Ukraine's 'muddling through': National identity and postcommunist transition (original) (raw)
Related papers
National Identity in Ukraine: History and Politics
RUSSIA IN GLOBAL AFFAIRS, 2022
This article studies the historical background that determined the formation of the specific features of Ukrainian, Little Russian, and Russian identities starting from the late 17th century to the present day. It traces the evolution of Ukrainian identity from the notion of "a single Slavic-Russian people" to the current radicalization and consolidation of anti-Russian sentiment as its dominant element. At different stages of nation-building, intellectual elites molded different constructs of this identity. At times these constructs existed in parallel and independently of each other, and at other times they confronted one another. The notion of a single people (or different peoples) constantly changed. The article highlights the key
Introduction: Studying Identity In Ukraine
Post Soviet Affairs, 2018
While it is common wisdom that “identity matters” in Ukrainian politics, we still lack a robust understanding of precisely when and how it matters. Reflecting challenges facing the broader interdisciplinary field of comparative identity politics, authors frequently bring to their analyses very different notions of the nature of identity itself, skipping a rigorous examination of these notions in an effort to get right to documenting the effects of identity. Similarly, identity is frequently operationalized in quantitative studies without much discussion of the implications of selecting one particular measure over another or of what precisely each measure is reflecting, not to mention what might have changed over time. While we do have nuanced research on Ukrainian identity, it tends not to address the evolution of identity over time or the moments and conditions of identity change. Such issues are particularly important for current research since identities and their associated meanings may shift or “harden” during severe crises or conflicts like those that unfolded in Ukraine during 2013–14. The five original articles that make up this special issue1 all address these challenges, with important implications for how we understand Ukrainian politics after the EuroMaidan.
Russian-Ukrainian Crisis, National Identity and Democratic Consolidation in Ukraine
2016
In 2016, Ukraine faces multiple problems in terms of its divided identity, corrupted elites, poor economy and hostile Russia on its eastern borders. Proper understanding of Ukrainian complex identity-building process requires some familiarity with history of the USSR and its management of nationalities, although, certainly Ukraine had possessed a huge historical legacy long before the USSR and that also had influenced its cultural memory. Ukraine can be compared with many other post-communist states that these days are divided between Soviet mentality and modern nation-building but it is also sort of unique because of its geographical position on the crossroads of Western and Russian civilizational influences. Geopolitics has always been important to Ukraine's national identification. However, it should not imply that Ukraine has been only an object of contestation between Russia and the EU and not an actor on its own as some neo-realists would say as, for example, John Mearsheimer who has suggested it was West who provoked Russia's aggression to maintain its sphere of influence in Ukraine. 1 Geopolitics is certainly important to Ukrainian future but it is still not as decisive as domestic politics and reforms that country has been undergoing since Euromaidan. Russia's involvement in modern Ukraine has been contradictory to say the least and it is hard not to give acknowledgement to Ukrainian nation for finally rejecting Russian paternalism and cultural influence that under Vladimir Putin has obtained neo-imperialist and authoritarian colors. After all, Russia had supported pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarchs from
The Development of National Identities in Ukraine
From “the Ukraine” to Ukraine A Contemporary History, 1991–2021, edited by Edited by Matthew Rojansky, Georgiy Kasianov and Mykhailo Minakov , 2021
Analysis of changes in national identities in Ukraine from the late perestroika period until present times, with particular focus on identities during times of conflict (the Euromaidan and the war in Donbas).
Identity and Geopolitics: Ukraine's Grappling with Imperial Legacies
Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 2014
During his March 18, 2014 Kremlin speech celebrating Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea, Vladimir Putin declared: “Kiev is the mother of Russian cities. Ancient Rus is our common source and we cannot live without each other.” Putin had already hinted that, to him, Ukraine “isn’t a state.” The border between Russia and Ukraine would, somehow, be the result of a staggeringly immense, ancient, but still ongoing conspiracy: “The intention to split Russia and Ukraine, to separate what is essentially a single nation in many ways, has been an issue of international politics for centuries.” Yet, how well founded are such deep, encompassing, meta-irredentist claims? The question impinges upon Ukraine’s very raison d’être: its right to constitute an autonomous, self-ruling entity whose existence and boundaries are acknowledged and respected, as well as its ability to develop an identity which is distinct from that of its latest imperial overlord. An answer to, or analysis of this question clusters around three highly contentious issue areas: national origins (i.e., Rus, Poland, Russia, and "Little Russians"); language; and state violence – specifically the treatment of Ukrainian compatriots in Soviet times (most notably the Holodomor).
The central argument of this paper is that radical and opposing interpretations of the Ukrainian conflict in politics and media should be studied as offspring of broader narratives. These narratives can be better understood by examining the national identity of Ukraine. Since Ukrainian national identity shows a high degree of diversity, it offers a rich source of arguments for any party wanting to give an interpretation of the present Ukrainian crisis. Narratives explaining the crisis often ignore this complex diversity or deliberately use elements from it to construct the 'desired' narrative. Firstly, this paper defines four overarching narratives used in the current debate: the geopolitical, the nationalist, the structuralist, and the legal narrative. Secondly, this paper shows how various interpretations fitting within these narratives are all one way or another related to the divisions dividing Ukraine's complex national identity. Examining the underlying divisions helps to explain the appeal of differing interpretations of the conflict in the West, Ukraine, and Russia. Especially the nationalist narrative and geopolitical narratives show how the complexity of Ukraine's national identity is deliberately used to construct a narrative. The combined study of constructed narratives and Ukrainian national identity thus provides valuable material for any scholar or policymaker looking for a deeper understanding of the situation in Ukraine amidst a confusing information war .
An overview of Ukraine interms of nationhood and identity, and how this impacts upon current events in Ukraine, particularly with regards to Euromaidan and the on-going conflict. Much focus is given to linguistics and historical memory and interpretation and how this effects and creates divisions within Ukraine. Furthermore, the question of a European Ukraine is looked at, particularly in the current conflict context.