Facilitated Dialogue with the Ukrainian Community in Italy: Report

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.

Introduction

The forced displacement of millions of Ukrainian citizens abroad has become one of the most massive consequences of the Russian Federation’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. According to the Civil Network OPORA, as of May 2025, approximately 8.9 million Ukrainians were outside Ukraine, although the actual figure varies depending on the accounting methodologies used by Ukrainian and international institutions. Based on available estimates, the proportion of Ukrainian citizens abroad reached 15–20% of Ukraine's population prior to February 24, 2022. Such a scale of external migration creates long-term challenges for social cohesion, the labor market, and reintegration policy, necessitating coordinated decisions both at the national level and in cooperation with the states that have hosted the largest numbers of Ukrainians.

Effective engagement with the Ukrainian diaspora in the context of war and post-war recovery requires a systemic understanding of how its needs, expectations, and possible forms of involvement are evolving. In view of this, the Civil Network OPORA initiated a series of facilitated dialogues with Ukrainian communities abroad. The first discussion took place in April 2024 in Vilnius (Lithuania); subsequently, this format was also used to research Ukrainian communities in the United Kingdom and Germany. In December 2025, facilitated dialogues were held in Warsaw (Poland) and Rome (Italy). The next stage involves similar events in Spain and Ireland.

According to UNHCR information cited by Civil Network OPORA, as of late March 2025, there were 171,000 refugees from Ukraine in Italy; accordingly, Italy ranks among the top ten countries that have hosted the largest number of Ukrainian forced migrants. Conversely, according to data provided by the Centre for Economic Strategy, as of mid-2025, approximately 390,000 Ukrainians were legally residing in Italy, making them the third-largest non-EU community in the country. However, the Ukrainian community in Italy was quite numerous even before the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation; for example, a report by the Italian Ministry of Labour stated that as of January 1, 2022, there were 230,373 Ukrainians legally in the country, meaning they were the fourth-largest group of non-EU citizens. According to data from the Italian Ministry of the Interior, cited by UNHCR in the study “Integration Between Challenges and Opportunities: A Study of Socio-economic Conditions of Refugees in Italy,” as of January 1, 2023, the majority (71.7%) of Ukrainians with temporary protection status in Italy were women.

Civil Network OPORA visited the Ukrainian community in Rome to identify the difficulties faced by Ukrainian citizens in Italy, understand their communication needs regarding the Ukrainian state and society, and outline potential programs and measures that could be implemented to strengthen resilience and ensure sustainable support. OPORA sincerely thanks the Congress of Ukrainians in Italy for their assistance in organizing the dialogue.

Key Findings

Civil Network OPORA held a facilitated dialogue in Rome, Italy, 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 domestic policies.

The dialogue was attended by 19 participants. In addition to members of the Ukrainian community in Rome, two representatives from the Office of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights joined the dialogue.

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.

Participants in the dialogue in Rome largely report a lack of unity within the Ukrainian community, characterizing it as a set of separate "bubbles" with distinct life experiences, migration trajectories, and levels of engagement with the Ukrainian context, which complicate mutual understanding and solidarity.
Some respondents insist on the necessity of preserving Ukrainian identity regardless of place of residence and criticize the instances of its conscious loss. Others, however, caution against judgment, highlighting the diverse life circumstances of people who have left Ukraine. At the same time, they emphasize that even individuals who have decided not to return to Ukraine may engage in collective action in the future.
Participants see a threat in exploiting linguistic, religious, and migration differences to divide Ukrainians and emphasize the need to develop culture, policy, and strategic communication as spheres capable of shaping shared meanings and reducing polarization.
Dialogue participants define identity as a key factor in their connection to Ukraine—one formed in childhood within the family and shaping life decisions, values, and readiness to invest in Ukraine, particularly through raising children in a Ukrainian cultural environment.
The respondents' connection to Ukraine is primarily maintained through specific elements of identity—first and foremost Ukrainian language (as a marker of the political nation), as well as culture, traditions, history, faith, the army, symbolic figures, cuisine, and nature, which together form a sense of belonging to Ukraine regardless of where they live.
For participants, the emotional connection with Ukraine manifests as a sense of belonging, “roots,” love, and patriotism, as well as shared emotions: a striving for victory, a struggle for the country's future, and hopes for a better life and justice.
Participants maintain their connection to Ukraine through a sense of community with other Ukrainians, shaped by shared historical and cultural experiences, and through close relationships with family and friends, who serve as key "bridges" to Ukraine.
Participation in socio-political life and remaining within the Ukrainian information space, especially through consuming Ukrainian media, news, and Telegram channels, serves as a channel of connection, allowing participants to stay informed about events in Ukraine.
Dialogue participants primarily link their connection to the state to formal attributes: citizenship, documentation, and state services. At the same time, those interviewed emphasize that only in Ukraine do they feel the full realization of their rights, recognition of their professional status, and respect from both the state and society.
Connection to Ukraine is also maintained through services, primarily in medicine and the beauty industry, which respondents rate as higher quality than those available abroad.
Participation in the socio-political life is expressed through organizing and participating in demonstrations, hosting cultural events, and communicating on social media to convey the Ukrainian position to Italian society. Furthermore, the participants emphasize the historical role of Ukrainian labor migrants as informal cultural ambassadors, whose work built trust in Ukrainians and facilitated the mobilization of humanitarian support at the start of the full-scale invasion.
Part of the Ukrainian community's activity in Italy is internally focused and includes working with children (teaching the Ukrainian language, passing on traditions, preserving identity), as well as networking and creating shared spaces for interaction.
Respondents identify volunteer work—collecting aid, making donations, and other initiatives to support the Armed Forces of Ukraine—as the primary format for direct involvement in Ukraine's socio-political life.
Participants describe their involvement in Ukraine’s socio-political life as an internal need and a form of expressing their Ukrainian identity, independent of state requests or initiatives. Notably, Ukrainians in Italy (unlike participants in other countries) reported an internal sense of shame about their safety abroad and their limited participation in collective actions. According to them, this feeling simultaneously drives them toward activity and exhausts them, creating a risk of emotional burnout and susceptibility to external manipulation. Anger, triggered by events in Ukraine or unfair attitudes toward the country abroad, serves as an additional emotional motivator that transforms into a drive for action, alongside the desire to be useful and help their fellow citizens.
Respondents indicated that their motivation to participate in socio-political life stems from a desire to preserve Ukraine as a sovereign state, as they envision their own and their children’s future and the future there, meaning they strive to have the opportunity to return. An important factor is also the internal demand to build a state governed by the rule of law, to implement reforms, and to transform institutions, as well as prior experience in civic engagement and a sense of gratitude toward the military.
Some respondents view participation in activities benefiting Ukraine as a means to apply or develop professional skills, particularly when their work abroad does not align with their level of qualification.
In describing the challenges of living in Italy, dialogue participants pointed to a persistent sense of "otherness" caused by integration difficulties, the inequality of rights and social status compared to the local population, complex bureaucracy, and limited opportunities for professional self-actualization (specifically due to the non-recognition of diplomas), as well as constant uncertainty regarding the future. An additional challenge is the inertia and outdated practices within certain segments of the Ukrainian community, which hinder mutual support and development.
In response to questions about what deters participants from returning home, security risks, as well as general instability in Ukraine, were cited as primary reasons. Other factors include being rooted in Italy (family, work, medical treatment), the impossibility or reluctance to start life anew, economic uncertainty, fear of income loss in Ukraine, children’s education abroad, distrust of the legal system, and corruption in Ukraine. Some respondents also noted that they consider their activities abroad more effective for supporting Ukraine, while not ruling out returning if the security and economic situation improves.
Participants identified the lack of financial resources, knowledge, and skills, as well as a limited circle of active individuals, as the primary barriers to socio-political engagement. Respondents emphasize their willingness to learn but simultaneously stress the need for institutional and educational support from Ukraine.
A key request to the Ukrainian state, cited by dialogue participants, was not direct funding, but rather access to training programs and mentorship (specifically in grant writing), as well as the expansion of Ukraine’s institutional presence in Italy (cultural institutions, counter-narratives to Russian influence). At the same time, there is an internal debate within the community about the appropriateness of financial requests during wartime: some respondents emphasize that national defense must remain the state's priority, whereas civic activism abroad should be based primarily on voluntary engagement.

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.

Reflecting on what unites them with other Ukrainians, the dialogue participants in Rome noted that they do not feel a sense of complete unity within the Ukrainian community—either in Ukraine or abroad. Specifically, the respondents stated that Ukrainian society consists of separate “bubbles,” each with distinct experiences and contexts that differ markedly from one another. According to the respondents, this disparity in experience leads to people gradually drifting apart and understanding their compatriots' decisions and actions less and less.

If people are in the same context, it is indeed [easier]. I have a lot of experience both in Ukraine and here. Right now, we are in the same context—that we are Ukrainians in Italy. I had my best friends from Crimea, but everything changed significantly; we are in very different contexts and are no longer friends. It is very difficult to continue understanding that a person is on the same wavelength as you and wants the same things. It’s a huge question of what comes next… When people move to Crimea deliberately—yes, that is a conscious termination of communication. Knowing these people, I believe they had a choice, and they made it. But I have a Crimean Tatar acquaintance who left and lives in Rome, and she remains in the Ukrainian context and identifies as Ukrainian.

There is no single Ukrainian community in Italy. Previously, there were 250,000 Ukrainians in Italy. These people are completely different: some are active, some are labor migrants, for some Italy is just a workplace, some remained mentally in Ukraine, while others, on the contrary, stayed here—they have a completely different path. Now there is a third group—the refugees. We sometimes involved them in events, and they later asked if anyone even wondered whether they wanted to do anything at all. They chose not to return; some have a Ukrainian passport but are mentally there, others are Russian-speaking. There are many such branches.

At the same time, some participants noted that despite living in different contexts, Ukrainians must remain Ukrainians by preserving their identity. The respondents do not understand those who lose their identity. Specifically, they mention that many Ukrainians in Italy avoid active participation in the life of the Ukrainian community and strive to assimilate in order to stay in Italy permanently. Conversely, other interviewees pointed to the example of people under occupation who continue to resist, even despite the direct threat to their own safety. Some respondents reported having to sever ties with friends or acquaintances who chose to renounce their Ukrainian identity.

If you identify as a Ukrainian, you must remain a Ukrainian in any context.

I have relatives from the Donetsk region: in 2014, everything was “wonderful” for them, Russia. But they traveled to Ukraine for their pensions because “money has no smell”... This is a matter of survival. And this self-interest will manifest itself. That is how your identity reveals itself—whether you are [Ukrainian] by passport or possess a Ukrainian identity.

The “Yellow Ribbon” movement. Some people, even staying there [in occupation], choose to keep fighting.

The last demonstration in Rome—at least 25,000 Ukrainians should have come—but no. In 2014, when the first demonstration was held in Rome, about 10,000 people came. Most people aren't interested... I wouldn't say the diaspora is united at all.

There are thousands of refugees. A great many of our refugees have gone to Russian schools and the Russian church. They have forgotten the Ukrainian language. Most are doing this consciously.

Some participants, however, noted that one should not judge those who chose to remain under occupation or stay abroad, as no one truly knows the context and challenges that influenced these individuals' decisions. Respondents emphasized that the possibility of such people collaborating with the Ukrainian community in the future should not be completely dismissed.

We can judge a person when we know them. But regarding people who made a choice we don't understand—we cannot judge whether they are “for” or “against.” When we judge people who, for example, left for Russia, we cannot judge the real reasons why they did so.

There are circumstances that you cannot explain to everyone. The choice you made may create a feeling that you have betrayed [your country]. We should not judge a person as a criminal if it has not been proven that they are one. We must believe until the very end that people are capable of collective action.

Moreover, a prevailing view among the dialogue participants was that differences among Ukrainian communities could be exploited—either by external forces (specifically the Russian Federation) or by internal Ukrainian actors—to divide society. In particular, they noted the potential for polarization around issues such as religion, language, and residence in Ukraine or abroad.

Any group has things in common. And if those things aren't there, the group can be torn apart. If someone wants to break up a group, they will target these different areas.

There is a threat of division between labor migrants and refugees. I see risks of division based on religion or language—this is my experience.

According to the respondents, the risk of such division can be overcome by investing in what unites society. They noted that Ukrainians are adept at uniting under external pressure; however, during calmer periods, there are fewer opportunities and common causes for unity. Among the unifying factors, participants mentioned politics, culture, and the need to develop strategic communication.

“Srach” (heated public disputes) is a part of our culture, our tradition. But at the moment when we are pressured (the Oval Office, the full-scale invasion), we unite quickly when we feel a threat. Under stress, under threat, we unite quickly.

Many Ukrainians had grievances against Zelenskyy — but when Trump began to pressure him, Ukrainians said, "Excuse me, he is ours, we elected him."

Politics can unite us where we are divided. We can find common ground. If some Italian tells me now that they like one politician and dislike another — well, okay, I wouldn't care. At our holiday feasts, we constantly have political “srachs” We wouldn't argue like that with strangers. But you can argue about this with your own kin because you are always together.

Crimean Tatars have one culture, people from Podillia have another, but what unites us is the "Ukrainian-ness."

We lack strategic communication.

Awareness and Support of Ukrainian Identity

When discussing what sustains their unity with Ukraine, the dialogue participants most frequently cited national identity. Most respondents identified themselves primarily as Ukrainians and emphasized that identity is formed from early childhood, within the family. The respondents stressed that a sense of belonging to Ukraine shapes their self-perception and life decisions, and motivates them to invest in Ukraine and act on its behalf.

National identity is formed individually. I owe my identity to my family. My family shaped me as a Ukrainian from the first days of my life. At home, I studied things we didn't learn in Soviet school. The language of my children, even though they were born in Italy, is Ukrainian. Identity, if it exists, must be in the children first and foremost. What kind of Ukrainian are you if your children are Francesco and Pietro? What kind of Ukrainian are you if your children don't speak Ukrainian? You must continue through your children; they must know the language, study, and preserve traditions and the church. Russia has always been engaged in the destruction of Ukrainian identity.

Ukrainian identity means we want to do something for Ukraine.

Respondents also mentioned various elements of Ukrainian identity that maintain their connection to Ukraine, particularly the language. In the respondents’ view, speaking Ukrainian is often the most prominent marker of identity; even non-ethnic Ukrainians may use it to emphasize their belonging to the Ukrainian political nation. In this context, the preservation of the Ukrainian language during the USSR was cited as an expression of genuine Ukrainian identity. Participants also mentioned their relatives or acquaintances in the military who help them maintain connections with Ukraine.

The Ukrainian language. There are [Crimean] Tatars who speak Ukrainian without being Ukrainian.

When we were born in the USSR, the whole world saw us as happy Soviet people who supported communism. The world saw statistics and did not expect that we were preserving our language and culture .

Furthermore, the participants emphasized the importance of culture, traditions (particularly festive ones), history, humor, Ukrainian cuisine, and clothing in maintaining a connection to Ukraine. Some respondents noted they are linked to Ukraine through politics and historical figures (mentioning Taras Shevchenko and Maria Prymachenko). For many participants, faith and the church also remain important. Several respondents stated that Ukrainians attend different churches and that faith can also take different forms. For some respondents, the nature inherent to Ukraine is also significant.

Emotional Ties

The sense of belonging to Ukrainian society is complemented by an emotional connection to Ukraine, which was repeatedly mentioned by the dialogue participants. Specifically, they spoke of a sense of “roots” in Ukraine, as well as love and patriotism.

For many participants, the shared emotions that link them with other Ukrainians are the striving for victory, the sense of fighting for the country's future, and the hope that the country will ultimately achieve a better life. Some respondents also noted a striving for justice in this context.

Social Ties

Alongside an internal sense of unity with Ukraine, the participants noted more tangible manifestations of this connection. These primarily referred to social ties with other Ukrainians, as well as participation in Ukraine's socio-political life.

Personal Ties

For dialogue participants, a vital way of maintaining their connection to Ukraine is a sense of community and communication with other Ukrainians. Respondents explained that they are linked to their compatriots by shared experiences: victories and tragedies, similar upbringings, common cultural content, and collective memories. In the respondents’ view, these factors form a worldview that enables Ukrainians living in different parts of the world to find common ground more easily.

Shared tragedies, like the Holodomor. Shared victories, like the cruiser "Moskva."

Memories of the past that shape us and that we carry into the present. Bread that must never be thrown away. Scarcity. This is a shared past.

We are united by a common context: where we grew up, what we watched on TV, and collecting gum wrappers and stickers. If you tell an Italian about "Love is..." [gum], they won't understand you.

Expertise in knowing the "Russian world". It is very difficult for us to explain the "Russian world" to Italians, but we know it perfectly.

Furthermore, respondents mentioned more intimate relationships: specifically, the importance of family and friends as "bridges" for maintaining a connection with Ukraine.

Socio-political Activity

During the dialogue, some respondents mentioned socio-political activity as an element of their connection to Ukraine. This primarily involved participation in specific political movements and remaining within the Ukrainian information space. For instance, the respondents emphasized that they read Ukrainian media and Telegram channels to stay informed about events in Ukraine.

Connection with the State and Business

Furthermore, Ukrainians abroad maintain connections with their homeland through their interactions with the state. This refers primarily to legal aspects. Additionally, 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 remain within the Ukrainian context.

State

When discussing their connection to the Ukrainian state, participants primarily mentioned formal attributes: possession of documents and Ukrainian citizenship. A sentiment also emerged among the respondents that they can feel truly whole in their rights and experience genuine respect only in Ukraine, whereas in other countries they are foreigners, with limited opportunities and rights.

Everyone is united by documents. [The] Diia [app].

Respect is when you feel like a Ukrainian in Ukraine and understand that you have rights. Your education, your professionalism, and your civic stance are recognized. It is respect from the state toward its people. It is about respect for one another and for those around you—for you as a human being.

Business

When discussing the business community, respondents primarily mentioned medicine and the beauty industry; they reported that the quality of these services in Ukraine is significantly higher, so they seek them either in Ukraine or from Ukrainian citizens abroad.

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

Some of the dialogue participants are actively involved in the life of the Ukrainian community in Italy, including volunteering, organizing demonstrations, and other activities. Additionally, some participants had experience with socio-political engagement prior to leaving Ukraine. Their proactive stance may have influenced the substance of the discussion.

Furthermore, many of the dialogue participants migrated to Italy before February 24, 2022, and have lived outside Ukraine for a significant period. This has affected the depth of their integration into the host country's society and may have shaped a perspective on the challenges and needs of the Ukrainian community that differs from that of the newcomers.

Promotion of Ukraine Abroad

The primary way respondents engaged in socio-political life was by organizing and participating in demonstrations. These events aim to draw the host country's population's attention to the war in Ukraine and publicly represent the Ukrainian position.

After the horrific events in Ukraine, there are more people at the rallies.

So that Italians understand Ukraine better, [we need] to show our Ukraine, so that they understand it and vote for it.

In addition to demonstrations, the Ukrainian community in Rome organizes cultural events, including concerts and festivals. Their target audience includes both Ukrainians and the Italian population.

During the dialogue, those present also mentioned the use of social media to promote the Ukrainian cause.

Separately, participants recalled a rather specific way of promoting Ukraine in Italy, stemming from the particular nature of labour migration to this country. Ukrainian women, working in Italian families and caring for the most vulnerable segments of the population, served as direct cultural ambassadors. This daily, often non-prestigious but dedicated work, built a capital of trust that became one of the factors in mobilizing humanitarian aid for Ukraine after the start of the full-scale invasion.

I would expect a thank you from the state for our work ever since we’ve been here. Not just over the past four years, but since you’ve existed here on this continent. For the fact that you preserved what is Ukrainian and represented our state with dignity. Because Italians would say they had a Ukrainian woman working for them, and they’ve never seen a better person. It was non-prestigious work, but you are working with vulnerable people within a family. Italians brought humanitarian aid because they had Ukrainians working for them, and they said they had never seen such a kind and radiant person.

Development of Local Community

Part of the socio-political activity that the dialogue participants engage in is directed inward, toward the community itself. In particular, they discussed working with children—organizing Ukrainian language studies, passing on Ukrainian traditions, and, more broadly, preserving Ukrainian identity.

Many of those present also pointed to networking within the community as a form of civic engagement.

We want to communicate, to have a sense of community.

Interaction with Ukrainians in Ukraine

The participants of the dialogue also occasionally mentioned interaction with compatriots residing in Ukraine. However, the only form of cooperation mentioned by the interviewees was volunteering. Respondents emphasized that, since they are not directly enlisted in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, they must support the Ukrainian military by collecting aid, donating, and participating in other volunteer initiatives in Ukraine.

Either at the frontline, or for the sake of the frontline.

Motivation to Engage in Socio-political Processes in Ukraine

Emotional Factors

One of the key motivations driving dialogue participants in Italy to engage in the socio-political life of Ukraine is a sense of calling. According to the respondents, they feel an internal need to act for the benefit of Ukraine, as it helps them express their Ukrainian identity through action, even if they do not receive specific requests for such activity from the Ukrainian state.

The state didn't ask me to create a children's choir in Rome, and the church didn't ask either. It is a calling to do what I love for the social good. It was "related labor" (srodna pratsia).

I cannot do otherwise because it is my identity.

The facilitated dialogue conducted by OPORA in Rome stood out from others because the participants clearly communicated a sense of shame as a stimulus for socio-political activity. This feeling is twofold: on one hand, it drives action (“we are privileged here because we are safe”), and on the other, it exhausts internal resources.

There’s a sense of shame when, due to circumstances, I don’t attend demonstrations. It’s a responsibility to the community. When you donate on a regular basis, and suddenly, you can't, there’s a feeling of shame and helplessness that you can't give what you want to give or do what you want to do. When you can't do your maximum, there’s a sense of shame that we are safe here while people in Ukraine are experiencing much worse things. We are privileged here, and that motivates us to do something.

I left [Ukraine] after the start of the full-scale war, and I needed time to forgive myself for leaving.

I have a feeling that I betrayed Ukraine twice: first, when I left, and second, when I didn't return.

This sense of shame can be manipulated. In the context of personal development, shame burns your resources for nothing. It takes away the opportunity to do something better. It helps those who are fighting against us.

I am living through this sense of shame myself, and the more you beat yourself up, the less strength you have to do anything.

Another emotional factor motivating Ukrainians in Italy to engage in Ukraine's socio-political life is anger. According to them, tragic events in Ukraine or the unfair treatment of Ukraine by foreigners prompt respondents to invest more in helping Ukrainian society and the state.

I often feel anger. Especially if there are some horrific events in Ukraine. After working with a psychologist, I learned to transform it into action, to make it useful, to turn anger into fuel.

A separate, equally important emotional factor cited by the dialogue participants is the desire to be needed by Ukraine and to help their compatriots.

In this context, it is also pertinent to mention a sense of civil duty which, according to the participants, is closely intertwined with a sharp sense of justice; this makes active engagement an internal necessity that is impossible to ignore.

A sense of lack of justice. I feel that I cannot do otherwise. That Ukraine has the right to live like other countries. Many people I know also say, "I have to do this because it must be done." And I feel that I cannot not do it.

We cannot do otherwise. Ukraine hurts, so we must do something.

Perspective of Returning to Ukraine

For many dialogue participants, a significant motivation driving their involvement in Ukraine's socio-political life is the fact that they envision their own future and the future of their children in Ukraine. Respondents noted that they want to preserve Ukraine in order to have the opportunity to return there and, therefore, are ready to contribute to the support and development of the Ukrainian state right now.

A vested interest in preserving Ukraine to have somewhere to go back to. We are talking about high-minded concepts right now. Victory will come when Ukraine is preserved and remains a sovereign state.

Furthermore, respondents note that by participating in the socio-political life of Ukraine, they gain the opportunity for self-fulfillment or to utilize and develop their skills. According to the participants, Ukrainians abroad often hold jobs that do not correspond to their true level of knowledge and expertise. Conversely, while working for the benefit of Ukraine, they have the chance to fully express themselves and achieve self-realization.

It is important for everyone to do what they are professional at or to continue learning. Very often, the work Ukrainians do here is demeaning. There is a prejudice because the work Ukrainians have done in Italy often looks unnecessary or degrading, but they were performing the role of social workers. In Northern Europe, elderly and vulnerable people are placed in institutions. Ukrainians here act as social workers because in Italy, the practice is that everything stays within the family. This is decent and worthy work. It will continue to be needed and should be further developed.

The dialogue participants are also motivated to engage in Ukrainian socio-political life by an internal demand for Ukraine's development as a state governed by the rule of law and a desire for genuine reforms. According to the respondents, for the sacrifices of Ukrainian soldiers not to be in vain, the state must change and transform for the better. In light of this, the participants are ready to join various activities to facilitate the reformation of the Ukrainian state. They view the building of strong institutions and the rule of law not only as a tribute to the memory of fallen defenders but also as the only safeguard against corrupt practices and a guarantee of effective post-war recovery.

There must be reforms. Strong institutions that would elevate Ukraine to another level.

We are convinced that we will win. But if there is no rule of law, why did those hundreds of thousands die? Another Mindich will just come along.

A sense of a lack of justice. I feel that I cannot do otherwise. That Ukraine has the right to live like other countries. Many people I know also say, "I have to do this because it must be done." And I feel that I cannot not do it.

I feel sorry for us in a human sense because we have the land, a tradition of labour, and many Soviet inventions were created by Ukrainians. We have something to work with. I have a rosy hope that when victory and peace come, investments will follow. But if they are handled by people who don't know what they're doing, the investors will leave, and we will be left with debts. There must be people to prevent them from being stolen so that the investments don't just run out.

We must invest now in what will come later.

Previous Experience of Participation

Another motivation driving Ukrainians in Italy to engage in socio-political life in Ukraine is the established habit of being active citizens. According to the respondents, their prior experience of participating in public life prompts them to continue taking part in various events, joining volunteer initiatives, and so on.

I cannot do otherwise, because it is my identity.

Ultimately, respondents emphasized that they feel gratitude from others, particularly from the military, which also encourages them to involve themselves in Ukraine's socio-political life.

To feel that what we are doing, even if it's just a little, even if it's small, brings at least the shadow of victory closer. This gives us a major boost. When you feel that you are doing something useful.

Unity. When the military thanks us for the help. The gratitude of the soldiers is motivating. That is what we work for.

Barriers to Participation

A key challenge discussed by the dialogue participants in the context of barriers to socio-political participation in Ukraine was the lack of financial resources. Due to the absence of sufficient funding, various initiatives, events, or courses that Ukrainians in Italy could otherwise implement remain effectively inaccessible to them. Consequently, all socio-political activity within the community, according to the participants, takes place almost exclusively in a volunteer capacity.

We can organize events and involve musicians, but funding is needed.

A similarly significant obstacle to socio-political activity is its lack of priority compared to meeting basic needs.

Volunteering and social work are often something additional. You have to cover your basic human needs first.

Another barrier mentioned by the interviewees is the lack of necessary knowledge. Many respondents noted that before moving to Italy, they had no experience with activism at all, or had never organized mass events or activities. At the same time, dialogue participants emphasized that they are willing to learn and acquire the necessary skills but lack sufficient funds or other resources to do so. This is why the respondents highlighted the need for state support for their training.

I would ask to be given the tools. Teach me how to write grants, pay for a course where I can learn how to write a project. I cannot afford it myself. I will find the money on my own, but I don't have several thousand euros for a course. If there were an agreement with a university or private organizations that run such courses... if there were a state policy, I could get an education in the field where I am active. Then we would be more useful and would feel that the state is investing in us because it wants us to be beneficial to it.

Another obstacle mentioned by the dialogue participants is the lack of active individuals. According to the respondents, they try to involve more people in activism, but ultimately a specific circle of the most active individuals is formed, who participate in the majority of events.

We all cross paths at the events we organize.

Requests to the State

Considering the greatest obstacle—the lack of funding—the key request from the dialogue participants in Italy was for training programs on grant writing. The respondents emphasize that they are ready to seek funds for their activities independently but require mentoring support, especially when doing so for the first time.

Another request from the Ukrainian community in Rome is the opening of an institution in Italy that would promote Ukrainian culture. According to the respondents, the Russian Federation still exerts significant influence in Italy, particularly through culture. They see a need for Ukraine to develop its presence by forming counter-narratives regarding the Russian-Ukrainian war.

The state should open a Ukrainian cultural institute in Italy and allocate funds for it. Some kind of organization or project, at the very least, to pay people for their work. There must be some kind of projects or institutions.

During the discussion of this issue, a debate emerged among those present regarding the appropriateness of requesting financial support from the state at a time when Ukraine is spending vast sums daily to defend its independence. While some dialogue participants expect a sense of gratitude from the Ukrainian state for their activities and stance, others point out that military operations, rather than humanitarian issues, must be Ukraine’s top priority.

We must do something for Ukraine, not Ukraine for us. A day of war costs Ukraine $120 million. That is the first priority. This must be the primary understanding.

We all keep forgetting that we are at war. It isn't over yet. What money from Ukraine?

Professionals need to be paid, but only when the state makes a request for something. No one asked me to do this. People often talk about payment, but the work must come from the heart. You have to do something without looking for your own benefit.

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

In responses to questions about the challenges the dialogue participants face while living in Italy, the majority of those surveyed pointed to the difficulties of adaptation and integration into Italian society. Respondents emphasized that they consider themselves outsiders in Italy, feeling that they are not living the life they want and longing for Ukraine. At the same time, some respondents highlighted that they find it difficult to establish new contacts in Italy and do not fully understand how to properly coexist with Italian society.

I am a stranger here and will always be a stranger.

I am uprooted from the life I dream of.

In a foreign land—not at home. In Italy, we are outsiders.

For some respondents, a key challenge is the inequality of rights between Italians and Ukrainians in Italy. Specifically, participants note that they feel lower in status than Italians and are forced to fight for their rights.

Our social status is lower than that of the Italians.

The dialogue participants also emphasized that Italian bureaucracy is a significant challenge for them. Those surveyed explained that the bureaucratic system operates very slowly and often remains not fully understood by them.

Bureaucracy and a foreign system are always difficult because they are incomprehensible and complex.

Some respondents emphasized that the issue of self-realization remains vital for them. According to them, it is difficult to prove their professional expertise in Italy (often due to challenges with the recognition of Ukrainian higher education diplomas) and to apply their actual skills or talents.

To prove that you are worth something as a specialist.

Non-recognition of our diploma.

At the same time, some participants stated that they consider the uncertainty of the future to be their greatest challenge. Respondents highlighted that they are currently primarily occupied with survival and do not know how to plan for the future, especially given the security situation and their children's education.

Uncertainty about tomorrow.

Additionally, some dialogue participants noted that a challenge of living in Italy is the "outdatedness" of the Ukrainian community which, in their opinion, is still guided by principles from the post-Soviet period.

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

In describing the key challenges deterring Ukrainians in Italy from returning to Ukraine, the majority of dialogue participants mentioned security risks. According to those surveyed, they worry about the safety of themselves and their children, experiencing a fear that makes them hesitant to consider returning home for the time being. At the same time, some respondents noted that they plan to return to Ukraine as soon as the security and energy situation stabilizes.

Danger, worrying about my child.

Nothing is holding me back. Except, perhaps, for a rather difficult winter. But as soon as it passes, I plan to return home.

For other respondents, the key challenge preventing their return is a sense of being rooted in Italy. Some have lived here for quite a long time, so their family, work, and other obligations are now tied more closely to this country than to Ukraine. Certain dialogue participants came to Italy from temporarily occupied territories and are not considering a return to Ukraine because they do not want to start their lives from scratch again. For some respondents, medical treatment is a significant factor forcing them to remain in Italy. Others noted that they are ready to return to Ukraine temporarily, for a specific period.

The habit of living here! The fear of starting everything from zero.

My home (family, work, well-being) is here, but I could go there to work.

My family is in Italy; no one is left in Ukraine. My city is occupied.

Economic instability is also among the factors deterring respondents from returning. Specifically, participants noted a fear of not finding a job or receiving too low a salary; they feel their skills are not sufficiently valued in Ukraine and generally observed that the economic situation is quite fragile and unpredictable..

Financial and career opportunities in Ukraine right now.

My profession is not as highly valued financially in Ukraine.

The fear of not finding a job.

For some respondents, an important factor deterring them from returning home is also their children's education in Italian schools or higher education institutions.

A child’s education.

Certain dialogue participants noted that the political situation in the country—specifically injustice and corruption—is also a significant deterrent for them.

The state is not fully governed by the rule of law.

Some are held back from returning home by the feeling that they are able to do more for Ukraine while staying abroad.

Being a voice for other Ukrainians on the international stage.

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, 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.

To date, the Civil Network OPORA has conducted seven dialogues: a pilot dialogue took place on April 29, 2024, in Vilnius, Lithuania; the next three were held in cities across the United Kingdom (Manchester, Liverpool, and Preston) from December 9 to 12, 2024. On October 18, 2025, the fifth facilitated dialogue was held with the Ukrainian community in Germany (Berlin), followed by one in Poland (Warsaw) on December 12, 2025, and another in Italy (Rome) on December 14, 2025.

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 key part of the preparatory phase of the facilitated dialogue was the recruitment of participants. To achieve this, local community leaders conducted targeted outreach among their own contacts and invited Ukrainians living in Italy (primarily in Rome) to participate in the dialogue.

In total, 19 Ukrainian citizens (16 women and 3 men) took part in the facilitated dialogue in Italy. The average age of the participants was 45. Almost all participants are employed, while some are also engaged in volunteering and social activism.

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

Since participation in the facilitated dialogue was voluntary and depended solely on participants' motivation, this may have influenced the subsequent discussion outcomes. Participants with a strong Ukrainian identity who maintain closer ties with the Ukrainian community and demonstrate civic and political activity (e.g., participation in rallies, fundraising) were more motivated to join the event.

Main Stage

The main stage of the research involved a facilitated dialogue in Rome on December 14, 2025. The facilitated dialogue lasted 3 hours.

The facilitated dialogue was composed of 3 primary parts:

Introduction. The goal of this part was to create a safe environment in which participants could get to know one another, feel ready to share their own stories, and listen to one another. 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.

Given the sensitive nature of the topics discussed and the need to create a comfortable environment and a trusting atmosphere for 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, a fact communicated to the participants in advance. Furthermore, photography was conducted during the event, and those present 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

Rome (14 December 2025)

Location: Basilica minore di Santa Sofia, Via di Boccea, 478, 00168 Roma RM, Italy.

Number of participants: 19.

Co-organized by: Congress of Ukrainians in Italy.