The legacy of the USSR military-industrial complex in Ukraine after the restoration of independence in 1991

Abstract

The study highlights the crisis transformation of the defense-industrial complex of Ukraine after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. It is determined that Ukraine inherited surplus stocks of Soviet weapons that exceeded national needs.

The study offers a comprehensive re-conceptualization of the transformation of Ukraine’s defense-industrial complex after 1991, interpreting it as the outcome of structural governance decisions and strategic constraints of the transitional period rather than as an automatic consequence of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

At the same time, it has been proven that the Ukrainian defense-industrial complex (DIC) developed according to the post-Soviet model, which is characterized by low adaptability to external challenges and the inability to effectively meet the needs of the defense forces, high dependence on state funding, insufficient transparency, as well as weak financial discipline and executive responsibility.It was found that during the 1990s and early 2000s, the state budget was replenished mostly by exporting surplus stocks of Soviet weapons and ammunition from warehouses, but such actions did not stimulate technological renewal or investment in new developments.The key factors that influenced the formation of a full-fledged domestic defense industry are outlined: the transition from a planned to a market economy; transformation of management methods; lack of a developed regulatory framework; disruption of integrated production cycles.It was determined that the legacy of Ukraine's military-industrial complex required diversification of production, technological modernization, reduction of dependence on Russia, adaptation to market conditions and new geopolitical realities. Effective realization of this potential required systemic reforms, state support, and integration into international defense cooperation to preserve and develop defense capabilities in the context of independence.It is emphasized that in the absence of a comprehensive state strategy and against the backdrop of geopolitical instability, a significant part of this heritage has either been lost or not fully realized.