The Ukrainians (4th Edition)
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
The most acute, informed, and up-to-date account available today of Ukraine and its people, now in its fourth edition.
"An interesting and provocative read, which will, one hopes, contribute to the Western understanding of what Ukraine is and why it matters."—Volodymyr Kulyk, Harvard Ukrainian Studies
"A spirited and eminently learned investigation of who Ukranians say that they are, how they came to be so, and how others view them. . . . If you re add only one book of Ukraine, this should probably be it."—Elizabeth Luchka Haigh, H-Net Reviews
entourage if they put the ‘separatist’ genie back in the bottle – after they themselves had released it. Sviatoslav Piskun, whose only previous achievement was to cover up the Gongadze scandal during his previous term of office in 2002–3, was reappointed as procurator on 10 December 2004: on a spurious technicality, but more importantly on a private understanding that he would not actually prosecute anybody (the constitutional changes absurdly gave more power to this controversial hangover from
factor that was missing’ was ‘the presence of the Russian army’.20 His point was to claim that annexation could also have been possible in the Donbas, but his argument clearly underscored the artificial side of the protests. In Crimea Russian troops were already in place, though more were quickly sent. Now they were massed on the east Ukrainian border. NATO counted 40,000: Ukrainian sources claim that the figure was 146,000 in April 2014, in three separate groups poised for an all-out invasion;
statut Narodnoho Rukhu Ukraïny (Kiev: Rukh 1992), p. 13. 14.V. Yakovlev, ‘Obshchenatsional’nye idei sovremennoi Ukrainy’, Tovarysh, 2 (January 1996). 15.Interested readers can also consult my chapter (6) in Graham Smith et al., Nation-Building in the Post-Soviet Borderlands: The Politics of National Identities, (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 119–38. 16.Vybory ’98: politychnyi kompas vybortsia (Kiev: KIS, 1998), p. 61. 17.In Ukrainian Review, 43, 4 (winter 1996), p. 5.
and Tkachuk, Ukraïns’ka mriia, p. 144. 16.Stepan Rudnyts’kyi, ‘Ukraïns’ka sprava zi stanovyshcha politychnoï heohrafiï’, pp. 155–7, emphasis in original. 17.Rudnitsky (Rudnyts’kyi), Ukraine: The Land and its People, p. 231. 18.Mykhailo Drahomanov, ‘Lysty na Naddniprians’ku Ukraïnu’, in M.P. Drahomanov. Literaturno-publitsystychni pratsi, vol. 1 (Kiev: Naukova dumka, 1970), p. 446. Ukrainian historians would argue that this victory was largely achieved by local Cossacks, but it is also true
Ukrainian Cossack identity, however, added something more. It might even be possible to argue, although I would not push the point here, that modern Ukrainian identity was actually founded on an idea – Cossack liberty as opposed to tsarist autocracy – rather than on ethnicity or religion alone. There are three periods when it is possible to speak of the emergence of a Ukrainian ‘nation’. As argued in chapter one, the era of Kievan Rus is problematic because so much of its heritage is shared with