Strategic communication cannot replace military force, but it has become a vital element of Ukraine’s defence against Russia. What lessons can other countries draw from Ukraine’s experience? This is the question researchers at FOI set out to explore.

Strategic communication refers to the deliberate use of communication by organisations, among others, to achieve long-term goals. In Ukraine, the government, civil society, the armed forces, and public authorities have all turned to strategic communication as a means of national survival.

In the report All Eyes on Ukraine – Strategic Communication in the Russo-Ukrainian War, 2023–2024, FOI researchers Per-Erik Nilsson and Kristina Hellström analyse how Ukraine has employed public diplomacy, public affairs, and psychological operations to advance its strategic objectives. The study places particular focus on the challenges and lessons encountered by Ukrainian strategic communication practitioners.

“Ukraine’s strategic communication has gone through several distinct phases. In the face of extreme pressure at the outset, it seemed the entire country spoke with one voice—even though those behind the messaging came from all parts of society and operated with minimal coordination. There was a great deal of improvisation, new ideas, and a spirit of experimentation,” says Per-Erik Nilsson.

The report was commissioned by the Swedish Armed Forces and is based primarily on interviews conducted by Per-Erik Nilsson on location in Kyiv in October 2024. In total, he interviewed 18 senior figures from Ukraine’s armed forces, Ministry of Defence, fact-checking organisations, and news media.

Formalisation may create friction

Ukraine is currently working to streamline its strategic communication and formalise mandates among the actors involved.

“Doing so can lead to tensions and even power struggles between different organisations. Inevitably, strategic communication during wartime is a political matter. Who has the mandate to represent the nation? That’s why it’s important for Ukraine not to overlook, for instance, civil society when developing rules about who does what,” says Per-Erik Nilsson.

Overly technical approaches miss the point

So, what lessons can democratic states draw from Ukraine?

“That the human complexity involved in information influence and opinion formation is immense. You can’t simply assume that action X will always lead to outcome Y. On top of that, changes in the information environment are accelerating ever more rapidly due to technological development, algorithms, and media logic. Quite simply, one should avoid viewing strategic communication too technically,” says Per-Erik Nilsson.

Here are a few additional conclusions:

• Having a lot of data is not the same as having a clear picture. Robust analytical capacity is needed to draw meaningful conclusions from the enormous volumes of data that exist today.
• The media landscape is becoming increasingly diverse. Capturing and maintaining global attention is difficult. The challenge is to convey your message—and undermine your adversary’s—on platforms like social media in a way that is both credible and sustainable.
• While technological development is accelerating, many fundamental social, political, cultural, and psychological factors appear to remain relatively stable. An example is the principle that a country’s leaders should be elected in free elections—not appointed by an invading neighbour. This perspective is important to keep in mind when communicating with the rest of the world.