The prevailing opinion in the West was that Ukraine would not be able to sustain long-term frontal resistance when the large-scale invasion of the Russian army into Ukraine began two years ago.
Moreover, a quick fall of Kiev was anticipated, with the expectation that if not within weeks, then within months, the Russian army would establish full control over the entire eastern part of Ukraine, up to the Dnieper. A similar viewpoint prevailed in Moscow until the beginning of the full-scale war.
The fact that Vladimir Putin, during his address before the invasion, named the large-scale military activities a “Special military operation” also serves as a proof of this. In other words, an impression was being created while listening to the speech that accelerated military activities with a limited contingent are going to be conducted against Ukraine.
As of now, it can be argued confidently that doubts about Ukraine’s ability to resist before the Russian invasion mostly emerged due to perceptions of societal division within Ukraine.
However, within hours of the invasion, the world already witnessed the opposite reality. Ukrainian society, regardless of nationality, demonstrated its ability to unite for the sake of the “defense of the common motherland”. Not surprisingly, the concept of the “revival of Ukrainian political society” was put into circulation during that period.
Was the Ukrainian society divided?
The political landscape of Ukraine during the 1990s and 2000s indeed reflected regional divisions, with the western and central regions generally supporting “pro-Western” political forces, while the southern and eastern regions tended to be more sympathetic towards Russia.
This tendency was vividly demonstrated during the 2004 presidential elections, marked by a fierce confrontation between the “pro-Russian” candidate Viktor Yanukovych and the “pro-Western” candidate Viktor Yushchenko. The stark divide between these two candidates was mirrored in the headline of the magazine “Kommersant: Power,” which read: “Украина против Якраины”. The intense struggle between the candidates culminated in the First “Maidan”, also known as the Orange Revolution, which ultimately led to Viktor Yushchenko coming to power.
The so-called “electoral” polarity between the western and eastern regions of Ukraine was further deepened when, in 2010, Yanukovych finally managed to become president after being nominated for the second time in the presidential elections. The country paid for this with the second “Maidan” of 2014, the annexation of Crimea, and Russian hybrid aggression in Donbass.
As a result of these Russian activities, approximately 5.2 million voters were excluded from the political and electoral landscape of Ukraine. Among them, 1.7 million voters remained in Crimea and Sevastopol, while 3.5 million voters resided in the territories of the self-proclaimed republics formed in Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Notably, these were voters who had previously supported political forces aligned with Moscow and had entirely rejected Ukrainian identity.
In the absence of such an electorate, the “electoral” division of the country disappeared. This was proved during the 2014 presidential elections, when Petro Poroshenko won with an overwhelming majority of votes in all regions of Ukraine.
The absence of political division within society became evident once again in 2019, during the presidential elections, when Volodymyr Zelensky garnered high percentages of votes across the entire territory of the country, except for the Lviv region.
However, neither the annexation of Crimea, nor the Donbass conflict, nor the evident anti-Ukraine propaganda through Russian state channels could break the belief existing among half of the residents of Ukraine that Ukrainians and Russians are one people.
In fact, 41% of respondents participated in the census conducted by the “Reiting” group in July 2021, held such a belief. However, this picture underwent a radical change after the invasion of 2022. More specifically, precisely two months after the onset of the war, in April, that indicator plummeted, reaching as low as 8%. During the same period (from August 2021 to April 2022), the number of Ukrainians identifying themselves as “citizens of Ukraine,” “Ukrainians,” or “Europeans” also surged, increasing from 75% to 98%.
Therefore, one can confidently argue that the Russian invasion served as a unique stimulus for the consolidation of Ukrainian society. Such a trend can be observed in the modern history of Ukraine and the history of the Republic of Ukraine, in general, more than once.
From pan-Russian federation to independence
Let’s start from the February Revolution of 1917 and the period following it.
The process of the collapse of the Russian empire did not result in sentiments aimed at complete separation from Russia in Ukrainian social and political movements.
This was best demonstrated when the political parties formed the Central Rada in March 1917. In the text of the first decision, titled “Universal” adopted by this body exercising legislative functions in the Ukrainian territories, the pursuit of autonomy with broad rights within Russia was affirmed.
“Let Ukraine be free. Let the Ukrainian nation have the right to govern its own affairs on its own land without separating from the entire Russia and the Russian state”.
This clause, in various formulations, was affirmed in the second “Universal” regarding the country’s sovereignty adopted in July. In fact, this marked a landmark for the formation of a united state with Russia on a federal principle.
At the outset, it faced resistance from Russia. However, the provisional government ruling in Petrograd, considering the country’s difficult social-political situation, eventually accepted Ukrainian autonomy.
The situation changed in October 1917 when, as a result of a coup in Petrograd, the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party (Bolshevik) came to power. After these developments, the Central Rada, considering itself a federal body acting under the authority of the overthrown provisional government, refused to accept the power of the Bolsheviks in the third “Universal”. Moreover, within the same document, again within the framework of autonomy, the formation of the People’s Republic of Ukraine was declared, reaffirming the preservation of the perception of forming a unified state system with Russia.
However, these perceptions underwent transformations when Bolshevik Russia initiated military operations to overthrow the Central Rada and Sovietize Ukraine. In early 1918, communist uprisings in southern and eastern Ukraine, followed by a Russian military invasion, compelled the Central Rada to declare Ukraine’s full independence in the fourth “Universal”: “The Ukrainian People’s Republic hereby becomes an independent, free, and sovereign state of the Ukrainian people, subject to no one”.
In other words, there was a situation where it was necessary to unite and mobilize Ukrainian society to resist the Russian invasion.
In this period, which coincided with the last phase of the First World War, the Ukrainians, receiving support from Germany and Austria-Hungary, the main members of the Quadruple Alliance, who were still in winning positions, managed to repel the first Russian invasion.
The defeat of the Alliance in the war in 1918, the failure of the anti-Bolshevik rebellions aimed at restoring the empire in Russia, and the decisive victories of the Bolsheviks during the civil war led to the overthrow of independent statehood in Ukraine.
From 1919 to 1920, the Bolsheviks intensified their activities, and the Soviet order was quickly established in Ukraine. Subsequently, in 1922, Soviet Ukraine became one of the founding republics of the USSR.
The repressive policy of the USSR and the great famine organized by the Stalinist regime in 1932-1933, known as the “Holodomor” and resulting in the loss of around 5 million lives, undoubtedly left a mark on the aspirations for the restoration of Ukrainian statehood and the formation of nationalist movements. This was manifested both during the Second World War, when Ukraine was occupied by Nazi Germany from 1941 to 1943, and in the subsequent period.
For example, the Ukrainian Nationalist Organization (UAK), which was active at that time and is now accused by Russia of collaborating with Nazi Germany, actually advocated for “leading the people of Ukraine against the Germans during the Hitler occupation, and against the Bolshevik occupiers since 1944”.
In addition, one can grasp the main ideology of the UAK regarding the struggle against the Russian occupation from the slogan of the booklet published by the organization in 1948: “Freedom to the nation and the people. For an independent and unified Ukraine. For the free states of all nations within the USSR. Suppressed nations of the USSR, come together to struggle against the enslaving and exploiting Bolshevik interests”.
A significant awakening of statehood restoration occurred in Ukrainian society when the Declaration of Sovereignty of the Ukrainian SSR was adopted on July 16, 1990. This period witnessed intensified movements for independence within the USSR. In the third part of this Declaration, the provision regarding Ukrainian society as a political entity was already clearly featured: “Citizens of the Republic of all nationalities constitute the people of Ukraine”․
To clarify, the “political nation” in this context encompasses all citizens of Ukraine, regardless of their ethnic origin, language, or religious affiliation. This approach was later enshrined in the 1996 Constitution.
Thus, one can argue definitively that the formation of the independent Ukrainian state and the consolidation of the nation around it were primarily built in the context of Russian imperialism.
Moreover, it was the result of Russian aggressions. These processes became especially evident after the 2022 invasion, ultimately shaping a distinct political identity among Ukrainians. This identity distinctly rejects Moscow’s initiative of the “great Russian nation”, which aims to encompass both Russian and Ukrainian peoples.
Մասնագիտությամբ միջազգայանագետ եմ։ Ձգտում եմ մարդկանց ապահովել տեղեկատվությամբ՝ նպատակ ունենալով թեկուզ չնչին ներդրում կատարել անցյալից ու ներկայից տեղեկացված հասարակություն կերտելու գործում։ Հետաքրքրությանս ոլորտներն են կրոնները, հատկապես իսլամը՝ իր շիա ուղղությամբ, պատմությունն ու պատերազմի մասին ժողովուրդների ընկալումները։