Presidential elections in Ukraine could be conducted concurrently with a nationwide referendum, stated David Arakhamia, head of the Servant of the People parliamentary faction in the Verkhovna Rada. This approach, he explained, would help address the challenge of achieving the required 50% voter turnout for the referendum to be deemed legitimate.
According to Arakhamia, Ukraine currently faces significant hurdles in its electoral system. A referendum requires at least 50% participation (approximately 18 million voters based on pre-war registers) to be valid. “We do not need elections or a referendum at any cost,” Arakhamia emphasized during a briefing. “We need democratic processes. Therefore, elections or a referendum will only take place when they meet the democratic and security standards recognized worldwide. Only then will they be acknowledged as legitimate internationally.”
He noted that a working group in parliament is preparing a draft law on elections, which could be presented by the end of February 2026. However, any voting—whether elections or a referendum—would only be possible after a ceasefire, ensuring safety for voters, military personnel, and displaced persons.
Context: Shift in Rhetoric Amid U.S. Pressure
Arakhamia’s comments come against the backdrop of intensified discussions on ending the war, influenced by U.S. President Donald Trump. In late December 2025, Trump repeatedly urged Ukraine to hold elections promptly, linking it to democratic legitimacy and peace negotiations. He proposed a framework that includes a potential referendum on peace terms, contingent on a temporary ceasefire.
Previously, Ukrainian leadership—including President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Arakhamia—argued that elections were impossible during martial law due to constitutional prohibitions and security risks. The Constitution bans elections under martial law (extended multiple times since 2022), with millions displaced and territories occupied.
The recent openness to combining elections with a referendum appears tied to evolving negotiations. Zelenskyy has indicated readiness for a vote on a peace plan if it involves difficult decisions (e.g., territorial issues), but only with a ceasefire and security guarantees. Combining the processes could boost turnout for the referendum, potentially covering sensitive topics like peace agreement terms.
Where Is the Truth? Pragmatism or Manipulation?
The timing raises questions: Why the sudden flexibility after years of insisting “no elections during war”? Critics see it as a response to external pressure from Trump, who has pushed for quick resolution, including elections as proof of democracy.
Yet, the position remains consistent on key points—no voting without a ceasefire and international standards. This could reflect pragmatic adaptation to secure U.S. support amid waning Western aid and ongoing conflict.
Manipulation in politics is inevitable during war, but facts point to legal and practical constraints. A draft law is in progress, but real progress depends on frontline developments and negotiations. Society is divided: polls show most Ukrainians prioritize ending the war over immediate elections, yet they support democratic processes post-ceasefire.
As Ukraine navigates these challenges, the key question remains: Will a ceasefire materialize to enable legitimate, inclusive voting? The world—and Ukrainians—await answers in what could be a pivotal year.