Recent conferences at Yale, Columbia reflect tremendous growth in field of Ukrainian studies
by Irene Jarosewich
PARSIPPANY, N.J. - For decades the field of Ukrainian studies was small - tiny when compared to Soviet or Russian studies worldwide - and genuine Ukraine scholars and experts could all comfortably fit into one respectable conference hall. In North America, two disciplines - history and literature - formed the bedrock of the field. However, Ukraine's independence, along with other dramatic changes of the past decade in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union have transformed the field of Ukrainian studies, expanding it substantially beyond the traditional disciplines, adding scholars from disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, economics and political science.
Experienced and established Ukraine scholars are still not numerous, but several trends have become evident in recent years that have increased their numbers. Established scholars from other fields have turned their focus on Ukraine, those, for example, with expertise in Russian or Polish studies. New scholars from countries that have not been traditionally associated with Ukrainian studies, such as the Netherlands, Finland and Japan, are enlarging the pool of Ukraine experts. Scholars from Ukraine now regularly appear at international forums. And there has been a tremendous influx of young scholars into the field.
Although political changes have allowed for the opening of previously closed archives in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, offering new research possibilities for scholars, and although the lifting of the Iron Curtain has facilitated travel and scholarly exchanges, it is the new computer technologies that have also dramatically impacted the field. The Internet, relatively inexpensive and easy desktop publishing, expanded computing capability for writing, searching and archiving - none of which were readily available even a decade ago - now allow for the rapid and accurate exchange and recording of information.
These changes in the field are quickly obvious in the area of publications: whereas the release of a dozen decent Ukraine-related titles a decade was once the norm, now a dozen titles a year are being published.
These changes are reflected also at academic conferences, two of which were held recently at Yale University in New Haven, Conn., and at Columbia University in New York City.
The Yale-Ukraine Initiative
NEW HAVEN - Funded with a $1 million endowment by Yale alumnus, George Chopivsky of Washington through The Chopivsky Family Foundation, the Yale-Ukraine Initiative is a fairly new program in Ukrainian studies, established in 1994 to support the study of Ukraine at Yale through graduate work, research, instruction, library acquisitions and conferences.
The Yale-Ukraine Initiative's sixth conference, "Ukrainian Politics in the Twentieth Century" was held April 8-9 and included panels on the topics "Politics in Ukraine, 1890 - 1917: The Historical Legacy"; "The 1999 Presidential Election and Ukrainian Politics"; "Economic Transformations: Macro and Micro Views"; "Cultural Politics: 1920s to the Present"; and "Language and National Identity."
The keynote address, "'It Is Later Than You Think': Will The Real Ukraine Please Stand Up?" was given by Prof. Roman Szporluk, director of the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University, and the dinner address, "Reading and Misreading Ukraine," was given by Prof. George G. Grabowicz of Harvard University.
This year's conference was dedicated to the memory of Solomea Pavlychko, scholar and educator, who passed away unexpectedly at the age of 41 on December 31, 1999.
In his presentation Prof. Szporluk stated that we have been part of a long cycle of nation-making and remaking in Europe, and that for Ukraine 1991 marks the conclusion of a historical cycle that began in 1848. "A certain epoch ended in 1989-1991 - and we're 10 years into a new epoch - we're not yet sure what," he noted, introducing an observation that would resonate through many presentations in both conferences.
He noted that, in order to prevail over challenges and succeed, it is imperative for Ukraine to build a strong identity as a civic nation, and warned against focusing attention primarily on symbols of national identity, such as language, as a means or solution to the problem of national identity in general. The new Ukrainian identity must be willing to incorporate Russian, German, Jewish and Polish elements from its past, he stated.
Historian Olga Andriewsky of Trent University began her presentation with the observation that "Ukrainians closed out the 20th century much as they had begun it: still pondering - or being forced to ponder - 'to be or not to be.'" (Later in the conference, during his presentation, Yale Fellow Taras Kuzio made a similar observation, nothing that "the issue of 'will Russia continue to exist?' was not an issue in the Putin election, but 'will Ukraine continue to exist? was an issue in the Kuchma election.")
"Ukrainians had a historic narrative," Prof. Andriewsky continued, "and that narrative was suppressed. ... Ukrainians did not vanish - there were 17 million Ukrainians, the single largest minority in the Russian Empire - rather, in the late 19th and early 20th century Ukrainian national identity was deconstructed."
This deconstruction, she stated, began in the early 19th century with the assimilation of the Kozak "shliakhta" (gentry class). The disappearance of a distinct Ukrainian elite signaled the disappearance of the Ukrainian state and nation. However, publications at the time wrote of the willing assimilation by the Ukrainian gentry into the Russian identity and the voluntary nature of Ukrainians' association with Russians, nonetheless a distinction was made between the two.
The writing, however, focused on the gentry class and not the Ukrainian masses, "who were seen as an echo of a dying culture," she noted. With the assimilation of the gentry class, Russians - not Ukrainians - began to define Ukrainians to the point where by 1850 any attempt to retain or make a distinction between Ukrainian and Russian was seen as unnatural and by latter half of the 19th century as seditious.
Theodore Weeks, a historian from Southern Illinois University, noted in his presentation "A Dialogue of the Deaf? Russians and Ukrainians Before World War I" that he found little documentation at the turn of the 20th century of any Russian acknowledgment of Ukrainians as being separate from Russians, but noted that the focus of Russian imperial authority was on religious identity, Orthodox, Catholics (Poles) and Jews, and that, by virtue of being Orthodox, Ukrainians were considered to be Russian - "ours" rather than "others." "From liberal constitutionalists to hidebound conservatives, Russian society in the early years of the 20th century was one in its unwillingness - or inability - to accept the Ukrainian national movement or the Ukrainian nation," he stated. "One should not forget the national calculus that, if Ukrainians were considered a separate nation, Russians would make up less than half of the total population of the Russian Empire."
Jumping to the end of the century, Andrew Wilson of the University of London noted the dramatic switch between the 1999 elections and those in 1990-1991 in Ukraine. In the earlier elections it was widely assumed that the Communist Party would win; in 1999 it was widely expected that it would lose. However, the victory of the so-called "centrist" parties does not necessarily reflect the positions of the electorate, according to Dr. Wilson, since Ukraine's centrist parties are only "virtual" parties - they have no real connection with voters, rather they are part of the "circles of influences" and "clans" that influence the president rather than respond to the electorate.
Dr. Kuzio added that civil society had been leveled in Ukraine and "a legacy of the empire is the large body of amorphous centrism." He noted that Ukrainian elites lack ideological concepts and, in fact, are afraid of civil society. Oleh Havrylyshyn, senior advisor at the International Monetary Fund, commented that the elites, the power group, already have what they want, namely, power; in fact, they like the status quo, despite their claims of seeking reform, and have no real interest in reforming civil society.
Association for the Study of Nationalities
NEW YORK - For the fifth year in a row, The Harriman Institute at Columbia University hosted the annual convention of the Association for the Study of Nationalities (ASN). Though the association was established in the early 1970s at the City University of New York by scholars in Central and East European studies, it has experienced substantial growth in the 1990s. It now has hundreds of members in more than 50 countries.
For the convention this year, held April 13-15, more than 600 participants registered, compared to approximately 400 last year and 260 in 1998. According to conference organizers, the great majority of the panelists, about two-thirds, were young scholars under age 40.
The focus of the ASN is the study of ethnicity and nationalism in post-Communist states, and the topic of the convention was "Identity and the State: Nationalism and Sovereignty in a Changing World." Fourteen panels were organized on the Balkans, 13 on the Russian Federation, 12 each on Ukraine, Central Asia and Central Europe, six on the Southern Caucasus, five on the Baltics, and almost two dozen on thematic and cross-regional themes.
Some of the topics of the thematic and cross-regional panels included: "What Is European Identity?"; "The European Union: Problems and Prospects of Enlargement"; "Jewish Minorities in the Post-Communist States"; "Self-Determination in the Age of Globalization"; and "Language Laws: Nation-Building, Ethnic Containment, or Diversity Management?"
Among the panels that focused exclusively on Ukraine, the topics included "Ukraine's Foreign Policy Orientation"; "State Building and the Politics of Inclusion in Ukraine"; "Identity Change in Ukraine through the Prism of Literature and Linguistics"; "Forging the Nation"; "Institutions and Elites in Ukraine"; "Issues of Identity during State-Building: Ukraine in the 1990s"; "The New Ukrainian History: Restoring or Reinterpreting the Kozak Age?"; "Hans Kohn Revisited: Civic and Ethnic States in Theory and Practice"; and "Ethnic Politics in Crimea."
The majority of presentations about Ukraine focused on the past decade. The theme that Ukraine's ruling structures are a closed elite, with little concern about accountability to the electorate, a group that responds only to external pressures, such as foreign governments and international organizations, and not to internal pressures, was repeated in numerous presentations.
Historian Orest Subtelny of York University commented that "the economy doesn't work, the political system doesn't work, land reform doesn't work, but the elite works. ... There's nothing idealistic ... they make money in Ukraine therefore they stay in Ukraine. ... (B)ut they don't share the wealth, they ship out the wealth." He added that the elites are a closed system, "neo-feudal," that in all likelihood will not survive long in an era of economic globalization.
In her presentation on media, historian Marta Dyczok of the University of Western Ontario commented that, though there are many positive aspects concerning the media in Ukraine in comparison to 1990, such as more media outlets, increased use of the Internet, and better technical production and presentation of information, unofficial information control remains. The elites that own the media use laws which state that "the dignity and honor of citizens or enterprises in Ukraine cannot be violated" as a pretense to stop criticism by journalists of their activities. The government, in turn, uses administrative coercion, such as arbitrary tax audits, freezing of banks accounts and lawsuits to block criticism of the government or president.
Andrea Curti and Vlada Tkach, graduate students at Tufts University, stated in their presentation on land reform that prospects are not good for genuine land reform in the form of small to mid-size farm privatization - regardless of recent announcements by Ukraine's government that collective farms no longer exist - "since the government doesn't want it, the 'kolhosp' directors don't want it, multi-nationals only want to deal with one or two large entities, and there is no psychological desire" among the peasants for such change.
However, it is business elites in Ukraine, particularly those from the military-industrial sector, who, acting in their own self-interest, have pushed Ukraine's foreign policy in a pro-Western direction, according to Tor Bukkvoll, senior researcher at the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment. Identifying Ukraine as a "privatized state," that is, one that "functions to defend the interests of a small, capitalist class," he stated that it is the interests of these economic elites that have moved Ukraine towards a more European foreign policy.
"Ukrainian industrial barons from East and Central Ukraine paid for Kuchma's campaign in 1994," he claimed, "and were awarded with numerous influential positions in the government and presidential administration ... They set out to achieve integration with Russia, but on terms that gave themselves a considerably stronger and more equal position than had been the case during Soviet times. When they learned that this was not how the Russian elite envisioned the reintegration, they became proponents of a pro-Western foreign policy course instead."
He did note, however, that since privatization is almost complete in Russia, but not so in Ukraine, that Russian business elites are once again cultivating close personal ties with Ukraine's business elites with the intention of having Russian capital invested in Ukraine as the state continues to privatize. This is especially evident, according to Dr. Bukkvoll, in Ukraine's energy sector.
Ukrainian studies websites
Below is a list of websites, obtained at the Yale and Columbia conferenes, of organizations in the field of, as well as publishers that carry titles in, Ukrainian studies and related topics:
Copyright © The Ukrainian Weekly, April 30, 2000, No. 18, Vol. LXVIII
| Home Page |