PERCEPTIONS OF UKRAINE IN THE EUROPEAN SPACE: FROM A «BUFFER STATE» AND «GREY ZONE» TO A «EUROPEAN ACTOR»

Yevhen Kobets,

PhD Student,

Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, Mykolaiv, Ukraine

Oleksandr Mosin,

PhD Student,

Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, Mykolaiv, Ukraine

 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/2524-048X.2025.32.2

 

Abstract. The article addresses the problem of Ukraine’s positioning in the European political and security space, emphasizing the transformation of its image from a «buffer state» or «grey zone» into a European actor. The relevance of this issue stems from the persistence of outdated discursive definitions in Western narratives, which portrayed Ukraine as a passive object of external strategies, despite its growing institutional integration and political agency. The full-scale aggression of Russia against Ukraine has further intensified the need to reassess such approaches and to conceptualize Ukraine as a subject that actively shapes the European order.

The purpose of the article is to trace the transformation of perceptions of Ukraine from 1991 to 2014, with partial projections onto subsequent developments, in order to outline the tendency toward actorness and to substantiate the transition from outdated categories to the concept of a European actor.

The research methodology is based on an interdisciplinary approach and the principles of historical analysis, objectivity, and comparativism. The study applies methods of discourse analysis, systematization, generalization, and elements of diachronic and systems-analytical approaches, combined with the framework of the Regional Security Complex Theory (RSCT).

The scientific novelty of the study lies in combining the theoretical framework of RSCT with the empirical analysis of Ukraine’s key milestones – from institutional legitimation in the 1990s, through waves of expectations and disappointments, to the value-based shifts during the Orange Revolution and, above all, the Revolution of Dignity. This allows for the identification of Ukraine’s gradual movement toward actorness and the exposure of conceptual insufficiency in the categories of neutrality, buffer, and grey zone.

Conclusions. The author emphasizes that the notions of «buffer state» and «grey zone» should be regarded as discursive anachronisms, incapable of adequately describing Ukraine’s evolving role. Instead, the concept of «European actor» more accurately reflects its growing ability to mobilize internal resources, influence regional security, and project normative narratives of dignity, resilience, and solidarity in the European political and security order.

Key words: Ukraine, European Union, buffer state, grey zone, RSCT, European actor, securitization.

Submitted 12.07.2025

Download

References:

  1. Zhovtko, H. (2016, April 27). Obraz Ukrainy za kordonom yak «strichka Mebiusa». Hromadskyi Prostir. Retrieved from: https://www.prostir.ua/?focus=obraz-ukrajiny-za-kordonom-yak-strichka-mebiusa [In Ukrainian].
  2. Kobec”, (2025). Idejno-konceptual”ni vymiry Pomaranchevoyi revolyuciyi u zaxidnoyevropejs”kyx ta amerykans”kyx doslidzhennyax. Starozhytnosti Lukomor’ya, 4, 167–175. https://doi.org/10.33782/2708-4116.2025.4.380 [In Ukrainian].
  3. Mosin, O. (2025). Reakciya mizhnarodnoyi spil”noty na podiyi Revolyuciyi Hidnosti: dyplomatychnyj ta instytucijno-pravovyj vymiry. Starozhytnosti Lukomor’ya, 4, 176–186. https://doi.org/10.33782/2708-4116.2025.4.381 [In Ukrainian].
  4. Uhoda mizh Ukrayinoyu ta Rosijs”koyu Federaciyeyu z pytan” perebuvannya Chornomors”koho flotu Rosijs”koyi Federaciyi na terytoriyi Ukrayiny (2010, 21 kvitnya). Verxovna Rada Ukrayiny. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/643_359 [In Ukrainian].
  5. Ash, T., Gunn, J., & Lough, (2017). The struggle for Ukraine. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House). Retrieved from: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2017-10-18-struggle-for-ukraine-ash-gunn-lough-lutsevych-nixey-sherr-wolczuk.pdf [In English].
  6. Åslund, A. (2009). How Ukraine became a market economy and democracy. Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics. [In English].
  7. Åslund, A. (1999, June 23). Problems with economic transformation in Ukraine. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from: https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/1999/06/problems-with-economic-transformation-in-ukraine?lang=en [In English].
  8. Biscop, S. (2023). War in Europe and the new balance of power. Egmont Institute Policy Brief, 298. Retrieved from: https://www.egmontinstitute.be/app/uploads/2023/02/Sven-Biscop_Policy_Brief_298.pdf [In English].
  9. Bretherton, C., & Vogler, J. (2006). The European Union as a global actor (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. [In English].
  10. Buras, P. (2014, September 22). The buffer zone illusion. European Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved from: https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_the_buffer_zone_illusion315/ [In English].
  11. Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2003). Regions and powers: The structure of international security. Cambridge University Press. [In English].
  12. D’Anieri, P. (2007). Understanding Ukrainian politics: Power, politics, and institutional design. Armonk, New York, London, England: M.E. Sharpe. Retrieved from: https://shron1.chtyvo.org.ua/DAnieri_Paul/Understanding_Ukrainian_Politics_Power_Politics_And_Institutional_Design_anhl.pdf [In English].
  13. Dickinson, P. (2020, November 22). How Ukraine’s Orange Revolution shaped twenty-first century geopolitics. Atlantic Council. Retrieved from: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/how-ukraines-orange-revolution-shaped-twenty-first-century-geopolitics/ [In English].
  14. Fehlinger, G. (2017, April 27). Austrian neutrality is no model for Ukraine. Euromaidan Press. Retrieved from: https://euromaidanpress.com/2017/04/27/austrian-neutrality-is-no-model-for-ukraine/#google_vignette [In English].
  15. Fischer, S. (2019, April 17). The Donbas conflict: Opposing interests and narratives, difficult peace process. Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP) Research Paper. Retrieved from: https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2019RP05/ [In English].
  16. Freedom House. (2002). Freedom in the world 2002. Refworld. Retrieved from: https://www.refworld.org/reference/annualreport/freehou/2002/en/51254 [In English].
  17. Gady, F.-S. (2014, March 6). Austrian neutrality: A model for Ukraine. The National Interest. Retrieved from: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/austrian-neutrality-model-ukraine-10005 [In English].
  18. Gärtner, H. (2014). Neutrality for Ukraine according to the Austrian Model (Policy Paper No. 1). Wien: Österreichisches Institut für Internationale Politik (oiip). Retrieved from: https://d-nb.info/118641359X/34 [In English].
  19. Ignatius, D. (2014, May 20). A Finland model for Ukraine? The Washington Post. Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/david-ignatius-a-finland-model-for-ukraine/2014/05/20/75a414a8-e05e-11e3-810f-764fe508b82d_story.html [In English].
  20. Kirchick, J. (2014, July 27). Finlandization is not a solution for Ukraine. The American Interest. Retrieved from: https://www.the-american-interest.com/2014/07/27/finlandization-is-not-a-solution-for-ukraine/ [In English].
  21. Kotlyar, Yu., & Lymar, M. (2025). Ukraine as a shield for Europe: The Russian invasion and the reshaping of international security. Acta De Historia & Politica: Saeculum XXI, 10, 75–86. https://doi.org/10.26693/ahpsxxi2025.10.075 [In English].
  22. Kotlyar, Yu., & Lymar, M. (2023). Ukrainian shield in defense of European civilization: Chronology and periodization.Eminak: Scientific Quarterly Journal, 3(43), 255–271. https://doi.org/10.33782/eminak2023.3(43).669 [In English].
  23. Kuzio, T. (2003, November 1). EU and Ukraine: A turning point in 2004? European Union Institute for Security Studies: Occasional Papers, 47. Retrieved from: https://www.iss.europa.eu/publications/occasional-papers/eu-and-ukraine-turning-point-2004 [In English].
  24. Lane, D. (2008). The Orange Revolution: «People’s revolution» or revolutionary coup? British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 10(4), 525–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856x.2008.00343.x [In English].
  25. Menon, R., & Snyder, J. L. (2017). Buffer zones: Anachronism, power vacuum, or confidence builder? Review of International Studies, 43(5), 962–986. [In English].
  26. Mite, V. (2006, June 22). Ukraine: Prolonged political wrangling has its cost. RFE/RL. Retrieved from: https://www.rferl.org/a/1069382.html [In English].
  27. Molchanov, M.A. (2003, May 20). Ukraine’s European choice: Pitfalls and prospects (Final Report, NATO-EAPC Fellowship 2001–2003). Ottawa: NATO, Office of Information and Press. Retrieved from: https://www.nato.int/acad/fellow/01-03/molchanov.pdf [In English].
  28. Noach, O., & Johansen, A. I. (2025, August 1). Warpod #11: Ukraine as buffer state since the end of the Cold War. University of Southern Denmark. Retrieved from: https://surl.li/ykadsk [In English].
  29. Novotny, J. (2014, March 14). Ukraine: Reviewing the fault lines. Gateway House. Retrieved from: https://www.gatewayhouse.in/ukraine-reviewing-the-fault-lines/ [In English].
  30. Pedi, R. (2020). Small states in Europe as a buffer between East and West. In G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the Politics of Small States (pp. 167–188). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. [In English].
  31. European Union. (2013). Proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion of the Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part (Proposal COM/2013/0290). EUR-Lex. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX%3A52013PC0290 [In English].
  32. Richter, W. (2014, April). Die Ukraine-Krise: Die Dimension der paneuropäischen Sicherheitskooperation. Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, SWP-Aktuell, 23. Retrieved from: https://www.swp-berlin.org/publications/products/aktuell/2014A23_rrw.pdf [In German].
  33. Sakwa, R. (2015). Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the borderlands. London: I.B. Tauris. [In English].
  34. Sutela, P. (2012, March 9). The Underachiever: Ukraine’s economy since 1991. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from: https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2012/03/the-underachiever-ukraines-economy-since-1991 [In English].
  35. Vilson, M. (2017). Baltic Perspectives on the Ukraine Crisis: Europeanization in the Shadow of Insecurity. Ideology and Politics, 1(7), 8–46. [In English].
  36. Wawrzonek, M. (2016). Ukraina jako przykład państwa „szarej strefy”. Studia Politologica Ucraino-Polona, 6, 209–216. [In Polish].
  37. Wawrzonek, M. (2014). Ukraine in the «Gray Zone»: Between the «Russkiy Mir» and Europe. East European Politics and Societies and Cultures, 28(4), 758–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325414543947
  38. Wissgott, S.S. (2019, November 22). New hope for Ukraine, 15 years after Orange Revolution. CGTN. Retrieved from: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2019-11-22/New-hope-for-Ukraine-15-years-after-Orange-Revolution-LPx5gASGdy/index.html [In English].
  39. Wolczuk, K., & Žeruolis, D. (2018). Rebuilding Ukraine: An Assessment of EU Assistance. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House). Retrieved from: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2018-08-16-rebuilding-ukraine-eu-assistance-wolczuk-zeruolis.pdf [In English].