Ukraine: Divided Battleground with Ethnic Scars
A historical perspective of the current crisis
Ukraine has a population of 42.5 million and a land area of about the size of France. It is not yet an EU member, but it has strong ties with both the West and Russia depending on the region. The West, including Kiev, the capital, holds its loyalty to the West and seeks EU membership while the East, closest to Russia, remains loyal to Russia. This split in allegiance dates back to the Russification of Ukraine under Tsarist rule, and has continued into modern day politics and life.
Tsarist Rule
The Tsar was the imperial leader of the Russian Empire. These leaders were charged with expanding and ruling the Empire. Part of this expansion included the Russification of Ukraine, which became part of the Russian Empire after annexations and the abolition of autonomy. These new territories, such as the Right Bank, Hetmanate, and Sloboda, were reorganised and administered by St. Petersburg. In effect, a Governor was appointed to administer and take care of their new state.
During this reorganisation, the Russian Empire began to move peasants and Russians alike into the region. In doing so, Russians and ethnic Ukrainians began to intermarry. The objective of having Russians integrate and intermarry was to abolish Ukrainian identity from society. At the same time, Polish land ownership in Central and Eastern Ukraine eroded as the Russian Empire took more control and Ukrainians farmed more. Russian elites began to dominate more of society as a result of this Polish land ownership erosion.
To further improve the Russian elite’s position, the Empire restricted Ukrainians from education. At that time, literature became an important form of expression and a way to counter this move. Taras Shevchenko, a philosophical artist-scholar, became an important figure through his writings and was also dubbed the “Father of Ukrainian Art.” In 1863, the Russian Foreign Minister, Pyotr Valuev, banned the publication of any written documents in Ukrainian as word spread of Shevchenko’s work. The Empire became wary the Ukrainians could stage a revolution. At the same time, Ukraine was also under other Europeans’ control.
Austro-Hungarian Rule
From 1772 until 1918, the Austro-Hungarian Empire ruled parts of present day Western Ukraine. The Austro-Hungarian Empire had more liberal policies than the Russian Empire to the East. Austria-Hungary obtained this part of Ukraine, often dubbed Halychyna, after Austria, Prussia, and Russia agreed on how to divide Poland.
The Austro-Hungarian rule proved to be a period of growth for Ukrainians, especially when compared to the East of present day Ukraine that was under Russian rule. This growth happened once serfdom was abolished across the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1848. During the 1880s, infrastructure grew. As a result, Lviv became an important railway hub for the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Eastern Europe. It was in this environment that Jews, Poles, and Ukrainians lived in harmony amongst each other. This lasted until the Austro-Hungarian Empire found itself embroiled in a World War and the Russian Revolution in 1917 ended Tsarist rule.
Russian Revolution and WWI
WWI broke out during 1914 and lasted until 1918 when it ended in an armistice. During the War, the Austro-Hungarian Empire fell apart. At the same time, Tsarist rule ended with the Bolshevik revolution in March 1917 and the rise of Vladimir Lenin. Lenin would seek to implement the Bolshevik way throughout the Russian Empire, including in Ukraine.
During this transitional period at the end of the War, the Ukrainians thought this was an opportunity to obtain their own independence. During April 1917, political dissidents were able to return home. This sense of pride and nationalism led to the Ukrainians founding the Western Ukrainian National Republic, consisting of western Halychyna, part of Volhynia, and part of Bukovina. Sadly, this newly founded Republic did not survive long with the rise of the Bolsheviks.
Soviet Union under Lenin
After the Russian Revolution overthrew the last Russian Tsar, Nicolas II, Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks created the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). In 1922, the USSR consisted of Ukraine, Belorussia, Russia, and the Transcaucasian Federation (later split into the republics of Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia in 1936). With this newly formed Union, Lenin had lessened his grip on Ukraine. By 1921, Lenin allowed for free trade, specifically of grain and other agricultural products. Ukraine had fertile land and was primarily trading these types of products. In addition, the country began to become educated and feel a sense of freedom and gain in society. This was rather short-lived as Lenin died in 1924 and Joseph Stalin came to power.
Rise of Stalin
Joseph Stalin rose to power and sought to expand the power of the USSR and reduce the USSR’s failing grip in Ukraine. Stalin saw the USSR losing its grip as Ukrainians became more educated, so he felt it was the time to prevent any rebellion. He sent troops to arrest 5,000 Ukrainian doctors, academics, and other persons of interest and sentenced them to death. Thereafter, he implemented the Soviet land distribution system known as collectivisation. Under this scheme, all land became part of the state. This meant that Ukrainian farmers owned no land and were not allowed to touch it. In particular, Stalin wanted to eliminate peasants, especially the wealthier class known as Kulaks who were agricultural farmers considered a threat to the Soviet Union.
As Stalin feared Kulaks, he embarked on a campaign of cleansing this class from Ukraine. To do this, he imposed a famine within the entire country often referred to as Holodomor. Under his direction, Russians troops were to seize grain and other food and lock it up. At the same time, Stalin also invited Communist activists to raise a campaign of fear and propaganda to further his argument that Kulaks should be cleansed from society. He also took men, older boys and others and transported them to Siberia or other regions for larger industrial projects.
By 1933, most of Ukraine was collectivised and there was no food left for Ukrainians to eat. The Ukrainian Communists pleaded with Stalin to relax the grain quotas that had been strictly set. Instead of hearing their request, Stalin took more severe action by closing the Russian/Ukrainian border. This move effectively prevented any further transportation or passing of grains or any other products into Ukraine. The consequence of this border closure led to approximately 25,000 Ukrainians dying every day. By the end of this famine, millions of Ukrainians had died. The exact figure is disputed — some say 3.5 million and others put the figure higher between 7–10 million Ukrainians who were malnourished and later died of starvation. Despite this institutionalised famine, the international community did not intervene.
Joseph Stalin managed to prevent any international sanctions or official disapproval of his famine under the guise of the 5-year modernisation plan for the Soviet Union. He managed to obtain necessary equipment and other infrastructure from the United States. This equipment and machinery served to power the workforce that he needed to advance the USSR. Stalin believed growing the workforce and getting women to work was necessary to continue industrialising and building the military. However, the famine continued during this period. The only thing that stopped the famine was the Nazi invasion in 1941.
WWII and “liberation”
As the Nazi battle tanks rolled in, some Ukrainians believed this was a change for the better. The Nazis steamed in and “liberated” Ukraine from USSR control. During this time, Germany ruled the Ukrainian land by shipping some of its population to Germany as so called “Eastern workers” and harvested as much of the land as possible to support the war effort. This continued until 1943.
During 1943, the Red Army under Stalin defeated the Germans at the Battle of Stalingrad. It was after this battle that the Red Army began forcing the Germans to retreat westward. After their retreat and complete departure from Ukraine, Ukraine fell under Soviet control once again. The USSR imposed economic restructuring policies to strengthen industry and increase industrial output. These policies increased industrial output except for agriculture. The agricultural sector struggled and failed to reach the same output. This lack of growth is due to the ravaged landscape after the war and the famine of 1946–1947.
The return of Soviet rule included the reimposition of collectivisation and other related polices, which marked the last years of Stalin’s rule. Stalin died in 1952. After his death, there were several changes in Soviet leadership. Ukraine remained part of the USSR until the changes brought about by Mikhail Gorbachev’s leadership in the 1980s.
Ukrainian Independence
Gorbachev was the last leader of the USSR. He faced a bloc that was struggling with many economic problems. Gorbachev supported glasnost (openness) that would allow the perestroika (restructuring) that he needed to turn the economy around. This policy opened the door for more noise from the other republics, which included a greater sense of nationalism. Ukraine’s nationalist momentum came much later and slower than the other republics. The reason for this delayed momentum was due to the destruction of the country’s population and the near loss of the country’s ethnic identity. Finally, in 1991, Ukraine declared independence from the Soviet Union.
After independence, Ukraine embarked on modernisation and liberalisation that included offering citizenship to all residents. At the same time, Ukraine faced some difficulties with Crimea. Crimeans had been deported during World War II. The first group of people that were deported were the Crimean Tatars, a Muslim-Turkic ethnic group, that were native to the land. These people were deported to Siberia, Uzbekistan, and other parts of the USSR for industrial projects. After the deportation of the Tatars, Stalin initiated the deportation of Greeks, Bulgarians, and Belorussians to Siberia, present day Uzbekistan, or the Volga basin. It was only after 1956 that the Soviet Union recognised these mass deportations of particular nationalities, with the exception of Crimean Tatars, German-Russians, and Meskhetian Turks (originating in Georgia) as criminal.
After Ukrainian independence, Tatars and other groups returned to the Peninsula, and a separatist referendum was held. This referendum occurred because Crimea had its own President and Government for a brief period starting in 1992. Russian financing provided the Crimean Government the financial means to govern while excluding ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars who returned after Ukrainian independence from the USSR. In addition to the ethnic disputes on the Crimean Peninsula, the split in Ukrainian allegiance versus Russian allegiance or West versus East continued. A further set of events that highlighted this division was the protests that took place in 2004, commonly referred to as the Orange Revolution.
Orange Revolution
The Orange Revolution occurred after the 2004 Presidential election that saw pro-Russian candidate Viktor Yanukovych running against the anti-corruption candidate Viktor Yushchenko. The electoral committee declared Yanukovych the winner after the second round run-off. This electoral result caused an outrage with people dressing in orange in support of Yushchenko. After several protests and other mobilizations, the Ukrainian Supreme Court annulled the results and ordered a new run-off. Following the third round, Yushchenko was declared the winner.
President Yushchenko remained in power for 5 years until the 2010 Presidential election. Yanukovych ran once more, defeating Yuliya Tymoshenko, a former Orange Revolution member, who had also been Prime Minster in a coalition with Yushchenko’s party. After the election, Yanukovych’s Presidential power was increased when the Supreme Court overturned a 2006 reform that had lent more powers to the Prime Minister.
The protests in 2010 were very similar to the protests seen in 2004. The difference between the 2004 and the 2010 protests were that the people mobilized. In 2004, the protesters fully supported Yushchenko to such an extent that Yushchenko became the central piece of the protest and the main focus of the slogan that protesters used. Fast forwarding six years, the pro-Western bloc did not have the street support of protesters who were against the election of Yanukovych. In addition, Russian nationalists were mobilized in support of Yanukovych against Tymoshenko.
The fractured or complete lack of support for the pro-Western bloc combined with the Russian nationalist push in support of pro-Russian Yanukovych, and the renewal of the lease of Sevastopol giving Russians access to Sevastopol until 2042 with the possibility of further extension for another 5 years until 2047, was the perfect storm to position Russia’s subsequent and by far most bold move in Ukraine. It would be the boldest Russian action in Ukraine since the relinquishing of Soviet control.
2014 Annexation of Crimea
To understand more about the geographical split and political division between EU or Russian involvements in modern times, one must consider the Ukrainian President who was in charge during the unrest leading up to the annexation. Viktor Yanukovych, a pro-Russian political figure, faced a difficult choice between joining the EU or the Eurasian trade bloc. Most of the Ukrainian people had been wishing to join the EU and go through the necessary steps to do so. At the same time, further east, Vladimir Putin has been trying to establish an Eurasian Union, a trade bloc that would function in some ways like the EU. Thus, Yanukovych faced the choice of accepting a $15 billion loan from Russia in exchange for joining the Eurasian Union or going through the painful steps of joining the EU. Yanukovych took the money and with that choice, massive protests broke out in Kiev, the Ukrainian capital. These protests eventually led to the ousting of Yanukovych and new elections later in 2014 that saw the rise of Petro Poroshenko as President.
As a response to the ouster of Yanukovych, Russian President Vladimir Putin initiated the annexation of Crimea. Reasons used to justify this annexation included the population’s allegiance to Russia, its ‘Russian’ feeling, and the strategic importance of Crimea to Russia. The Crimean population is approximately 60% ethnic Russian, so Putin used this fact as the main justification for the annexation. The Peninsula’s complicated history is instructive for understanding this matter further.
The Crimean Peninsula lends the Russian Navy access to the Black Sea and from there the Mediterranean Sea. The Peninsula has changed hands many times, firstly through Tsarina Catherine the Great, who annexed the Peninsula from the Ottomans in 1783. In 1954, Nikita Khrushchev, an ethnic Ukrainian Soviet leader, declared Crimea to be part of Ukraine, thus transferring Crimea from the Russian Socialist Federative Republic to the Socialist Soviet Republic of Ukraine. This declaration meant that Russia lost a significant asset and an integral part of territory. A treaty in 1997 gave the Peninsula back to Ukraine, with a special lease allowing Russia to maintain its fleet in Sevastopol.
As the Peninsula was initially possessed by Russia while physically being part of Ukraine represents the conflict that has long existed. It was shortly before this annexation that war broke out between the Government of present-day Ukraine and Russian separatists. Russian separatists have their stronghold in the East while Kiev and Western Ukraine remain committed to European involvement.
Pro-Russian Separatist Invasion
After the Crimean annexation, rebel groups that pledged allegiance to Russia in Eastern Ukraine mobilised and attacked forces loyal to Kiev. In addition, Russia mobilised approximately 40,000 troops at the Russo-Ukrainian border to support the rebel separatists, providing a great deal of support to the rebels’ war efforts with its troops and the sharing of arms at the border.
As a result of their mobilisations, the separatists set up the People’s Republic of Luhansk and the People’s Republic of Donetsk in the East of Ukraine. These unrecognised ‘republics’ are pro-Russian states that receive humanitarian and military aid from Russia. While they are still internationally recognised as part of Ukraine, they remain aligned with Russian interests. In doing so, these states pose a potential risk to the Ukrainian Government that has struggled to stop the war. To support the Ukrainian Government, NATO sent approximately 25,000 troops to Ukraine for military exercises.
These military actions are meant to deter any Russian military encroachment into Ukraine or the promotion of Russian interests. This rebellion of separatists who declare their allegiance to Russia is a mirror of those in West Ukraine who pledge alliance to Kiev.
NATO Debate and Ukraine
The Eastern part of Ukraine maintains its affinity for Russia. The Russian separatists desire continued affiliation with Russia. The Western part remains inclined towards the EU and Western European policies and liberal democratisation. This bitter divide and civil war continues to rage on, although the issue is not covered much in the mainstream press nowadays. We need more coverage to recognise the challenges and maintain attention on a major conflict that has hardly ebbed since the Soviet collapse and Ukrainian independence.
Currently, Russian forces remain on the Russian side of the border with Ukraine despite current Ukrainian President Poroshenko’s 15 point peace plan. NATO remains in the country to support Poroshenko and his mission to dissolve the crisis in Ukraine. This confrontation has raised much debate on the future of NATO, Ukraine, and Russian influence and strength in the world.
The Russian presence on the Ukrainian border and the possibility of further encroachment in the East has raised much debate within NATO regarding its Article 5 on mutual protection of its member states. How will Article 5 play a role if Ukraine becomes an integral part of the pact? What is the endgame for Russia putting the world on notice of its strength and renewed presence on the international stage? Only time will tell who wins and how Ukraine will fit into Europe and the broader Atlantic framework.
Final Thoughts
Ukraine continues to walk a delicate tight rope between pleasing Russian interests in the East and Ukrainian interests in the West. The country continues to experience challenging ethnic disputes that stretch back into its complex history. It may be a situation that may never truly solve itself.
Ukraine is an exemplar of Soviet policy failures. Soviet policies were extreme and inconsistent, engendering structural conflicts within Ukrainian society. It is clear that Ukraine has not fully recovered from the Stalin era as its population remains deeply divided with diverging interests.
