Russia as Ukraine’s ‘other’: identity and geopolitics

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).

Kurdish Studies, 2024

This interdisciplinary study delves into the multifaceted relationship between Ukraine and Russia, tracing their historical interactions, geopolitical shifts, and the evolution of national identities that have contributed to the current state of conflict. The research seeks to analyze the complex interplay of historical, cultural, economic, and political factors shaping the dynamics between these two nations, leading to the escalation of tensions and the outbreak of armed conflict in recent years. By employing a comprehensive approach that integrates insights from history, political science, international relations, sociology, and cultural studies, this investigation aims to offer nuanced perspectives on the roots, manifestations, and implications of the Ukraine-Russia conflict. Through meticulous examination of primary sources, archival materials, scholarly literature, and contemporary media reports, the research endeavors to provide fresh insights into the historical trajectories and contemporary complexities of one of the most significant geopolitical crises of the 21st century.

2015

All rights reserved The Cicero Foundation is an independent pro-Atlantic and pro-EU think tank. www.cicerofoundation.org The views expressed in Cicero Foundation Great Debate Papers do not necessarily express the opinion of the Cicero Foundation, but they are considered interesting and thought-provoking enough to be published. Permission to make digital or hard copies of any information contained in these web publications is granted for personal use,

Ukraine and Russian Neo-Imperialism: The Divergent Break, 2018

This book first proves that the rationale behind Russia’s aggressive actions in its neighborhood resides in its goal of achieving certain geostrategic objectives which are largely predefined by the state’s imperial traditions, memories, and fears that the Kremlin may irretrievably lose control over lands which were once Russian. In other words, Russia constantly remains an expansion-oriented and centralized state regardless of epochs and political regimes ruling over it. That is its geopolitical modus operandi successfully tested throughout history. This book also scrutinizes Ukraine as a young post-colonial and post-communist state which, unlike Russia, is more prone to democratize and decentralize. To understand the logics of the ongoing Ukrainian transformation, its domestic and international developments are assessed in their connection to the Soviet political tradition and the medieval legacy of the Cossack statehood (15–18 centuries). This book outlines differences between the political cultures of Ukrainian and Russian nations. This envisages scrutiny of historical experiences and their impacts on the Ukrainian and Russian state-building, institutional structures, national identity, religious issues, and other features of sovereignty. Based on these discoveries, a structure of symbolic thinking which predefines indigenous understandings of justice and order has been constructed for Ukrainians and Russians.

Lines drawn to bound territory and around settler's claims are messy, layered, and contested. Great powers are rarely on an equal footing, however, and this is what makes comparisons difficult. If all the world's a chessboard, one might assume a realist or eugenicist perspective ("only the strongest survive") for empires and nation-states. Scholars stuck in geopolitics pay professional lip service to the construction of this-or-that nation to have a vacation or paid conference trip, yet privately lament the loss of prestige, privilege, funding, and jobs. Not every nationality is reducible to bound identity in a world of transnational governance, negotiated citizenship, nested identities, laws and norms against genocide (even as they do not work), and prohibitions against massive treaty and border violations. To paraphrase and then invert Margaret Thatcher, there is such a thing as society. Some societies and entire countries like Ukraine get ignored for decades. This leads to an inflated emphasis on Russia or the Soviet Union as some kind of preferred monolith, in a Russia-centric Slavic Studies world. Entire countries are violated, silenced, or marginalized. Immovable Cold War giants go sinking in their own quicksand. Each of these three books is "post-Soviet," and one might say, "post-West." They are an edited volume by two historians, a monograph by a qualitative political scientist grounded in sociopolitical anthropology and critical ethnography methods, and a policy guide to empires by a policy analyst. As Russia's nine-year war against Ukraine has illustrated, we are nowhere near an end to the era of brute territorial conquest. Political elites map and fabricate history to make "my-turf" claims to bordering and contested regions. Resentments and revisionisms then linger, not least in stories of loss and grievance. Historical geographers are left to ponder how borders and identities are (un)made, to

Ukraine's "Orange Revolution" directed the world's attention to a nation formally brushed off as a Russian satellite state. The international press portrayed Victor Yushchenko's democratic challenge to the fraudulently elected Victor Yanukovych as the birth of Ukrainian independence. But though there's no doubt that Ukrainian civil society has come of age, is the independence movement as young as all that? The author gives a historical overview of Ukrainian relations with Russia, and argues that talk of an East-West divide along pro- and anti-Russian lines simplifies the reality of a culturally and ideologically eclectic nation.

Routledge, 2017

This book is a unique contribution to scholarship on the sources of the conflict in Ukraine. Bringing together writers from Russia, Ukraine, Canada, the United States, Europe and Australia, it was provoked by a gathering of scholars and activists from all over Ukraine, held in Yalta, Crimea just after the conflict in Eastern Ukraine erupted. Challenging both the demonization of Russia which has become standard for Western writing on the topic, and the simplistic discourse of official Russian sources, this book scrutinizes the events of the conflict and the motives of the agents, bringing to the fore the underlying causes of the most critical flashpoints of the post-Soviet world order. This volume offers a refreshing, profound perspective on the Ukraine conflict, and will be an indispensable source for any student or researcher. I am uploading the Table of Contents and the Introduction

Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 2015

In the realm of social life, unimaginable and obvious often go hand in hand. The conflict between Ukraine and Russia is one such unimaginable, alas, obvious event. For many Russians and Ukrainians, who believe in the fraternal relationship of these two nations, the conflict would have been unimaginable even as armed 'green men' occupied Crimea in March 2014. For others, the conflict is an obvious and inevitable extension of what Anatol Lieven called 'fraternal rivalry' (Lieven 1999). In the mainstream academic discourse and media, the unfolding events in Ukraine have been referred to as the 'Ukrainian Crisis'. Yet, this terminology is somewhat problematic, as the word 'crisis' does not tap into the scope of the conflict and seems to confine it to Ukraine alone (Wilson 2014). However, the conflict between Ukraine and Russia is a crisis not merely for Ukraine. It is also a Russian crisis, which exposes the ambitions and weaknesses of Russian political and economic power. It is also an international crisis, which leaves many unanswered questions for interstate cooperation, peace, and security. The four articles presented in this feature section seek to unpack the nature of the 'crisis' from a variety of perspectives. Ukrainians refer to the last year as 'the year that changes us forever'. This statement seems to describe not merely the political changes that have taken place in the country over the last year, but also the citizens' perceptions of themselves and their country. The debate over the nature and origin of the Ukrainian nation are not new, as Taras Kuzio and Mykola Riabchuk's in-depth analyses of Ukraine's national identity vividly illustrate. Ukraine has often been described as a divided county. The ethnic, linguistic, and regional divisions received a great deal of traction in academic literature and have been credited as the source of Ukraine's political woes . Moreover, Ukraine's national identity or lack thereof is closely related to its relationship to its neighbours to the east and west, thus further splitting the country . Both Kuzio and Riabchuk investigate the alleged divisions between Ukrainians and offer new perspectives on Ukrainian politics. Riabchuk rejects common wisdom and suggests that division of Ukraine's population into 'two Ukraines' is ideological rather than ethno-linguistic. An ongoing academic debate in the study of nationalism and national identity distinguishes civic and ethnic forms of nationalism. In the case of the latter, the identity is based on primordial kinship ties between members of the same ethnic group. The former, however, is a more inclusive identity centred on state symbols and citizenship, and is more closely related to patriotism. During the last year, the bs_bs_banner