We’ll be teared into pieces soon like Yugoslavia!

[TT1943]

While Gazprom is going to cut off the gas and Europe is celtbrating Xmas, Yuschenko decided to celebrate Bandera’s centenary! It looks like Ukraine officials dream to divert nation’s attention from gas problem and spend more money for sake of its own weakness! Yuschenko don’t understand that by such celebrations he heats up people’s anger. It’s too late to flood our eyes, stop to show, look, we are in complete a-s and there is no any light in the end of the tunnel!
Look, only hard and quick measures could stop Ukraine destruction and make life more happy for Ukrainian people! I mean full change of power in the Ukraine!
IMO Yuschenko’s sold Ukraine already and we’ll be teared into pieces soon like Yugoslavia!

[Lvivske]

you spammers make me sick. get the hell out.

how can you compare Ukraine to Yugoslavia? Yugoslavia was a federation whereas Ukraine is a unitary state.

[Dekameron]

Originally Posted by TT1943

While Gazprom is going to cut off the gas and Europe is celtbrating Xmas, Yuschenko decided to celebrate Bandera’s centenary! It looks like Ukraine officials dream to divert nation’s attention from gas problem and spend more money for sake of its own weakness! Yuschenko don’t understand that by such celebrations he heats up people’s anger. It’s too late to flood our eyes, stop to show, look, we are in complete a-s and there is no any light in the end of the tunnel!
Look, only hard and quick measures could stop Ukraine destruction and make life more happy for Ukrainian people! I mean full change of power in the Ukraine!
IMO Yuschenko’s sold Ukraine already and we’ll be teared into pieces soon like Yugoslavia!

You're a Russian i bet you are, Russia attempts to terrorize Ukraine with economic demands and Juszczenko resists it, finally Ukraine has dignity to stand up for itself.

[Lvivske]

so if I refuse to pay my gas bill to the city, is that considered standing up for my rights?

[The Big Yin]

Ukraine isn’t like Yugoslavia…more like Belgium which has problems of it’s own right now.

Ukraine’s Orange Revolution was always painted (in the western media, at least) as a conflict between western-looking Yushchenko and the eastern-looking former Prime Minister Yanukovich, the man whose suspect election to the presidency sparked popular protests and an eventual turnaround back in November 2004. Yushchenko was, it is alleged, the target of an assassination plot backed by Moscow, while Yanukovich was merely backed by Moscow. When the Revolution got its way and Yushchenko came to power, it seemed the West had won.

But it was never going to be that simple, or that easy. After countless disputes between Ukraine’s various political factions over the last four years, another post-Orange Revolution government is nearing collapse thanks to spats between former Orange allies Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko - and all as the aftermath of the Georgia crisis continues to rumble with the US handing Saakashvili a tidy $1 billion in reconstruction money (otherwise known as a fiscal two fingers to Moscow), and Russia announces a review of its global trade relations. Although the EU may account for 31% of Ukraine’s export market, Russia makes up 21% - and after the various spats over gas supplies over the last couple of years, you can be sure that Ukrainians are somewhat worried about just what Moscow may have planned to reassert the influence she lost with the fall of former President Kuchma back in 2004.

And so it would appear that the spread of the Georgia standoff does indeed seem likely to spread to Ukraine.

The thing is, though, that even without the squabbles between the various political leaders, the position of Ukraine was never going to be resolved by a simple election. Did Yanukovich try to steal the election back in 2004? Quite possibly. But that still doesn’t alter the fact that the country’s vote was split almost exactly down the middle.

Of course, it’s easy to label this an East vs West thing, and that’s part of it. But the actual reason is cultural and linguistic. Ukraine’s just like Belgium, in fact. The parallels are painfully evident:



You see, just as Belgium has a north/south split between Flemish and French speakers, so too it has a north/south political divide. And in Ukraine, there’s a northwest/southeast split between majority Ukrainian speakers and Russian speakers, echoed in political support for the “west-leaning” Yushchenko/Orange Revolution in the northwest and “pro-Russia” Yanukovich in the southeast.

So, why does Ukraine have the borders that she does? They’re a fairly recent creation, after all - with the origins of Ukraine lying in the medieval Kievan Rus’, which stretched north from Kiev through modern Belarus and Poland to the Baltic, not south and east to the Black Sea. It went on to be absorbed into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (covering much the same area - but again missing out the south and east of modern Ukraine, which was part of the Crimean Khanate, before being sucked into the similarly vast Kingdom of Poland via the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Check the maps below (very rough, I know) charting Ukraine’s geographical history up to the 19th century (when it was absorbed by the Russian Empire) - notice something?



Yep - that’s right. The Russian-speaking, Yanukovich-voting part of modern Ukraine was not, historically, part of Ukraine - it’s a later addition tacked on during the Russian Empire. During the chaotic times following the Russian revolution and around the Ukrainian War of Independence of 1919, the northwest that tried to break away as a Ukrainian state (actually, several Ukrainian states, after repeated failures to consolidate their position), while the southeast (briefly) went its own way as the Crimean People’s Republic. It was really only under the Soviets - who took the Tsars’ attempts to crush the Crimean Tatars and put down Ukranian nationalism (especially after the Second World War, where Ukrainian nationalists fought both the Russians and the Germans, depending on who was occupying the area at the time, in a campaign that lasted until 1956) - that Ukraine’s current borders began to be fixed. In fact, you can even put a precise date on it - 19th February 1954, the day the Crimean Oblast was transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

So here’s the question. If northwestern Ukraine is the linguistic, cultural and historical hub of the Ukrainian people, and southwestern Ukraine has only been spliced on within living memory, why persist with the pretense that the current borders of the modern Ukrainian state are actually meaningful? They were created by the Soviet Union as a handy administrative division, not based on any of the usual factors that go into the creation of a coherent state. Artificial borders have, time and again, led to conflict and division - be it via European colonialism in Africa or the carving up of the Middle East after the First World War.

If Ukraine really is torn between east and west, in other words - and it is - and if its artificial makeup keeps leading to political stalemate and unrest - and it does - isn’t the logical thing to do to follow the Belgian example and consider splitting the country down the middle? (This would also, one hopes, have the added benefit of shutting Russia up for a while as she regains part of her old sphere of influence - and enable the EU to focus on the more “European” northwest for development and eventual integration.)

Am I serious about this as a suggestion? It’s about 50/50 at the moment. But the longer Ukraine goes without forming a normal stable governments, the more likely an outcome this will be.

[MichaelB_PL]

Big Yin, a good post.

Originally Posted by The Big Yin

Yep - that’s right. The Russian-speaking, Yanukovich-voting part of modern Ukraine was not, historically, part of Ukraine - it’s a later addition tacked on during the Russian Empire.

Yes, that's true - I think this has been said on this forum once or twice, but you presented it in a truly comprehensive way.

[Albatross]

Hello Big yin,

I like the diligence you displayed in your post and also your colourful graphs. I agree that Ukraine "language issue" resembles Belgium in some ways. I have a few observations as well.

1) Land borders are almost by definition artificial. Also history shows that borders move around a lot. That in itself doesn't mean that it's a good idea to move Ukraine's borders around again (now).

2) The Ukrainian and Russian language are not neatly divided in Northeast versus Southwest. Rural areas tend to have a higher concentration of Ukrainian speakers. But in Kiev for instance, Russian is the dominant language (70%). Since it's obviously not feasible to spin off cities while retaining the countryside, it's unclear which area should be spun off.

3) Are you really sure that the Russian speakers in the Southeast want to leave Ukraine and rejoin Russia? The people that I spoke to from that area aren't all that keen on a split off or re-unification. Many Russian speakers see themselves as Ukrainians, despite the fact that they speak Russian at home. And even the ones that do identify themselves with Russia culturally don't really want to join a country run by former KGB officials or go through a messy transition period.

There are lots of real problems for Ukraine: an outdated infrastructure and industrial base, an underfunded education and medical system, corruption, pollution, you name it. Fixing any of those real world problems would actually mean something for the standard of living and quality of life, thereby strengthening Ukraine as a country. Since politicians have little interest in fixing real world problems (too much work + they're doing ok themselves), they've invented the language problem. So the issue is not about artificial borders but about artificial problems.