The Defense-Industrial Complex in the Activities of the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR: Between the Soviet Legacy and the Formation of National Security (1990–1991)

Abstract

This article examines the role of the defense-industrial complex (DIC) in the activities of the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR in 1990–1991. It demonstrates that in the context of Ukraine’s state-building process, the political elite was compelled to choose between preserving the Soviet legacy and subordination to the Union Center, on the one hand, and developing its own system of national security, on the other. The study analyzes and evaluates parliamentary debates between the opposition “People’s Council” and the communist majority “Group 239.” It is shown that the issue of converting defense industry enterprises became one of the key markers of divergent political orientations within the parliament.

Particular attention is paid to the fact that, in the vision of the democratic opposition, placing defense industry enterprises under republican authority was viewed as part of the formation of national Armed Forces and as an essential element of genuine state sovereignty. Opposition deputies also advocated not only reducing defense spending and the maintenance costs of defense enterprises, but also reorienting them toward the production of consumer goods, a demand dictated by specific socio-economic conditions. The communist majority, in turn, sought to balance loyalty to the Union Center with the growing societal demand for economic and political autonomy of the Ukrainian SSR.

Based on parliamentary speeches, the article traces the transformation of approaches to the functioning of the defense-industrial sector, its problematic aspects, and proposed solutions. It outlines the evolution of the idea of ownership and subordination of defense enterprises on the republic’s territory: from preserving control by the Union Center to the concept of transferring them under the jurisdiction of republican authorities, particularly the Supreme Council of the Ukrainian SSR. The debates around the DIC concerned not only economic or social aspects but above all political dimensions. Alongside attempts to integrate the defense industry into the national economy through conversion, there emerged a recognition of its significance for strengthening defense capacity as a component of the future independent state.

The article concludes that, in the context of the adoption of the Declaration on State Sovereignty of the Ukrainian SSR, the debates revealed not only a search for effective models of managing defense enterprises but also the emergence of a national political consensus on the need to reduce dependence on the Union Center. These discussions on the future of the defense industry thus became an important element of Ukraine’s security policy even before the formal restoration of independence.