The etymology of Ukraine can be traced to Old Slavic as
meaning border and the USSR referring to it as “the” Ukraine or “the” borderland. Thus, Ukraine “lacks a history of its
own” and is historically considered a borderland or territorial component of
the Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth, Austro-Hungarian Empire, and Russian
Empire/Soviet Russia. The territorial split of Ukraine between differing powers
has left a weakened footprint on the nation’s identity as a cultural east/west
and ethno-linguistic (Ukrainian/Russian) split. According to the scholar, Von
Hagen (1995), Ukraine is an artificially constructed nation, formed out of the post-communist
fallout of Soviet Russia and likewise has a politically instrumented national identity.
In addition, Russia’s hindering presence as a significant internal and external
“other” poses a threat to the still developing notion of Ukrainian national
identity. This post will discretely map a multi-faceted, dynamic Ukrainian
identity that constantly serves the agenda to affirm its autonomy from their
evident “other”, Russia.
The
formation of Ukrainian national identity is split into two defining periods.
The first period aligns with the 1991 independence of the state and the nationalist
attempt to construct a unified identity of what it meant to be Ukrainian. The
second falls into the period of the Orange and Euromaidan revolutions (2010-2014)
and its role in redefining said identity. Stephan Shulman (1999) states that
amidst the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukrainian Nationals constructed
political and cultural ethnic myths to produce collectivism and a sense that
Ukrainians had a unique path of history from the “all-Russian history” of Eastern
Slavs. Shulman (1999) adds that this new identity was the categorization of Ukrainians
as a peasant people with a deep love of folk dance/song and origin from the
Cossacks that defied Polish rule. It is important to note that the definition
of Ukrainian identity is still synonymous with Ukrainian ethnicity/language and
refers to said identity as tolerant of other ethnicities that share the same
land (Tatars, Jews, and Russians). The last defining characteristic of the
formulated Ukrainian persona is emphasis on emotional romanticism or an existential,
poetic world view (Shulman, 1999). The newly constructed identity may encompass
the vast, majority of western ethnic Ukrainians (77%), but there is still a vocal
minority of eastern ethnic Russians (17%) and Russian speaking Ukrainians that don’t
adhere to said mold (Ukraine Demographics, 2016).
The
second period in the establishment of Ukrainian identity takes form as the
Orange and Euromaidan revolutions, which were a series of civil uprisings
calling for change in both political figures and ideology. The Orange and
Euromaidan revolutions prompted Ukraine’s holistic and political identity to
become associated with democratic operation/policy, Western European economic alliances
over the previous Russian alliances, and a new ideological embracement of Ukrainian
nationality over what was previously exclusive to Ukrainian ethnicity/language.
Nadia Diuk (2014) states the recent revolutions prompted the birth of a “new
Ukraine”, changing the political and social outlook people hold of their
nation. Diuk (2014) continues that Ukraine has defined its identity by becoming
a “liberal democratic” institution by popular demand of its collective people. Simultaneously,
Ukrainians are associating their future economic prosperity to further
establishing alliances with the European Union instead of their authoritarian
neighbor, Russia (Diuk, 2014). The Eurasian scholar, Volodymyr Kulyk (2016),
states that this period of revolution has prompted Ukrainian’s to embrace
uniting under the identity of joint Ukrainian nationality (belonging to the nation of Ukraine) instead of their previous ethno-linguistic
identity, which in turn prompted more support from eastern, Russian speaking Ukrainians
towards a political collective.
The next
integral part of Ukraine’s national identity is the presence of Russia and
ethnic Russians as both external and internal significant others that undermine
the autonomy of Ukraine. Triandafyllidou (1998) defines external significant
others as (1) “dominant nations”, (2) bordering nations with ongoing
territorial disputes, and (3) nations that claim similar origin. Russia falls
under the categorization of all three components as an external significant
other for Ukraine. For example, Russia has direct political and economic
influence upon Ukraine, forcefully annexed the Crimean-peninsula in 2014, and reference
back to centuries of Ukraine being territory of Russian rulers indicates much
of Russian and Ukrainian origin is interchangeable. In addition, the vocal
minority of Ethnic Russians in the east can be considered an internal
significant other. In recent years, the overtaking of the Crimean Peninsula,
presence of Russian military on Ukrainian land and polar divide in political views
can be accredited to ethnic Russians occupying much of Southeast Ukraine. Looking
back at Shulman’s (1999) work on the early construction of Ukrainian identity, hostility
towards the Russian ideas of immense authoritarianism under the Czar and
communism prompted embrace of more political individualism and democracy as
Ukrainian identity. In addition, the adoption of emotional romanticism by Ukrainians
was due to the rejection of supposed Russia’s “materialism” (Shulman,1999). It
is highly evident that the efforts of both early Ukrainian nationalists and
modern Ukrainian populists point to Ukrainian national identity being defined
as “not Russian”. Analyzing the current redefined identity of Ukraine, through
the workings of both the Orange and Euromaidan revolutions, indicate that
Ukrainians are uniting socially, economically, and politically against Russian
aggression.
Mark Von
Hagen (1995) stated, when asked the question of whether Ukrainian history truly
existed, Ukrainian scholars wittily replied “If Ukraine has a future, then Ukraine
will have a history”. Ukraine’s historical role as territory of other dominant
powers has led lack of myth history to support its narrative of national
identity. The attempt of early Ukrainian nationalists to piece together a
narrative of national identity out of shambles of the fallen Soviet Union was synonymous
with the establishment of Ukrainian ethno-linguistic identity from Cossack
peasants. Through the workings of both the Orange and Euromaidan revolutions, Ukraine
redefined its identity as national versus
ethno-linguistic and garnered political union towards a more democratic and westernized
economy across the historically established east/west border. In addition, the
othering of Russia and Ethnic Russians as both external and internal significant
others correlates to both notions of Ukrainian identity established by early
nationalists and the present rejection of Russian aggression.
Work Sited/References:
Diuk, N.
"Finding Ukraine." Journal of Democracy, vol. 25 no. 3,
2014, pp. 83-89. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/jod.2014.0041.
Kulyk, Volodymyr. "National Identity in
Ukraine: Impact of Euromaidan and the War." Europe-Asia Studies 68.4 (2016): 588-608. Web.
Shulman,
Stephen. "The Cultural Foundations of Ukrainian National Identity." Ethnic
& Racial Studies 22.6
(1999): 1011-1036. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.
"Ukraine Demographics Profile 2016." Ukraine Demographics Profile 2016. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Jan. 2017.
Von Hagen, Mark. “Does Ukraine Have a History?” Slavic Review,
vol. 54, no. 3, 1995, pp. 658– 673. www.jstor.org/stable/2501741.
