Paul Goble
Staunton,
February 1 – Despite the expectations of some and the fears of others, the real
dividing line among Ukrainians is not between the western, central and eastern
parts of their country or between ethnic Ukrainians and ethnic Russians but
rather between those who are in power and those who are not, according to
Vitaly Portnikov.
The
conflicts in the regional capitals of Ukraine show, the Kyiv commentator says,
are “a tragic but precise confirmation” that Ukrainians are far less divided
regionally and ethnically than many imagine and far more divided between the
powers that be and the overwhelming majority of the population (rus.newsru.ua/columnists/27jan2014/borba.html).
The
reason that the central and western oblasts of Ukraine appear to be
overrepresented in the Maidan is because in addition to this underlying divide,
these regions have “political representation in the form of opposition
parties.” Residents in the eastern part
of the country don’t. There, the government’s Party of the Regions has
“cleansed” itself of competitors.
Despite
pressure from Kyiv and Moscow, residents of the largely Russian-speaking if not
ethnic Russian East often have voted for those, like Sergey Tigitsko who
present themselves as “a wise alternative” to the dictates of Yanukovich’s
party. But Tigitsko has not pressed his case, preferring instead to devote his
attention to business.
As
a result, Yanukovich and the Party of the Regions have been able to be more
repressive in the east and to force people there into quiescence but not into
active support. They are the most
intimidated, and Kyiv expects they would go along with the division of the
country I that is what Moscow and Kyiv decide.
But that is not where their hearts and minds are.
That
means, Portnikov says, that the future of the Ukrainian state depends in
particular “on the courage of the residents of the eastern oblasts of Ukraine
and on their readiness to free themselves from slavery and to oppose the
creeping occupation of their motherland” even
more perhaps than on the enthusiasm of Ukrainian citizens in other parts of the
country.
There
have been many flags of eastern Ukrainian cities in the Maidan, he continues,
and there are “many in the East who do not want to ‘be cattle’ according to the
Belarusian scenario.” They too suffered
from the Terror Famine of Stalin’s time, the destruction of industry at the end
of the 20th century, and corruption and official thievery since.
Portnikov
says that he “believes in these people” and thus has confidence in the future.
His
argument is important because many in Moscow and some in the West who had no
confidence in the power and importance of ethnic identity now once again insist
that ethnicity is more important than citizenship in Ukraine, an assumption
that is problematic for at least three reasons.
First,
it plays into the hands of those, mostly in Moscow, who want to destabilize the
post-Soviet region as a whole in order to recover the former Soviet center’s
dominance of what are now 15 internationally recognized independent countries. Such attitudes are the cause of instability in
these countries, not the attitudes and actions of the citizens of these
countries.
Second,
ethnic Russian identity is weaker than many imagine, especially in Ukraine,
where the overall decline in the number of ethnic Russians over the last two
decades reflects the re-identification of many of them as Ukrainians. In Soviet
times, being a Russian conferred preferences. Now, it no longer does, and these
people have been re-identifying.
And
third, and certainly most important, those who continue to stress what are ever
less important ethnic divides not only ignore the formation of a civic nation in
Ukraine where that kind of identity has progressed far more than in the Russian
Federation but also makes the future development of a democratic and open
society and polity there far more difficult.
No comments:
Post a Comment