of your opponent. Hinder the government work by all means. Involve prominent figures of the enemy in criminal acts. Undermine prestige of the enemy’s leadership and expose it at the right time to the public shame. Use cooperation with the most vile people for these purposes. Incite quarrels and clashes among the citizens of country hostile to you. Incite young people against the elderly. Interfere in all ways with the normal supply of enemy troops and maintaining order in them. Do everything possible to devalue traditions of your enemies and undermine their faith in their gods. Be generous with offers and gifts to buy information and partners. Do not spare any money or promises, because they bring great results [5].

Napoleon Bonaparte was actively guided by Sun Tzu’s teachings in his conquests. His army always had a mobile printing house with sets of foreign fonts. Therefore, invasion was always preceded by distribution of newspaper. Official publish house was established and in every conquered city and region. Napoleon said: “Four newspapers will do more harm than an army of hundreds of thousands!” [6]. The year 1633 officially dates back to the emergence of such a massive instrument of information warfare as propaganda. After all, it was in this year that Pope Uranus VIII founded the Congregation for Propaganda as a committee of cardinals responsible for the foreign missions of the church [7]. Ukrainian Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytskyi skillfully used informational and psychological weapons in the national liberation war. Thus, the Ukrainian Cossacks were opposed by a much larger Polish army in September 1648, near the town of Pyliavytsia. The Polish army had 80–90 guns and 32.000 noble militias, 8.000 German mercenaries and 40.000 to 50.000 noble servants. At the same time, only 50.000 to 70.000 Cossacks were properly armed. Khmelnytskyi did not start the battle, expecting allies – the Tatars. But only 4.000 Tatars arrived which did not affect the balance of power. However, Khmelnytsky ordered loud salutes and loud congratulations, as if an army of 50.000 had arrived. At the same time, a priest was sent to the Poles. He prayed that he had seen the 50.000 strong Tatar army arrive. The battle began on the morning of September 13. Colonel Maksym Kryvonis’ cavalry changed into Tatar attire by the order of Khmelnytsky. It together with last night’s misinformation caused panic and complete demoralization among Poles. The

262

R. Primush et al.

Polish command withdrew all banners from the battlefield and began to prepare for the retreat of the camp to avoid complete defeat. The retreat began at night and turned into a panicked escape. Their convoy was abandoned at random. All artillery and large supplies of gunpowder went to the Cossacks. The winners received tens of thousands of carts, 92 cannons and large gilded and precious stone Hetman’s mace Zaslavskyi [8]. The methods of information and psychological influence during the First and the Second World Wars were extremely widely used. It was reflected in such books as Secrets of Crewe House by Kenneth Stewart, Technique of Propaganda in the World War by Harold Lasswell, Psychological Warfare: Theory and Practice of Mass Consciousness by Paul Leinburger, etc. According to I. Feshchenko in the 1920s, the United States conducted propaganda radio broadcasts to the regions of its “traditional interests” – Latin American countries, Great Britain – to its colonies. Germany tried to revise the terms of the Versailles Peace. Therefore, it conducted propaganda to the Germans of Pomerania and Upper Silesia in Poland, students – in the Czech Republic. At the same time in the 1930s, information wars ceased to be an adjunct to the armed forces. It became an independent phenomenon such as the GermanAustrian radio war of 1933–34 over Austria’s accession to the Reich. Then the concept of “information aggressor” appeared and became widespread [9]. In fact, experts attribute collapse of the Soviet Union first of all to the successful use of information warfare tools during the Cold War. Thus, almost the entire territory of the USSR was covered by the signals of the “Voice of America,” the BBC and other “enemy” radio stations. Heorgii Pocheptsov is the most authoritative theorist of information wars in the CIS. He states that the main corrosion component was propaganda with the help of material world things. The propaganda system was not ready to work with such slice of informational influence. “The first type of new information influence can be considered household items made in the West which were obviously of better quality. Things went ahead, performing uncharacteristic functions of information carriers. Imagination of the Soviet people painted completely different world based on them. Other media were also things, only on the screen of a movie or television - secondary information not related to the plot. The third carrier was people who visited abroad. Discussion of received information took place not at official level, they took place ‘in the kitchen’ at personal contacts level. Personal level is the most favorable, because we receive information from an acquaintance whom we trust. So, we began to receive Western standards” [10]. Thus, inconsistency of gray routine of Soviet life against the background of aggressive communist propaganda was a cognitive dissonance in comparison with vivid pictures of the Western world. The highest party leadership of the USSR also came under this informational influence. At least, Russian professor Dmitrii Frolov (doctor of political science) says that the former US President Bill Clinton mentioned the following: “President Truman was going to destroy the Soviet Union with the help of the atomic bomb. We did it with the help of skillfully applied electronic information influence. However, we did it with one significant difference. We received a raw material appendage, not a state destroyed by the atom” [11].

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics. . .

263

Information wars were especially active in the second half of the twentieth century. I. Iuzova analyzed events in Korea (1950–1953), Afghanistan (1979–1989), Grenada (1982), Panama (1989), the Persian Gulf “Desert Storm” (1991–1992), Yugoslavia (Allied Force, 1999), Iraq (Freedom of Iraq, 2003), Afghanistan (Unshakable Freedom, 2001–2002). She emphasized that in all these cases information and psychological operations of influence on the mass consciousness of autochthonous population and its leaders were used. These elements of information warfare were introduced “in order to create favorable conditions for further successful operations and hostilities, effective use of their troops (forces), armaments and military equipment and reduce effectiveness of enemy troops (forces) and weapons by capturing and maintaining information advantage over the enemy during the preparation and in the course of military (combat) actions by indirect introduction of the opposing party into the field of its management at the information level” [12]. The above-mentioned French philosopher Jean Baudrillard called the abovementioned Gulf War a “simulacrum” or a “failed” war. In his opinion, it was an illusion created by a fighting machine of controlled media. Everything that was known about this war in the world had nothing to do with reality. Journalists and TV reporters became the main combat unit in both Gulf Wars. This “military-entertainment complex” created necessary media content for the world with its own tension, drama and excitement [13]. Use of media weapons was the basis of victorious war. It is well known that 75% of Iraqi soldiers surrendered to the Americans during the “Desert Storm” in 1991. They confirmed that their decision to surrender was influenced by American leaflets (they were distributed to about 30 million) and the Internet and radio. S. Sungurov says that in the twenty-first century, “media wars” became a real integrated process. Governments and related military groups improved their methods of influencing public in the 1920s by exponentially increasing knowledge. Theory of social psychology and empirical research was combined with psychological warfare and public diplomacy methods. This combination with the help of advanced media technologies, techniques and monopolistic media companies had to develop into a situation where media had to become an integral part of military efforts [14]. Thus, as F. Webster notes: industrial war was replaced by the information war. It is characterized by the following features: – Does not require mass mobilization of the population. Traditional soldiers are inferior to the so-called “warriors of knowledge.” They are specialists in the use of computer technology. – There is a change in military institutions. They begin to perform more specialized and technically demanding roles. – Wars as such become instantaneous. – Information warfare requires more careful planning. Its conduction effectiveness is measured by the flexible response speed. It is about increasing the amount of information needed to wage war and the need for its rapid processing.

264

R. Primush et al.

– The masses are not directly involved given that in information wars, in contrast to industrial wars. It becomes important to achieve control over the media as translators of information. – Attention is paid to “managing the perception” of the population of internal affairs and the world situation in the information war, [15]. Tools of information and psychological influence become important in the course of historical development, especially in the era of global information space and the mankind’s transition to the era of information society. Today, an American researcher of Indian descent Ramesh Bhan is convinced that it is information that will decide the fate of future wars. In his book Information War: (Des)Information Will Decide on Future Wars, he describes how many powerful countries used information weapons and misused information to destabilize the political system and spread negative messages, using examples of US-Russia, Israel-Palestine, China-India about hostile nations and their leaders [16]. Thus, the modern global information space becomes the main environment for interpersonal, group and international contacts and the main place of conflict of national interests and the battlefield for information sovereignty for the best geopolitical place in the global information society. Mastery level of information and communication technologies is already a determining factor in the level of development of any state [17]. Understanding of information as a special weapon is enshrined in the National Security Doctrines of leading countries because those who have information owns the world. According to V. Torianyk: “the main arena of clashes and struggles of different national interests of states is the information space in the context of global integration and fierce international competition. Modern information technology allows states to pursue their own interests without military force, weaken or cause significant damage security of a competitive state, which does not have an effective system of protection against negative information influences” [18]. The above examples clearly illustrate the nature and features of information warfare. The term itself is used in scientific circulation relatively recently. The first use of this definition dates back to 1967 when the book Secret Surrender was published by former CIA chief Alain Dulles and 1976 when the phrase was used by T. Ron in the report “Weapons Systems and Information Warfare” where the researcher emphasized that information infrastructure is a key aspect of the American economy. At the same time, it becomes a vulnerable target in both wartime and peacetime [19]. But further use of the definition “information warfare” came only in the middle of the last decade of the twentieth century when one after another appeared: Winna Schwartau’s Information War: Chaos on the Electronic Superhighway (1993), Martin Libiki’s What is Information Warfare (1994), Anthony Kordesman and Abraham Wagner’s Lessons from Modern Warfare: The Gulf War (1996), Roger Molander, Andrew Riddle, and Peter Wilso’s Strategic Information Warfare: The New Face of War (1996), Dorothy Denning’s Information War and Security (1998), James Adams’s The Next World War: Computers Are Weapons and the Frontline is

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics. . .

265

Everywhere (1998) and a number of other publications. James Scott summarizes these books and speaks about a new world around us, a world where “we are no longer a society within the geographical lines on the sand laid by the people who won the world war 50 years ago. Rather, we are a society driven by ideological variations, led by the leaders of the digital tribal society. This is a new world order and the exact opposite of what the self-proclaimed elites planned. The United Nations is no more important than Facebook. WikiLeaks knows more than a CIA intelligence analyst, and Google’s permanent censorship algorithm became a new gatekeeper for critical information. We are a society of daily comprehensive battle for the psychological core of the world’s population. Digitized influence operations became a new norm of control over the electoral process, public opinion and public consciousness in general. The struggle of subjects in this geoinformation space is fierce. Nation of states and special interest groups in all possible variants fight for the highest position in the control of public information” [20]. There are various approaches to the interpretation of the concept of “information warfare” in modern scientific discourse. Different researchers and scholars put different meanings into these concepts, in particular defining the essence and purpose of information warfare as: – Strategic series of information and psychological operations conducted by the state, which influence the thoughts, attitudes, actions of the object to support the political goals of the country’s leaders (J. Aro [21]). – A control over the information space in order to obtain economic, political, diplomatic and other benefits (D. Ventre [22]). – A dominance due to computerization of military equipment and formation of network organization of the armed forces during a special type of military operation. This is either an independent form or part of expanded set of military actions that form network and cyber wars (J. Derian [23]). – A combination of human or technological actions designed to appropriate, destroy or alter information or impose a certain vision of reality. Information wars are characterized by the ability to use wide range of tools. It allows to conduct ambitious propaganda campaigns and accurate cyber attacks (V. Tarkin [24]). – The most effective means of conducting political confrontation. It does not require human sacrifices and extraordinary material costs, and it is in some sense a faster and covert means of political goal achieving than ordinary war (B. Kalinichenko [25]). – A disruption of information exchange in the enemy’s camp, destruction not of the population but of state mechanism, weakening moral and material strength of the enemy or competitor through targeted measures of propaganda influence on human consciousness in ideological and emotional spheres (S. Starodub [26]). – A complex, overt or covert targeted informational influence of one party, or mutual influence of the parties on each other. This contains system of methods and means of influencing people, their psyche and behavior, information resources and information systems, in order to achieve information advantage

266

–

–

– –

–

R. Primush et al.

national strategy. All these lead to adoption of favorable decisions for the initiator or destruction of the information infrastructure of the enemy while strengthening and protecting their own information and information systems (A. Fisun [27]). A control of information space and protection ensure of their information from hostile actions; use of control over the information space for information attacks on the enemy; increasing of overall efficiency of armed information functions (Z. Brzhevska, N. Dovzhenko, R. Kyrychok, G. Haidur, A. Anosov [28]). A holistic technology aimed at achieving humanitarian enslavement of some groups of people by others which is a product of post-industrial society and due to the impossibility of global armed conflicts that can destroy the planet (I. Mikhalchenko [29]). Prevention of possible military conflict, forcing the enemy to refuse to participate in hostilities due to the weakening of the morale of the personnel of the armed forces and the civilian population of the enemy (O. Kurban [30]). A large-scale information struggle with the use of a set of measures, operations and tools of action on the human psyche as a purposeful information impact on the mass consciousness, system of state and military management of the opposing side (I. Parfeniuk [31]). A continuation of dominant ideological foundations of state policy, carried out through a set of information technology industry, mechanisms of information and psychological influence on society within the state or the population of competing countries in political (military-political, economic) conflict to form the social aspect unity of society, definition of its identity and information protection of worldview values, as well as demoralization and fragmentation of the population and the power component of enemy states within the global information space (V. Shemchuk [32]).

In turn, a group of authors from the National Academy of Security Service of Ukraine under the leadership of O. Iudin proposed to use separate term “information and psychological warfare.” Third, in today’s developed information society, the spread of aggression by other states can characterize: political activity of individuals, groups, parties, movements; election campaigns of candidates for various elected positions; advertising activities of commercial structures or economic groups; struggle of individuals (and small groups) in the competition for leadership in production, research and other teams; political, economic or cultural confrontation of conflicting ethnic groups; negotiation process between competing firms or organizations [33]. Thus, we can draw a general conclusion that information warfare is a qualitatively new radical form of geopolitical and domestic political conflicts of latent and asymmetric nature. It is universal means of bloodless interests of the subjects of information warfare where the information is a main weapon. Internet and mass communication channels are aimed at desired change of public consciousness, basic values and political orientations of citizens, political elite and senior government officials. In the world, there is also a narrow interpretation of information warfare as a separate component of direct military actions, use of information by armies during

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics. . .

267

carrying out combat operations. Thus, the Chinese doctrine founders of information warfare believe that information warfare is a product of information society era. This product uses information technology and information weapons in battle, creating appropriate high-tech “networking” of battlefield to gain full control over the information space of the theater of war [34]. Computer devices are the main combat unit in such battle. Their capture and destruction is the main task, and capture and management of information space is the key condition for victory. Combat operations are aimed primarily at conducting intelligence and counterintelligence, electromagnetic or viral destruction of enemy information and communication infrastructure or unauthorized intrusion, dissemination of enemy information disinformation with simultaneous distortion or destruction of operational information of the command in order to demoralize command and personnel of military units, undermine their fighting spirit and refuse to continue hostilities. The two above-listed approaches as a broad and narrow interpretation of the concept of information warfare are clearly separated in American scientific and expert discourse. They use two definitions: “Information war” (to define purely military operations, the main targets of which will be enemy information systems) and “Information warfare” (translated as “information warfare used by a political organization (e.g., the state) to weaken or destroy another political organization” [35]). Due to the fact that phrase “Information warfare” is not translated literally, and such component as “fare” in English has many different meanings from “live” to “tariff.” In the non-English language scientific segment, in both cases the same definition “information war” is used. Any process or social phenomenon in the systemic dimension always has its subjects and objects. Therefore, we define the latter for case of information warfare. Thus, the main subjects of information warfare include taking into account the scientific approaches presented in this section: – States and their institutions (among the world’s states, the undisputed leaders in the development and use of information warfare tools are the United States, China and Russia). – Interstate formations, military-political and defense alliances. – Transnational media corporations and transnational financial-industrial corporations. – Virtual social communities and social Internet services (e.g., Facebook, Vkontakte, Odnoklassniki, etc.) – Mass media and communication (satellite, internet and terrestrial TV channels, traditional newspapers and magazines and online publications). – Leaders of public opinion, exponents of national values and mentality of the people, nation. – Special services and special units of the national defense and security system. – Agents of influence (fifth column) – citizens of particular state, their organizations, movements and parties, which on an ideological or financial basis carry out information operations in favor of a foreign state.

268

R. Primush et al.

– Non-state radical, extremist, fundamentalist, terrorist and other armed and unarmed ideological-radical and religious-radical organizations and formations. – Main objects of information wars include the following: – Social and personal consciousness of citizens. – National values and national mentality. – System of socio-political and information-communication relations of the respective country and its society. – System of preparation and adoption of public administration decisions in the political, economic, security spheres of life of the state. – Political and administrative culture of the state and elite. – Information and information-communication infrastructure of the state. – Institutions of national defense and security, their leaders and employees. – Institutions of public government of the state, their leaders and employees. – Critical economic infrastructure of the state, banking institutions, enterprises of the military-industrial complex, etc. The Center for Global Studies “Strategy XXI” in the framework of the project “Antares” under the leadership of M. Gonchar offers following distribution of signs of hybrid warfare on three levels: 1. Yellow level: Problems raising of the neighboring state (object of future aggression) in the mass media of neighboring country (potential aggressor) with comments about threats to the national security of neighboring country; initiating and conducting various public events of scientific and applied nature on resonant topics, which creates split in the public consciousness. 2. Orange level: Sharp intensification of non-governmental organizations in opposition to the government and calling for “not words but deeds” to solve problems. 3. Red level: Mass information and psychological campaign in the neighboring state media aimed at protecting compatriots; holding mass events under anti-state slogans; local disconnections from the air of state television channels, their replacement by TV channels of the aggressor country [36]. Modern information wars are characterized by a number of features according to I. Zharovskaya and N. Ortinskaya: – Monopolization of newspapers, magazines, radio and television and means of communication by specialized corporations. – Direct subordination of media and communication to oligarchic capital. – Open interference of state bodies in the sphere of mass media, prohibition or illegal restriction of freedom of speech. – Dominance of relatively small number of media and news agencies in the global news market. – Information space monopolization of the country or region. – Deepening disparities in the provision of information and communication between developed and developing countries.

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics. . .

269

– Use of the press, radio, television and news agencies of developed countries to provide information on their own domestic and foreign policies in other countries. – Publication of number of materials aimed at discrediting certain political force, event, policy; creating a negative image of a political force, movement, statesman, significant event in the country [37]. We can see from the above material that information warfare first of all consists in one or another informational and psychological impact. O. Nevelska-Gordeeva and V. Nechitailo define it as an influence on the consciousness and subconscious of individual and population in order to make changes in their behavior and worldview. Object of information and psychological influence is human consciousness. So, information and psychological weapons are very dangerous because they affect the functioning and development of society, psyche and behavior of the population [38]. This influence is carried out in the course of information and psychological operations and use of various types of information and information and psychological weapons. Thus, S. Zaporozhets emphasizes that “leading role in hybrid warfare is given to informational, psychological and economic influence on the enemy” [39]. M. Turanskyi emphasizes that “one of the features of today’s military operations is measures set implementation for information and psychological impact on population and enemy troops with special emphasis on such components as information and psychological and information and advocacy. We see new approach to military campaigns in the hybrid war of the Russian Federation against Ukraine where the key moment was psychological and informational processing of local population. This allowed Russia to annex Crimea” [40]. E. Manuilov and Yu. Kalynovskyi add that “information weapons are especially effective against country in crisis where value ambivalence, socio-political uncertainty in the public consciousness is present. Use of information weapons becomes especially effective when the state is observed confrontation between political forces or there is a crisis of moral and legal consciousness or there is a weak patriotic elite in all spheres of public life” [41].

3 Conclusion Thus, we can conclude that the phenomenon of information warfare has a long history. Tools of information warfare were modernized and passed the evolutionary path from an auxiliary means of traditional warfare to the dominant element of modern hybrid wars. It was from the beginning of global information space formation. So, various political processes of interstate geopolitical struggle moved to it. They acquired the features of the phenomenon of “hybrid war.” Use of information weapons is becoming more widespread in the practice of international relations in modern conditions. It provides opportunity to gain information advantage and dominance in the information space of the world. This

270

R. Primush et al.

exacerbates the need to intensify actions of public authorities of Ukraine in timely detection and neutralization of threats and risks of negative impact of harmful content of national and global information space, meeting information needs of man and society, national interests in the global information space and effective protection of national information space and information sovereignty of the state. It is especially important to confront manifestations of hybrid warfare for Ukraine which require our state to take appropriate response measures.

References 1. Shvets, V. Y., Rozdobudko, E. V., & Solomina, G. V. (2013). Aggregated methodology of multicriterion economic and ecological examination of the ecologically oriented investment projects. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu, 3, 139–144. 2. Bukhtatyi, O., Radchenko, O., & Holovchenko, H. (2015). Ukraine media: On the threshold of the information revolution: Monograph. SVS Publisher Panasenko. 3. Bogdanovych, V. Y., Vorovych, B. O., & Marko, E. I. (2018). Information security as the basis of military security of the state and society. Collection of Scientific Works of the Center for Military Strategic Studies of the Ivan Chernyakhovsky National University of Defense of Ukraine, 3, 44–48. 4. Kramer, S. (1988). In the world of Sumer: An autobiography. Wayne State University Press. 5. Loziichuk, N. Psychological warfare: against everyone. Retrieved from https://life.pravda.com. ua/columns/2014/07/2/173904/ 6. Orlov, V. Theory and practice of information and psychological struggle. Retrieved from https://soldier-moskva.livejournal.com/429055.html 7. Poltorak, V. A., & Stadnyk, A. H. (2020). Propaganda and its place in the process of information warfare. The main forms of propaganda influence: Direct propaganda, jeans, publicity, propaganda 2.0. Epistemological Studies in Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences, 3(1), 126–138. 8. Skrypnyk, O. (2019). Scouts born in Ukraine: [e-book]. Strelbytskyy Multimedia Publishing. 9. Feshchenko, I. V. (2021). Information warfare as an organic component of modern armed and political conflict. Philosophy and political science in the context of modern culture., 13(1), 96–103. 10. Pocheptsov, H. H. The Cold War as a variant of information warfare. Retrieved from http:// www.rossia.in/modules/sections/index.php7op—viewarticle&artid¼11 11. Frolov, D., Hruniushkyna, S., & Starostyn, A. (2008). Information geopolitics and the internet. ImageLab. 12. Yuzova, I. Y. (2020). Analysis of the organization and conduct of information and psychological operations in the conduct of hybrid warfare. Collection of scientific works of Kharkiv National University of the Air Force., 2, 40–44. 13. Baudrillard, J. (2012). The Gulf war did not take place. Power Publications. 14. Sunhurova, S. (2020). Conceptual approaches to the study of the concept and phenomenon of information warfare. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies., 29, 251–256. 15. Webster, F. (2003). Information Warfare in an Age of Globalization. In D. K. Thussu & D. Freedman (Eds.), War and the Media: Reporting Conflict 24/7. SAGE Publications. 16. Ramesh, B. (2017). Information war: (dis)information will decide future wars. Educreation Publishing.

15

Information Wars: Historical and Comparative Analysis, Specifics. . .

271

17. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2 879/paper04.pdf 18. Torianyk, V. (2016). Information security as a component of national security. The role of the media in ensuring the information sovereignty of Ukraine. Law and Society., 2, 151–156. 19. Pronoza, I. (2018). Information warfare: The essence and features of manifestation. Current Policy Issues., 61, 76–84. 20. James, S. (2019). Information warfare: The meme is the embryo of the narrative illusion. Amazon Digital Services LLC - KDP Print US. 21. Aro, J. (2016). The cyberspace war: Propaganda and trolling as warfare tolls. European View, 15(1), 122. 22. Ventre, D. (2016). Information warfare. John Wiley & Sons. 23. Der Derian, J. (2009). Virtuous war: Mapping the military-industrial-media-entertainment network. Routledge. 24. Tarkin, V. P. (2020). Information wars: Theoretical. State and law. Legal and political sciences., 87, 285–294. 25. Kalinichenko, B. (2019). Determining areas of strategy for countering information warfare. State and law. Series: Political Science., 83, 61–73. 26. Starodub, S. (2018). Information wars and defense systems in the context of globalization. State and regions. Series: Social Communications., 3, 27–31. 27. Fisun, A. (2011). Genesis of the concept of “information warfare”. Gilea., 49, 534–538. 28. Brzhevska, Z., Dovzhenko, N., Kyrychok, R., Haidur, H., & Anosov, A. (2019). Information wars: Problems, threats. Cybersecurity: education, science, technology., 3, 88–96. 29. Mykhalchenko, Y. A. (1998). Information wars at the turn of the XXI century. Information technology security., 3, 14–15. 30. Kurban, O. (2015). Theory of information warfare: Basic principles, methodology and conceptual apparatus. Scientific Journal “ScienceRise”, 11/1(16), 95–100. 31. Parfeniuk, I. (2019). Tools of information warfare: Traditional and modern tools. Bulletin of the Book Chamber., 1, 7–10. 32. Shemchuk, V. (2019). Conceptual approaches to understanding information warfare in the modern world. Series: Legal Sciences., 30(69), 29–35. 33. Iudin, O. K., Matviichuk-Yudina, O. V., & Suprun, O. M. (2021). Information and psychological warfare and social engineering technologies. Science-Intensive Technologies, 2, 130–139. 34. Pillsbury, M. (1997). Chinese views of future warfare. DIANE Publishing. 35. Horpynych, H. I. (2018). Information wars as an object of scientific reflection. Polyparadigmatic approach. Habitus, 5, 36–41. 36. Honchar, M. (2016). Putin’s gibberish. Non-military aspects of the new generation of wars. In Excerpts from the research of the Center for Global Studies “strategy XXI” in the framework of the project. “Antares”, Kyiv. 37. Zharovskaya, I., & Ortinskaya, N. (2020). Information warfare as a modern globalization phenomenon. Bulletin of the National University “Lviv Polytechnic”. Series: Legal Sciences., 7(2), 56–61. 38. Nevelska-Hordieieva, O. P., & Nechytailo, V. O. (2021). Manipulation as a means of information and psychological influence in information warfare. Bulletin of the Yaroslav the wise National University of law. Series: Philosophy, Philosophy of Law, Political Science, Sociology, 3, 71–83. 39. Zaporozhets, S. A. (2019). The state of information security of Ukraine in the military sphere in a hybrid war. Political Science Bulletin, 83, 16–25.

272

R. Primush et al.

40. Turanskyi, M. O. (2018). Information and psychological operations in hybrid warfare: The historiographical aspect. Bulletin of Cherkasy University. Series: Historical Sciences, 1, 111–111. 41. Manuilov, Y. M., & Kalynovskyi, Y. Y. (2017). Axiological dimension of information security of the Ukrainian state. Bulletin of the National University "Yaroslav the Wise Law Academy of Ukraine". Series: Philosophy, philosophy of law, political science, sociology, 3, 13–30.

Chapter 16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars Oleksandr Radchenko , Oleksandr Nepomniashchij Yaroslav Chmyr , and Valeriia Kovach

, Ivan Shkurat

,

Absrtact This work proposes analysis and systematization of technologies of modern hybrid information wars, forms of using certain types of information weapons capable to reform mass and individual consciousness of citizens, destroying established values of national identity and social solidarity and thus reprogramming the social space in the interests of external object of influence. Structural-functional model of information warfare is proposed. Such a model has a system-organized form and purposeful character. It is realized in two main forms: information-technical war and information-psychological war. Systemic activities of public authorities in Ukraine first of all the institutes of the President of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, the Armed Forces, the Security Service and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, should be urgently deployed. They counteract manifestations of information warfare, conduct counter-propaganda information operations, etc. Keywords Information wars · Information weapons · Techniques · Technologies · Hybrid wars O. Radchenko (✉) Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland O. Nepomniashchij National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine I. Shkurat Institute of Personnel Training of the State Employment Service of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine Y. Chmyr Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine V. Kovach National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine Center for information-analytical and technical support of nuclear power facilities monitoring of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_16

273

274

O. Radchenko et al.

1 The Problem Statement Information wars become an everyday phenomenon and a new form of promoting the national interests of states while protecting their own information sovereignty in the modern world. Field of information warfare become both national and global information space where states, governments and politicians in practice try to implement the well-known saying: “those who owns the information—owns the world.” Thus, for each country, “ensuring national security” is a matter of national strategy forming related to domestic political activities and aimed at achieving and maintaining social stability and progressive development of society [1]. Use of information weapons is evolving and spreading extremely fast. Effectiveness of its use is confirmed by virtually all armed and political conflicts of recent decades. Their experience shows that modern methods of information warfare can lead to such consequences as loss of national material values, change of social order and political system, collapse of state and army, collapse of economy, destruction of science, exacerbation of ethnic and religious conflicts, etc. There are the following methods used in information aggression: misinformation and manipulation, propaganda, diversification of public opinion; psychological and psychotropic pressure; spreading rumors [2]. One of the main threats to Ukraine’s national security in the first quarter of the twenty-first century is active deployment of geopolitical information war on our territory. Its ultimate goal is the civilizational choice of the Ukrainian people: to move toward European integration or return to Orthodox-Russian civilization. Information war became an everyday phenomenon for us, information weapons are used in the information space of Ukraine every day by thousands of Internet blogs and services, TV channels, newspapers and magazines, rumors and fakes, misinformation and street actions. Analysis and systematization of technologies for modern hybrid information wars and forms of use of certain types of information weapons in them are extremely important under such conditions.

2 Main Material Presentation The latest formats of information weapons are able to reformat mass and individual consciousness of citizens, destroy established values of national identity and social solidarity and thus reprogram social space in the interests of the external subject of influence. These and other significant advantages of using tools of information war over traditional forms of gaining advantage over enemy (no loss of manpower and equipment, much less need for material resources and finances, relative ease of implementation, difficulty in counteraction, etc.) led to active transition of ideological and international political economic confrontations in the spatial field of the global information society. I. Iuzova notes that today “the world’s leading countries use armed struggle only after previous information campaign, when the enemy’s

16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars

275

information field is significantly disorganized and risk of defeat is completely eliminated” [3]. In turn, this led to transformation of essence of information weapons use and transition from the first-generation information warfare (where information technology was used as an auxiliary arsenal and one of the components of traditional military operations) to the second-generation information war. The second generation of information war provides the following according to the views of US military experts: – creating of atmosphere without spirituality and immorality, negative attitude towards the cultural heritage of the enemy; – manipulation of public consciousness of social groups of the population in order to create political tension and chaos; – destabilization of political relations between parties, associations and movements in order to provoke conflicts, incite distrust, suspicion, intensify political struggle, provoke repression against the opposition and even civil war; – reduction of information support level of authorities and management, inspiration of erroneous management decisions; – population misinformation about the work of state bodies, undermining their authority, discrediting government bodies; – undermining of the state international prestige, its cooperation with other countries; – damage to vital interests of the state in political, economic, defense and other spheres [4].

The main object of information war of the first generation is enemy’s military infrastructure, command and personnel of the armed forces. Information war of the second generation is characterized by significant expansion of main facilities. In the second case, according to B. Kalinichenko, there is a public opinion. It is an important and, in some cases, fundamental element of state policy. Significantly, this applies not only to democratic societies but also to authoritarian ones. The fact of public opinion transformation indicates the establishment of control over certain information space [5]. This opinion is shared by O. Iudin, O. Matviichuk-Iudina and O. Suprun. They emphasize that the “purpose of information and psychological war is to change psychological characteristics of people (views, opinions, values, attitudes, motives, attitudes, stereotypes behavior), group norms, mass sentiments, public consciousness in general in the desired direction” [6]. Model of information war has a system-organized form and purposeful nature in structural and functional terms (Fig. 16.1). Figure 16.1 shows that in modern hybrid information-military geopolitical confrontations, there is a significant expansion of forms, methods and tools for the use of information weapons in the global information space. Such confrontations take place in two main forms in the greatest generalization: information and technical warfare and information and psychological warfare. The first of these forms, according to V. Tarkin, is a “high-tech form of traditional, kinetic war based on extensive computerization and electronicization. It is also an armed conflict but only information, technical and software-mathematical weapons are used. Informationpsychological warfare is influence on certain audience. It uses various methods with hidden motives to create atmosphere where the public is the best subject of influence. This is designed to control perception through two key concepts—“belief” and “suggestiveness” [7].

276

O. Radchenko et al.

SOCIAL PRECONDITIONS: Exacerbation of existing internal, external, intersectoral or interstate ideological and political, socio-economic, cultural and ideological conflict in the conditions of inability to resolve it by traditional diplomatic means

SUBJECTS OF INFORMATION WAR

SETTING (CORRECTION) OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: Performing of information- communicative manipulative influence on public and individual consciousness by means of translation, empathy and interaction of information weapons in order to achieve a certain level of deformation of the consciousness of the object and the subject to obtain the desired benefits

SUBJECTS of higher level (customers): state, political elites, transnational business elites, terrorist groups, etc.

Feedback monitoring and analysis of obtained data

TOOLS AND MEANS OF INFLUENCE: Written and oral text frames and codes, semiotic symbols and visual messages, audio and video messages, dipfeys, computer viruses, programs

SPREADING of harmful manipulative information and communication content through selected communication channels

SUBJECTS of lower level (executors): political technologists, PR specialists, scientists, analysts, journalists and bloggers, etc.

PROGRAMMING: Development of technological programs, plans, implementation schedules, definition of distribution channeIs, creation of operational groups and "bot farms"

SPHERE OF MANIPULATIVE INFLUENCE: INFORMATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL

INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL

info rm ati on spa ce fee dba ck

CHANNELS OF MASS COMMUNICATION: Visual Printing advertisement

Newspapers, Radio and TV magazines

Internet

Mobile Social communication networks

OBJECTS OF INFORMATION WAR: Personalized State leaders

Military command

Political elite

Business elite

Social leaders

Social groups

Hacker attacks, etc.

Mass

Ethnic Professional groups groups

Territorial communities

DESTRUCTIVE SOCIO-POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES: deformation of deep structures of human consciousness (instincts, emotions, archetypes, worldview) which results in socio-political destabilization, panic, delegitimization of public authorities, loss of faith in the correctness of the chosen course of socio-political development, etc.

Fig. 16.1 Structural and functional model of information war

16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars

277

The key areas of information weapons use are: – Violation, damage or modification of information resources and knowledge of people about themselves and environment around them. – Influencing public opinion and political elite position. – Inflicting damage to the opposite party by diplomatic means. – Propaganda, psychological and subversive actions in the field of culture and politics. – Misinformation and deliberately created negative rumors. – Introduction of their supporters in the media for subversive actions. – Intrusion into computer networks and database management systems, infection of computer systems with viruses, intentional introduction of various errors in the software of the object. – Information support of dissident and opposition movements [8]. In the future, it is necessary to outline the main threats to the information sovereignty of the state and processes of democratic state-building. O. Barna states that such threat to national security is “lack of state ideology, common values of society, clear socio-economic policy, critical property stratification of society. It led to polarization of worldviews on the prospects of the Ukrainian state and increased consumer motivation behavior of citizens” [9]. A. Iafonkin and V. Shevchuk consider the uncontrollability of social networks and virtual communities to be a significant threat. Using social networks, it is possible not only to influence public consciousness, gather people for mass actions and “color revolutions” but also to recruit mercenaries and coordinate their actions, organize terrorist attacks and sabotage, conduct large-scale operations, causing unacceptable damage to the enemy state [10]. U. Ilnytska provides more detailed disclosure of threats to Ukraine’s national security in the information sphere: – – – – – – – – – –

Manifestations of restrictions on freedom of speech and access to information. Distortion, blocking, omission and biased coverage of information. Its unauthorized distribution. Open misinformation. Information expansion by other states and destructive information intrusion into the national information space. Emergence and functioning of uncontrolled information flows in the national information space of the state. Dissemination of violence and cruelty cult in the mass media. Slow entry of Ukraine into the world information space. Unbalanced state information policy and lack of necessary infrastructure in the information sphere. Posting misinformation on the Internet [11].

Listed above and other threats cause the existence of a number of problems of the Ukrainian state in the field of information security. The most important of these problems is “heterogeneity of information and cultural space, resulting in paradox

278

O. Radchenko et al.

when some Ukrainians identify with neighboring cultures, use foreign languages and potentially support the aggressor. This became one of the foundations of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and invasion into Donbas. Therefore, we have tendency: separatism, rejection of Ukrainian statehood, symbols, culture mainly occurs in the territory where foreign language dominates and vice versa; such problems do not arise where Ukrainian language dominates” [12]. Another existing problem for Ukraine is the change of priority source of information important of citizens, especially young and middle-aged. It was mainly newspapers and magazines in the last century. Since the beginning of the second millennium, it was television, now more and more Ukrainians do not trust TV channels (most of which in Ukraine belong to a narrow group of oligarchs), and refocus on social Internet services. According to R. Hryshchuk and K. MolodetskaHrynchuk, “social Internet services became source of threats to information security of the state. These channels spread unreliable, incomplete or biased content in combination with information and psychological impact on individual, collective and mass consciousness. It can result in social tensions, ethnic hatred, protests, dissatisfaction with the current system of government in the country, etc. Experience of Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine showed for the first time that social Internet services are one of the effective tools of new form of confrontation—hybrid war” [13]. U. Ilnytska singles out three key problems of our state in the sphere of formation and development of the system of ensuring information security and protection of information sovereignty of Ukraine: 1. Ukrainian information space is unprotected from external negative propaganda and manipulative influences. It becomes the object of information expansion. 2. There is no Ukrainian national information product in the world media space that would disseminate objective, unbiased and up-to-date information about events in Ukraine. So, the world community lacks information or receives it from other sources. They sometimes misinform, provide distorted, incomplete information. At the same time, powerful media resource is actively used against Ukraine, foreign entities are expanding in the information services market, negative information influences are intensifying. All they are aimed at distorting reality, underestimating the international image of the state. 3. Activity of domestic media on systematic, objective coverage of facts, events and phenomena is insufficient and lacks strategic planning; information and communication policy of Ukraine in the field of national security needs urgent revision and improvement [11]. A number of information security problems of Ukraine make our country vulnerable in the information war. They are singled out by scientists of the Department of Information and Cyber Security of the State University of Telecommunications. In particular, these are:

16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars

279

First, out-of-control global information networks continue to grow rapidly. New electronic resources appear every day, including mass media, sites of various radical groups, etc. Secondly, means and methods of delivering information and propaganda materials to the audience in the course of information and psychological operations are being improved. For these purposes, new media tools such as satellite television and radio, digital television, e-mail, virtual reality media and others are increasingly used. Third, the number of means of special software influence on information systems is growing. It, with the development of global networks, became widely available and leads to an increase in hacker attacks on information resources of the state. Fourth, there are more and more satellite communication systems, technical characteristics of which are improving. Fifth, research programs are developed to create technical means of manipulating consciousness. Sixth, the training of graduates of higher education institutions in specialties related to information technology is not effective enough. In addition, there is a mass moving abroad. So, Ukraine can be left without qualified specialists in the field of development and implementation of new information technologies in the information security system of the state. Seventh, the low level of communication development. There is almost no culture of using licensed software. A large number of PCs have pirated operating systems (Windows XP, Windows 7). Their technical support has long ceased and they are no longer updated [14]. All these and other problems of Ukraine are quite actively used in the information war against our state by the Russian Federation. Information operations are determined by the well-known Western security sector expert Brad Perry as the most effective. It includes the obvious hybrid war of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea and the aggression in the Donbass. B. Perry states that “control over the situation escalation was achieved through active longterm pro-Russian propaganda among the population of the South-Eastern regions of Ukraine” [15]. This thesis in the article “How Russia armed social media in Crimea” is supported by another American analyst Michael Holloway. He states that the Russian government spent $ 19 million to fund the activities of 600 specially engaged contributors in Facebook, Vkontakte, Odnoklassniki. The activities of these authors were to publish articles and comments on them in order to form an impression of local support for annexation, discrediting the local opposition, spreading rumors, feelings of fear and hatred in Ukrainian and international public opinion. The speed of content distribution was five thousand reposts per day. In addition, Russian information operations troops created an information vacuum by blocking government websites and carrying out cyber attacks on media sites in Crimea. The result of such actions was to obtain significant benefits in the information space to facilitate action on the annexation of the peninsula. Thus, the annexation of Crimea served as a

280

O. Radchenko et al.

research platform for information operations against information security of the state and demonstrated that social Internet services are an effective tool for managing society [16]. It is worth mentioning the controversial opinion of their opponent given the views of the last two American experts. British specialist on Russian issues M. Galeotti believes that Russia’s capabilities in waging information warfare are greatly exaggerated because: – Negative perception of Russia in Europe between 2013 and 2014 increased from 54% to 74% of respondents. – Distrust of their politicians is natural, not formed by translators of Russian messages. – Some of Russia’s successes in the information struggle are due to the EU’s internal problems, not to the uniqueness or power of its media. The researcher emphasizes that some of Moscow’s measures in this context are downright awkward. – Lack of an organic combination of cyberattacks and the formation of public opinion. Russia discredits itself by the audacity of the former. – Both Russia and the West forget that the infosphere is not a battlefield where you can conduct completely controlled campaigns. It is rather cacophonous forum where numerous voices compete for the right to be heard [17]. It is worth to single out certain forms of information weapons as tools of information wars in the development of the chosen issues. According to researchers, propaganda is one of the most common among such known forms since the early twentieth century. A. Grebeniuk notes “propaganda is a method of both special information operations and the act of aggression, its information component in particular in the modern information war” [4]. At the same time, V. Poltorak and A. Stadnyk state along with the actual propaganda that there are other forms of propaganda influence such as hidden advertising, publicity and propaganda 2.0. According to researchers, hidden advertising can be considered both propaganda and PR. In any case, it is ordered, paid (and this is how many famous journalists earn money) on the one hand. On the other hand, it is more credible than regular propaganda or advertising message due to its anonymity. Propaganda message is not created or transmitted to order in the case of publicity. It is “produced” independently, using such news that has the right to exist itself [18]. Propaganda 2.0 (G. Pocheptsov’s term) is a propaganda hidden inside literature and art, movies and TV series. Propaganda 2.0 is characterized by the fact that its propaganda orientation is not disclosed. It is based according to the model of a work of art or documentary film not on news [18]. In turn, B. Kalynychenko singles out the following tools of information weapons: – Biased presentation of facts and biased coverage of certain information related to certain events with the help of purposefully selected (taken out of context) true data; at the same time, specially formed information is given in doses, taking into account the increasing voltage.

16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars

281

– Terminological “mining” which essence is to distort original, correct essence of fundamentally important, basic terms and interpretations of worldview and operational-applied nature (for example, Russia’s distortion in connection with the annexation of Crimea and occupation of Donbass, principles of international rights related to the use of the veto, compensation for damage, identification of prisoners of war, the use of UN peacekeeping forces, etc.). – Misinformation “on the contrary” which occurs by providing true information to distorted form or in situation where it is perceived by the object as untrue. Then, situation is arised where object actually knows true information about intentions or specific actions of the other party, but perceives it inadequately, not ready to resist negative impact. – “Gray” misinformation involves the use of synthesis of true information with misinformation and “black” misinformation involves the use of mostly false information [19]. O. Nevelska-Gordeeva and V. Nechytailo also note the existence of a separate form of “psychological infection.” Its essence is to transmit emotional state and attitude (e.g., panic, fear), infecting the audience through verbal and nonverbal messages [20]. O. Levchenko demonstrates a slightly different perspective of focusing scientific attention. It defines the main types of information and psychological weapons that affect the psyche, consciousness, subconscious, moral and psychological state of man, social groups and society: – Propaganda is designed to carry out information and psychological influence aimed at consolidating the desired ideas, habits, beliefs of man (social group) or destruction of undesirable ideas, habits and beliefs. – Psychophysical is designed to carry out information and (or) energy impact on mental functions and the work of physiological organs and systems of man. – Neurolinguistic is designed to control human consciousness and behavior through linguistic constructions, a set of certain symbols, colors, sounds, archetypes, visual images. – Psychotronic designed to influence special technical means on the consciousness and subconscious of man in order to reduce its will, oppression, temporary disabling, zombies. – Psychotropic designed to affect the human brain, excite or reduce the processes of thinking and perception of information through the use of the mechanism of changing the biochemical characteristics of processes occurring in the human nervous system. – Psychogenic is designed to make changes in the neuropsychological activity of the human brain. – Psychoanalytic is designed to influence the human subconscious by therapeutic means in the state of hypnosis and deep sleep with the suggestion of the necessary settings [21].

282

O. Radchenko et al.

Recently, there appeared many new and innovative forms and tools for use of information weapons during the information war. They include “media viruses,” political “trolling,” “fakes” and “deepfakes” which flooded the Internet space of social media. I. Parfeniuk states that “media viruses” are events or phenomena that extremely quickly and widely spread in the information space memes and memocomplexes using media communication channels. These are units of cultural information which are replicators of socio-cultural processes capable of self-copying and competing with each other in the struggle for the resource of existence. Media viruses directly or indirectly lead to both global and local worldview and behavioral transformations in the social dimension [22]. O. Samorukova states that concept of “trolling” is characterized as a process of placing provocative links in virtual environment in order to increase social tension by violating rules of ethical norms of Internet communication. Trolling is usually used to divert public attention from hot topics and turn constructive discussion into quarrels and one of attack methods by aggressively throwing slander, rumors [23]. “Fake” is false, falsified information (deliberate misinformation) posted on social media and traditional media as a real and credible event to mislead readers. Particularly harmful is the latest form of this phenomenon—“deepfake.” Deepfeke is an artificial intelligence-driven mechanism for replacing a person’s face on video with another person’s face through machine learning. This technology allows anyone to create videos about real people, where they will say what they have never said. Experts and lawmakers are already predicting that this high-tech way of “putting words in someone’s mouth” will be the most modern weapon in information warf [24]. We emphasize that the main field of use of these forms of information weapons is the global media space and channels of its distribution are various messengers and social media. Thus, O. Berezovskaya-Chmil states that modern “social media” become an important tool for intensifying social communication and organizing social protests. It is used by domestic and foreign actors to achieve their own goals due to emotional influence and destructive moods. It is very difficult to distinguish so-called “fake” information from real facts because fake constructions are based on partially true information [25]. In today’s world, information is widely and aggressively used not as a product or communication tool but as a special weapon designed to inflict maximum damage to particular object of application by carrying out harmful informational influences in the information struggle. Information weapons include both: information technology tools, designed to interfere in information networks of other countries and steal, distort or neutralize information, infect and destroy these networks, and information and psychological tools designed to have devastating effect on human consciousness, its worldview, change of her views and beliefs, undermining trust in state institutions and socio-political system of their own state [26].

16

Information Weapons: Forms and Technologies of Modern Information Wars

283

3 Conclusion So, the conducted research suggests that the importance of scientific research of socio-psychological foundations of human nature as a fundamental foundation of information-manipulative technologies of information warfare is increased. It gains fundamentally new features through the use of social networks and search engine analysis of queries on the Internet and creation of personalized databases. It also creates conditions for point of individual-targeted impact on a person to adjust their personal values, change identity and transform their own ideals in the desired direction for the subject of information weapons. It is no coincidence that the issue of information wars and the use of traditional and modern forms of information weapons is extremely relevant in Ukraine especially after 2014. Russia due to the successful use of information special operations managed to annex Crimea and launch military confrontation in eastern Ukraine. It provided positive perception by part of local population of these regions of aggressive actions of the Russian Federation. We can conclude the need for urgent deployment in Ukraine of systemic activities of public authorities, primarily institutions of the President of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, the Armed Forces, SSU and MIA to form modern effective system of protection of national information sovereignty recognizing, preventing and counteracting manifestations of information war, conducting counterpropaganda information operations.

References 1. Kriukov, O. I., & Radchenko, O. V. Ideology as a factor of national security in the context of public administration dimension Bulletin of the National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine. http://repositsc.nuczu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/7743/1/ilovepdf_com-30-39.pdf 2. Feshchenko, I. V. (2021). Information warfare as an organic component of modern armed and political conflict. Philosophy and Political Science in the Context of Modern Culture., 13(1), 96–103. 3. Iuzova, I. Y. (2020). Analysis of the organization and conduct of information and psychological operations in the conduct of hybrid warfare. Collection of Scientific Works of Kharkiv National University of the Air Force., 2, 40–44. 4. Hryniaev, S. Views of US military experts on information warfare. PSI-FACTOR is an information resource center for scientific and practical psychology. https://psyfactor.org/ infowar1.htm 5. Kalinichenko, B. M. (2020). Formation of public opinion as a factor in ensuring success in the information war. Scientific journal of the National Pedagogical University named after MP Drahomanov. Series 22: Political Science and Methods of Teaching Socio-Political Disciplines, 27, 69–74. 6. Iudin, O. K., Matviichuk-Iudina, O. V., & Suprun, O. M. (2021). Information and psychological warfare and social engineering technologies. Science-Intensive Technologies., 2, 130–139. 7. Tarkin, V. P. (2020). Information wars: A theoretical aspect. State and law. Legal and Political Sciences., 87, 285–294.

284

O. Radchenko et al.

8. Chalapko, V. V. (2020). Threats to information security of Ukrainian society in a “hybrid war”. In Bulletin of the National University “Yaroslav the wise law academy of Ukraine”. Series: Philosophy (Vol. 1, pp. 168–179). 9. Barna, O. S. (2019). Information space of Ukraine as a factor of social consolidation in a hybrid war. State and law. Legal and Political Sciences., 86, 365–376. 10. Iafonkin, A., & Shevchuk, V. (2017). Information war against the state and information security of Ukraine. Law Forum., 5, 466–472. 11. Ilnytska, U. (2016). Information security of Ukraine: Current challenges, threats and mechanisms for counteracting negative information and psychological influences. Humanitarian Vision., 2(1), 27–32. 12. Parfeniuk, I. (2019). Ukrainization of the cultural space of Ukraine in the system of information security of the state. Ukrainian Information Space., 2, 63–72. 13. Hryshchuk, R., & Molodetska-Hrynchuk, K. (2017). Statement of the problem of information security of the state in social internet services. Modern Information Protection., 3, 86–96. 14. Brzhevska, Z., Dovzhenko, N., Kyrychok, R., Haidur, H., & Anosov, A. (2019). Information wars: Problems, threats and counteraction. Cybersecurity: Education, Science, Technology., 3, 88–96. 15. Bret, P. Non-Linear Warfare in Ukraine: The critical role of information operations and special operations. http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/non-linear-warfare-in-ukraine-the-critical-roleof-information-operations-andspecial-opera 16. Holloway, M. How Russia weaponized social media in Crimea. Real clear media group newsletters. https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/05/10/how_russia_weaponized_ social_media_in_crimea_111352.html 17. Galeotti, M. The West is too paranoid about Russia’s information war. https://www. theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/07/russia-propaganda-europe-america 18. Poltorak, V. A., & Stadnyk, A. H. (2020). Propaganda and its place in the process of information warfare. The main forms of propaganda influence: Direct propaganda, jeans, publicity, propaganda 2.0. Epistemological Studies in Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences., 3(1), 126–138. 19. Kalynychenko, B. (2019). Determining directions of formation of strategy of counteraction to information war. State and Law. Series: Political Science., 83, 61–73. 20. Nevelska-Gordieieva, O. P., & Nechytailo, V. O. (2021). Manipulation as a means of information and psychological influence in information warfare. In Bulletin of the Yaroslav the Wise National University of Law. Series: Philosophy, philosophy of law, political science, sociology (Vol. 3, pp. 71–83). 21. Levchenko, O. (2014). Classification of information weapons by means of information warfare. Modern Information Technologies in the Field of Security and Defense., 2(20), 142–146. 22. Parfeniuk, I. (2019). Tools of information warfare: Traditional and modern tools. Bulletin of the Book Chamber., 1, 7–10. 23. Samorukova, O. (2020). Destructive behavior in social networks as a tool of information warfare. Scientific works of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.I. Vernadsky, 58, 82–92. 24. Deepfeak technology will be the most modern information weapon–Associated Press. Internet representation of Radio Liberty. https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/29345082.html 25. Berezovska-Chmil, O. B. (2021). Theoretical foundations of national security research. Creative Space., 2, 147–148. 26. Hubanova, T., Shchokin, R., Hubanov, O., Antonov, V., Slobodianiuk, P., & Podolyaka, S. (2021). Information technologies in improving crime prevention mechanisms in the border regions of southern Ukraine. Journal of Information Technology Management., 13, 75–90. https://doi.org/10.22059/JITM.2021.80738

Chapter 17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements of Information War in Ukraine Yaroslav Chmyr , Maryna Deineha , Eduard Shchepanskiy Artem Koshelenko , and Roman Kozenko

,

Abstract Our state needs to create a national information security system in the context of the Russian Federation’s aggressive information and armed war against Ukraine. Such a system should be able to resist propaganda, information and subversive activities of Russian intelligence services and protect national information sovereignty. Ukraine should use more effective technologies to oppose modern methods of information-technical and information-psychological influence, expansion of the “Russian world,” its aggressive pressure on the national identity of Ukrainians. Ukraine should form new media culture of Ukrainian society able to recognize fakes, hostile narratives and manipulations and resist them, find alternative sources of information, critically evaluate content of information messages, understand national values and be able to defend them in information and communication processes. Our state and society should pursue a consolidated state information policy to protect and strengthen the national sovereignty of Ukraine and ensure information security. It should be facilitated by the proposals in this intelligence on the further development of the main directions of such policy. Keywords Information war · Counteracting · Information aggression · Tools · Society

Y. Chmyr Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine M. Deineha (✉) National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine e-mail: [email protected] E. Shchepanskiy Leonid Yuzkov Khmelnytskyi University of Management and Law, Khmelnytskyi, Ukraine A. Koshelenko Academician Yuri Bugay International University of Science and Technology, Kyiv, Ukraine R. Kozenko State Institution of Higher Education University of Educational Management of National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_17

285

286

Y. Chmyr et al.

1 The Problem Statement Globalization is closely related to the “fourth information revolution” [1]. It radically changed not only information but also social and political space. The third millennium is characterized by the loss of rigid comprehensive attachment of man to its state. Today, person becomes a “citizen of the world” because all communication borders are opened, territorial boundaries are erased and its own space of public and private life reaches unprecedented scale. At the same time, not all citizens are able to comprehend new scale of threats posed to usual system of values by the global information space [2]. It is filled with a huge number of manipulative technologies that are difficult to identify and difficult to prove due to the inability to unambiguously interpret and the preferences of the relevant social community. Thus, the main danger of modern information weapons is that they have “soft” nature of influence, invisible to the average citizen and at the same time can latently deform such deep structures of human consciousness as instincts, emotions, archetypes, symbolic codes, worldview, behavior, etc. Purposefully organized and controlled aggressive campaign is the main feature of information warfare. It is characterized by substitution of meanings, content and values of phenomena and events in their country, their primitivization, discrediting and irrationalization in the mass and individual consciousness. All this distorts public consciousness and imposes on society another, uncharacteristic picture of the world. Further, accelerated development of forms, means and technologies of information wars underscore the need for each state to create a system of information security and protection of national information sovereignty, mechanisms and methods of protecting the information space of the state from unauthorized harmful interference and development of countermeasures. This is especially important for Ukraine where according to O. Levchenko, “real information threats have not appeared today. Prerequisites for their emergence were: lack of unified state policy in Ukraine in the field of information security, necessary regulatory framework, relevant authorities, The main reason for disappointing results is the fact that Ukraine does not have information security system that would ensure not only detection and analysis of information threats to national security. It should ensure adequate response to the threats” [3]. Problem of protection of national sovereignty is acute in these circumstances. O. Solodka defines “ability of the state to control and regulate information flows outside the state in order to comply with Ukrainian laws, rights and freedoms, guarantee national security. Concept of information sovereignty implies state control over information flows and dissemination of information on its territory, right to independently formulate information policy, regardless of outside influence” [4]. In the twenty-first century, V. Tarasova emphasizes change in nature of conflicts. It is more important to win the war of words and narratives than to possess the most powerful weapons. Boundaries between politics and war have never been so blurred and politics so unstable [5]. So, “information and psychological war is applied to enemies, allies, and even to their own population” [6]. Thus, it is important for our

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

287

state to develop effective tools for combating information aggression and the use of elements of information war in Ukraine. Attempt to analyze it is proposed in this work.

2 Main Material Presentation Current trends in the extremely dynamic development of social networks and other means of information and communication interact with transition from understanding information and communication technologies as purely technical means of information transfer to their understanding as an effective tool for shaping global and national “agendas” [7]. The last one is able to distort and deform social reality, turning it into a virtual simulacrum. Dynamic growth of these processes is influenced by a number of objective factors. They include the following: – Actual destruction of the Ialta-Potsdam system of international relations, accompanied by the efforts of the world’s leading states to take more favorable position in new system which is in the process of formation. – Crisis nature of geopolitical and economic struggle escalation between such key world powers as the United States, China and Russia. – Intensification of globalization processes with active use of information and communication practices. – Growing crisis of national and ethnic self-identification caused by globalization processes of expansion of “universal” values, rules of conduct, procedures. – Dissemination of coverage geography of the globe by a reliable broadband signal of the Internet. – Spreading scale and total amount of manipulative influence on the person in its information environment. – Accelerated transformation and development of media policy infrastructure of the global information space, accompanied by improvement of channels, technologies and means of influencing mass and individual consciousness. – Development of software and technological tools and infrastructure equipment of information space. This leads to emergence of new forms of information weapons and mechanisms of manipulative influence on society; – Inability of the vast majority of ordinary citizens to recognize manipulative influence on psyche (due to its predominantly latent nature) and ignorance of the mechanisms and forms of resistance to such influence. – Actual impossibility of censoring Internet or establishing effective moral and ethical or regulatory prohibitions on harmful and dangerous content in private posts on social networks. – Easy access to possibility of promoting ideas and actions of various terrorist, extremist sectarian organizations and movements on the Internet. – Growing demand for the latest scientific and applied research in the field of information warfare and development of innovative types of information

288

Y. Chmyr et al.

weapons to stimulate influx of creative and talented representatives of psychological, political and sociological sciences. – Minimization of time between the development of new technologies to influence mass consciousness and their practical use in the course of information wars of today. These and other factors in the development of the global information space contribute to the spread of information warfare as a kind of “confrontation in the information field that can affect people and systems, have a protective or offensive logic” [8]. This requires modern states to create information security systems as “not only an integral part of each area of national security (military, domestic, economic, social, humanitarian, scientific and technological, environmental) but as an important independent area of national security. Information security system of the state should protect people and society from destructive information and psychological influence in hybrid (information) wars” [9]. These measures of public authorities of Ukraine to combat information aggression and use elements of information warfare at the present stage of formation of the global information society should be specified in the state policy of information sovereignty and aimed at solving major problems of Ukraine in information security and countering urgent information threats. According to experts, there are many such problems and threats: – Lack of single clear coordinated state policy in the field of information security, actual lack of information security in Ukraine which would ensure adequate response to these threats not only detection and analysis of information threats to national security (V. Khimei [10], A. Holovka [11], I. Bodnar [12], O. Kriukov [13], O. Levchenko [3]). – Incompleteness and imperfection of regulatory framework in the field of information relations and information security; lack of domestic legislation of the law on providing information security, as the draft law “On the principles of information security of Ukraine” was withdrawn from consideration (the project was withdrawn on 27.11.2014) and it is still under development [A. Holovko [11], I. Bodnar [12]). – Purposeful formation of negative international image of Ukraine by some foreign states and intensification of criticism of the top state leadership of Ukraine. – Implementation of a number of foreign countries of strong information pressure on Ukraine in order to encourage the Ukrainian leadership to take favorable decisions for these countries in domestic and foreign policy. – Strengthening information measures to prevent Ukraine from pursuing its foreign policy course and encouraging it to participate in projects that are not beneficial to our state in modern conditions; discrediting our state as a competitor in the field of international military-technical cooperation. – Growing threat to Ukraine of cyber attacks due to the emergence of new, more advanced models of cyber weapons (M. Nikiforov, I. Pampukha and V. Loza [14]).

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

289

– Introduction by foreign states of restrictions in relation to Ukraine on dissemination of information and acquisition of new information technologies, which causes insufficient development of the information infrastructure of the state (I. Bodnar [12]). – Inability of our state at the current stage of development to provide maximum protection from external and internal destabilizing factors, creating external and internal conditions for effective self-sufficiency of the state and its entry into a competitive economic level along with leading countries [15]. – Purchase by the government of means of information from abroad, telecommunications and communications in the presence of Ukrainian counterparts that are not inferior to the parameters of foreign production, resulting in the displacement from the domestic market space of Ukrainian production of the above means. – Monopolization of the domestic information market system, its specific areas that support domestic and foreign information structures; the presence of low efficiency of information support aimed at public policy due to the shortage of specialists; there is no system for creating and implementing public policy in the field of information; departure of highly qualified specialists outside the state (A. Turchak [16]). – Illegal activities of officials, various formations and groups in the field of information interests of citizens and the state, in particular, illegal collection and use of information; development and dissemination of programs that disrupt the normal functioning of information and telecommunications systems, including information security systems. – Information leaks through technical channels; introduction of electronic devices for interception of information in technical means of processing, storage and transmission of information, as well as in the offices of public authorities, enterprises, institutions and organizations, regardless of ownership; interception of information in data transmission networks and communication lines, decryption of this information and imposition of erroneous information; unauthorized access to information contained in banks and databases (O. Morozov [17]). – Insufficient professional level of information workers, lack of domestic training system (especially for electronic media and new information, in particular, global systems) and technical backwardness of information infrastructure and its complete dependence on foreign equipment, the decline of domestic telecommunications industry (V. Khimei [10]). – Manifestations of restriction of freedom of speech and access of citizens to information; distortion, blocking, default biased coverage of information; unauthorized distribution; open misinformation; dissemination of the cult of violence and cruelty in the mass media. – Information expansion by other states and destructive information invasion of the national information space, when countries with stronger information potential were able to expand their influence through the media on the population and the public of a less powerful state; emergence and functioning in the national information space of the state of uncontrolled and information flows (U. Ilnytska [18]).

290

Y. Chmyr et al.

At the same time, A. Turchak notes that “the most striking thing is that one of the main threats to information security lies in the work of public authorities: failure or improper implementation of public authorities within the information sphere. According to the Constitution information security is one of the priorities of the country and the cause of all Ukrainians” [16]. Z. Brzhevska, N. Dovzhenko, R. Kyrychok, G. Haidur and A. Anosov have a rather complete list of problems that make the Ukrainian state vulnerable in the information war. First, out-of-control global information networks continue to grow rapidly. Literally every day new electronic resources appear, including mass media, sites of various radical groups, etc. Secondly, means and methods of delivering information and propaganda materials to the audience in the course of information and psychological operations are improved. New media tools such as satellite television and radio, digital television, e-mail, virtual reality media and others are increasingly used for these purposes. Third, a number of tools for special software and mathematical influence on the resources of information systems is growing. These tools themselves with the development of global networks became widely available. It leads to an increase in hacking attacks on information resources of the state. Fourth, there are more and more satellite communication systems. Their technical characteristics are improved. Fifth, research programs are developed to create technical means of manipulating consciousness. Sixth, training of graduates of higher education institutions in specialties related to information technology is not effective enough. In addition, there is a mass exodus abroad. As a result, Ukraine can be left without qualified specialists involved in the development and implementation of new information technologies in the information security system of the state. Seventh is the low level of communication development. There is almost no culture of using licensed software [19]. Professor O. Kriukov is a well-known specialist in the field of state information policy and information security. He names a number of humanitarian and communication-technological problems of information security. They include: 1. Dissemination of ideas that provoke conflicts on national, religious and social grounds and mass riots, as well as incitement of separatist ideas among the Ukrainian population. 2. Calls for encroachment by certain groups and individuals on state sovereignty, territorial integrity, economic, scientific, technical and defense potential of our state. 3. Conducting special information operations and acts of external information aggression to the detriment of the interests of Ukraine. 4. Computer crime. 5. Information terrorism.

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

291

6. Disclosure of information that constitutes state and other secrets provided by the law and confidential information that is the state property or aimed at meeting the needs and national interests of society and the state. 7. Discrediting policy of our state and the individual statesmen authority. 8. Manifestations of freedom restriction of speech and access of citizens to information and other rights and freedoms. 9. Spreading cult of violence, cruelty, pornography and other manifestations of immorality in the media. 10. Attempts to manipulate public opinion by disseminating inaccurate, incomplete or biased information. 11. Significant amount of foreign presence in the information space of Ukraine. 12. Dangerous for economic independence of Ukraine growth of foreign capital share in strategic sectors of the economy related to the information sphere. 13. Scientific and technological backwardness of Ukraine from developed countries. 14. Low competitiveness of information service products. 15. Underdeveloped domestic market of high-tech products and lack of its effective protection against foreign technical and technological expansion [13]. A. Golovka considers in detail the main obstacles to effective cooperation between the state and civil society in the information security sector. There are three main problems: 1. Skepticism among the general public about possibility of tangible influence on policy-making in the information security sector. This problem is closely connected with the process of formation of the absentee type of political behavior and general political pessimism in the conditions of Ukrainian realities. This is based on disbelief in prospects of significant changes in the political system of Ukraine. Necessary step is to conduct an appropriate information campaign to solve this problem. This will be aimed at activating the population to participate in the protection of national interests in various fields, including information. 2. Imperfection of institutional framework of cooperation mechanism between civil society and state. The main point is that existing institutions act as intermediaries between government agencies and public organizations (these are public councils under state bodies). They often have purely formal nature. In other words, they do not have real influence on political decision-making and act as an advisory body with minimized advisory capacity. 3. Lack of sufficient experience of interaction between civil society and state in the context of information warfare. There is a lack of experience in effectively combating external threats despite significant successes in this area (for example, activities of “Information Resistance,” implementation of projects “Information Shield,” “Information Troops” and others) [20]. According to I. Korzh, “It is important for the state authorities and society to be able to recognize negative features of information used as an information weapon.

292

Y. Chmyr et al.

Therefore, it is first necessary to perform following to identify inaccuracies or misinformation: – be able to clearly separate real facts and opinions (judgments) about events with disseminated relevant information; – analyze and understand whether the subject may have direct access to the information it disseminates (disseminates); – know and take into account real attitude of dissemination information subject to events (object); – know and take into account personal characteristics of dissemination information subject: interest; tendency to exaggerate or distort facts; dependence on circumstances related to events (facts); – take into account that desired for the subjects information is the most easily perceived” [21]. Such activities cannot be defragmented and chaotic. They require balanced state policy to protect information sovereignty and systematic vision and structuring of public institutions. V. Himei states “There is an urgent need to develop and implement set of measures to reform national information activities. This system should be aimed at solving three main tasks: 1. Identification and assessment of threats sources to the information space. 2. Development, coordination and unified state policy (in the field of information security). 3. Development and unified state policy in the field of international information relations in the direction of the state image forming. The state policy on the formation of the national information space should include the following components: – ensuring protection of the information sovereignty of Ukraine. In particular, it is protection of the national information resource in the current conditions of internationalization and globalization of processes taking place in the information sphere; – ensuring level of information adequacy for decision-making by government agencies; – ensuring implementation of the constitutional rights of citizens, society and the state to information” [10]. A similar position is held by V. Domarev and R. Klimchuk. They believe that “main activities to ensure information security of the state are a huge set of measures. They include: development of scientific and practical foundations of information security; development of legislative and regulatory framework for information security, concept development of information security, special legal and organizational measures to ensure preservation and development of information resources, formation of the legal status of information security, development of laws and regulations governing elimination of threats to information security, improving

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

293

forms and methods prevention and neutralization of threats to information security; development of modern methods of information security” [22]. We present number of provisions and proposals for further development of the main directions of such policy as a generalization of possible ways to improve the state policy of protection and strengthening of national sovereignty of Ukraine and information security of our state. It is proposed by such domestic researchers as I. Bodnar, U. Ilnytska, B. Kalynychenko, O. Kyrychenko, A. Turchak and others. They defined the following measures and actions of public authorities of our state [2, 7, 16, 18, 23–29]: – Establishing of reasonable balances of “checks and balances” between the need for free exchange of information and permissible restrictions on its dissemination. – Activities coordination of public authorities and associations, powers delimitation of public authorities and local governments in the relevant field. – Preservation of single information and spiritual space of Ukraine and traditional foundations of public morality. – Development of legal awareness and psychological culture of citizens in the field of psychological and information security. – Teaching of population by methods of self-protection from negative information influences, basics of safe behavior in the modern information environment. – Development and support of domestic production of protection means against negative information and psychological influences. – Organization of international cooperation in ensuring information security. – Creation of domestic system of licensing, certification, examination and control in the field of information security. – Development and adoption of standards in the field of information security. – Examination in order to identify negative information and psychological influences and mandatory licensing of activities and information security and certification of appropriate tools and methods. – Regulatory and legal regulation and bringing domestic legislation in the field of information to international norms and standards. – Ensuring state regulation in the field of creation and use of information resources and information technologies. – Protection of owners’ and users’ rights of information products and intellectual property in the information sphere. – Improving system of information protection which is a state secret. – Ensuring information security in telecommunication networks. – Ensuring information security in satellite, phone and other types of communication. – Ensuring security of interaction of domestic information systems with foreign counterparts and expanding cooperation in the field of information technology. – Ensuring information security in the field of information and computer technologies. – Ensuring information security of information resources during using the Internet.

294

Y. Chmyr et al.

– Creating conditions necessary for the formation of common information space at the international level. – Ensuring protection of information resources of the state and its citizens from cybercrime and organization of measures and mechanisms to combat cybercrime at the state level. – Ensuring protection of information resources and information security of the state in conditions of hybrid war and military aggression. – Integration of Ukraine into the global and regional European information space. – Integration into international information and telecommunication systems and organizations. – Creation of own national model of information space and ensuring development of information society. – Modernization of entire information security system of the state and the formation and implementation of effective information policy. – Improvement of legislation on information security, harmonization of national legislation with international standards and effective legal regulation of information processes. – Development of national information infrastructure. – Increasing competitiveness of domestic information products and information services. – Introduction of modern information and communication technologies in public administration processes. – Effective interaction of public authorities and civil society institutions during the formation, implementation and adjustment of public policy in the informational rational sphere. – Implementation of preventive strategy and tactics (preventive measures). – Implementation of response strategy (prompt response to information attacks of the enemy and active offensive). – Control over information flows, providing objective, comprehensive information, providing professional comments and explanations about events, systematic coverage of the official position of officials and political leaders. – Register development of information resources of the state. – Regulation of information exchange between public authorities, enterprises and institutions. – Normative consolidation of officials and ordinary Ukrainians responsibility for compliance with information security criteria. – Development of modern methods and technical means that would provide comprehensive approach to solving problems of information security. – Development of criteria and methods for evaluating information security systems and tools in terms of efficiency and their certification. – Measures to strengthen moral and psychological stability and social security of professionals dealing with classified and confidential information. – Avoid use of phrase “information war” at any opportunity and refrain from paranoid perception of the situation of information confrontation. Danger of the first is that information war is beginning to be taken lightly, frequent mentions of

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

295

it openly burden the audience. In turn, paranoid perception reduces the ability to adequately counteract the negative informational impact of the enemy, because in this state it is difficult to assess the real threats and skillfully use available resources. In our opinion, the following should be added to these measures: – Formation of Ukraine’s strategic policy to improve its international image in the global information space of the world. – Formation of strategic information and communication policy of Ukraine on prevention, counteraction and neutralization of harmful information and psychological influence on public consciousness at the national, regional and local levels. – Protection of information and communication command infrastructure of computer and information networks and databases of state and military administration. – Creation of special units and services of the protection system against unauthorized access to information resources. – Fight against fakes, spread of tendentious distortion of facts, biased coverage of existing problems. – Opposition to information expansion of the Russian Federation and destructive information impact of information weapons of Russian Federation on the national information sovereignty of Ukraine. – Carrying out of information education actions with society on formation of democratic information and communicative culture, ability to understand reliability of the information. According to scientists from the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, one of the most important characteristics of an individual’s life in modern society is the ability to select information. Therefore, it is necessary to develop so-called information immunity in society as an individual ignores not necessary information and creates internal psychological barriers to messages with a manipulative component. This method of regulatory influence is more effective than simple state intervention in information processes to limit or prohibit certain of its flows. It creates opportunity for individual to choose the most important information and conscious restriction of information flow. This transforms individual from the object of manipulative influence on the subject. This independently forms its own information space [30]. Recently, Ukraine has done a lot in these proposals implementation through the adoption of strategic documents. Thus, the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of October 9, 2020 № 1233-r approved the Concept of the State Targeted Social Program of National-Patriotic Education until 2025. It provides concentration of efforts on the following priorities: 1. Formation of Ukrainian civic identity – It is implementation of measures aimed at the introduction and establishment of social and state (national) values, development of civic identity of the population of Ukraine.

296

Y. Chmyr et al.

2. Military-patriotic education – It is implementation of measures aimed at forming citizens’ readiness to defend Ukraine, public assistance to security and defense of Ukraine and increase prestige of military and special civil service. 3. Formation of scientific-methodological and methodological foundations of national-patriotic education – It is implementation of measures aimed at developing holistic national policy of national-patriotic education. 4. Support and cooperation of state authorities and local self-government bodies with civil society institutions on national-patriotic education [31]. Taking into account the best practices of Europe and the United States, we consider it necessary to implement in Ukraine the following measures to ensure information security of our country: (a) Based on the implementation of provisions of the European Union Cyber Security Strategy: Open and Secure Cyberspace, establishment of the national strategy and standards of information security, implemented at the state level together with the most important cybersecurity organizations, institutions, private sector and citizens society. (b) Development of international cooperation on information security and expansion of cooperation with the EU and NATO in the field of information security, primarily with regard to Ukraine’s accession to the European information security warning system and information on new threats. (c) Formation of competent national bodies in the field of network and information security with sufficient financial and human resources for appropriate actions and response in case of incidents and threats in the field of network and information security. (d) Creation of unified system of strategic communication of the state and building capacity of active counteraction to misinformation and fakes by introducing dialogue between the government and civil society, coordination of procedures for cooperation with news and social media with the involvement of citizens and non-governmental organizations. (e) Promoting of information and telecommunication systems development in Ukraine, effective cooperation and state support in the field of cybersecurity to private operators of important elements of infrastructure controlled by ICT systems and operators and providers of ICT services. (f) Enhancing cooperation in the field of protection against hacking attacks on the private sector. It is important in the context of infrastructure elements owned by private contractors of strategic importance for the country’s security. (g) Introduction of modern technologies of on-line monitoring of the global information space, measures to prevent, promptly detect and counteract dangerous threats, hacker attacks and other harmful interferences in the technical and software-technological equipment of the information sphere. (h) Introduction of tripartite public dialogue in the field of information security in the format of “state-media-society.” It will contribute to the common concern for cybersecurity of the state.

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

297

(i) Formation of information education system of citizens, promotion of public awareness of dangers associated with information manipulation through training in the field of information security. In our opinion, implementation of these proposals and recommendations will contribute to formation and development of effective mechanisms for information security of the state in the system of public governance of Ukraine in the formation of a global information society.

3 Conclusion Civilizational development of mankind entered phase of the information society. It sharply strengthened the importance and role of information and communication technologies in all spheres of human life [32]. Information escaped the control of state structures to some extent. It became much more intellectually and technologically important and became leading driver of progress and a major weapon in geopolitical, interstate, domestic and business conflicts. Freedom of mass media and unlimited Internet provide stakeholders with wide opportunities to use technologies of information and psychological influence on people, formation, transformation and deformation of mass public consciousness, imposing certain myths, stereotypes, destructive patterns of behavior on social groups and individuals. Our state needs to create a national information security system in the conditions of the aggressive information war waged by the Russian Federation against Ukraine. The system should be able to resist propaganda and information and subversive activities of Russian special services and protect Ukraine’s national information sovereignty. We need to develop and use more effective technologies to resist modern methods of information-technical and information-psychological influence, expansion of the “Russian measure” and its aggressive pressure on the national identity of Ukrainians. We need to form new media culture of Ukrainian society able to recognize fakes, hostile narratives and manipulations and resist them, find alternative sources of information, critically evaluate the content of information messages, understand national values and be able to defend them in information and communication processes. In general, our state and society should pursue consolidated state information policy to protect and strengthen the national sovereignty of Ukraine and ensure information security, which should contribute to the proposals proposed in this intelligence on further development of the main directions of such policy.

298

Y. Chmyr et al.

References 1. Bukhtatyi, O., Radchenko, O., & Holovchenko, H. (2015). Media Ukraine: On the threshold of the information revolution. SVS Publisher Panasenko. 2. Oliinyk, O., Bilan, Y., Mishchuk, H., Akimov, O., & Vasa, L. (2021). The impact of migration of highly skilled workers on the country’s competitiveness and economic growth. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 17(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2021.17-3.1 3. Levchenko, O. V. (2014). Problems and ways of forming the information security system of the state. Collection of Scientific Works of Kharkiv University of the Air Force, 2, 166–168. 4. Solodka, O. (2020). Information sovereignty and information security of Ukraine: The dialectic of concepts. European Political and Legal Discourse, 7(6), 233–239. 5. Tarasova, V. V. (2020). Verbal means of information and psychological warfare. Bulletin of Mariupol State University. Series: Philology., 22, 251–258. 6. Tarkin, V. P. (2020). Information wars: A theoretical aspect. State and Law. Legal and Political Sciences, 87, 285–294. 7. Kovach, V., et al. (2020). Electronic social networks as supporting means of educational process in higher education institutions. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2588, 418–433. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2588/paper35.pdf 8. Sunhurova, S. (2020). Conceptual approaches to the study of the concept and phenomenon of information warfare. Bulletin of Lviv University. A Series of Philosophical and Political Studies, 29, 251–256. 9. Nevelska-Hordieieva, O. P., & Nechytailo, V. O. (2021). Manipulation as a means of information and psychological influence in information warfare. Bulletin of the Yaroslav the Wise National University of Law Series: Philosophy, Philosophy of Law, Political Science, Sociology, 3, 71–83. 10. Khimei, V. (2014). The main modern problems of information security of Ukraine. TV and Radio Journalism, 13, 127–132. 11. Holovko, A. A. (2019). Civil society as a subject of counteraction to threats to national security in the information sphere. Natsionalnyi instytut stratehichnykh doslidzhen. 12. Bodnar, I. R. (2014). Information security as the basis of national security. Mechanism of Economic Regulation, 1, 68–75. 13. Kriukov, O. I. (2016). Information support of public power as a factor of national security in the context of globalization. Bulletin of the National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine. Series: Public Administration, 1, 142–149. 14. Nikiforov, M. M., Pampukha, I. V., & Loza, V. M. (2018). Analysis of threats to the military security of the state in the information sphere and counteracting them in a hybrid war. Collection of scientific works of the Military Institute of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv., 61, 135–142. 15. Kriukov, O.I., Radchenko, O.V. Ideology as a factor of national security in the context of public administration dimension Bulletin of the National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine. Retrieved from http://repositsc.nuczu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/7743/1/ilovepdf_com-30-3 9.pdf 16. Turchak, A. (2019). The main components of information security of the state. Aspects of Public Administration, 7(5), 44–56. 17. Morozov, O.L. Information security in the current state and prospects of statehood. http://www. viche.info 18. Ilnytska, U. (2016). Information security of Ukraine: Current challenges, threats and mechanisms to counter negative information and psychological influences. Humanitarian Vision., 2(1), 27–32. 19. Brzhevska, Z. M., Dovzhenko, N. M., Kyrychok, R. V., & Haidur, H. I. (2019). Anosov, A.O.: Information wars: Problems, threats and counteraction. Cybersecurity: Education, Science, Technology, 3, 88–96.

17

Tools for Counteracting Information Aggression Use of Elements. . .

299

20. Holovka, A. A. (2016). Improving the mechanisms of involving civil society in the implementation of security policy in the information sphere of Ukraine. Scientific and Information Bulletin of the Academy of National Security, 1-2, 86–98. 21. Korzh, I. F. (2016). The main criteria of information - the subject of the information function of the state as security. Law and Society, 5, 108–115. 22. Domarev, V. V., & Klymchuk, R. V. (2013). Trends in methodological, technological and organizational foundations of information security. Modern Information Protection, 1, 55–57. 23. Bodnar, I. R. (2012). Priority areas of the state in the field of information security. Economy and State, 2, 27–29. 24. Kyrychenko, O. S. (2018). Conceptual principles of forming a system of information security of the state. Scientific notes of KROK University. Series: Economics, 49, 19–26. 25. Yatsyshyn, T., Mykhailiuk, Y., Liakh, M., Mykhailiuk, I., Savyk, V., & Dobrovolsky, I. (2018). EStablishing the dependence of pollutant concentration on operational conditions at facilities of an oilandgas complex. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 2(10–92), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.126624 26. Pogodayev, S. E. (2013). Marketing of works as a source of the new hybrid offerings in widened marketing of goods, works and services. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 28(8), 638–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2012-0069 27. Biletskyi, V., et al. (2017). Research into the process of preparation of Ukrainian coal by the oil aggregation method. East Eur J Ent Technol, 3(5–8), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.15587/ 1729-4061.2017.104123 28. Iatsyshyn, A. V., et al. (2020). Applying digital technologies for work management of young scientists’ councils. CEUR Workshop Proc., 2879, 124–154. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2879/ paper04.pdf 29. Kalinichenko, B. M. (2020). Interpretation of the concept of information warfare in the Western media. State and law. Legal and political sciences., 87, 212–221. 30. Sytnyk, H. P., Nelipa, D. V., & Orel, M. H. (2020). Political, public and public administration in the field of national security in the context of public and state policy. Scientific Journal of the Academy of National Security, 1-2, 8–32. 31. Savchenko, S. V. (2021). Patriotic education of youth in the information war: The experience of organizing socio-pedagogical work in the relocated HEA. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Luhansk. Pedagogical sciences., 1(2), 148–158. 32. Leshchenko, M. P., et al. (2021). Development of informational and research competence of postgraduate and doctoral students in conditions of digital transformation of science and education. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1840, 012057. https://doi.org/10.1088/ 1742-6596/1840/1/012057

Chapter 18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context of “Civilizations Clash” as the Main Object of Information War in Ukraine Oleksandr Radchenko Inna Semenets-Orlova

, Oleksii Kriukov , Valeriia Kovach , , Artur Zaporozhets , and Vitalii Kostenko

Abstract Peculiarities of the value-world archetypes formation of Ukrainian society and dynamics of political process in Ukraine are considered through the prism of the civilizational theory of A. Toynbee and S. Huntington. Mental and value guidelines of citizens and social groups became the main object of information wars. So, cultural and linguistic value aspect is a key in the democratic statebuilding of Ukraine. Field study was conducted. Comparative analysis of the value orientations of citizens of four megaregions of Ukraine was done on its basis. It includes: eastern, western, southern and north-central. Values that divide and unite Ukrainian society were identified. Matrix of value methodology of political systems

O. Radchenko Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland O. Kriukov National University of Civil Defence of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine V. Kovach National Aviation University, Kyiv, Ukraine Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine Center for information-analytical and technical support of nuclear power facilities monitoring of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine I. Semenets-Orlova Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine Symu State Pedagogical University named after A.S. Makarenko, Sumy, Ukraine A. Zaporozhets (✉) General Energy Institute of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine e-mail: [email protected] V. Kostenko Cherkassy Institute of Fire Safety named after Heroes of Chornobyl of National University of Civil Defense of Ukraine, Cherkassy, Ukraine © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 O. Radchenko et al. (eds.), National Security Drivers of Ukraine, Contributions to Political Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33724-6_18

301

302

O. Radchenko et al.

research on four binary value oppositions in three corresponding axiological clusters is offered: value absolutes; universal modalities and socio-archetypal values. It allowed determining the place of Ukrainian society in the value-political space of the modern world. Such a concept also defined basic principles of state humanitarian policy to develop and consolidate in Ukrainian society those values that should bring Ukraine closer to democracy. Keywords Mental features · Value features · Society · Ukraine · Information war · Civilization clash

1 The Problem Statement Objective regularity of human development determined fundamentally new geopolitical situation at the threshold of the third millennium of history. Rapid expansion of international trade and investment, awareness of environmental problems on planetary scale, influence increasing of non-state agents, primarily multinational corporations and international political and public organizations caused systemic political shift that increasingly affects traditional role and priorities of nation states. This actualizes scientific and theoretical studies of mental and value foundations of the state in the geopolitical perspectives in light of its role and place in fundamentally new world geopolitical coordinates. The modern world has already grown out of outdated framework of Westphalian international political system. There any political, socio-economic, cultural or informational processes in each individual country are inevitably assessed for compliance with the international value system established by relevant documents of the UN and other international organizations. However, problem is that “national values as a category of sustainable development theory and theory of state national security are extremely poorly developed especially in such countries as Ukraine. The last one is in long-term systemic crisis and in harsh conditions of transitional economy. The situation is complicated by the tendencies of strengthening level of conflict in the surrounding world” [1]. Therefore, we will try to follow logical paths of the modern philosophical understanding of political future and find place for Ukraine there. Such place should correspond to its historical mission through the prism of national interests, focus scientific attention on close relationship of the national security concept. The lost one “expresses state security and its citizens from various threat” and concept of national interests as “the content of main values, goals and aspirations of society and the state at specific historical stage of development” [2]. It takes the following look in the context of global information space and issues of information security: “we understand the state of protection of its national interests in the information sphere under the concept of information security of Ukraine. They are determined by a set of balanced interests of individual, society and the state” [3].

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

303

2 Main Material Presentation G. Panasenko notes that “modern relations between man and society in conditions of global development are characterized by contradiction when Man does not pursue any special goal or benefit. He/she is not able to sacrifice own interests for sake of the national interests of society, therefore he/she distances from own national space and is spontaneously included in the global space. Therefore, development of modern society is not possible without taking into account global interest. Global interest today affects everyone. Its fulfillment is interpreted differently for everyone. We are now in the process of new consciousness forming. Therefore, modern man unfortunately is not able to clearly define its own national priorities on conscious or subconscious level” [4]. We consider it necessary to begin this investigation by researching the globalization phenomenon. It received its awareness in the form of civilizational theories in the field of political philosophy. The theory claims that classical ideologies are surviving in the modern world; traditional economic, ideological antagonisms of past ages are gradually losing their dominant status in politics and increasingly turning into means of asserting cultural values and civilizational identities. These circumstances lead to the transformation of the world order. It is no longer built around political and ideological blocs of states as it was back in the twentieth century. It is built around world civilizations (the most famous scientific studies are O. Spengler’s Glimpse of Europe; A. Toynbee and S. Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations and Reconstruction of the World Order.” The definition of “civilization” was first introduced into scientific circulation by V. R. Mirabeau in 1757. Over the next 250 years, its understanding was accompanied by significant changes. At first, “civilization” concept absorbed meanings of concepts that preceded it. They are close in meaning and personified processes of behavior rationalization, civil society formation and public administration improvement. In the nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth century, its valuable content gives way to versatile in meaning scientific component. Finally, in the twentieth century, its meaning is restored as a whole. In the same time, the accumulated content is not lost but is transferred into a hidden, potential form and actualized [5]. Arnold Toynbee’s systematized history convincingly proved that the history of mankind develops not as straight line of gradual progress. It develops as a cyclicalwave coexistence of individual civilizations – closed societies based on religion and forms of its implementation. The most stable spiritual values are concentrated in religious teachings. They are dominant not only in traditional patriarchal societies but also in developed democracies. Such values represent “political system framework” and the “society spirit.” Human history itself “begins its run not from the birth of man as a biological being but from the beginning of man’s sense of time, its immersion in the world of everyday-value bases of life. Life of man and entire civilizations in ‘time-values’ is constant focus on self-improvement, self-justification, self-affirmation, which becomes meaning of life in general” [6].

304

O. Radchenko et al.

Toynbee says that every civilization goes through the stages of genesis, growth, collapse and decay, rise and fall of universal states, universal churches. The following should be recognized as the main conclusions of A. Toynbee’s theory: – Genesis of civilizations requires efforts of more than one race. – States are always an element of larger system—society. They arise only after society emergence. That is why civilization boundaries are always wider both in space and time than any nation-states, city-states or political unions. – No civilization encompasses all of humanity and the entire Earth. – None of the civilizations is “the best,” and although they are forced to interact with each other, their complete fusion into the “unity of civilizations” is impossible [6]. Further, political development of the civilizations theory in the global-political aspect was carried out in the studies of Samuel Huntington. The American political scientist proves that the main criterion for differences between people is their cultural affiliation to certain civilization, identity consisting of linguistic, ethnic, historical, religious and institutional elements in the modern world. The civilizational theory explains political process peculiarities in Ukraine. The country declared course for westernization. It is a movement towards the European community since the beginning of its independence. The most important problem on this path is that across Ukraine (Huntington in his work pays considerable attention to it as a “divided country”) there is rupture of civilizations caused by the Brest Union in 1596. For more than 400 years, the Left Bank Ukraine has existed as a part of European states instilled in itself state management traditions based on values of Catholicism and Protestantism. For the same amount of time, the Inhabitants of the Right Bank part knew nothing else except a mixture of collectivist statism with the Asian despotism of the Moscow autocrats. This civilizational difference between the two Ukrainian ethnic groups could not be manifested in the totalitarian Stalinist state, but quite naturally appeared in independent Ukraine (as well as in the post-totalitarian Balkan countries). Thus, in 1994, Jan Brzezinski commented on presidential elections in Ukraine in The New York Times: “these elections reflected and even crystallized split between the Europeanized Slavs in Western Ukraine and the Russian-Slavic vision of what Ukraine should become. This is not so much ethnic polarization as different cultures” [7]. Subsequent presidential election campaigns of 2010 and especially 2019 proved that the civilizational split in Ukraine only worsened in the following 20 years. Unfortunately, atmosphere of enmity and political confrontation in Ukraine has not passed until now even after armed aggression of the Russian Federation and annexation of part of Ukraine. There are still quite a few citizens in our country who at least continue to be in the field of Russian mental and value identification if they do not sympathize with the aggressor. They are now afraid to express their true beliefs, but in the next elections, they will vote not for candidates with nationally expressed slogans but for those who articulate peaceful coexistence both within Ukrainian society itself and with its neighbors. It was voters with such position that ensured a

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

305

convincing victory of 2/3 votes for Volodymyr Zelenskyi over Petro Poroshenko in the 2019 presidential race. It is obvious that the root of Ukraine’s problems is actually much deeper than the simple explanation of significant public support for pro-Russian narratives as a result of Kremlin propaganda. It is understood by Western political philosophers and analysts. The majority of the political elite still does not want to see it when it claims, like a spell: “we have one Ukraine and one Ukrainian people” ignoring significant mental and value differences of various social groups and territories. We in Ukraine are trying quite aggressively to Ukrainize the Russian-speaking population (according to 2017 data, the number of Ukrainians who communicate exclusively in Russian in their daily lives is 31.8% of citizens and “in equal measure Ukrainian and Russian”—20.8%) [8]. However, we do not take into account our own historical examples, when the Russian Empire for centuries unsuccessfully tried to Russify Ukrainians, just as Poland on its territory to Polonize them. Likewise, the Baltic post-Soviet countries eventually forced Russian speakers to speak Latvian or Estonian and were unable to change their mentality and cultural and mental guidelines. It forms the basis of pro-Russian public opinion of the Russian-speaking strata of the population of these countries. Therefore, it is mental and value guidelines of citizens and social groups and strata that become the main object of information wars. B. Kalinichenko explains this by the fact that “public opinion is extremely important for the formation of the internal and external policy of the state despite certain ephemerality. This applies even to authoritarian and totalitarian countries, whose rulers try to legitimize illegal decisions with public opinion. That is why it becomes an arena of struggle between different political actors if we talk about the internal aspect and between enemy states in the case of waging an information war. Public opinion (both of one’s own people and of the enemy) is the object of attack in the conditions of a hybrid war ‘because establishment of control over the process of its formation means entry into the political sphere and is a guarantee of gaining power. It without a proper reaction will mean defeat’” [9]. We think that cultural-linguistic value aspect is key in the democratic statebuilding of Ukraine. All theoretical paradigms and models of democratic transit assume presence of one overriding prerequisite—consolidation of society around the understanding of need and desire for democratic state-building, readiness to accept new democratic value system. Otherwise, D. Rastow warns that polarization of society will be intensified. It will inevitably lead to disintegration and division along regional, ethnic or other lines [10]. In the state, there is no substantiated comparative analysis of value orientations of citizens in Ukraine: how similar and different are they in different regions of the country and in comparison with value orientations of citizens of Western European democracies (we have not come across such studies in the press)? Which values separate and which unite Ukrainian society, which political slogans and actions can lead us to democracy and which can only lead to dead end? On what values should the Ukrainian national idea be built?

306

O. Radchenko et al.

It should be noted that European integration programs of Ukraine today do not cause objections either in political community or in the status of citizens. However, “it is not enough to proclaim values. They need to be formed, spread, replicated, fixed in public consciousness, cultivated” [11]. Therefore, these programs should be supported by concrete actions of the state to form such national idea. The last one is nevertheless supported by all citizens of the country regardless of their place of residence, language of communication, cultural and ethnic affiliation. The author’s methodology of axiological comparativism of political systems and processes is proposed based on the above. It allows us to place Ukraine in the modern geopolitical space and develop ways of further social development of our state. At the beginning, we try to apply possible outlines of new value system. Its introduction through socialization and political and legal education will return Ukrainian society to inevitable path of democratic state. Thus, the phenomenon of value consideration on three hierarchical interrelated levels is proposed: 1. Philosophical foundations of existence or level of civilization (value absolutes). 2. Socio-political or state level (universal modalities and general-instrumental). 3. Socio-psychological or individual level (utilitarian and subject-instrumental values). The famous Russian political philosopher S. Pereslegin invests in the concept of civilization “the way of interaction of the bearers of the mind with the environment” [12] considering the value absolutes of the civilizational level. He names four pairs of binary oppositional value absolutes (values of the highest order). Human communities are divided into civilizations according to absolutes: – Time (as a direction for constant development)—space (as a direction for stability and steadfastness). – Personality (as an advantage of individualism)—mass (as an advantage of collectivism). – Rational (as realm of logic in understanding the world)—transcendental (as priority of intuition in understanding the world). – Spiritual (as an orientation towards cultural enrichment) – material (as an orientation towards material enrichment) [12]. These absolute principles cannot be combined in the framework of making any rational managerial or emotional mental decision. The world religions and states arose on these absolutes. Specified absolutes of leading civilization of the modern world are in different quadrants of the three-dimensional value matrix (see Fig. 18.1). Value absolutes determine understanding and essence of all other values from universal modalities to utilitarian ones. It is precisely that representatives of different civilizations interpret seemingly same basic values (universal modalities) that lie in foundations of state-power relations. There are numerous misunderstandings and disagreements of power relations in different political regimes. Person of the Protestant civilization puts a completely different meaning than the person of the

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

307

Fig. 18.1 Leading modern civilizations in space of value absolutes

Orthodox, Muslim or Confucian civilizations in accordance with his own absolutes. So, they put different meanings in the categories of “freedom,” “legality,” “goodness,” “equality,” “justice,” etc.! For example, universal value “freedom” has fundamentally different interpretation (perception) in civilizational systems where value absolutes are individualism and collectivism. Thus, for the first (according to the classic definition of Engels), freedom is the perceived necessity and right to the individual freedom of others. For the second it is complete freedom or so-called Russian rebellion which is “fierce and merciless.” Brotherhood for the first system is solidarity, partner interaction; for the second it is self-sacrifice, neglecting the interests of the individual for the sake of all happiness. Value absolutes remain unshakable during the cyclical wave development of society. Universal modalities determined by them (“individualism – collectivism,” “statism – participation,” “power-centrism – decentralization,” “pluralism – monism”) and instrumental values are subject to “value shift” of the second level (opinions of personalized-social archetypes) as a “new reading” of basic absolutes underlying existence of this society. In turn, peculiarities of reading “cultural code” of such universal modalities as “social justice,” “freedom,” “equality” determine unique features of power relations, political institutions and practices of policy implementation of each states based on mental value opinions of the nation. S. Pereslyegin (in terms of identifying value absolutes [12]), O. Donchenko and Yu. Romanenko (in terms of defining societal archetypal values [13]) developed a

308

O. Radchenko et al.

Compliance level with clusters of value system of society max

value absolutes

Germany

mid

min

min mid

Poland

Ukraine

max russia

Space/orderliness Time/dynamics

Western Christian civilization (liberal-democratic society)

Axiological clusters (binary oppositions)

value absolutes Chaos/fragmentation Space/statics

Rationality

Transcendence

Legos/law

Anarchy

universal modalities Individualism/ competitiveness Participatoryness Decentralization Pluralism/ tolerance

social archetypes

universal modalities Collectivism / congregationalism Etatism

Power centrism Monism / intolerance

social archetypes

Extraversion

Introversion

Pragmatism

Emotionality

lnternality Intentionality

Eastern Orthodox civilization (authoritarian-traditionalist society)

Axiological clusters (binary oppositions)

Externality Executiveness

Fig. 18.2 Matrix of value methodology of political systems study

matrix of value methodology for the study of political systems (Fig. 18.2) based on the developments of S. Huntington (in terms of identifying values at the level of universal modalities [14]). Social values are located according to four binary value oppositions in three corresponding axiological clusters in the proposed matrix. Cluster of value absolutes consists of extremely stable and practically unchanging general societal orientations towards orderliness—fragmentation (Cosmos—Chaos); social and personal dynamics – statics (Time – Space); material – spiritual (Rationality – Transcendence); compliance – circumvention, deception of the laws (Legos – Anarchy). Division of humanity into civilizations takes place according to them.

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

309

Cluster of universal modalities consists of basic values of national mentalities: priority of individual group/society (Individualism—Collectivism), orientation towards expectation of guardianship from the state/reliance on one’s own strength (Etatism—Participatory), priority of seeing power relations as rigid subordination partnership and solidarity (Vladocentrism—Decentralization) and orientation towards socio-political, linguistic, religious, etc. tolerance—intolerance (Pluralism—Monism). It is these values that determine type and nature of political system, essence and content of power relations, institutionalized in respective statepower regimes. Values of this level are quite stable. They are changed with change of several generations in turning stages of state formation, in times of political transformation, crises, and breakdowns of values. Cluster of societal-archetypal values consists of values of personal-societal archetypes of everyday life and character of “average citizen”: orientation to the openness-closedness of one’s own “I” to the surrounding world (ExtroversionIntroversion), to figurative-logical perception of the world (EmotionalityPragmatism), on external-internal responsibility for results of one’s own activity (Externality-Internality) and orientation towards the male-female type of sociocultural behavior defining goal, finding new ways/implementation of tasks, consolidating achievements (Intentionality-Executiveness). These are extremely mobile values. They are present in any society and dominance of some over others can change during lifetime of one generation. Four graphs of the correspondence of the mental and value guidelines of four European states are given based on the secondary analysis of the results and materials of S. Huntington, S. Pereslyegin, E. Afonin, O. Donchenko and other researchers: Germany as the core country of EU, Poland as the closest to Ukraine with a common history, Ukraine and Russia as a core countries of the SlavicOrthodox civilization. Level of graphs closeness to each other determines level of unity of value space and at the same time level of closeness to Western European or Slavic-Orthodox civilization. Thus, compliance level with certain poles of binary oppositions of axiological clusters makes possible to determine place of Ukrainian society in value-political space of the modern world and basic principles of state humanitarian policy regarding development and consolidation of those values in Ukrainian society that should bring us closer to democracy. Comprehensive expert survey of the state of political orientations and priority political values in four subregions of the country (in the West, South, East, and Center of Ukraine) was conducted in March–April 2009. It became a pilot project for testing this methodology in terms of mental and territorial integrity of Ukraine and repeated in 2021. General population of respondents, scientists, civil servants and officials of local self-government bodies working and studying in the system of the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine were chosen. This is exactly layer that directly implements state policy interacts with the population and forms a social base of support or rejection of socio-political reforms. Total of 623 (2009) and 44 (2021) experts are relatively evenly distributed across 4 mega-regions—West, Center, South and East of Ukraine (with centers in regional institutes of the National Academy of Sciences in Lviv, Kyiv, Odesa and Kharkiv).

310

O. Radchenko et al.

They were interviewed by characteristics of education, gender and places of hierarchy in the civil service (with slight predominance of the percentage of men and managers among Kyiv experts. It is due to their concentration in central authorities). Fifty-four values-slogans (Topics) separated from the political discourse of Ukraine in the last 10 years. They were subject to value assessment, grouped into 9 blocks: foreign policy, reforming political regime, power-legal relations, territorial system of power, civil service, economic policy of the state, directions of humanitarian development, political evaluation and interpretation of history, ways out of the political crisis. All experts were asked to answer to what extent public opinion of their surrounding domain environment perceives these slogans in value dichotomy of “unification—-division” of Ukrainian society. It was not possible to hold a plenum large-scale nationwide survey due to resource limitations. Therefore, study cannot claim to be an absolute reflection of the value orientations of Ukrainians in a regional context in terms of the level of representativeness. However, it identifies trends that require further close attention from scientists and politicians. Conducted research demonstrated groundlessness of thesis about homogeneous socio-political unity of Ukrainian society and its insurmountable split. Fortunately, factors that clearly unite our society (18 out of 54) are twice as many as those that clearly divide it (9 out of 54). Myth of Eastern Ukraine as the biggest opponent of Western Ukraine can also be questioned. In the vast majority of cases, position of Southern Ukraine was more radical in relation to the West than position of the East. We will provide two summarizing diagrams – a subregional definition of those values and topics that divide Ukrainian society (Fig. 18.3) and those that unite it not being able to fully present the results of the conducted research. Representatives of all regions of Ukraine believe that the eight proposed topics are those that divide Ukrainian society. It can be seen from the diagram (see Fig. 18.3). First of all, this is topic 5: “Actions regarding implementation of plan for Ukraine’s accession to NATO” (only topic that significantly reduced level of public disapproval from 2009 to 2021, although it did not go beyond the zone of division) and topic 13: “Transformation of Ukraine on federation of self-sufficient fraternal regions.” There are four more topics in the zone of total split (according to experts of three subregions) and partial risk of split (according to the experts of Western region). These are “Legislative recognition of OUN-UPA soldiers as a party that fought for the independence of Ukraine with provision of benefits to war heroes” (topic 45), “Creation of Soviet occupation museum in Ukraine” (topic 46) and “Awards (after death) of R. Shukhevych and S. Bandera with the title of Hero of Ukraine” (topic 47). Finally, two more topics pose real threat to democratic consolidation of Ukrainian people: “Purposeful state policy of national identity formation based on the lessons of Krut, the Holodomor and other tragic events in the national history of Ukraine” (topic 48) and “Giving Russian language status of regional in certain regions” (topic 40). Analysis of division topics allows us to say that Ukrainian society (unlike many Ukrainian politicians) is consolidated mainly on the civic platform of

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

Level of fluctuation between social perception (from below) and non-acceptance (from above) of the

18

311 total division sector

sector of division risk West Center South East 5

51

uniting sector 45

47

46

48

40

13

Rice

Fig. 18.3 Diagram of sub-regional definition of values and topics that split Ukrainian society

self-identification. So, the vast majority of our fellow citizens have already outgrown nationalism which Sh. Avineri considers “childish disease of democracy” and heir of communism. It allows the researcher to speak not about the modernization process in democracy direction but about deviations from democracy, its certain “defective character with formally democratic institutions and predominance of authoritarian practices” [15]. S. Avineri says that post-communist states live in dissonance with time, because it is inherent in combination of high industry with market weakness, high politicization with lack of experience in democratic mobilization, tendencies towards nationalism with its militant non-democratism in relation to other ethnic groups and peoples. Another well-known political philosopher John Schwarzmantel in contrary to Avineri does not reject nationalism. He speaks of its certain transformation from “ethnic” to “civic.” In his opinion, the modern format of “civic nationalism” includes vision of nation as a primarily political entity rather than a community formed on the basis of origin and birth. Therefore, for young democracies, J. Schwarzmantel suggests “to give up from dangerous form of ethnic nationalism. This case cannot be implemented in a modern multicultural society in any. So, we get a renewed civic nationalism which can be called “constitutional patriotism.” In this case, under the

312

O. Radchenko et al.

Level of societal support

uniting sector

West Center South East 19

32

34

22

division sector 23

49

29

20

50

31

7

28

24

12

17

16

Themes

Fig. 18.4 Values that unite Ukraine

nation we will understand totality of all those who have equal political rights and accept all procedures and duties defined by the Constitution of respective state [16]. Ukrainian reality testifies the existence of optimistic grounds for the formation of new Ukrainian nationalism (national idea) precisely on the basis of civic values. Conducted research revealed fairly large number of values of civic-democratic nature which are fully positively supported by residents of all regions of Ukraine (see Fig. 18.4). In particular, there are following topics supported by the absolute majority of experts and recognized by them as priorities: – Judicial system reform in direction of ensuring guarantees and protection of human rights in Ukraine (topic 19). – Formation promoting of middle class in Ukraine (topic 32). – Significant reduction of tax pressure on small- and medium-sized businesses in order to stimulate the economy (topic 34). – Real fight against corruption in the state power of Ukraine with show trials against corrupt officials (topic 22). – Simultaneous lifting of immunity from the President, people’s deputies and judges of Ukraine (topic 23). – Use of state funds to solve urgent problems of society (helping patients with AIDS, cancer, tuberculosis, etc.) instead of creating a memorial to the Holodomor (topic 49). Unconditional support in all regions without exception is the following value requirements for the implementation of state policy in Ukraine:

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

313

– Legislative approval of the Cabinet of Ministers only on condition that parliament adopts specific and clear Government Action Plan for the Economic Development of Ukraine (topic 29). – Restoration of full independence of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, unconditional obedience to its decision by all the highest state officials (topic 20). – Round table holding of national reconciliation by all political leaders of various political camps and public organizations (topic 50). – Development and implementation of measures to strengthen the competitiveness of the national producer, including import restrictions by the state (topic 31). – Mandatory introduction of submitting a declaration for themselves and family members not only about income and also about expenses for heads of state institutions (topic 28). – Prohibition of civil servants to engage in politics (be members of political parties) (topic 24). – Strengthening of unitary centralized Ukrainian state with a strong political leader of the nation (theme 12). – Liquidation of regional and district state administrations in Ukraine with simultaneous formation of executive committees of local councils (topic 15). Two topics which support were changed significantly between 2009 and 2021: – Support for decentralization idea of the Ukrainian government, transfer of powers and resources to the local level (topic 17) have grown. – Idea support for returning to “multi-vector foreign policy” of good-neighborliness with both Russia and the EU has fallen significantly (topic 7). So, there is a readiness in society for democratic consolidation, but not on the principles that some of our leading politicians and political forces would like. Such forces prefer flirting with aggressive national-radical groups that make up the majority of Ukrainian society against the background of the military confrontation with Russia. It is they who dominate streets and public space of Ukraine today. True democratic state-building requires other leaders, new politicians, new generation of political elite capable of truly uniting Ukrainian society. The research has shown that there is a broad social base for this, there is a wide list of socio-political values equally positively perceived by the vast majority of citizens both in Ukraine as a whole and in each of its regions. It is these political slogans and actions that should become the basis of unifying state policy and components of the program of politician who really strives for Ukrainian people consolidation. If we want happiness for our Motherland, we should not hide from the problem, we should solve it. It is time to admit that the united Ukraine consists of representatives of at least three different civilizations – Western, Orthodox Christian and Islamic. We are all Ukrainians in Lviv and Uzhhorod and in Luhansk and Kharkiv. But historically we were brought up on different spiritual values. This discrepancy in the essential assessments of surrounding existence, politics, the role of man and the state that is the real cause of discord in the country was cultivated in our country by

314

O. Radchenko et al.

political technologists in the struggle for power between two political elites and was skillfully used by the Kremlin leaders for annexation of Crimea and resolution of armed conflict in Donbas. In such conditions, it is necessary to think about the future of Ukraine itself, about expectations of the Ukrainian people related to the state and about Ukraine’s place in the future world. After all, we have to choose further strategy of state-building from only two options: clash of civilizations, enmity, attempt by one part of Ukraine to assimilate another or an open dialogue of sister (as defined by A. Toynbee) civilizations, rallying around common values, search for new political ideologies of integrative nature, capable of uniting Ukrainian people from East to West into single state and carrying out modernization while preserving cultural and civilizational identity of all regions of the state [17]. We aspire to the European family of nations and must honestly answer a simple question: to what extent do our values coincide with values of European democracy? Will we be able to abandon those values that hinder our movement towards democratic society and consolidate the nations, ethnic groups, and social groups of such diverse Ukraine around our own European choice? Therefore, it is fundamentally important for Ukraine to construct such new value system that reflects majority values of our fellow citizens and at the same time would be as close as possible to European norms and standards [18]. Since democratic state-building requires democratic consolidation of the nation, we should remove those value themes that divide society from the field of political discourse. John Rawls emphasized that it is common practice for democratic society, when “liberal thought should deprive the political program of those issues that cause the greatest discord and are capable of undermining the foundations of social cooperation in conditions of reasonable pluralism” [19]. This can only be done through political agreements among leading political forces and leaders such as five-year moratorium on public discussion of certain divisive topics. In another case, Huntington warns of danger of our country splitting along lines of civilizational fault line in event of aggravation of civilizational differences and inability of both parts of the state to compromise values. We should respond to challenge of history and understand that happiness for Ukraine cannot be won in confrontation with external enemy without civil understanding in Ukrainian society itself, without consensus of political elites and citizens of West and East, South and North and Center of Ukraine. When spiritual values lie in the foundation of the civilizational split of Ukraine, then the national idea should be based on priority of those spiritual values. They should be equally shared in different distinctive corners of our colorful country. We should rally society around unifying values and find courage for every political leader, every party, every citizen to concede share of those demands that have not yet found nationwide compromise. For this, it is necessary to make main pillar of state policy not political confrontation and intransigence of principles, but consensus.

18

Mental and Value Features of Ukrainian Society in the Context. . .

315

We should ensure transition to dominance of spiritual values, interests of man and society, principles of moral policy, high professionalism and devotion, all that can be called service to the people and the Motherland. Spiritual revival of the political nation as the state ideology of “civic nationalism” and as national idea in practice should mean consistent balanced and open policy, honest, stable and transparent rules in business, full freedom of speech and guaranteed judicial protection of constitutional rights of man and citizen, social justice and personal security, all necessary conditions for self-development and self-realization of a person. It is the citizen or “average Ukrainian” who should become the center of state policy and be recognized as the main value, the greatest wealth of the country. Maximally full disclosure and use of its potential should become the main goal of state authorities’ activities. Honest and professional government with high degree of political responsibility can be named among the most important social values of Ukraine’s spiritual revival. Among these social values are: complete cleansing from corruption, creation “rules of the game” that contribute to detinization and rapid development of production. Among such values, there is the right of the man to be protected from administrative arbitrariness and manipulation, supported by effective mechanisms. After all, as President Ronald Reagan remarked: “person cannot be free if the government is excessively free” [20].

3 Conclusion We heard all this not too long ago. It was values that thousands of honest Ukrainians embraced wholeheartedly and demanded in the December frost on the two Kyiv Maidans in 2004 and 2014. They sought spiritual revival for the state and Dignity for the citizen and entire society. That is why they believed in “orange ideals” and resisted brutal administrative arbitrariness! However, it turned out that beautiful declarations of spiritual principles alone are not enough. It turns out that it is not enough to declare values of democracy. They should be strictly observed in political and state management practice by state leaders and the nation’s political elite. Creation and consolidation of social values has always been prerogative of the political elite. And today main divine appointment of the elite of Ukraine is to create new unifying national system of political views that would meet aspirations of every Ukrainian, regardless of its place of residence, political views or language of communication. This is main national interest. Historical mission of Ukraine is following: search and development of new system of values, introduction of ideas of spirituality into society, government, consciousness of citizens, formation of new political elite of the state on basis of spirituality, patriotism and service to Ukraine. Responsible political elite, regardless of whether it is currently in power or in opposition. It should be abandoned use of social political technologies built on “finding the enemy” and move to modernizing integrative political technologies of

316

O. Radchenko et al.

unifying nature, cultivating true patriotism, national pride, single goals of further development of Ukrainian society.

References 1. Burkinsky, B. V., & Stepanov, V. N. (2017). National interests and values of Ukraine (applied and methodological aspects of research). Economic Innovations, 63, 45–52. http://nbuv.gov.ua/ UJRN/ecinn_2017_63_8 2. Mateta, O. (2020). Systematization and classification of national interests in the context of ukrainian national security. Visnuk of the Lviv University. Series Philos.-Political Studies, 31, 164–172. https://doi.org/10.30970/PPS.2020.31.21 3. Kopanchuk, O. E. (2020). State protection of national interests in the information sphere of Ukraine. Actual Problems of Public Administration, 1, 106–112. 4. Panasenko, H. (2019). Modern interaction of man and society in the conditions of global development: National interests. V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University Bulletin (Series “International Relations, Economics, Area Studies, Tourism”), 9, 67–74. http://nbuv.gov.ua/ UJRN/VKhMv_2019_9_10 5. Gorelov, M. E., Motsya, O. P., & Rafalskyi, O. O. (2005). Civilizational history of Ukraine. UVPC “Exob” LLC. 6. Toynbee, A. (2008). Comprehension of history: Selected. Iris-Press. 7. Erlanger, S. (1994). Ukrainian Leader’s Defeat Worries Kiev Bureaucrats (p. 8). New York Times. July 13, 1994, Section A. 8. Masenko, L. (2020) Language situation of Ukraine in sociolinguistic dimensions. Retrieved from https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/30586236.html 9. Kalinichenko, B. M. (2020). Public opinion forming process as a factor of success in the informational warfare. Scientific Journal of the National Pedagogical Dragomanov University, 27, 69–74. https://sj.npu.edu.ua/index.php/pnspd/article/view/856 10. Rastow, D. (1996). Transitions to democracy: An attempt at a dynamic model. Political Studies, 5, 5–9. 11. Garanina, G. (2009). Social transformation and change of value orientations. Social Psychology, 1(33), 54–59. 12. Pereslegin, S. (2006). Tutorial for playing on the world chessboard. AST. 13. Donchenko, O., & Romanenko, Y. (2001). Archetypes of social life and politics (deep regulations of psychopolitical everyday life). Lybid. 14. Huntington, S. (2003). The clash of civilizations. LLC AST Publishing House. 15. Avinery, S. (1992). The return to history: The breakup of the Soviet Union. Brookings Review, 10, 25–36. 16. Schwartzmantel, D. (2009). Ideology and politics. Publishing House Humanitarian Center Kharkiv. 17. Radchenko, A. (2016). Geostrategic Ukraine. Public Management, 3(4), 119–141. Retrieved from http://journals.maup.com.ua/index.php/public-management/article/view/720 18. Semerikov, S. O., et al. (2022). 3rd International Conference on Sustainable Futures: Environmental, Technological, Social and Economic Matters. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1049, 011001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1049/1/011001 19. Rawls, J. (2005). Political liberalism. Columbia University Press. 20. Morris, D. (2004). Games of politicians. AST Publishing House LLC, Tranzitkniga LLC.