It’s not so easy when Russia’s spreading disinformation and Donald’s regurgitating it.

But smart people write about Ukraine’s Constitutional Order in Wartime: Elections, Continuity, and Legitimacy

The article’s conclusion:

Wartime elections are neither a legal obligation nor a democratic necessity when they cannot be free, fair, or secure. Historical precedents confirm that elections are only feasible when security conditions allow, which is not the case in Ukraine’s current war. Meanwhile, the absence of elections does not mean the absence of legitimacy. Ukraine’s constitutional provisions, democratic consensus, and international recognition ensure that its government remains constitutionally legitimate, functional, and committed to democratic principles.

Once martial law ends, Ukrainian authorities should fulfil their constitutional duty to hold elections, ensuring a seamless transition back to full democratic governance. This transition presents other unique challenges, from logistics to structuring the post-war electoral process – whether holding all elections simultaneously or sequencing presidential and parliamentary votes to uphold democratic principles. But until then, Ukraine’s leadership remains fully legitimate under both constitutional law and international recognition. Calls to question this legitimacy ignore Ukraine’s constitutional safeguards, historical precedent, and the security necessity of stable wartime governance.