When international partners ask me about the risks of doing business in Ukraine during the war, I rarely begin with the frontline. Not because the war is insignificant—it defines everything. But because, from an investor’s perspective, war is a risk that can be understood, modeled, and managed. Legal uncertainty is not.
Over the past years of full-scale war, Ukraine has demonstrated something crucial: even under extreme pressure, business can continue to operate, export, invest, and sustain the economy. The agricultural sector has preserved logistics, restructured supply routes, adapted to new markets, and ensured foreign currency inflows. That is why international banks, development institutions, and private investors did not stop looking at Ukraine even in the most difficult moments of 2022–2024.
War is a visible and measurable risk. It is incorporated into financial models, insured against, and priced into capital costs. Investors know how to work with it. What they struggle to accept is unpredictability—especially when it comes from legal and institutional practices.
I see this clearly in my conversations with international partners. Their questions rarely start with the safety of fields or ports. Much more often, they ask about courts, regulators, and law enforcement. They want to understand not only whether business opportunities exist in Ukraine, but whether their rights can be protected in a transparent and predictable way.
In recent years, Ukrainian businesses have increasingly faced a troubling pattern: criminal proceedings that last for years without reaching court hearings on the merits, prolonged pre-trial investigations, and a lack of clear procedural outcomes. The absence of decisions creates a prolonged state of uncertainty. For entrepreneurs, this limits growth and planning. For investors, it is a red flag.
This is not about individual companies. It is a systemic signal to the market. When the legal system fails to provide timely and clear answers, capital looks elsewhere—even if alternative jurisdictions are less strategically important or geographically further from global challenges.
Ukraine today stands on two pillars: its armed forces and its business community. The military defends the country’s territory. Business sustains the state economically—through taxes, employment, exports, social initiatives, support for local communities, and assistance to veterans. Without a functioning economy, no defense effort can be sustained in the long run.
That is why any pressure on legitimate business during wartime has consequences far beyond individual cases. It undermines trust in Ukraine as a reliable partner. And trust is the most valuable currency in the global investment environment.
Today, there are many investors who are preparing to invest in Ukraine and, in some cases, have already begun doing so. A clear example is the new U.S.–Ukraine investment fund supported by the U.S. Development Finance Corporation, which has the potential to stimulate a significant inflow of capital into the country. In addition, family offices and hedge funds are preparing to enter the market, not to mention defense technology funds that are already testing opportunities on the ground. These investors are not afraid of war. They are afraid of legal uncertainty.
There is a common assumption that once the war ends, investments will naturally flow into Ukraine. This assumption is misleading. Investors do not enter countries “after” crises—they invest where institutions are already functioning. Reforms cannot be postponed until some undefined future. In fact, it is during times of crisis that a country’s institutional credibility is tested and its long-term reputation formed.
For agriculture, this issue is especially acute. Ukrainian agribusiness is no longer just a national sector. It is a critical element of global food security. Markets in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia depend on the stability of Ukrainian exports. When agricultural companies operate under legal uncertainty, the impact extends far beyond Ukraine’s borders and affects global supply chains.
From this perspective, investors approach Ukraine pragmatically. They are not looking for heroism. They are looking for rules—clear, transparent, and applied equally. Business does not seek immunity or special treatment. It seeks predictability: evidence-based investigations, court hearings, and final decisions within reasonable timeframes.
As I prepare to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, my thoughts are not limited to my own company or specific projects. I think about how Ukraine is perceived by those who are ready to invest in its recovery. Investors do not fear war. They fear systems in which it is impossible to understand how decisions are made and which rules apply.
If Ukraine aims not only to survive but to recover quickly and sustainably, protecting legitimate business must become part of its economic security framework. This is not a political issue, nor is it about personalities. It is about trust—without which no reconstruction effort can succeed.
This is the perspective I bring with me to Davos—not as an observer, but as an entrepreneur working on Ukraine’s economic frontline. I am convinced that Ukraine’s future will be determined not only on the battlefield, but also by its ability to guarantee fair, predictable rules for those who keep the economy running under the most difficult conditions imaginable.