Dnipropetrovsk and the Russian-Ukrainian War

This can be a preprint extract from Ukraine’s Outpost: Dnipropetrovsk and the Russian-Ukrainian Battle, edited by Taras Kuzio, Sergei I. Zhuk And Paul D’Anieri. A free model of the ebook is offered from E-Worldwide Relations

The literature on regionalism in Ukraine is in depth (see Arel and Khmelko 1996; Barrington 1997; Barrington and Faranda 2009; D’Anieri 2007; Hale 2008; Kubicek, 2000; Kulyk 2016; O’Loughlin 2001; Sasse 2010; Wolczuk, 2007). Students have debated the sources of regional variations from a wide range of components. They’ve debated one of the best ways of defining areas, with some utilizing a easy East/West dichotomy, others utilizing a quadripartite East/South/Central/West, and nonetheless others figuring out much more areas (see Barrington and Herron 2004). Explicit consideration has been paid to the political penalties of regionalism, and Russia’s seizure of Crimea and intervention in Japanese Ukraine has raised the stakes in these discussions. Some see the battle in Japanese Ukraine as a manifestation of Ukraine’s regionalism, somewhat than of exterior intervention.

Whereas the literature on regionalism is immense, the literature on areas themselves is far smaller, and is very targeting a number of distinguished circumstances reminiscent of Crimea, Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts – ‘oblast’ denotes an administrative division or area), and Galicia. Central Ukraine is handled largely as a residual class of Kyiv, whereas components of the east outdoors the Donbas are given comparatively little consideration, as are components of the south past Crimea. The focus of those essays on Dnipropetrovsk oblastand the town of Dnipropetrovsk (from 2016 renamed Dnipro), which in the usual quadripartite scheme are normally thought of a part of the East however are generally positioned within the South (and which Taras Kuzio’s chapter argues has moved in direction of the centre), is due to this fact uncommon and significantly useful. Lowell Barrington and Erik S. Herron (2004) place Dnipropetrovsk oblast within the East of a four-region scheme whereas Olga Onuch and Henry E. Hale (2018) place it within the South.

Town of Dnipro, recognized from 1926 to 2016 as Dnipropetrovsk and earlier than 1926 as Yekaterinoslav, is Ukraine’s fourth largest metropolis (see Zhuk 2010). The Dnipro River, generally seen as defining the center of Ukraine and generally seen because the border between East and West, runs by means of it. Whereas not receiving as a lot consideration as another cities and areas, Dnipro is way from obscure. Within the Soviet Union, Dnipropetrovsk nurtured Leonid Brezhnev, who ran the USSR for 18 years between 1964–1982, and rivalled Leningrad for affect. From 1994 till the 2004 Orange Revolution, a reinvigorated Dnipropetrovsk clan, centred on Leonid Kuchma, held a strong place in Ukrainian politics earlier than being eclipsed by the rise of the Donetsk-based Celebration of Areas from 2005 to 2014.

Dnipro is the executive centre of the area nonetheless recognized (since 1932) as Dnipropetrovsk. As a result of regional names are written in Ukraine’s structure, altering them is extra difficult, and whereas the Constitutional Court docket has dominated the change constitutional, parliamentary approval was nonetheless wanted on the time of writing. Due to this fact, on this assortment of essays, authors usually check with the oblast centre metropolis as Dnipro, and to the area as Dnipropetrovsk.

Past a give attention to this metropolis and surrounding area, the chapters on this ebook are usually not constrained by a selected thematic, methodological, or theoretical orientation. Whereas many of the essays are written by lecturers and mirror scholarly disciplines, the authors additionally embody activists and public intellectuals, whose work is outlined much less in disciplinary phrases. Somewhat they embody the notion that there’s a lot to be gained inspecting a standard subject by means of a range of approaches. Sergei Zhuk gives an necessary overview of the Soviet historical past of Dnipropetrovsk. Kuzio’s chapter analyses the larger image, arguing that due to battle in Japanese Ukraine, Dnipro metropolis and Dnipropetrovsk area have successfully reidentified, such that they’re now higher regarded as a part of Central Ukraine than as a part of Japanese Ukraine. Olena Ishchenko examines the rise of Dnipropetrovsk Jewish neighborhood since 1991. Nicholas Kyle Kupensky and Olena Andriushchenko examine the impression of battle with Russia in Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro. Oleh Repan and Ihor Kocherhin analyse the method of decommunisation from 1991 to the current and competing identities and reminiscence politics in Dnipropetrovsk. Oleksiy Musiyezdov compares attitudes to decommunisation in Dnipropetrovsk and Kharkiv, one other necessary Japanese Ukrainian oblast and metropolis. Kostyantyn Mezentsev and Eugenia Kuznetsova examine the Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro media’s protection of internally displaced individuals (IDPs).

Zhuk’s essay gives a broad overview of the pre-Soviet and Soviet historical past of Dnipropetrovsk. He stresses Dnipropetrovsk’s rise to Union-wide significance within the post-World Battle II period because of two components, the rise of the ‘Brezhnev clan’ in Soviet politics and the institution of what got here to be the Pivdenmash (Yuzhmash) missile manufacturing unit in Dnipropetrovsk. Pivdenmash and the oblastcentre’s college drew a few of the most proficient engineers from all through the Soviet Union and have become not solely a supply of intercontinental ballistic missiles, but additionally rockets and satellites for the Soviet area programme. Services all around the Soviet Union reported to Pivdenmash leaders. Whereas the rocket business made Dnipropetrovsk distinguished throughout the Soviet Union, it additionally meant it was closed to overseas guests.

Because of its Union-level prominence and Brezhnev’s patronage, Dnipropetrovsk additionally grew to become a dominant metropolis in Ukraine, with over 50 per cent of Ukrainian SSR officers within the Eighties hailing from the area. Dnipropetrovsk’s energy meant that it had a big diploma of autonomy from Kyiv.

Kuzio examines Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro since 2014 and engages the colourful debate about political reidentification in Ukraine. A number of authors have argued that the Euromaidan Revolution (often known as the Revolution of Dignity) and Russian army aggression have led to a strengthening of Ukrainian identification in Ukraine, and Kuzio helps that argument by taking a look at occasions on this metropolis and area. Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro, Kuzio contends, grew to become an important bulwark towards the unfold of Russian hybrid warfare in 2014, blocking its unfold and containing it to Donetsk and Luhansk. This position accentuates the variations Kuzio finds between Dnipropetrovsk, on the one hand, and Donetsk and Luhansk, on the opposite. He hyperlinks the opposition to Russian strikes within the area with the power of Ukrainian civic, somewhat than ethnic identification, declaring that the three leaders of this resistance weren’t ethnic Ukrainians (1 was Russian and a couple of had been Jews).

Kuzio makes the extra provocative argument, first aired by Tatyana Zhurzhenko (2015) that Ukraine’s ‘East’ not exists. He argues that Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro’s identification with the Donbas was all the time tenuous, and the battle there spurred a strengthening of identification with Central (or East-Central) Ukraine on the expense of its identification with the ‘East.’ This reidentification occurred in three neighbouring oblasts (Zaporizhzhya, Kherson, Mykolayiv) as properly, with the consequence that the outdated pro-Russian ‘East’ consists now solely of these components of Donetsk and Luhansk which might be occupied by Russian forces and their Ukrainian allies. Professional-Russian sentiments and Soviet nostalgia have all however disappeared from these different 4 oblasts. This raises the deeper query of the validity of the macro areas students impose upon Ukraine.

Ishchenko analyses the revival of the Jewish neighborhood in Dnipro since independence. Jews skilled discrimination underneath the Soviets, and assimilation decreased the variety of self-identified Jews, though the Soviet apply of recording individuals’s nationality helped preserve some individuals’s Jewish identification. Underneath Soviet chief Mikhail Gorbachev’s thaw in 1985-1991, Jews in Dnipro started organising extra brazenly, and teams from overseas offered assist, starting a renaissance. After the autumn of the Soviet Union, emigration to locations with much less discrimination and extra financial alternative lowered numbers however strengthened ties with communities in Israel, the US, and Western Europe. Initially depending on assist from overseas, the monetary success of some members of the neighborhood led to substantial assist from inside Ukraine. Over time, the neighborhood developed a variety of Jewish instructional establishments, secured the return of three synagogues, constructed new neighborhood centres, and constructed a museum specializing in the Jewish expertise within the area.

The battle with Russia has helped redefine the connection between the Jewish neighborhood and Ukraine extra broadly. Jews, Ishchenko factors out, had little purpose to be nostalgic for the Soviet Union, and their prominence in Dnipro, she says, helps clarify how Dnipro pivoted from Soviet stronghold to supporter of Ukrainian statehood. The Dnipro-based oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyy has been a serious benefactor of Jewish causes in Ukraine. In 2014, Kolomoyskyy organised volunteer battalions to fight Russia-backed separatists. Ishchenko paperwork the broader position of Jews within the battle towards Russia. The creation of a Jewish militia firm by former Pravyy Sektor (Proper Sector) head Dmytro Yarosh is proof that relations between Jews and Ukrainian nationalists are extra complicated than is typically portrayed.

Oleh Repan analyses reminiscence politics in Dnipropetrovsk throughout Ukraine’s independence till the adoption of the decommunisation legal guidelines in April 2015. The case is particularly fascinating, Repan says, as a result of underneath the Soviets, Dnipropetrovsk was in some respects the quintessential Soviet metropolis. Repan argues that each culturally and politically, Dnipro regularly grew to become a extra Ukrainian metropolis after 1991, and he sees these developments as being related, with reminiscence politics serving to to drive modifications in voting behaviour. Repan pays specific consideration to the Cossack interval of Ukrainian historical past, which receives comparatively little consideration in lots of remedies of reminiscence politics however has salience in Dnipropetrovsk, the place pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian Cossack teams vied for affect. Concerning the Imperial interval, a distinguished theme of the political institution was the civilising affect of the Tsarist Russian Empire on the area. A battle over Tsarina Catherine the Nice’s legacy was on the coronary heart of this debate.

Repan strikes by means of historical past, reviewing Ukraine’s reminiscence politics in every period. Total, Repan says, reminiscence politics in Dnipro has been in line with that elsewhere in Ukraine extra broadly, with specific give attention to native occasions and points. The persistence of statues to Vladimir Lenin alongside commemoration of the Holodomor (loss of life by starvation), which Repan finds ‘completely absurd,’ maybe captures the complexity and hybridity of post-Soviet reminiscence. Nonetheless, after 2014, narratives extra liberal and extra vital of Imperial and Soviet identities resonated far more successfully, and due to this fact grew to become dominant.

Kupensky and Andriushchenko examine the position of Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro and of individuals from the area within the Russian-Ukrainian battle in Japanese Ukraine. Kupensky and Andriushchenko argue that Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro’s identification has modified from the Soviet-era ‘Rocket Metropolis’ to a brand new forpost (outpost) of Dnipro, which they characterise as an advance guard, with each offensive and defensive connotations. Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro was each an necessary location from which to stage resistance to aggression in Donbas in addition to a refuge for these fleeing the battle. Kupensky and Andriushchenko look at why this took place.

Distinguished on this chapter are the various refugees, volunteer fighters and civic volunteers, a few of whose tales Kupensky and Andriushchenko relate. In addition they dig deeply into the cultural manufacturing that has resulted from the battle, stressing the position of artists and exhibitions in representing Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro’s new position and identification. They supply detailed evaluation of the methods wherein the battle is being memorialised. Whereas Kupensky and Andriushchenko don’t stress this, the method they chronicle is immensely necessary within the examine of the politics of reminiscence, within the sense that the real-time illustration of the battle and its penalties turns into the primary draft of historic reminiscence.

Ihor Kocherhin examines decommunisation in Dnipropetrovsk and makes the case for decommunisation on the whole. To Kocherin, the query of decommunisation is one among whether or not Ukraine may transfer in direction of changing into a European state, or whether or not it might stay a part of the Russian World. Framing the issue this fashion makes an important level: battles over Ukraine’s previous have been so bitter as a result of they’re struggling over Ukraine’s future. Kocherin summarises the arguments towards eradicating monuments and altering place names and finds them ‘unworthy.’ He sees eradicating monuments and altering place names as important for displaying that Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro is a part of Ukraine, not the Russian World.

Like many Ukrainian cities, Dnipropetrovsk nonetheless had a monument to Lenin in its central Lenin Sq. which was pulled down by Euromaidan Revolutionary protestors on 22 February, the day Yanukovych fled Kyiv, a part of the nationwide motion referred to as Leninopad (Lenin-fall). Kocherin particulars the sources of the various new toponyms, which totaled over 300 in Dnipro, displaying how they mirrored the town’s historical past and geography. Kocherin states that a lot of the bodily work of decommunisation in Dnipro is full however he believes modifications in individuals’s attitudes will take longer.

Oleksiy Musiyezdov compares attitudes to decommunisation in Dnipro and Kharkiv. These two cities have a lot in frequent. Extra importantly, this within-region comparability (if one places Dnipro within the East) or South versus East comparability (if one places Dnipro within the South) gives a useful variation from the East versus West comparisons that dominate dialogue of Ukraine. Dnipro and Kharkiv, the authors contend, differ from Luhansk and Donetsk in that mining and metallurgy, which dominate in Donbas, are inclined to generate a homogeneous working class, whereas the high-tech industries (aviation, rocketry, weaponry) that dominate Dnipro and Kharkiv made the inhabitants extra differentiated and due to this fact tougher to mobilise.

Musiyezdov finds that whereas most respondents in each cities oppose decommunisation, opposition is greater in Kharkiv, they usually ask why. Surprisingly, they discover that neither Ukrainian nor Russian identification correlates with views on decommunisation, however that European identification, which is held by fewer than 30 per cent of respondents, does. Attitudes towards decommunisation seem to correlate with geopolitical preferences, and with extra in Dnipro supporting a pro-Western orientation than in Kharkiv, that may clarify the cities’ totally different ranges of assist for decommunisation. Attitudes on decommunisation additionally correlate with views of the Soviet period. It seems that since 2014, extra identification change has taken place in Dnipro than in Kharkiv, a matter that Kuzio’s chapter takes up.

Kostyantyn Mezentsev and Eugenia Kuznetsova analyse the very important query of IDPs in Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro, specializing in how media representations of IDPs form attitudes and due to this fact insurance policies. There are roughly 33,000 IDPs in Dnipro, a 3rd of whom are retired and 17 per cent kids, based on Mezentsev and Kuznetsova. They make the essential level that after six years of battle and occupation, IDPs are experiencing ‘everlasting temporariness.’ Whereas there’s some tendency for individuals to combine into their new environment, they level out, Ukrainian society continues to emphasize individuals’s displaced standing, due to the need to imagine that the occupied territories will quickly be returned.

They pattern native TV programming to evaluate the attitudes being disseminated to Dnipro residents. Amongst their many fascinating findings is that in comparatively few of the tales are the IDPs capable of converse for themselves, and in that sense, they’re typically rendered silent or passive. The impact is that IDPs are offered not as brokers, however as recipients of assist.

Whereas this edited ebook focuses on Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipro, it illustrates the broad worth of region-focused, multi-disciplinary tasks. We’d study an ideal deal by such regional analyses of different components of Ukraine that don’t match into the usual ‘East-West’ or ‘East-West-Kyiv’ schemes. Kharkiv, for instance, is lumped in with the Donbas, however is clearly distinct, each in its historical past and its present politics. Uzhhorod and Trans-Carpathian oblast, equally, are seen as a part of the West however are fairly totally different from Galicia, to not point out the remainder of Ukraine. With a lot written concerning the salience of regionalism in Ukraine, this ebook gives a groundbreaking contribution in direction of a deeper and broader scholarly examination of an necessary area which has been historically ignored in tutorial literature.

References

Arel, Dominique and Khmelko, Valeri. (1996). ‘The Russian Issue and Territorial Polarization in Ukraine,’ Harriman Evaluate, 9, 1–2: 81–91.

Barrington, Lowell, B. (1997). ‘The Geographic Part of Mass Attitudes in Ukraine,’ Submit-Soviet Geography and Economics 38, 10: 601–614.

Barrington, L. B. and Herron, Erik, S. (2004).’One Ukraine or Many? Regionalism in Ukraine and Its Political Penalties, Nationalities Papers, 32, 1: 53–86.

Barrington, L. and Faranda, Regina. (2009). ‘Reexamining Area, Ethnicity, and Language in Ukraine,’ Submit-Soviet Affairs 25, 3: 232–256.

D’Anieri, Paul. (2007). ‘Ethnic Tensions and State Methods: Understanding the Survival of the Ukrainian State,’ Journal of Communist Research and Transition Politics 23, 1: 4–29.

Hale, Henry E. (2008). ‘The Double-Edged Sword of Ethnofederalism: Ukraine and the USSR in Comparative Perspective,’ Comparative Politics 40, no. 3: 293–312.

Kubicek, Paul. (2000). ‘Regional Polarisation in Ukraine: Public Opinion, Voting and Legislative Behaviour,’ Europe-Asia Research 52, no. 2: 273–94.

Kulyk, Volodymyr. (2016). ‘Nationwide Id in Ukraine: Affect of Euromaidan and the Battle,’ Europe-Asia Research 68, 4: 588-608.

O’Loughlin, John. (2001). ‘The Regional Consider Modern Ukrainian Politics: Scale, Place, House, or Bogus Impact?’ Submit-Soviet Geography and Economics 42, 1: 1–33.

Onuch, Onuch and Henry H.E. (2018). ‘Capturing Ethnicity: The Case of Ukraine,’ Submit-Soviet Affairs 34, 2–3: 84-106.

Sasse, Gwendolyn. (2010). ‘Ukraine: The Position of Regionalism,’ Journal of Democracy 21, 3: 99- Wylegałaa, Anna and Głowacka-Grajper, Małgorzata eds. (2020). The Burden of the Previous: Historical past, Reminiscence, and Id in Modern Ukraine, Bloomington: Indiana College Press. 

Wolczuk, Kateryna. (2007). ‘Whose Ukraine? Language and Regional Elements within the 2004 and 2006 Elections in Ukraine,’ European Yearbook of Minority Points, 5.

Zhuk, Sergei I. (2010). Rock and Roll within the Rocket Metropolis: The West, Id, and Ideology in Soviet Dniepropetrovsk, 1960–1985, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins College Press.

Zhurzhenko, Tatiana. (2015). ‘Ukraine’s Japanese Borderlands: The Finish of Ambiguity?’ In: Andrew Wilson ed., What Does Ukraine Suppose? London: European Council on Overseas Relations, 45–52. https://www.ecfr.eu/web page/-/WHAT_DOES_UKRAINE_THINK_pdf.pdf

Additional Studying on E-Worldwide Relations