Understanding Contemporary Ukrainian and Russian Nationalism. Olexander Hryb
attempts to limit the right of self-determination will be normatively self-defeating; nationalism is embedded in national identity and is based on the belief that mankind is “naturally” divided into nations and nation-states and that this division is important to human development; it is this quality of national identity, of combining rational and irrational or emotional beliefs that makes the denial of national sentiments so explosive.
Yet nationalism is of great importance even for modern liberal democratic societies, as it functions to secure state patriotism in a world of competing nation-states. As European integration illustrates, a post-nation-state world is not impossible. Until, however, nationalism is deconstructed and un-invented, federalism and civil society an only ease the negative excesses of this political principle. Chapter 5 also explores how federalism, together with civil society institutions, is capable of modifying extremes of the internationally enshrined right to self-determination, keeping together peoples within the same polity and easing inter-ethnic (national) confrontation until the possible development of new non-territorial identities solve the dilemma of competing nationalist projects. Finally, Chapter 5 summarizes the arguments and evidence for using the concept of societal (identity) security as a means of understanding the security concerns of societies, as opposed to states, as well as threats insufficiently evident in existing theoretical frameworks. This is then applied to the existing conflict of Ukrainian and Russian nationalisms and its likely resolution.
1 Benito Mussolini, speech at Naples, 24 Oct. 1922, in Scritti e Discorsi, ii.345, quoted in Nationalism: A Report by a Study Group of Members of the Royal Institute of International Affairs [1939]. Reprints of Economic Classics. New York (1966).
2 The term “nationalist revival” rather than “national revival” is used here to stress the political nature of the former. As Chapter 5 will illustrate national revivals in Eastern Europe became a form of belated nationalist project of economic and social modernization that developed into political movements. “National” and “nationalist revival,” therefore, are equal terms in a wider sense; however, national revival is not always political in the initial stages and therefore not always nationalist in the more narrow sense.
3 Sotsiologicheskiye teorii natsionalisma: nauchno-analiticheskiy obzor. AN SSSR. (Moskva: Nauka, 1991). Also: B. Popov, A. Shkliar, eds., Etnos I sotsium (Kyiv: Naukova Dumka, 1993).
4 G. Mashtakova, “Ih snova khvataet v sherengah po vosem,” in: Moscow News, no.16, 21-28 April 1996, 4.
5 Lola Topchieva, “The Renaissance of Red Russia,” in: Independent, 9 June 1996, 6-7; “The Cossacks,” in: Eastern Europe Newsletter 6, no. 15, 20 July 1992, 5-7.
2 Theories of Nation and National Identity: Comparing Soviet (Russian, Ukrainian) and Western Perspectives
There is a good deal of ambiguous terminology in the study of national and nationalist phenomena not only in the Western tradition, but also in the Eastern European tradition heavily influenced by the Soviet Ethnography. This chapter clarifies key terms, including “nation,” “ethnie” or “ethnic community,” “national” and “ethnic” consciousness. It conceptualizes national consciousness as a complex system of beliefs of rational and emotional origin, whose development is a constant dynamic process that reflects a group’s social existence. Terms drawn from cognitive psychology make it possible to conceive national consciousness as a myth while at the same time showing how myths and stereotypes are crucially important to the functioning of national consciousness. This chapter therefore establishes a common ground necessary for further exploration of nationalism as an ideology behind the nationalist revival and reveals its socio-historical dimension. It also compares major Western and Soviet (Post-Soviet Russian and Ukrainian) perspectives on national identity. The analysis identifies the key arguments of each school of thought, and, then suggests a possible synthetic approach to achieve clarity of analysis.
2.1. Major Elements Within the Genesis of Nation, Ethnie, National and Ethnic Consciousness
Comparative research illustrates that despite little academic exchange between Western and Soviet social scientists, understanding of national identity was substantially similar. For instance, Anthony Smith’s argument about the nature of national consciousness is closer to the position of the Soviet theoretician Yulian Bromley than to the purely modernist approaches that currently predominate the western social sciences. On the other hand, Eastern European theorists, such as Miroslav Hroch or Valeriy Tishkov have developed modernist or “constructivist”" approaches.
The key terms explored are “nation,” “ethnic community” (ethnie or ethnos), “national consciousness” and “ethnic consciousness.” The term “identity” in this monograph is distinguished from “consciousness” in the following way. Identity represents consciousness at a certain period of time and qualitatively defined by this period. Consciousness is therefore a process; identity is a part of it. Identity is related to the past and future of consciousness as a process. In this way the term “identity” will be related, for instance, to a subject (bearer) of consciousness at a moment of time in a specific location. The reason for making this distinction is to capture such phenomena as situational identity, as distinct from consciousness as a process, a constant activity that one can lose rather than change (Waver 1993, Drobizsheva 1985). Where reference to a specific subject, time or place is irrelevant, or the process itself is the focus of discussion, the term “consciousness” will be used rather than that of “identity.”
2.1.1 “Nation”: Modernist vs. Primordialist Perspectives
The word “nation” acquired its contemporary meaning after the French Revolution (1789-1794). As Liah Greenfeld (1992) has argued, “nation” originally referred to parties of student within medieval universities; later it was used to reflect on the social stratification of cities. Only at the end of the eighteenth century did the term acquire a political meaning: to identify the whole of the “revolutionary” people of France. It was only after the end of the Napoleonic wars and the second restoration in France (1815-1830) that “nation” acquired an association with ethnicity. In the English-language literature on nationality, “nation” is given two meanings: nation as a state, and nation as people. Therefore there were suggestions to introduce different terms—“state nation” or “nation-state” as well as, separately, “people” or “ethnic nation” (Riggs 1990, 12). In the Eastern European tradition, “nation” was usually understood as “people,” i.e., it directly corresponded to the word “narod.” It is often the case that depending on the first (state-nation) or second meaning (people, narod) different concepts are derived and theories are created.
Among Western scholars, the perennialist (modified primordialist) approach advocated by Smith is more receptive to the influence of the modernists than vice versa. Generally, primordialists like Smith (1986) and Llobera (1994) agree with Gellner`s model of social transformation from agrarian to industrial society. They recognize that nations are a modern phenomenon, precisely because of what they require—a unified jurisdiction, unified economy, fairly compact territory, “political culture,” all so crucial in modernist theories. Yet, Smith noticed that even though there are common characteristics which form the basis of modern nations, these do not make the world of nations homogeneous.
Smith distinguishes at least two models (Western and Eastern) that emphasize different aspects of nationhood. The first places importance upon territory, a system of laws, institutions and civic culture. The second emphasizes ethnic descent and cultural ties. It is the latter type of nation that led the author to his conclusion about the ethnic origins of nations. This point