
Navigating War and Hope: Oleksandra Romantsova on Ukraine’s Struggle for Survival
Oleksandra Romantsova has been at the forefront of documenting war crimes and championing human rights in Ukraine. As the Executive Director of the Center for Civil Liberties since 2018, she played a pivotal role in the organization’s efforts, culminating in her organization winning the Nobel Peace Prize, along with Ales Bialiatski and the Russian organization Memorial, in 2022. Joining me live from Kyiv, Ukraine, Romantsova brings an unparalleled perspective on human rights in the midst of an ongoing war.
In this conversation, she delves into Ukraine’s role within the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) annual presidency, serving as one of six Ukrainian representatives. With approximately 3.5 million people living in Russian-occupied territories, Romantsova confronts the grim realities of war crimes and displacement, emphasizing the critical need for sustained international support, humanitarian aid, and robust reconstruction efforts.
The discussion also explores broader geopolitical uncertainties, including Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency and the implications such shifts could have for Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty. Romantsova challenges the alarmist narratives often found in Western media, advocating instead for measured, actionable strategies over fear-driven catastrophism.
Romantsova’s reflections shine a light on the resilience of the Ukrainian people, who, even amidst profound suffering, use humor as a defiant act of survival. As she poignantly underscores, ending the war demands more than hope—it requires a united global effort, stringent oversight, and an unwavering commitment to justice and security for the millions affected by this conflict.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: The OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) operates under an annual rotating presidency. Each year, the president must navigate the complex mandate outlined by the Council of Foreign Ministers, which consists of representatives from 57 member states—predominantly foreign ministers. How does Ukraine’s current involvement reflect its priorities and challenges within this framework?
Oleksandra Romantsova: It is crucial to have influential players within the OSCE. I am one of six representatives from Ukraine, and we discuss various critical issues. Together with our partners from Russia and Belarus, we address war crimes and other urgent matters. It is clear that our first question to the council is: “What can be done?”
There are 57 member states, and each can contribute. They mentioned they could initiate and fund programs already underway, such as humanitarian aid and reconstruction projects. Significant financial support has been pledged, and discussions about sustaining assistance will continue next month. We emphasized the importance of communication. If negotiations arise, we must not overlook the reality of occupation—it cannot simply be undone overnight.
If the current frontline remains frozen, it means that approximately 3.5 million people will remain in Russian-occupied territories. While the exact number is unclear due to limited access and documentation, this estimate highlights the scale of the crisis. People in these regions face daily dangers, including torture, killings, and other human rights abuses perpetrated by occupying forces. These atrocities have been ongoing since 2014, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
Our primary concern is how the international community can support justice and security for these individuals while ensuring they are treated as citizens deserving of protection and dignity. This issue dominated our discussions. We also discussed the importance of international justice and its geopolitical implications for regions like Central Asia, which face their own challenges. Representatives from these areas and from Russia offered insights into their perspectives.

Jacobsen: Considering the return of Donald Trump to the White House, there’s significant speculation about how his leadership could shape global dynamics. Trump’s unpredictability has often been described as a double-edged sword: it can introduce flexibility in negotiations but also breeds substantial uncertainty. How do you foresee a possible Trump presidency influencing Ukraine’s efforts toward conflict resolution?
The situation on the ground in Ukraine remains dire. Recent missile strikes by Russian forces have targeted not only military infrastructure but also civilian sites, including hospitals, cancer treatment centers, and residential buildings. These attacks often occur in urban areas devoid of military presence, constituting undeniable violations of international law. In your view, what measures are most urgently needed to stop these crimes and protect civilians from further harm?
Romantsova: I hope we can hold onto the current situation—maintain the existing groundwork—rather than dream about some unrealistic transformation. This is not about envisioning a perfect future but managing the present effectively. Ukraine needs a foreign policy that prioritizes its survival and sovereignty, not shifting focus to internal U.S. issues. This conflict must end, but stopping the war is not straightforward.
The only people who can stop this war are the people themselves. Ultimately, it is up to the collective will. Negotiations and agreements alone are not enough. They require stringent oversight and enforcement to ensure compliance. We have learned from past experiences, such as Russia’s aggression over the past decade, that unchecked actions lead to escalation. Therefore, the international community must remain vigilant and committed to addressing Russian aggression in a structured and consistent manner.
It will not be easy, and it will not happen overnight. For instance, when Trump claimed he could resolve the conflict in 24 hours, Ukrainians found it laughable. Soldiers and civilians alike reacted with humour to such oversimplifications. One day to resolve this? That is far from reality.
Jacobsen: North American media frequently veers toward catastrophism, with narratives that often mirror political leanings. For instance, liberal-leaning outlets may frame opposing developments as apocalyptic, while conservative media often employs similarly extreme rhetoric when figures like Donald Trump gain traction. Both sides fuel a sense of impending collapse, whether predicting the erosion of rights or the loss of sovereignty for Ukraine. How does this polarized media landscape influence international perceptions of Ukraine’s fight for survival?
This tendency toward alarmism was evident during the last U.S. election cycle, where both sides framed the stakes as nothing less than the end of American democracy. If Kamala Harris had won, some claimed it would signify democratic collapse for specific reasons. The same rhetoric was applied to Donald Trump’s potential re-election, albeit for entirely different reasons. How can we encourage more balanced, solutions-driven discourse when discussing global crises like the war in Ukraine?
Romantsova: This rhetoric assumes that the entire world hinges on one moment or election, a flawed perspective. Life continues. The world does not stop. Neither America nor Ukraine will cease to exist. Seven billion people worldwide will still progress, even if the outcomes are not as ideal as imagined.
That said, we must remain grounded in reality. There is no quick fix or simplistic solution. Managing this conflict requires sustained effort, collaboration, and realism, not empty promises or exaggerated fears. Decisions must address real problems with practical solutions rather than perpetuate endless cycles of alarmism.

Jacobsen: Another challenge is the public’s skewed perception of global crises. Many people in the West don’t realize that half of the world’s population lives in Southeast Asia, which profoundly impacts population density, resources, and geopolitical focus. Perspective matters greatly in shaping global narratives. How can we bring this kind of nuance to discussions about Ukraine’s plight, particularly in the media?
It’s also worth noting the resilience of Ukrainian culture, even amid profound hardship. Humor, as you’ve mentioned, plays a critical role in coping with the trauma of war. Ukrainians often find ways to joke about even the darkest situations—sometimes within hours of a missile strike destroying a friend’s apartment complex. Could you elaborate on how this unique sense of humor serves as a survival mechanism in such devastating circumstances?
Romantsova: Oh, it’s a term that came up after a press conference Putin held. He was trying to justify the invasion, saying something like, “It’s just the beginning of the party,” referring to the invasion of Ukraine. President Zelensky responded with humour and called Putin a “dumbass” during a public statement. It became a viral moment.
Jacobsen: You referenced a particularly striking anecdote: Zelensky calling Putin a “dumbass.” Could you explain the context and significance of that moment? How does this type of rhetoric impact morale, both domestically and internationally?
Romantsova: Yes, it’s an example of the sharp wit Ukrainians use, even in dire situations. The context makes it even more impactful. Shortly after, there was news that a Russian general responsible for the chemical division of the Russian military was reportedly killed in Moscow. Ukrainian intelligence allegedly used a jet-powered scooter to deliver explosives to his car.
Imagine that—a general managing Russia’s chemical warfare operations taken out in such a creative way. In Kyiv, you see these small scooters everywhere, just lying around. The story reflects both ingenuity and the strange reality of the conflict. I don’t think the U.S. media covered it in much detail, but it highlights modern warfare’s dynamic and unpredictable nature.
Jacobsen: Regarding morale, what’s Kyiv’s current sentiment? Despite the relentless violence, how are people finding the strength to persevere, and what role does international support play in sustaining that resilience?
Romantsova: Ukrainians are exhausted but trying to focus on family. We just celebrated Christmas. Christmas traditionally brings people together. In Ukraine, we don’t celebrate Christmas like some other countries do, and we have an extended season of festivities. It’s more concentrated on the 24th and 25th, similar to Spain. Despite everything, people are trying to maintain some sense of normalcy and hope.
Jacobsen: That’s a powerful reminder of resilience. Thank you for sharing this perspective.
Romantsova: This evening feels like my main moment to focus. Many people are trying to integrate their thoughts and keep their minds steady because it’s horrible. Running a business, studying, or managing daily life while dealing with the war is difficult. Every week, life involves some form of support—helping a relative on the frontline, assisting someone teaching in a hospital, or caring for children studying in a basement due to the constant threat of missile strikes.
Your life starts to revolve around the war, and your behaviour adapts. Everything becomes intertwined with survival and the challenges of deadlines, trauma from COVID-19, and now the war. Many people struggle with the pressure to always perform at their best. Still, the reality of war introduces new challenges—like worrying about whether your home or even your road will survive another attack. Mentally, it’s exhausting to try and maintain a sense of normalcy or excellence when the circumstances are so overwhelming.
Negotiations might arise, but no one expects an easy resolution or an ideal outcome for Ukraine. People feel that if negotiations happen, they’ll still need to fight for Ukraine’s interests during and after those discussions. It’s just the reality of our situation.