Analytical Report: Dialogue with the Ukrainian Community in Germany

Introduction

As a result of the full-scale war launched by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, millions of Ukrainian citizens were forced to leave their homes and flee abroad. According to the Civil Network OPORA, as of May 2025, approximately 8.9 million Ukrainians were staying outside of Ukraine. While it is difficult to determine exact figures due to varying data from Ukrainian and international institutions, the share of Ukrainian citizens abroad currently represents about 15–20% of Ukraine’s population prior to February 24, 2022. This indicates that Ukraine's demographic and migration situation requires urgent intervention from the Ukrainian government, the civil sector, and the partner states that have hosted the largest numbers of Ukrainian citizens.

Comprehensive engagement with the diaspora, which has significantly grown and changed over the past few years, requires an understanding of the key challenges and needs facing its members. To explore these aspects, Civil Network OPORA initiated a series of facilitated dialogues with Ukrainian communities. The first such dialogue took place in late April 2024 in Vilnius, Lithuania. The second iteration of dialogues was held in December 2024 across three cities in the United Kingdom. The next stage involves a series of discussions in Poland, Italy, Spain, and Ireland.

Following the start of the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022, Germany provided Ukraine with comprehensive support, becoming one of Ukraine's key partners in the European Union. According to estimates by the German Federal Statistical Office (Destatis), as of July 2025, approximately 1,109,000 Ukrainian citizens resided in the country. They accounted for 9% of the country's total foreign population, forming the second-largest group after Turkish citizens. In 2024, approximately 56,000 Ukrainian citizens lived in Berlin. In July 2025, Destatis also reported that about 25% of Ukrainians in Germany are children under 18, 61% are of working age (18–60 years), and 14% are elderly (over 60 years). According to the Federal Employment Agency of Germany, 300,000 Ukrainian citizens were employed in the FRG at the beginning of 2025, of whom 174,000 were women and 126,000 were men. Thus, the employment rate among Ukrainians in Germany slightly exceeds 33%.

Civil Network OPORA visited the Ukrainian community in Berlin to identify the difficulties faced by Ukrainian citizens in Germany, understand their communication needs with the Ukrainian state and society, and outline potential programs and measures that can be implemented to strengthen resilience and ensure sustainable support. OPORA sincerely thanks the Allianz Ukrainischer Organisationen for their assistance in organizing the dialogue.

Key Findings

Civil Network OPORA held a facilitated dialogue in Berlin, the capital of Germany, to improve citizen engagement and integrate their views into public policies, ensuring their effective implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Among the key objectives OPORA set for these dialogues were systematizing the experiences of Ukrainian communities abroad, developing a strategy for their interaction with Ukraine's democratic institutions and civil society, and fostering a shared understanding of the problems, needs, and methods for involving Ukrainians abroad in the formation of domestic policies.

The dialogue was attended by 27 participants. OPORA identified the ties that connect Ukrainians abroad with Ukraine, their motivations for participating in social and political life, and the tools they know of or use for this purpose. Furthermore, we explored the challenges faced by Ukrainians abroad and the reasons that prevent them from returning to Ukraine.

The main factor maintaining the participants' connection with Ukraine is their Ukrainian identity and an internal sense of belonging to Ukrainian society. Respondents perceive Ukrainians as a single global community, with no division between "here" and "there." Additional elements that strengthen this sense of unity are the Ukrainian language and culture, as well as shared symbolic spaces.
Respondents feel a deep emotional connection to Ukraine, based on love for the country, nostalgia for their familiar way of life, and the need to belong among "their own." Shared values and the common experience of enduring the war are also significant to them.
Social ties are one of the most important ways of maintaining contact with Ukraine. Communication with family and friends in Ukraine helps participants stay involved in the country's life, understand current events, and feel an emotional closeness to home. The Ukrainian community in Germany also plays a vital role, providing a supportive environment and networking opportunities. According to the participants, this requires both physical and informational infrastructure.
The dialogue participants view civic and volunteer activities as a way to maintain their connection with Ukraine. Most frequently mentioned were providing aid to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, wounded soldiers, and civilians, as well as participating in volunteer initiatives aimed at supporting Ukrainians both in Germany and back home. At the same time, participation in socio-political initiatives is seen as a way to stay engaged in the country's life and feel a personal contribution to its democratic development.
Citizenship and possession of a Ukrainian passport remain key symbols of belonging to the state for the respondents. Some mentioned material assets in Ukraine—primarily real estate—which strengthen their physical connection to the country. Another vital channel of connection is the participation of children in Ukrainian educational programs, which allows families to remain within the Ukrainian linguistic and cultural space.
Ukrainian business also remains an important element of connection for the diaspora: some respondents continue to work for Ukrainian companies or are developing cooperation between German and Ukrainian businesses. An additional factor is the use of Ukrainian brands, banks, and services, which create a sense of Ukraine's presence abroad. Medical tourism and services from the Ukrainian beauty industry are particularly popular.
Dialogue participants emphasized that the Ukrainian community abroad is diverse in its level of activity. Alongside the active segment of the community, there is a conditionally "passive" group, whose connection to Ukraine is manifested primarily through practical or administrative channels—consular services, social support, or participation in events organized by other Ukrainians. This "passive" part of the community is less involved in socio-political life but actively follows legislative changes affecting them. However, passivity should not be equated with indifference; individuals may be inactive in certain areas while actively engaging in others.
Respondents identified six main areas of their participation in the socio-political life of Ukraine: political participation (specifically e-democracy), expert involvement and rulemaking, promotion of Ukraine in public, building of the local Ukrainian community, interaction with Ukrainians in Ukraine, and political participation in Germany and the EU.
Respondents exercise political participation from abroad through e-democracy tools (e-petitions, open letters), which are convenient for remote use. At the same time, participation in electoral processes is limited by institutional barriers—primarily the residency requirement. This effectively deprives Ukrainians who have lived abroad for a long time of the opportunity to run for high-level offices and creates inequality compared to those permanently residing in Ukraine.
Dialogue participants seek to join expert groups and contribute to rulemaking in Ukraine to help align Ukrainian legislation and policies with European standards. At the same time, there is a demand for specialized networking programs and sustainable communication channels with the Ukrainian expert community.
Respondents actively promote the Ukrainian agenda through appearances and publications in German media; however, they face linguistic, institutional, and networking barriers: Ukrainian experts are often unknown to local outlets. To remedy this situation, it is necessary to increase the visibility of experts, establish contacts with editorial offices and institutions, adapt messaging for local audiences, overcome stereotypes, and involve recognizable local opinion leaders.
Developing the local Ukrainian community in Germany is one of the key ways participants engage in the socio-political life of Ukraine. They take responsibility within their fields of expertise, initiate changes, and demonstrate leadership by example. Respondents engage the conditionally "passive" part of the community in activism through educational formats, particularly regarding their rights and tools for participation. At the same time, participants insist on the necessity of regular feedback from both the Ukrainian and German authorities.
Participants emphasize the importance of debunking stereotypes about Ukrainians abroad and regularly highlighting their activities for audiences within Ukraine. They see the diaspora’s role as that of a full-fledged partner in international cooperation: building sustainable contacts between NGOs and political circles in both countries, and developing joint projects and policies in the fields of security and defense (specifically drone production), medicine, and cybersecurity.
The participants view the potential acquisition of active and passive voting rights in Germany as a path toward systematically promoting the Ukrainian agenda. This included both joining existing parties and the possibility of creating a Ukrainian party in Germany. At the same time, important caveats were raised: the migrant community must carefully define the boundaries of its influence on Germany's domestic political processes to avoid reputational and political risks.
Among the key motivations for engaging in Ukraine's socio-political life, we can highlight emotional factors, the prospect of returning home, prior experience in civic participation, and the positive examples of others.
The emotional factors motivating participants include the need for self-realization and recognition, empathy and a desire to help others (both in Ukraine and within the diaspora), as well as a quest for justice and a sense of moral responsibility.
Many participants are driven toward socio-political activism by the feeling that their stay in Germany is temporary and by a desire to preserve their Ukrainian identity, as they envision their future in Ukraine. They view returning as a realistic prospect but emphasize the need for a clear "roadmap." An additional stimulus is the desire for change in Ukraine—including lustration, the establishment of anti-discrimination policies, and the protection of vulnerable groups: respondents are ready to be drivers of these changes, drawing on the practices of justice and equality they have witnessed in the EU.
For some respondents, motivation is rooted in their prior experience with activism in Ukraine. Participation in socio-political life in Germany is perceived as a continuity of their existing stance: people “brought” their work, competencies, and networks with them, and thus continue their engagement while simultaneously learning how participation tools function in the German context.
The respondents are motivated to act more vigorously by people from Ukraine—the resilience of the military, volunteers, and teachers in frontline cities. An additional stimulus was the wave of active individuals arriving in 2022, which created a community of like-minded people and facilitated the launching of initiatives. This confidence is further bolstered by positive examples of democratic changes or technological development in Ukraine.
Among the key obstacles to socio-political participation in Ukraine, respondents identify institutional limitations in electoral procedures (primarily the residency requirement), a chronic deficit of financial resources, a lack of systemic engagement of the diaspora in Ukraine's socio-political life, emotional burnout among activists, and security risks, including instances of harassment.
Among the key requests to the state, respondents identified: increasing the visibility and recognition of the volunteer work of Ukrainians abroad; supporting and promoting strong diaspora organizations and their institutionalization; establishing a systemic dialogue and a cohesive policy regarding the global Ukrainian community; leveraging diaspora expertise and securing Ukrainian state support for German-Ukrainian projects; facilitating the political participation of Ukrainians in Germany; building cooperation between overseas Ukrainian organizations and civil society in Ukraine; ensuring systemic state communication that treats Ukrainians abroad as equal citizens; developing a "roadmap" for return (especially for youth); and investing in the reform of embassies and consulates to create human-centered, accessible, and efficient services.
Among the most significant challenges faced by Ukrainian citizens in Germany are the language barrier, limited access to the labor market, non-recognition of qualifications and experience, difficulties with finances and housing, and prejudice from German society. For activists, these are compounded by weak institutional ties with Ukraine, a lack of coordination among initiatives in Germany, and a shortage of resources and funding.
Among the reasons deterring participants from returning to Ukraine, they cited security risks and the continuation of the war; economic instability and significantly better working conditions in Germany; the integration of families into German society; fear of mobilization; distrust of the authorities, political instability, and corruption; a sense of discrimination and a lack of faith in the restoration of justice; and the loss of property or business along with a feeling of being “unneeded” in Ukraine. At the same time, some participants see no obstacles and plan to return to Ukraine in the near future.

Discussion Results

Question 1. What Connects You to Ukraine When You Are Far From Home?

The first question raised for discussion during the facilitated dialogue aimed to identify which objects, emotions, ties, experiences, and feelings among the participants evoke the strongest sense of unity with Ukraine and Ukrainian society, despite being abroad.

Respondents mentioned various aspects of their connection to Ukraine, which can be broadly divided into the following main categories:

Awareness and conscious support of one's own Ukrainian identity;
Maintenance of emotional and social ties with the Ukrainian community abroad and in Ukraine;
Preservation of ties with the state and businesses.

All three categories of connection are of equal value. It cannot be argued that any one of them is more or less important to the discussion participants.

Awareness and Support of Ukrainian Identity

When discussing the factors that help them maintain a close connection with Ukraine, dialogue participants most frequently emphasized an internal sense of belonging to Ukrainian society. All those present unequivocally identified themselves as Ukrainian citizens, and this identity was often central to their self-definition. Some respondents noted that for them, being Ukrainian is not merely a matter of origin, but a conscious choice and a firm internal stance. At the same time, many participants stressed that their specific location does not matter: despite everything, they remain Ukrainians and perceive themselves as an inseparable part of Ukrainian society.

I don't make a distinction for myself; it makes absolutely no difference to me whether it's the people I communicate with here or the people there. I do not divide society into “here” and “there”.

We view the entirety of the Ukrainian people as one global community, regardless of whether I am currently living in Ukraine or beyond its borders.

For me, “Where am I?” is a very important question. Where will I be buried?

As the dialogue participants noted, various elements of Ukrainian identity that hold personal significance help them maintain a connection with Ukraine. Among these, the most frequently mentioned were the Ukrainian language, culture, humor, and national cuisine. Some respondents emphasized the importance of a shared faith and attending church as factors that sustain a sense of unity with the Ukrainian community. For some participants, an additional element of this connection is the rhythm of life and work: they noted that the pace of life in Germany is generally slower, whereas they are accustomed to living in the more dynamic rhythm inherent to Ukraine.

We talked about the church, specifically how most of the community [goes there] on Easter day. That is to say, it's less about faith and more specifically about the infrastructure—the church as a place where many come once a year, and others even more often.

You know that at home, all processes happen faster, and you take action when you are working with Ukrainian organizations. You know that you can work in the same rhythm.

If someone called you in the evening from Ukraine and said, “Hey, let's submit a joint project tomorrow?”, you would send them the documents during the night, you'd write something together, and you'd make it by morning. In Germany, that is impossible.

Emotional Ties

Closely linked to the sense of Ukrainian identity is the emotional connection that joins the dialogue participants with Ukraine. Most often, they spoke of love for their country and compatriots, and the need for solidarity with “their people.” For many, this connection is accompanied by nostalgia for life in Ukraine and a desire to return to their familiar way of life.

A longing for Ukraine due to the loss of the opportunity for the normal life you were accustomed to.

An important part of the emotional connection with Ukraine is the sense of shared values with other Ukrainians. Participants emphasized that they are united by a drive for freedom, determination, and a readiness to take responsibility for themselves and others.

Freedom is the central word for any Ukrainian. We are fighting not only for land but for our free [choice], for the freedom to make our own decisions—for freedom as a core element of Ukrainian identity.

For many participants, the shared emotions connecting them with other Ukrainians include hatred for the enemy and a longing for victory in the war. At the same time, a palpable sense of uncertainty remains, causing emotional fatigue and anxiety. Furthermore, some of those present spoke of a feeling of fear that unites them with both Ukrainians in Ukraine and Ukrainians abroad.

Uncertainty, because there is so much we don’t know. These “swings” are constant: Trump arrives, Zelenskyy leaves. And that’s it—we think it will end tomorrow, or by the end of the year, then by the end of next year, and so on. And this uncertainty is something we all share.

For me, the important word is “fear.” Because, in reality, every one of us here is united by fear with the people who are in Ukraine. Everyone has their own. How do I return? When will the war end? Will I be accepted there? And so on. And this fear is like a big, big lump. A massive one.

Social Ties

Alongside the internal sense of unity with Ukraine, the dialogue participants also noted more tangible manifestations of this connection. First and foremost, this referred to personal ties with other Ukrainians, as well as participation in the socio-political life of Ukraine.

Personal Ties

According to the respondents, the importance of personal ties is difficult to overstate. They take on special significance because both Ukrainians in Germany and Ukrainians in Ukraine share a common past—similar memories, childhood experiences, and more. Furthermore, the war and its associated challenges have created many shared themes and experiences through which, according to the participants, only another Ukrainian can truly understand them.

One of the key ways to maintain a connection with Ukraine for the dialogue participants is through contact with family, loved ones, and friends. The respondents noted that communication with loved ones who remain in Ukraine that helps them feel close to the country, understand current events, and avoid losing their connection to home.

Friends, family, love that hold us there.

No less important for the dialogue participants was the connection with the Ukrainian community in Germany. According to them, close contacts within the Ukrainian community abroad, along with shared events and projects help them avoid assimilating into German society and instead preserve a sense of belonging to "their own people."

Respondents particularly emphasized the significance of networking and moments when people from Ukraine visit the Ukrainian community in Germany. At the same time, participants noted that maintaining this connection is only possible through a shared infrastructure that facilitates communication: this refers to both physical spaces (hubs, churches, libraries) and a shared information space—media and social networks. Respondents stressed that it is fundamentally important for them to remain within the Ukrainian information space—following events, public discussions, and changes in the country—to ensure they do not lose touch with the nation.

Events where Ukrainians [gather], networking. When people from Ukraine come to Germany and those living here meet with the people arriving from Ukraine.

If you took away all our social media right now, all we’d have left are “Shalena Bdzhilka” candies we can buy and the courier who arrives once a week. Everything else would disappear. That includes the news, the communications, and the calls with family.

Socio-political Activity

Socio-political activity is another vital way for dialogue participants to maintain their connection with Ukraine. In this context, the most frequently mentioned activity was supporting the Armed Forces of Ukraine—both the military directly in Ukraine and wounded soldiers undergoing treatment and rehabilitation in Germany. Furthermore, many of those surveyed take an active part in volunteer activities aimed at helping Ukrainians in Ukraine and supporting those forced to move abroad. Some respondents noted their participation in socio-political initiatives in Ukraine, particularly in projects related to anti-corruption efforts.

Volunteering—specifically helping the wounded and helping each other both in Ukraine and beyond its borders. This is what unites us and maintains our connection with Ukraine.

Countering corruption as well, because our understanding of the threat of corruption unites us [in Germany] and unites us with Ukraine.

Ties with the State and Businesses

Furthermore, Ukrainians abroad maintain a connection with their homeland through interaction with the state. This primarily concerns legal aspects and access to state services. Respondents noted that Ukrainian businesses play an important role in preserving a sense of belonging to Ukraine by creating a familiar environment and helping them stay within the Ukrainian context.

State

Speaking about the connection with the Ukrainian state, the dialogue participants primarily mentioned their legal belonging to Ukraine—citizenship and the Ukrainian passport. Some respondents mentioned possessing material or financial assets in Ukraine, specifically real estate.

I have my passport, I have my driver's license, even if I am abroad.

Citizenship unites us. It is a legal fact.

Real estate. Many have either their own property or shared ownership.

Furthermore, respondents mentioned the connection with the state through their children. Specifically, they referred to studying in state-run Ukrainian schools or participating in remote educational programs, which allows children to remain within the Ukrainian educational space and enables parents to maintain their link to the country.

It is a connection through the child. Quite by chance, I saw an advertisement for a math school on Facebook. They offered math and various courses; they had set up targeted advertising, and we happened to open it. Because of this, there is this connection—my child, even though Ukrainian is his second language, can do math in Ukrainian. Up until that point, I always thought that language was simply identity. In reality, when I saw how they conduct math courses in Ukrainian, I realized that it is access to innovation. This prospect of returning is built on any attempts to maintain a connection with us. It’s investments, it’s courses, it’s meetings with creators in Ukraine. The main thing is that this connection must not be broken.

Business

The business environment also plays a vital role in maintaining the connection between Ukrainians abroad and Ukraine. Dialogue participants noted that some Ukrainians in Germany continue to work for Ukrainian companies and pay taxes in Ukraine. Others, meanwhile, find employment in German companies and strive to establish cooperation between German and Ukrainian businesses, encouraging investment.

For those who were lucky enough to find it: [a job] that connects you to Ukraine.

Some are still working for Ukraine officially and paying taxes there. So, work is also a bond.

There are people who are doing business here. And they integrate into German companies specifically to build bridges and do business with Ukraine or to bring Ukrainian business here.

Investing in Ukraine is a connection to Ukraine.

Respondents pointed out specific Ukrainian brands whose products or services help them maintain a connection with Ukraine, particularly Monobank, PrivatBank, Oshchadbank, Roshen, Halia Baluvana, etc. According to dialogue participants, Ukrainian carriers—Nova Post, Ukrzaliznytsia (Ukrainian Railways), and Ukrposhta—play an especially vital role. They also mentioned the connection to Ukraine through the medical and service sectors, citing cases of medical tourism (trips to Ukraine for treatment or consultations) as well as the high quality of the Ukrainian beauty industry.

Dentistry. Manicures, hairstyles, and so on. If you’re seeing a doctor, you absolutely have to get a haircut, manicure, pedicure, massage, botox—everything you possibly can. And you get it all done in three days.

What Connects Other Ukrainians Abroad to Ukraine?

Some dialogue participants voiced the opinion that a portion of Ukrainians abroad does not feel such a strong connection to Ukraine. According to the respondents, public discussions usually attract the more active community members, while there is also a conditionally "passive" segment for whom the connection to the country may manifest differently. However. some participants emphasized that one should not generalize: people may be passive in certain areas but show activity in others.

A very conscious crowd has gathered here. When I hear comments that everyone is in the [Ukrainian] information space—that is not the case. That everyone is super-conscious about self-identification—that is not the case. It’s just that the group gathered here produces these results. But it is not the reality. And we must take that into account.

This is not a representative sample of the Ukrainian diaspora in Germany. We are all “for everything good and against everything bad.” But that doesn’t mean that [other] Ukrainians are inactive.

I am a passive consumer of Plast [Ukrainian scouting] and the Ukrainian school, but I am not passive in other areas.

When asked what, in the opinion of the dialogue participants, connects the more "passive" part of the Ukrainian community with Ukraine, respondents most frequently mentioned the services of embassies and consulates, as well as practical assistance organized by active community members—such as the distribution of free food or clothing. Some noted that the "passive" segment is less involved in socio-political life and, while they do monitor legislative and political changes, they more often expect actions or decisions from the more active representatives of the community. However, other respondents emphasized that such a consumerist attitude is not universal and is not characteristic of the majority of Ukrainians abroad.

They visit consular centers.

They receive childbirth benefits; they register through our funds and receive 85,000 [UAH] for the birth of a first, second, or third child. This is also a form of civic engagement because it is access to administrative services.

Services provided by the active segment. Free meals: active Ukrainians organized Tafels [food banks], and the inactive ones come and take the food for free. Active Ukrainians organized clothing drives from Germans and set up a volunteer center, while the inactive ones came and took the clothes.

In the socio-political sphere—nothing [connects them].

People closely follow changes in legislation in both Ukraine and Germany that affect them personally. And they wait for the active part of society to do something to make that policy change faster or to ensure that law is passed.

On the other hand, there are people who happily bring their children to church, come to the library and take out books, without being “active” themselves.

Question 2. What Motivates You to Engage in Socio-political Life in Ukraine While Being Abroad? How Can This Be Done?

The second question presented for discussion during the facilitated dialogue aimed at two key objectives:

To identify which tools of socio-political participation the dialogue participants are aware of and which they have already utilized during their time abroad.
To identify the motivations participants have for engaging in Ukraine's socio-political life while residing abroad.

Ways of Engaging in Socio-political Life in Ukraine

Almost all participants of the dialogue meeting are actively involved in the life of the Ukrainian community in Germany: they engage in volunteering, advocate for the rights of vulnerable groups, participate in advocacy events, and more. Moreover, many participants were already involved in the socio-political life of Ukraine (at various levels) prior to their relocation to Germany. Their proactive stance significantly influenced the substance of the discussion.

Political Participation

Among the primary means of influencing socio-political life in Ukraine and exercising their civic rights, dialogue participants identified e-democracy tools, specifically electronic petitions and open letters. Those present pointed to the simplicity and convenience of using these tools remotely (especially when compared to similar instruments in Germany) and their role as a way to maintain a connection with Ukraine.

If I don't like something, it doesn't matter where I am. I have my passport, I have my rights, even if I am abroad. We have excellent opportunities to remotely initiate a signature drive to repeal a law. We have everything remotely: petitions, open letters, and so on. This can be done in any field, including the legal sphere. We can sign all of this remotely.

There was also discussion regarding participation in elections at various levels. In this context, respondents primarily mentioned the barriers to exercising their active and passive suffrage, specifically, the residency requirement (the mandate to reside within the territory of Ukraine for a certain period to be eligible to run for high elected offices). This is perceived as an obstacle that creates inequality between those abroad and those who permanently reside in Ukraine.

According to Ukrainian law, most of us cannot run for the Verkhovna Rada or for President. We do not reside permanently in Ukraine. If you want to be a Member of Parliament, you must return, live there for five years, and only then do you have that opportunity. This means that when or if the hostilities end, we will still be different from the people who remained in Ukraine

Expert Involvement and Knowledge Exchange

One of the key focuses of the discussion regarding the second question was the participants' readiness to take part in expert groups and the drafting of legislation. In particular, dialogue participants who have experience integrating into German institutions and knowledge of European legislation seek to use this resource for the transformation of Ukraine, especially within the context of European integration processes.

We see how institutions and democracy work here—systems that took hundreds of years to build, and we are a young state. People involved in German institutions see all of this, take note of it, and this experience is invaluable for Ukraine., provided there is an understanding in Ukraine that this is truly valuable to them.

There are many laws right now. They are being written all the time, but I often want to say: this doesn't correspond to reality; it isn't going to work. With our knowledge, we can help with that.

A similar way of engaging in Ukraine's socio-political life was described as the creation of "agents of influence": the accumulation and adoption of foreign experience in the fields of tolerance, integration, and non-discrimination for further relaying back to Ukraine.

Berlin itself encourages people to see that a society can be diverse. People who eventually return to Ukraine will carry a completely different narrative.

We could be the kind of experts who guide Ukrainian activists, explaining how the European community works and how European legislation functions.

Participants provided specific examples of such involvement, drawing from both personal experience and the practices of particular Ukrainian institutions. Some present pointed to the need to review certain legislative initiatives through the lens of European standards and the practical feasibility of their implementation.

In 2016, I was involved in drafting the law on the principles of youth policy, which was only signed this year. I realize now how incorrectly we drafted that law from the perspective of integration into European society. I would write and interpret it differently now.

Look at how it was in the energy sector. There was a restructuring at the legislative level. People who had been educated and worked abroad were invited to lead the process. People with high salaries abroad returned to work for pennies. The mechanisms existed, and people responded. If communication is built correctly, people will return and do the work.

Another method mentioned for influencing the situation in Ukraine was leveraging pressure through partners, namely drawing the attention of German or other international partners during negotiations and screenings to the necessity of implementing specific policies.

Ukrainians here can ensure that European partners pressure Ukraine regarding the implementation of anti-discrimination policies.

At the same time, there were requests for broader networking and communication with the Ukrainian expert community. Participants emphasized the need for specialized programs for knowledge exchange and the establishment of permanent links between opinion leaders in Ukraine and Germany.

I want a program that involves opinion leaders to establish ties with Ukraine, an exchange of leaders between Germany and Ukraine.

As for participating in expert groups in Ukraine—everyone is ready to be active, but there is a lack of communication with expert target audiences.

For some respondents, involvement in such expert communities is also important from the perspective of their professional activities in Germany.

Participating in expert groups in Ukraine is important to me because, without that knowledge, I am not an expert on Ukraine here.

As we can see, representatives of the Ukrainian community in Germany seek to utilize the experience and knowledge gained in Germany to implement best practices into Ukrainian legislation.

Promotion of Ukraine Abroad

For many dialogue participants, a way of engaging in Ukraine's socio-political life is through appearances and publications in German media to keep the Ukrainian agenda relevant globally. In this context, they emphasized the importance of direct communication and the agency of the Ukrainian community in the information space ("Ukrainian perspectives from Ukrainian voices").

At the same time, respondents recognized that the Ukrainian presence in the German public sphere remains limited due to structural barriers—primarily linguistic, institutional, and networking obstacles. In particular, it was noted that Ukrainian experts are often not involved—not because of a lack of competence, but due to low visibility within professional circles.

The issue is not a lack of experts, but their invisibility. German media simply doesn't know them, and this is where Ukraine can play a role by visibly involving Ukrainians abroad in processes. Those who are currently being interviewed act as experts on every topic. There is the issue of language proficiency, but we have more people who are capable of speaking.

However, if you are an expert in a certain field, your German doesn't have to be perfect. A person with a Turkish background might speak “broken” German, and that is considered okay.

Another important aspect of the discussion was overcoming stereotypes about Ukrainians in the host society—stereotypes that formed historically and due to a lack of visibility—and instead creating a positive image of Ukraine and Ukrainians.

There is a disproportion in how the Ukrainian community is perceived based on past experiences: as unskilled, Russian-speaking, etc.

Participants also pointed to their involvement in the process of gradually dismantling the "Russian filter" through which the Ukrainian community has traditionally been perceived in Germany.

We can be visible here and convey the Ukrainian perspective. Not through Russian intermediaries, but directly. We can represent the German community in Ukraine and the Ukrainian community in Germany.

Given their relatively long period of living in Germany and their awareness of local political realities, some respondents noted that they could participate in advocacy efforts as "intermediaries" in intercultural communication, helping to adapt messages for maximum effectiveness across different audiences. According to them, mastering the "language" of the German political establishment is critically important for conducting complex, systemic discussions.

I’m sitting in a hall full of Germans, and a Ukrainian speaker begins by saying: “Imagine what it’s like to live under shelling.” I think to myself: “That shouldn't have been said.” If they had asked me who was sitting there, I would have told them. I live here. I know them. I would have said that these people, for example, need the latest statistics from Ukraine and two compelling stories that you can bring to life. Strengthen the theme of Ukraine rather than sensitizing it, because emotionally, they are already completely on Ukraine's side.

Furthermore, some dialogue participants emphasized the differences in how political activism is understood in Ukraine versus Germany. In their view, effective advocacy for Ukraine abroad requires not only emotional protest but also systemic work: a transition from radical, crisis-driven forms of influence to the more sustainable instruments of interaction with authorities that are characteristic of mature European democracies.

For Germans, patriotism is synonymous with volunteering, whereas walking around with a Ukrainian flag is seen as risky.

We used to think that political influence meant burning tires in front of the administration overnight or organizing a Maidan. Но here, there is a democratic format. The primary focus is on society creating processes and relaying them to the authorities as positive cases—rather than us going out and shouting: “You are doing nothing, do something better!”

Another method of socio-political participation identified was the involvement of opinion leaders who are well-known in Germany to promote Ukrainian interests. It was noted that the media capital of such figures could serve as an effective tool for establishing direct communication with German authorities and society, shaping a positive image of Ukraine, and amplifying its voice within the European space.

Ask people who have actual power and political influence in Germany (someone like Klitschko) to build something Ukrainian here. When Klitschko says something here, he is heard. When a poor Ukrainian orphan comes along, they aren't heard.

Development of the Local Community

For many dialogue participants, an important way of engaging in Ukraine's socio-political life is through the development and strengthening of the Ukrainian community in Germany. According to the respondents, it is important for them to take responsibility for solving specific problems and issues, to be active, and to "change the system." Regarding this matter, there is a perceptible sense of competition between Ukrainians who arrived after the start of the full-scale invasion and the "old" diaspora that resided in Germany previously. At the same time, some respondents emphasize the necessity of strengthening cooperation between the different "waves" of the Ukrainian diaspora.

One must absolutely take responsibility; otherwise, it will end up like in Russia. If I don’t like something, it doesn’t matter where I am located. I have my passport, I have my rights, even if I am abroad.

We cannot bear responsibility for everyone, but everything begins with us. We can take responsibility for ourselves, for our actions, for the consequences of those actions, and for our choice. If we have made the decision for ourselves to speak about Ukraine in Germany, then we can do that. We all remember how the second Ukrainian revolution began—with a simple Facebook post. Sometimes one voice, one word, can change everything. We can be that word. We feel this power, that everyone is taking responsibility upon themselves. Even psychologically, we cannot take responsibility for what we cannot physically change. We cannot change other people’s minds. We have to do something. We cannot fire someone or get rid of corruption just because I want to at a specific moment. But we can decide for ourselves: “I am against corruption.” And then move in that direction.

I know how it happens when a group of people changes the system simply because it must be done. These are the ones who take conscious responsibility. We aren't talking about responsibility for everything. What are you an expert in? What can you influence? That is conscious responsibility.

The diaspora [that arrived before 2022] is much smaller, but they are heard much better.

But there is a very large divide: the old diaspora and the people who arrived after 2022. These people are the ones who bring innovation and from whom you learn things. It is important to bring these different people together.

In this same context, respondents noted that it is important for them to involve the "passive" part of society in socio-political life. Participants believe the most effective means for this is, first and foremost, educational activity within their own community, specifically through political and civic dialogues. Such activity, according to them, fosters a culture of participation and mutual support within the Ukrainian environment. Furthermore, the respondents emphasized the importance of setting a personal example and receiving feedback from both Ukrainian and German authorities.

There is often an ignorance of exactly how I can be politically active.

If people want to be active, they can be active from Ukraine, from Spain, from Italy, or from Germany. The question here is how we, the layer of active people, communicate this further to society, how we take our society and the next generations into account so that they know their rights and opportunities and are involved to the maximum extent. Have we done enough for this?

I cannot take responsibility for others. But in my own field, when we work with discrimination... I have the thought: “You can't treat me like that.” Then, from that comes the thought: “You can't treat my people like that.” It starts with yourself—signing a petition.

I once heard a definition of leadership: Leadership is standing in a rushing current so that it is easier for everyone else to stand behind you... And only because there are leadership communities can we show, through our own example and lengthy explanations, that uniting, signatures, and petitions can and must influence something. Feedback is very important. A quick example: we mobilized people to write a request regarding Tegel [the former Berlin airport serving as a temporary refugee center]. And nothing happened, because a commission arrived, entered Tegel, we showed them a “pretty picture,” they left and wrote: “Everything is fine there, you are being manipulative.” And people became discouraged again, thinking: “No, nothing can be changed.” Feedback is vital.

Furthermore, a segment of the dialogue participants is actively working to ensure the rights of vulnerable groups. They emphasized that these issues remain relevant both within the broader Ukrainian national context and within the Ukrainian community abroad itself.

The LGBTQ+ community, people with chronic illnesses, people who use drugs, men of conscription age, people who arrived earlier or those who came after the start of the war—all of these people have their own fears. They want to be heard; they need respect and empathy.

Interaction with Ukrainians in Ukraine

Similar to the stereotypes regarding Ukrainians held within German society mentioned above, the discussion also touched upon stereotypes regarding Ukrainians who moved abroad that exist within Ukrainian society itself. For this reason, an important role was assigned to informing about the activities of Ukrainian communities abroad and debunking negative perceptions of them.

Highlighting the work of Ukrainians abroad for Ukrainians in Ukraine (a lot is being done; we are acting as much as we can).

Non-destruction of the image of Ukrainians abroad.

Stories [need to be countered] that all Ukrainians in Germany are people from Halychyna who rented out their apartments for high prices and are just “sitting it out” on welfare and Jobcenter payments.

According to the participants, the Ukrainian community in Germany can engage organizations and individuals from Ukraine in international cooperation—specifically by implementing joint projects with German and Ukrainian organizations and drafting policy documents and support programs. At the same time, they emphasized the importance of creating sustainable contacts between civic initiatives and political circles in both countries, so that Ukrainians in Germany become not just "intermediaries," but full-fledged co-creators of international decisions.

For example, during meetings at the Bundestag, involve Ukrainians living in Germany so that they can continue working with one another afterward.

Aside from political engagement, special emphasis should be placed on establishing cooperation with foreign businesses, particularly in the security and defense sector. In the view of participants, this would allow Ukraine to adopt European standards and to share its unique experience gained during the war. Other positive examples of cooperation mentioned included the fields of medicine and cybersecurity.

Security in Europe, drones, and a systemic exchange of experience with Ukraine.

There is experience with medical projects, such as “Doctors Without Borders.” In MilTech, Germans are learning from Ukrainians how to build drones. Ukrainian cybersecurity is strong, but it doesn’t yet meet European standards.

The sphere of education and science served as an example of less successful cooperation. Concerns were voiced regarding an instrumental attitude toward Ukrainian scientists—essentially treating them as a means to secure grant funding—on the part of European partners.

In education and science, Ukrainians are often brought into projects just to get the money. Ukrainian scholars are viewed as “the poor ones” who need to be helped; Europeans underestimate their experience.

Participation in Political Life of Germany

Considerable attention was given by the participants to the issues of integration into Germany’s political life. In the long term, Ukrainians currently residing in Germany will be able to obtain both active and passive suffrage this country and more broadly within the EU, allowing them to promote the Ukrainian agenda even more effectively.

The diasporial part and the newcomers form a new European common society. This will change when politicians realize that we have the right to elect and be elected not only in Ukraine, but also in Europe.

During this discussion, ideas were voiced regarding the institutionalization of the Ukrainian community's interests, specifically the creation of a Ukrainian party in Germany. This idea is based on the conviction that direct political representation would ensure a significantly more effective protection of the community's interests at both the local and European levels.

No German will represent Ukrainians in the European Parliament or in the local government in Germany. We must enter them ourselves. This is what the Russians and the Turks did. They built a powerful community. The Turkish community is represented in every district of Berlin. It should be the same for us.

If we want to be represented and achieve results, we cannot only be great at volunteering and being visible on social media where people “like” us. We must join an existing party or create our own. I, for one, am in favor of there being a Ukrainian party.

Furthermore, some participants view such institutionalization as a path toward gaining access to specific resources—both political and material—to realize their aspirations.

Give us 10 seats in the European Parliament, give us 15 seats in the Bundestag, give us two seats in each of your local parliaments. We even know where the money is kept, on which “shelves.” But we cannot just walk in and say: “Give us a little from this shelf.”

At the same time, warnings were also voiced regarding the dangers and risks of careless interference in Germany's domestic political processes.

There are things you cannot express publicly. It is difficult for a migrant community to formulate these limitations. When Ukrainian communities try to influence things that they shouldn't. Ukrainians should not impose domestic policy on Germans.

Motivation to Engage in Socio-political Processes in Ukraine

Emotional Factors

First and foremost, participants are motivated to engage in socio-political activity by the need for self-realization and the desire to be recognized and heard.

Self-realization abroad—we are looking for places where we can feel like a human being.

Activism here boosts your personal brand here.

Another important factor is empathy and the desire to help others—both in Ukraine and within the Ukrainian community in Germany.

There is war fatigue, and people want to help others escape that stress. The mental state of Ukrainians is poor, but Ukrainians abroad can help alleviate this—supporting them with the internal strength we have. For this, we need events and spaces.

The connection to the people we are helping.

The participants recognized that Ukrainians abroad are in a more stable and secure environment than those in Ukraine, and therefore possess a greater emotional and mental resource. This places a responsibility on them to practice tolerance during communication and to foster mutual understanding between different segments of Ukrainian society.

When I travel to Ukraine, I feel a sense of sorrow because the people there are so exhausted. We have more resource; things are easier for us. When you visit Ukraine, you shouldn't “unload” your opinions on people; instead, you need to be tolerant of more polarized positions. I have the capacity to understand that point of view. We can share our internal resource—the resource of understanding one another's perspectives.

Among the factors prompting greater civic activity, participants pointed to the need for justice. As an example of realizing this need in Ukraine, participants mentioned the "Revolution on Cardboards" (mass protests for the restoration of the independence of anti-corruption bodies in July 2025).

We have a reason for doing this—to make the world around us fairer. Seeing injustice somewhere is also what motivates you to take action.

In a similar context, participants mentioned moral duty, responsibility, and self-respect.

One must absolutely take responsibility; otherwise, it will end up like in Russia.

Perspective of Returning to Ukraine

For many participants, the motivation for engaging in socio-political life is the understanding that their stay in Germany is temporary and a desire to maintain ties with Ukraine. This connection is deeply rooted in values and helps sustain their Ukrainian identity.

Faith in Ukraine; faith in the broadest sense of the word.

We do not feel detached from Ukraine. At the same time, there is a sense of being in a diaspora—there was even a feeling that was almost religious—but on the other hand, there is the realization that you also see yourself in Ukraine.

The prospect of returning is a major motivation. But one needs to have an understanding of the process [of return].

Another powerful incentive for socio-political activity is the desire for change in Ukraine. Specifically, requests were voiced for full-scale lustration and the implementation of anti-discrimination legislation. The dialogue participants are ready to be the driving force for these changes themselves, as they see the positive experience of European countries.

A demand for lustration to the very end—a purging of the circles of power. Large billboards featuring representatives of the “Party of Regions” who have simply “changed their colors”.

The opportunity to influence anti-discrimination legislation in Ukraine. There are many social layers that need protection at the legislative level, but there are no stable circles that would promote such interests. There is no political will, and even the fact that we are moving toward the EU does not generate this will. This applies, for example, to people discriminated against at the legislative level. For example, LGBTQ+ in Europe is the norm, but in Ukraine, it is not very well accepted. People came here and saw that society can live differently. They see a new experience where this discrimination does not exist.

Previous Experience of Participation

The motivation for some participants is largely based on their pre-existing experience of activism in Ukraine and their established civic habits. Participation in socio-political life, even while living abroad, is perceived as a continuity of their civic stance and a natural extension of long-standing practices of engagement.

Habit.

This is a conscious position. Many of us brought our work and our skills here.

We understand how activism works in Ukraine because we had that experience. This motivates us to learn how it works in Germany.

Positive Examples

Motivation for engagement is further strengthened by the positive examples of people in Ukraine who demonstrate resilience and the ability to self-organize under the difficult circumstances of war. The awareness that others are overcoming hardships in extreme conditions pushes those abroad toward more active measures.

The example of people in Ukraine—among loved ones, acquaintances, and relatives. The military, people in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, volunteers. Those who are teaching in underground schools in Kharkiv. You think to yourself: if they can go to work in the morning after being shelled, why can't we do something here? And that, too, provides a resource.

The community of active Ukrainians who have moved to Germany since 2022 also holds great significance. The presence of like-minded individuals creates an environment where it is easier to initiate changes and implement civic initiatives.

When the wave of active people arrived here in 2022, it became easier to make changes. It’s not just about language, dancing, and the church anymore, but also about political activism.

For another segment of the participants, activity in civic life is linked to a reimagining of their own identity, especially after February 24, 2022.

After 2022, there was a surge in the understanding of who we are. Many people switched to speaking Ukrainian after 2022.

Another source of inspiration for those present at the dialogue is the democratization of Ukrainian media. Participants note that this process fosters a belief in society’s capacity for transformation and encourages them to engage in similar processes abroad.

The investigations conducted by the media in Ukraine motivate us to keep moving forward. It is the realization that the country is moving in a democratic direction.

As another positive case that motivates them to push further, participants cited the development of technology in Ukraine. For some, digitalization is a source of pride and proof that Ukraine can be a driver of innovation even within a European context. This, in turn, strengthens the desire to be active in their new society.

The digitalization of Germany now depends on Ukrainians.“Nova Post” is providing a push here.

At the same time, according to the participants, along with the positive changes that have taken place in Ukraine, it is important to discuss the implementation of sustainable tools that will allow the accumulated experience and inspiration to be transformed into systemic changes both in Ukraine and in the host country.

Barriers to Participation

While discussing their motivations and forms of participation in socio-political processes in Ukraine, the dialogue participants noted that they face certain obstacles to active involvement. For instance, respondents mentioned barriers in electoral processes, specifically the residency requirement, which deprives them of the opportunity to run for office in elections. Some participants who had experience with internal displacement after 2014 drew parallels between the current restrictions for Ukrainians abroad and the difficulties previously faced by internally displaced persons (IDPs).

I have experience with emigration in 2014. Back then, there were many restrictions related to one’s place of registration. Even since then, there were many voting restrictions, and only those who were active were aware of them.

Since most of the dialogue participants are active representatives of the civic sector, they pointed out the obstacles to socio-political activity faced by both their organizations and themselves as activists. Among the primary challenges mentioned were a lack of resources, primarily financial, and limited expertise in specific areas of work. Furthermore, respondents noted a widespread sense of fatigue and burnout accumulating after a prolonged period of volunteering and civic engagement.

We all have one problem in common—we don't have enough money to match all our motivations.

To put it roughly, we have about 10 people who can engage with the German political establishment at an expert level in their language. It is difficult and unpleasant to admit, but without this truth, we won't be able to move forward effectively.

At the same time, one shouldn't take on too much: there is a history in activism of taking on a ton of things and burning out.

Speaking about their activities in Germany, some interviewees expressed concerns regarding personal safety. According to them, there have been instances of persecution of Ukrainians on ethnic grounds, specifically by far-right activists and the Russian diaspora abroad, which increases the risks for Ukrainian activists overseas.

The safety of Ukrainians in Europe. This question was addressed to the Ambassador by activists who had faced persecution because of their ethnic origin. This is simply harassment for speaking the Ukrainian language publicly.

Requests to the State

Within the framework of the dialogue, participants formulated a series of requests to the Ukrainian state which, in their view, could contribute to improving the living conditions of Ukrainians abroad. Given that a significant portion of the respondents are civic activists, most of the voiced requests concerned the development of the civic sector and the refinement of mechanisms for cooperation between the state and civil society.

First and foremost, the dialogue participants noted that within the active Ukrainian community in Germany, there is a significant demand for greater visibility within Ukrainian society. Respondents emphasized that their activity is mostly voluntary and does not involve financial compensation. Consequently, the lack of recognition for their efforts at the state and societal levels leads to feelings of being undervalued, frustrated, and resentful. Some participants noted that they occasionally feel less valued than foreigners who visit Ukraine.

Many people here are full-time volunteers; this civic activity is unpaid. There are fewer opportunities in Germany to work for Ukrainian civil society and receive funding for it. Accordingly, all volunteers are simply expecting recognition.

The state must understand that volunteers need to be given the opportunity to be visible so that they feel they are valued. Give us the feeling that “we see you”: we see Plast in Berlin, we see the Ukrainian school.

When you create many projects and then come to Ukraine, there is a feeling that we value foreigners more than ourselves. A low-level German manager gets better treatment than the head of a Ukrainian program.

Furthermore, the respondents emphasized the need for state support and the promotion of strong Ukrainian organizations abroad. Participants noted that by the fourth year of the full-scale war, a powerful Ukrainian civic sector has already formed in Germany; therefore, it is now crucial to invest in its institutionalization and the strengthening of its public image. Some interviewees expressed a request for more active cooperation between Ukrainian politicians and overseas NGOs, highlighting that media support from government representatives could bolster the visibility and influence of the civic sector abroad.

The civic sector here is strong; it needs to be institutionalized. This is about building strong brands—not only for Ukrainian businesses but for civic organizations as well. If we are seen, it becomes easier to ensure a feedback loop.

Regarding politics—right now, there is no political life in Ukraine. Everything revolves around the war. War is death, not politics. As long as the situation remains as it is, the only thing we can do is create something here, because here, politics exists. We should ask people who have authority and political influence (such as Klitschko) to build something Ukrainian here.

The dialogue participants emphasized the need to establish a systematic dialogue between the Ukrainian state and the civic sector in Germany. In their view, Ukraine currently lacks a cohesive policy aimed at Ukrainians abroad. Some respondents spoke critically of the already disbanded Ministry of National Unity, noting that no consultations with representatives of civil society abroad took place during its creation. They believe that involving activists in the discussion of the ministry's concept could have increased the effectiveness of its activities.

I find it very logical that the Ministry of Unity was disbanded. To me, the primary function of a Ministry of Unity should be about social cohesion. If we view Ukrainians as a global community, then it requires a common policy, regardless of where those Ukrainians are located.

Before the Ministry of Unity was created, there were no initial consultations with civil society. If they had asked us, they would have found something better. We are perceived more as a part of Ukraine here than we are in Ukraine itself. However, civil society is significantly more united across borders. We need a better dialogue between civil society and the state. Then, cohesion will be higher.

Moreover, the respondents emphasized that Ukrainians abroad possess knowledge and skills that could be beneficial to the Ukrainian state. This includes, in particular, an understanding of European legislation and awareness of socially sensitive issues. In addition, the dialogue participants highlighted the need for state support for German-Ukrainian projects, specifically through transparent communication regarding which sectors require the most investment.

Many of our political figures are communicating with the civic sector today. We could serve as experts who explain how the European community works and how European legislation functions. We could also develop concrete mechanisms regarding the experience we have here and which we can [share]. We would like to receive a request from Ukrainians about what they would like to receive from us, and we are ready to share our strategy.

There were several forums with investors where they said, “We want to help, we have the resources, but we don't have [information] on where to direct these resources or what the priorities are.”

Some respondents spoke about the need for the state to adapt its attitude toward the aspirations of Ukrainians to run for office in Germany. They noted that many other diasporas already have their own representatives in local government bodies and parliaments across EU countries; therefore, Ukraine could more actively support such initiatives, helping to expand the political influence of Ukrainians abroad in shaping the European agenda.

The diaspora and temporary displaced persons are the new European common society of the future. I have a feeling that the Ukrainian political establishment does not realize that we can run for office not only in Ukraine but also abroad. 20% want to become active here—to elect and be elected here—and they need to be empowered. We must build a robust system here because they will be the ones representing Ukrainian interests.

In addition to strengthening the interaction between the state and the civic sector, the dialogue participants emphasized the need to establish systematic cooperation between Ukrainian organizations abroad and civil society within Ukraine. According to the respondents, it is crucial to create joint projects that unite Ukrainian initiatives across different countries and facilitate the exchange of experience, knowledge, and resources.

Previously, when there was USAID, it was a bit easier because there was more money in civil society. I constantly try to convey to capable Ukrainian NGOs, who are truly more capable than we are in diaspora organizations, that they should involve us as partners. There are opportunities to travel, and they bring, for example, youth groups here. Why not add 10 young people who live here to that youth group? In this way, you simply mix these two groups and create social cohesion.

Participants called upon the Ukrainian state, and especially the President, to build a systematic line of communication with citizens living abroad. In their view, Ukrainians outside the country currently feel largely excluded from the communications of state bodies, which intensifies a sense of detachment from Ukraine. Respondents emphasized the importance of the state portraying Ukrainians abroad as an inseparable part of Ukrainian society, as equal citizens who are likewise making a contribution to the country’s development.

Convey to the government and institutions that we should also be considered a target audience the President addresses in his New Year’s speech, or in state communications in general. So that Ukrainians abroad are also considered a piece of Ukraine.

Build the image of Ukrainians as Ukrainians at the institutional level. Do not say that you are traitors, not enough Ukrainian, incapable, or that you don't have the right to something. Do not devalue Ukrainians abroad; build up this image instead. Because whatever is said at the Presidential level eventually filters down and is repeated at the everyday level—and we hear all of it.

Speaking about the Ukrainian state's policy toward citizens abroad, respondents also emphasized the necessity of developing a "roadmap" for those planning to return to Ukraine. In their view, such a strategy could become a key tool in stimulating the return of as many Ukrainians as possible. The interviewees noted that the process of returning is often complex and traumatic; therefore, the state must create conditions that make this journey as simple and safe as possible. According to the dialogue participants, special attention should be paid to supporting youth who are considering the possibility of returning.

There will be a moment when people decide to return. A person realizes they are ready to come back, but for that to happen, they need to understand how they are returning and for what purpose. Here, they already have a settled life. But there is no roadmap, no understanding of how to do it—no mechanism to follow.

Our community has a chat—about 200 people living with HIV. I recently shared an article with them about returning: some ministry mentioned that a return process is starting soon. And it wasn't very encouraging. Because these fears are very basic. We talk about global things, but the decision of where my child will go to school, where I will live—these are basic safety issues for me and my family.

We lack state structures that can support Ukrainian youth in returning to Ukraine. There are very cool examples from private universities—like the Kyiv School of Economics. They have a course literally targeted at youth here, abroad, to encourage them to return. State universities don't have such programs. It would be great to see similar initiatives there.

Another important request voiced by the dialogue participants was the need to invest in the reform of Ukrainian embassies and consulates. According to the respondents, contacting these institutions is currently a difficult process, accompanied by numerous bureaucratic barriers and, at times, inappropriate behavior from the staff. At the same time, some respondents noted that diplomatic mission employees are often overworked and exhausted; therefore, they offered their own assistance to provide additional support to the staff.

Our embassy and consulate have a lot of borders and restrictions in communication—borders that cannot be crossed. This needs to change because there should be empathy and help there, and currently, there isn't. This is the territory of your state. A person coming to the consulate should be able to receive help and empathy. There is no empathy there. The people sitting there are burnt out. Perhaps they need help. We can conduct seminars and workshops for the people there who have burned out.

Analysis of Individual Answers

After the group discussion on the two previous topics concluded, participants of the facilitated dialogue were asked to respond to two additional questions:

One challenge you face while living abroad.
One thing that holds you back from returning to Ukraine?

The participants provided their answers to these questions individually in writing. This format was chosen to ensure anonymity and increase the likelihood of sincere responses, as well as to provide everyone with an opportunity to speak. The collected responses were organized by OPORA representatives into thematic areas and analyzed.

Additional Question 1. One Challenge You Face While Living Abroad

Many dialogue participants noted that integration into German society has proven to be a complex and lengthy process. After moving to Germany, many faced a language barrier, which remains a significant obstacle even in their fourth year abroad. They emphasized that limited language proficiency makes it difficult to fully express their thoughts and interact with the local population.

Another significant challenge for the participants was the job search. Respondents pointed to difficulties in accessing the labor market, the recognition of qualifications, and the impossibility of regaining the professional positions they held in Ukraine. Some interviewees noted that while searching for work, they encountered instances of discrimination and a lack of recognition of Ukrainian experience or education by German employers.

Closely linked to the issue of employment are the material hardships faced by Ukrainians abroad. Respondents noted that they have limited financial resources and frequently encounter problems when searching for housing. According to them, this makes it difficult to feel fully autonomous and empowered (subiektnist) in their new environment. For some dialogue participants, an additional challenge is living "on two countries," which requires significant material and physical resources.

[It is difficult] to achieve the level of recognition, salary, and position that one had in Ukraine. [You are] starting life all over again.

The failure of German organizations to perceive Ukrainian experience as socially useful or of a sufficiently high standard.

Another challenge mentioned by the dialogue participants is the prejudiced attitude of a portion of German society toward Ukrainians. According to them, myths and stereotypes about Ukrainians are still widespread in Germany, as is a lack of understanding of Ukraine and the scale of the challenges the Ukrainian state is facing. Respondents wrote about biases related to the perceived low qualification of Ukrainians or their "inferiority." Furthermore, some participants noted that Ukrainians are often not taken seriously due to the "temporary" nature of their stay in Germany.

Clichés and prejudices in Germany regarding Ukrainian lack of qualification and inferiority.

Ukrainians—as a 'temporary' community—are not taken seriously.

Some dialogue participants pointed out specific challenges they face as civic activists. They noted the weakness of institutional ties between themselves, their organizations, and Ukraine, as well as the importance of strengthening coordination among Ukrainian civic initiatives within Germany. They also emphasized the difficulties in finding resources and funding to support the activities of the Ukrainian civic sector abroad.

Weak networking in Ukraine; [weak] integration into civic or political structures within Ukraine.

Some respondents raised the theme of challenges related to the presence of Russian citizens in Germany. According to them, in certain cases, there is tension, competition, or even resentment from Russians due to the refusal of Ukrainians to maintain communication with them. An additional challenge, in the participants' view, is the gradual displacement of Russians from social spaces. For some of those present, the issue of Russian-language usage among Ukrainians remains a separate and distinct problem.

To displace the “Rusnia” [Russians] from social spaces (and everywhere).

When I hear our fellow citizens speaking Russian in Ukrainian communities, at language courses, or at Ukrainian concerts. I ask everyone to speak to me in our language.

Additional Question 2. One Thing That Holds You Back from Returning to Ukraine

The primary reason deterring dialogue participants from returning from abroad is a sense of general instability in Ukraine. Above all, this refers to security risks—the continuation of the war, active hostilities, and constant shelling. Respondents also mentioned economic instability in Ukraine contrasted with the relative stability of life in Germany. Many noted that they already have jobs and feel professionally fulfilled, with their labor being compensated at a much higher rate. Respondents pointed out that the standard of living in Ukraine is lower and that they do not see professional prospects for themselves there. Some respondents reported losing property or businesses in the occupied territories, meaning a return to Ukraine would necessitate starting life over from scratch.

The prospect of a protracted, endless war holds me back.

In Germany, my salary for the same position I held in Ukraine is ten times higher.

Professional rooting in Germany and a lack of prospects in Ukraine.

Some dialogue participants noted that their sense of integration into German society is what keeps them from returning to Ukraine. Respondents pointed out that their children have successfully adapted to the German educational system, and they themselves have close friends or loved ones in Germany. Some remain due to access to a higher-quality healthcare system, which is necessary for themselves or their family members. Others noted that they have no family left in Ukraine or lack a clear personal strategy for future development within Ukrainian society, which also reduces their motivation to return.

A child’s integration into German society and building a future based on the existing reality.

At the same time, some dialogue participants are deterred from returning to Ukraine by issues related to mobilization, as well as the political and social climate. Some respondents noted that they do not return due to fears of being mobilized and losing their freedom of choice and movement. Others spoke about a sense of discrimination in Ukraine and a lack of faith in the possibility of restoring justice. A portion of those surveyed mentioned political instability and corruption as additional factors that reduce the motivation to return. For some, a significant deterrent is a sense of being unneeded in Ukraine and the fear of being "rejected" by society.

Nothing holds me back except for the living conditions that have become complicated due to mobilization.

There are no prospects for justice. My family in Ukraine does not have equal rights (discrimination at the legislative level).

I don't think I am needed in Ukraine. I think I am NOT needed

For a portion of the respondents, an important factor currently deterring them from returning is the desire to gain new experience and knowledge in order to apply them in Ukraine in the future. At the same time, some dialogue participants noted that they do not feel any obstacles to returning and plan to do so in the very near future.

Dialogues in Germany and the UK: Comparison

Below is a comparison of the key findings from the facilitated dialogues conducted by OPORA in Germany and the United Kingdom. It should be noted that the differences in responses were influenced not only by the geographical factor but also by the different compositions of the participant groups: in Germany, civic activists predominated, while in the UK, participants were somewhat less involved in socio-political life. Furthermore, the difference in timing should be taken into account: the dialogues in the UK took place at the end of 2024, while those in Germany occurred in October 2025. A longer period of stay abroad fosters deeper integration of participants into the host society and the formation of more stable plans regarding returning or not returning to Ukraine.

Aspect	Commonalities (UK & Germany)	Differences (UK vs. Germany)
Ukrainian Identity and Emotional Connection to the Motherland	Participants in both dialogues unanimously identify as Ukrainian, despite living abroad. They maintain a strong Ukrainian identity and emphasize that they remain an inseparable part of Ukrainian society. They share a deep emotional connection: love for Ukraine, nostalgia for home, and the collective pain and anxieties of wartime. Participants are united by shared values (desire for freedom, justice, mutual empathy) and the collective experience of the war.	UK: Participants emphasized the differences in worldview and lifestyle between Ukrainians and Britons, highlighting the uniqueness of Ukrainian identity (shaped by specific historical circumstances) compared to the British context. For many, it is vital to nurture the Ukrainian language and culture as symbols of their identity. Germany: Less attention was paid to cultural attributes (language, traditions, church) and more to civic activism as the primary manifestation of identity. Participants emphasized that being Ukrainian abroad is not just about speaking the language or preserving traditions, but about taking active steps to support Ukraine.
Social Ties	Respondents in both the UK and Germany noted that regular communication with family and friends in Ukraine helps them stay informed about current events and feel emotional closeness to their homeland. The Ukrainian diaspora also plays a unifying role: close contact with other Ukrainians in the host country provides a sense of support, "one's own people," and community. In both countries, participants find a social circle within local Ukrainian communities that helps them more easily endure forced emigration.	UK: Responses placed more emphasis on ties with loved ones in Ukraine—family, friends, and colleagues. Memories of shared experiences with people in Ukraine and constant contact with them are key to maintaining unity. At the same time, the local Ukrainian community was mentioned more in the context of joint events, rather than as a primary factor of connection. Germany: The dialogue in Berlin highlighted the importance of the local Ukrainian community. Participants frequently noted that it is specifically the community in Germany that helps them feel connected to Ukraine—through mutual support, meetings, volunteer projects, etc.
Socio-political Participation	Both groups actively seek ways to contribute to Ukrainian life from abroad. Participants in both countries shared how they volunteer, join charitable initiatives, and organize information campaigns or rallies. Ukrainians in both the UK and Germany hold protests and public events, raise funds for the Armed Forces and war victims, and raise awareness among foreigners. The diaspora strives to maintain a positive image of Ukraine, counter Russian disinformation, and build their communities to preserve identity and mutual support. Participation in the host country's political life is also present: some try to convey the Ukrainian position to local authorities or integrate into local volunteer and civic movements.	UK: Participants focused heavily on building a local Ukrainian community and preserving culture in emigration (weekend schools, cultural events, church communities), alongside attending rallies and fundraisers. Activists noted that it is sometimes difficult to attract new people to protests or volunteering, but shared civic activity helps unite the community. Germany: In Berlin, there was a stronger emphasis on political and expert activity. Participants frequently spoke about advocating for Ukrainian interests at the international level and assisting the military. They mentioned exchanging expertise with Ukraine, participating in the work of German institutions, and cooperating with local authorities. Less attention was paid to cultural events—the focus was on systemic volunteer work, political lobbying, and the development of the civic sector. This reflects that the Berlin audience consisted largely of civic activists.
Connection with the Ukrainian State and Business	Participants in both countries maintain ties with Ukraine at both official and economic levels. Many feel a personal responsibility toward the state and strive to fulfill their civic duties from abroad. They utilize Ukrainian state services (the "Diia" app, Pension Fund services), pay utility bills in Ukraine, and ensure their children receive a Ukrainian education through online schools. Economic ties also persist: some continue working remotely for Ukrainian companies and paying taxes into the Ukrainian budget; others open businesses abroad or seek partnerships between Ukrainian and foreign businesses. Both communities support Ukrainian brands, use Ukrainian banks and carriers, and buy Ukrainian goods. "Medical tourism" and the beauty industry were specifically mentioned—many still receive these services in Ukraine.	UK: Respondents placed particular emphasis on the legal bond with the state—the importance of maintaining citizenship, obeying Ukrainian laws, and paying taxes with the state's future in mind. They noted the convenience and importance of Ukrainian digital services for life abroad. Some participants compared Ukrainian and British bureaucracy: while recognizing the advantages of the British system, they admitted being more accustomed to Ukrainian approaches. Germany: In Berlin, business ties with Ukraine were discussed more actively. Dialogue participants mentioned that many have integrated into German companies specifically to establish cooperation with Ukraine, attract investment, or help Ukrainian businesses enter European markets.
Reasons for Participation or Non-Participation in Civic Life	In both countries, respondents strive to be useful to their homeland—this provides a sense of purpose and self-fulfillment. Key motives include a desire to contribute to victory and reconstruction, a need to be heard and recognized, and a wish to preserve identity and connection to home. Some stated that civic activity allows them to remain part of Ukrainian life and "keep their finger on the pulse." A vital incentive is the hope of return: many join initiatives because they plan to go back and want Ukraine to become a better country to live in. In both communities, deterrents exist. First is the priority of basic needs: newcomers must solve urgent integration issues (housing, work, language), pushing activism to the background. Second, some do not feel their contribution is needed or impactful—there is a lack of faith in the possibility of positive change. Experienced volunteers also report burnout.	UK: Some respondents admitted that participation in public life is not a priority for them—survival and adaptation hinder activism. Some participants explicitly noted the low engagement of many fellow citizens: it is difficult to mobilize people for rallies or volunteering. Germany: In Berlin, the focus was primarily on institutional barriers: the community feels partially excluded from Ukrainian politics, particularly due to the residency requirement. A lack of recognition was another major factor: participants complained that their volunteering is rarely noticed or valued at the state level, leading to frustration. They also mentioned security risks for Ukrainians in Europe, including cases of harassment.
Key Challenges and Barriers to Living Abroad	Adaptation and integration are core challenges shared by both groups. Ukrainians in the UK and Germany faced language barriers and cultural shock: mastering English or German and understanding new rules of life proved difficult. Many participants noted employment issues: the inability to quickly find a job in their specialty, non-recognition of diplomas or experience, and the need to restart careers at entry-level positions. This leads to financial difficulties: limited income vs. high costs (especially housing). Additionally, many experienced social isolation, having to rebuild social circles from scratch and struggling to find close friends in a foreign environment. Emotional and psychological issues affect everyone. Participants describe chronic stress and anxiety—for relatives in Ukraine and their own futures—alongside homesickness and a sense of uncertainty regarding the duration of their forced emigration. People are haunted by fear for loved ones, loneliness, and a lack of support.	UK: Participants generally view the local population's attitude toward them positively, with no reports of discrimination or prejudice. Instead, the British context revealed specific bureaucratic and economic hurdles: some complained about the difficulty of opening a business. It was noted that starting a company in the UK is quite complex, and unclear tax residency rules between Ukraine and the UK caused confusion. Germany: German society, according to participants, does not always perceive Ukrainians as equals. In Berlin, they noted stereotypes and prejudices: a portion of locals allegedly view Ukrainians as unskilled or as merely "temporary guests." This attitude complicates job searches and integration. Furthermore, activists pointed to the fragmentation of Ukrainian initiatives: there is a lack of coordination between different Ukrainian organizations in Germany. Another challenge is the presence of the Russian diaspora. In Berlin, Ukrainians faced tension and even hostility from some Russians; it was noted that the Russian presence creates a competitive environment, and conflicts occasionally occur.
Motives or Deterrents Regarding Return	The war is the primary obstacle to returning. In both the UK and Germany, danger and instability in Ukraine are the top concerns. People are afraid to go home as long as there is a risk to their lives—both their own and those of their children. Many say they are "waiting for the war to end" and will only make a decision then. A lack of guarantees for the future. Even if hostilities were to end, people worry that Ukraine will face a difficult and long post-war period or a frozen conflict without a clear perspective. In both communities, there is a palpable fear of the unknown: it is unclear when the situation will stabilize or whether there will be jobs, security, and a normal life. Quality of life abroad. Another common motive for not returning is the higher standard of living and the greater opportunities in the host country compared to Ukraine. Participants in both dialogues have already integrated: they have found jobs, their children attend kindergartens and schools, and their daily lives are established. Abroad, they often feel more socially and materially protected. In contrast, Ukraine currently has lower salaries, poorer conditions, and fewer social guarantees. Personal circumstances. Many have tied their lives to the new country: children have adapted and are successfully studying abroad, receiving a higher quality of education; the parents themselves have built careers, entered into relationships, or formed a circle of friends among the local population.	UK: For Ukrainians in Britain, a major deterrent is the distrust of the Ukrainian government and public institutions. Many respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the country's leadership. People do not want to return to a state where, in their opinion, there is no rule of law and where injustice thrives. Another psychological barrier is the fear of judgment from Ukrainians staying in Ukraine. There are concerns about hostility, aggression, or resentment from compatriots who remained under shelling toward those returning from a more comfortable life abroad. Germany: Ukrainians in Berlin mentioned political instability, corruption, and a lack of faith in justice, which lower the motivation to go home. At the same time, many participants feel they have realized themselves professionally in Germany, hold high-paying jobs, and see no equivalent prospects in Ukraine. Another distinction is that in Germany, the issue of mobilization was noted: men fear returning so as not to lose their freedom of movement or be drafted into the military. Respondents in Germany also mentioned that some of them no longer have family in Ukraine or a clear plan of what to do back home—the absence of "anchors" diminishes the sense of returning. Despite this, in both groups, there was a small percentage of people who stated that nothing is holding them back and they plan to return to Ukraine soon.

Recommendations

Based on the dialogue, a series of practical recommendations have been identified, aimed at strengthening the connection between Ukrainians in Germany, state institutions, and civil society in Ukraine. These recommendations reflect the needs, expectations, and visions of the participants regarding how the state, the civic sector, and international partners can more effectively support Ukrainians abroad, facilitate their integration into host societies, and simultaneously maintain a close bond with the Motherland. The recommendations we previously developed following the dialogues in the United Kingdom remain relevant to the German context; however, within the framework of the current discussion, a series of additional, specific proposals were formulated concerning the challenges that particularly face the Ukrainian civic sector in Germany.

Given the requests expressed during the dialogue, the state must build a clear and consistent policy regarding Ukrainians abroad. One of the cornerstones of this policy should be their visibility and the recognition of their contribution to the common struggle. This is not just about symbolic support, but about systemic communication in which Ukrainians abroad are consistently treated as an inseparable part of the Ukrainian nation. Official addresses by top state officials, regular coverage of the activities of Ukrainians abroad, and inviting volunteers and diaspora organizations to public discussions, events, and projects in Ukraine—all of this creates a sense of respect and strengthens the motivation for further participation.

The state must move from situational support of individual civic initiatives to fostering the institutionalization of Ukrainian organizations abroad. A prominent civic sector has already formed in Germany, and its capacity requires purposeful investment: stable funding mechanisms, support for organizational development, and media coverage. It is advisable to create a public registry of Ukrainian organizations abroad with detailed descriptions of their fields of activity and contact information, so that state bodies, donors, and stakeholders can quickly find partners. It is important for politicians and government officials to systematically bolster such organizations through their public presence and media support—this significantly increases trust in their projects and their impact abroad.

The state must build a sustained dialogue with citizens and organizations abroad. Representatives of the Ukrainian civic sector abroad should be included in open discussions, advisory boards, and the legislative process regarding issues that affect their lives. Furthermore, it is essential to systematically leverage the expertise of Ukrainians abroad during the preparation of reforms. At the same time, transparency regarding state priorities is needed—a list of sectors that require investment and human resource reinforcement in the near future.

The state should facilitate the participation of Ukrainians abroad in the political life of EU countries to more effectively protect the interests of the Ukrainian community and Ukraine as a whole. This involves educational and media support, as well as assistance in defining the boundaries of political participation to avoid undue interference in the domestic politics of the host country.

It is necessary to facilitate systemic cooperation between the civic sector abroad and in Ukraine. Joint projects should be encouraged where teams from Germany and Ukraine work together on specific goals—ranging from youth exchanges and internships to analytical products and advocacy campaigns. This creates horizontal ties, accelerates the exchange of knowledge and resources, and narrows the gap between the two environments.

Since a significant portion of participants views returning to Ukraine as a realistic prospect, the state must offer a clear "roadmap" for return. This involves support in housing, employment, enrolling children in kindergartens and schools, medical care, and more. Special attention should be paid to youth: university return programs and internships in the public and private sectors can serve as a bridge between current life abroad and reintegration in Ukraine.

Finally, it is essential to invest in the reform of embassies and consulates. This includes both the expansion of digital services and support for staff within the system: customer service training, increasing staff numbers during peak periods, and more.

Methodology

There is a wide range of methods for collecting and analyzing public opinion that allow for the exploration of the views, needs, and expectations of various social groups, adapting different approaches to the context and specificities of the audience. Specifically, these include in-depth interviews, focus groups, surveys, content analysis, observation, and more. Given the research objectives and available resources, the Civil Network OPORA selected the facilitated dialogue approach among other data collection methods.

Facilitated dialogues are aimed at improving citizen engagement and integrating their opinions into public policies, ensuring their implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Among the key tasks that OPORA set for itself while conducting dialogues with Ukrainian communities abroad were:

Systematization of the experiences of Ukrainian citizens who went abroad as a result of the full-scale invasion;
Development of a strategy for interaction between Ukrainian citizens abroad and Ukraine’s democratic institutions and civil society;
Promotion of a common understanding of problems and needs, and the involvement of Ukrainian citizens abroad in the formation of domestic policies within Ukraine.

Facilitated dialogue is a distinct methodological approach that has a specific purpose and implementation method. It requires a specialized way of interaction between participants that differs from classic sociological approaches. While facilitated dialogue shares many similarities with focus groups—specifically in creating a safe space for discussion, engaging diverse perspectives, and analyzing collective narratives—these two approaches serve different goals through different methodological frameworks. In Table 1, we outline the key differences between facilitated dialogues and focus groups, which highlight the core characteristics and specifics of each approach.

Methodological Features of Focus Groups and Facilitated Dialogues

	Focus Group	Facilitated Dialogue
Aim	Used as a research tool to collect opinions, perceptions, and feedback from participants regarding specific topics, policies, or conflicts. The primary goal is to collect data for analysis.	Promoting mutual understanding, building trust, and facilitating meaningful conversations between participants. The goal is to create mutual understanding and shared learning.
Facilitation Approach	Conducted by moderators who guide discussions using a standardized set of questions to ensure the collection of relevant data. The role of the moderator is to keep the group on track and ensure the conversation aligns with the research objectives.	Led by a dialogue leader who encourages an open and balanced exchange of ideas, sometimes without predetermined questions. The role of facilitators is to create a safe space, encourage active listening, and foster deeper conversation.
Participant Interaction	Interaction is often limited; participants respond to questions and occasionally interact with one another, but within a highly structured environment. It requires a structured approach to the selection of all participants.	Participants are encouraged to engage in deeper, more open discussions with one another, exploring perspectives and ensuring equal participation in the conversation. This approach is more qualitative in terms of its commitment to inclusivity.
Result Orientation	The result consists of concrete findings or insights that can serve as a basis for decision-making, research conclusions, and so on.	Leads to the establishment of relationships, improved understanding, and often personal or collective transformations of opinions. The outcome provides tangible data for analyzing collective views, but also intangible benefits, such as trust.
Nature of the Discussion	More evaluation-oriented, centered on opinions and feedback. Participants often stay within the boundaries of the specific questions provided.	Exploratory and reflective, allowing participants to more freely discuss personal experiences, stories, and viewpoints.
Duration and Structure	Usually limited in time (for example, 1–2 hours) with a structured agenda, typically conducted as a series of sessions.	Can be more flexible in duration and, if necessary, may span several sessions to develop deeper discussions and foster stronger relationships.

Facilitated dialogues consisted of three main stages:

The preparatory stage, which included recruiting participants, developing the dialogue plan, and training facilitators to lead the discussions.
The main stage, which involved the direct facilitation of the dialogues and the collection of data based on the discussions.
The final stage, which consisted of processing, analyzing, and describing the data obtained during the dialogues.

Based on the results of the discussions, a report was prepared.

Preparation Stage

During the preparatory stage of the facilitated dialogue, Civil Network OPORA adapted the discussion methodology to the specific context and characteristics of Germany. Representatives of OPORA determined that facilitated dialogue should be the key data collection method, as it creates a trusting atmosphere that encourages Ukrainian citizens abroad to engage in frank and deep discussions regarding their experiences and needs. Additionally, preliminary research was conducted on the communities where the dialogues would take place to identify key local leaders capable of assisting with the on-site organization of the facilitated dialogue.

A crucial part of the preparatory stage was the recruitment of participants. To achieve this, local community leaders conducted targeted outreach among their own contacts, inviting Ukrainians living in Germany (primarily in Berlin) to participate in the dialogues.

In total, 27 Ukrainian citizens participated in the facilitated dialogue in Germany (21 women and 6 men). The average age of the participants was 42 years. All participants are employed, and most are involved in volunteering and civic activism.

The majority of respondents moved to Germany after the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation; however, some had been living in Germany prior to 2022. At the same time, some participants left for Germany from settlements that, at certain periods of the Russian-Ukrainian war, were under direct threat of occupation or were occupied.

It is important to note that since participation in the facilitated dialogue was voluntary and relied solely on the participants' own motivation, this may have influenced the subsequent discussion results. Participants with a strong Ukrainian identity, who maintain closer ties with the Ukrainian community and demonstrate civic and political activity (participation in rallies, fundraising, etc.), were more motivated to join the event.

Main Stage

The main stage of the research consisted of conducting a facilitated dialogue in Berlin on October 18, 2025. The duration of the facilitated dialogue was 3 hours and 45 minutes.

The facilitated dialogue was composed of 3 primary parts:

Introduction. The goal of this part was to create a safe environment where participants could get to know one another, feel ready to share their own stories, and listen to each other. During this part, the facilitators:

Introduced themselves and the primary goals of the dialogue, ensuring the clarity and transparency of the process.
Organized introductions among the participants and divided them into groups for further discussion.

Facilitated dialogue. The goal of this part was the group discussion of key issues brought forward by Civil Network OPORA. Within this part, the facilitators:
1. Explained the key principles upon which the dialogue would be built and familiarized the participants with the plan for further discussion.
2. Moderated the group discussion of questions and the presentation of group findings by representatives from each group.
3. Moderated individual reflections based on the results of the discussions.
Closing part. The purpose of this part was to obtain individual responses from the participants to two additional questions, explain the value of such discussions to the attendees, and encourage them to maintain contact. During this part, the facilitators:
1. Posed two additional questions to the participants, the answers to which were to be individual. The responses were provided in writing and collected by the facilitators.
2. Organized a final "sharing circle" for discussion and informal networking after the conclusion of the dialogue.

The facilitated dialogue was based on several key principles (see the table below), with which the participants were familiarized before the discussion began.

Principles of Facilitated Dialogue

Respect	Dialogue is a collective process of listening and exchanging opinions. All opinions are important. In a dialogue, we do not try to convince one another of our expertise; on the contrary, we treat the thoughts of others as an opportunity to update and improve our own opinions, ideas, and visions. Respect ensures the safe environment that we strive to create during our conversation.
Empathy	Dialogue provides the opportunity to hear opinions that may differ from your own point of view, values, convictions, or faith. This diversity offers a chance to accept and listen to different opinions with empathy and an attempt to put oneself in another person's shoes. Such an approach strengthens trust.
Balance of Expectations	A dialogue does not always reach a specific result or agreement regarding concrete actions. The group will not necessarily reach a consensus, and it can be expected that finalizing recommendations may require a compromise from everyone.
Equality and Inclusion	Every participant has the opportunity to speak. The dialogue format promotes equal and inclusive participation. All opinions, ideas, and visions are equally significant and important.
Confidentiality	In communications, no references are made to names, nor is an individual’s contribution to the dialogue personified.

The key questions around which the discussion of the facilitated dialogue was organized were:

What connects you to Ukraine when you are far from home?
What motivates you to engage in socio-political life in Ukraine while being abroad? How can this be done?

In addition, during the closing part of the facilitated dialogue, the facilitators asked participants to provide anonymous written responses to two further questions:

One challenge you face while living abroad.
One thing that holds you back from returning to Ukraine.

Taking into account the sensitive nature of the topics discussed, as well as the need to create comfortable conditions and a trusting atmosphere for the participants, Civil Network OPORA deliberately did not conduct video or audio recording during the event. Instead, during the dialogue, representatives of Civil Network OPORA took notes on key discussion points while maintaining confidentiality, of which the participants were informed in advance. Furthermore, photography took place during the event, for which those present had provided prior written consent.

Final Stage

During the third and concluding stage, the preliminary findings obtained during the facilitated dialogue were structured and systematized for further analysis. The results were anonymized, digitized, and processed by OPORA analysts. Subsequently, the discussion results were categorized into thematic blocks and documented. Generalized conclusions were also prepared and later integrated into the final report.

Community

Berlin (October 18, 2025)

Location Interkukturelles Haus Pankow, Schönfließer Str. 7, 10439 Berlin, Germany

Number of participants: 27

Co-organised by: Nataliia Pryrornytska, Allianz Ukrainischer Organisationen

Specifics of Community. Most of the dialogue participants are civic activists and volunteers who are actively involved in the socio-political life of Ukraine and the Ukrainian community abroad.

This report was created within the "Advancing Democratic Integrity and Governance in Ukraine” project, which is implemented by Civil Network OPORA with the support of the EU. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Civil Network OPORA and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.