Russo-Ukranian War: Slavic culture between tradition and westernization: still protagonist of world disputes

  Focus - Allegati
  22 febbraio 2024
  9 minuti, 58 secondi

Abstract

The Russo-Ukrainian war that began in February 2022 when the Russian army invaded Ukraine represents a turning point for Europe and international peace. The conflict has been described as the result of geopolitical tensions between Russia and the West: the former felt insecure because of NATO and EU enlargements towards its Western borders. However, stating that geopolitics is able to explain many aspects of this war, it is not the only element that we have to consider. In fact, Ukraine is in the middle between the Russian Federation and the West, not only geographically, but also, on some extent, culturally. Russians and Ukrainians share traditions, values, religion, and according to some they have the same history and belong to the same people. Yet, younger generations, especially those born after the end of the Cold War, want to get closer to Europe, with whom they feel to share ideas and values.

Authors

Eric Petersen Buchgeher - Junior Researcher, Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. - Politics

Sharon Giacomelli - Junior Researcher, Mondo Internazionale G.E.O. - Politics

Introduction

For more than two decades, Europe has thought that war wouldn't have been one of its problems and peace would have been forever, on its continent at least. Europeans believed in the concept of end of history, a theory defined by the American political scientist Francis Fukuyama according to which with the end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union humanity had reached a period of post-war history. Liberal democracy was seen as the ultimate and best form of government.

When, on February 24, 2022, Russia launched its "special military operation" in Ukraine, this European dream was demolished, and war entered once again the Old Continent.

Analysts and experts have been debating since then about the reasons that led Vladimir Putin into war. Geopolitical arguments seemed to be the best explanations: Russia felt insecure and threatened by NATO's enlargements and, at the same time, wanted to expand its influence and power over Eastern Europe.

Putin’s willingness to recreate a geopolitical space in which the Russian Federation is the center is clear. He openly and recurrently compared the invasion of Ukraine to Peter the Great’s imperial conquests during the 18th century. The Czarist power and influence is seen by the Russian President as a dream to reach. The dissolution of the USSR was, in this view, a demise of historical Russia.The war started two years ago was the first and fundamental step to rebuild the Russian Empire and elevate the Russian Federation as a global superpower. Yet, after 24 months of conflict this goal is far from being reached.

Even though geopolitics can explain many aspects of this war, there are some elements that go beyond it. In fact, the Russo-Ukrainian War has brought into sharp focus the complex interplay between Slavic culture, tradition, and westernization, highlighting its role in global disputes. This conflict, while rooted in recent geopolitical developments, is deeply intertwined with historical, cultural, and ideological narratives that span centuries.

Russian-Ukrainian relations and their shared values

Historically, Ukraine's relationship with Russia has been fraught, marked by periods of control and alliance since the 18th century. Focusing on the period following World War II, it is important to note that Ukraine was one the fifteen Republics that made up the USSR. Ukraine remained part of the Union until August 24, 1991 when the Ukrainian government declared its independence.

Like some other former Soviet Republics, for example the Baltic States, Ukraine decided to get closer to the West, the winner of the Cold War. But if Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia entered the European Union and the North Atlantic Alliance, Ukraine was left out.

Particularly important was the NATO enlargement towards the East. Its borders went closer to Russia's national borders, creating the idea among Russians that NATO was a hostile entity. The potential alignment of Ukraine with Western institutions like the EU and NATO were and are seen as direct challenges to Russian influence in the region. This perspective underpins much of the current conflict, where the traditional Russian method of conflict resolution involves relentless brutality and suppression of resistance​​.

The particular and historic relations among these two states generated the idea that Russia and Ukraine belong to the same people and share the same values. This vision is supported by Putin himself. In fact, in his February 21, 2022 speech, he declared that “Ukraine is not just a neighboring country for us. It is an inalienable part of our own history, culture, and spiritual space. These are our comrades, those dearest to us - not only colleagues, friends, and people who once served together, but also relatives, people bound by blood, by family ties” (Putin 2022). In his mind, the two countries are divided by artificially made boundaries that separate blood ties. In this view, the war is a way to reunite what has been divided since 1991, when Ukraine gained its independence from the USSR.

According to some analysis, it is true that the values of Ukrainians tend to lean towards Slavic-Orthodox values. However, is it also true that there is an essential generational difference: whilst old people share values with Russians, the younger generations seem to be more outspoken towards EU values like democracy, freedom of expression, and no discrimination. An example of this internal and generational contrast can be seen in the 2014 Maidan Revolution. The protests started after the decision of the Ukrainian pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovich not to sign the association agreement with the European Union, distancing the country from the EU and tying it to Russia. This decision was not supported by Ukrainians whose majority preferred to join the Partnership Programme and decided to take to the streets to demonstrate their disapproval. The Revolution of Dignity toppled Yanukovych, who fled to Russia.



Religion

Religion, too, plays a significant role in this landscape. The war has not only caused a physical divide but also a spiritual one, particularly within the Orthodox Christian community. The conflict has led to a questioning of allegiances within the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, with a noticeable silence from the clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate on the invasion. This has implications for the religious landscape in Ukraine and possibly for Orthodox Christianity globally​​.

In fact, in both Russia and Ukraine the majority is Orthodox Christians, while other religions are less practiced. However, in Ukraine an important share of the population belongs to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, and there are also significant groups of Jews and Muslims.

Since 1991, some voices are advocating for an independent Orthodox Church in Ukraine. After the Maidan revolution, Patriarch Filaret of Kiev tried to grant Ukraine autocephaly, but that was denied, leading to the excommunication of Filaret. In 2018 Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I approved the request for autocephaly and an independent Orthodox Church of Ukraine was established.

Even so, the Moscow Patriarchate is still the most common affiliation of Orthodox people in Ukraine. And the Russian government has used this for maintaining power and influence in the country.

The 2022 invasion has changed and undermined the position of the Moscow Patriarchate since many priests decided to fly the Ukrainian flag and condemned Russia’s violence.


Identity

Culturally, the war has had a profound impact on Ukrainian society.

The sense of national identity has been a driving force in resisting the Russian invasion.

This identity is reflected in various aspects of culture, from music, as seen in Ukraine's victory in the Eurovision Song Contest, to the arts and literature, where themes of war and resistance are prominent. The conflict has also led to a surge in global interest in Ukrainian culture and language, highlighting the resilience and richness of Ukrainian heritage despite the devastation of war​​.

The war has challenged prevailing views in Western academia, particularly in the field of Slavic and Eurasian studies. The dominant narrative, often Moscow-centric, has historically underestimated the distinctiveness of Ukrainian identity and culture. This has led to a skewed understanding of the region, as seen in the underrepresentation of non-Russian Slavic languages and histories in academic curricula and the misjudgment of Ukraine's national resilience​​.


Conclusion

In conclusion, the Russo-Ukrainian War is not just a territorial dispute with which the Russian Federation wants to recreate its sphere of influence. It is a complex clash of histories, cultures, and ideologies. It underscores the ongoing struggle of Slavic nations like Ukraine in defining their identity amidst the pull between traditional ties and the lure of Westernization. Russia and Ukraine have a common and long history, characterized by both positive and negative relations, have the same faith and believe in the same values. Yet, a large part of Ukranians, born in an independent Ukraine, are getting away from those ideas and getting closer to European ones. They want to be part of the EU and live in a freer and more democratic society. This is not only a generational dispute but also a component of the current military conflict. The war, therefore, is a critical juncture in the narrative of Slavic culture and its place in global affairs.



Classification of sources and information:

1

Confirmed

Confirmed by other independent sources; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic

2

Presumably true

Not confirmed; logical in itself; coherent with other information on the topic

3

Maybe true

Not confirmed; reasonably logical in itself; coherent with some other information on the topic

4

Uncertain

Not confirmed; possible but not logical in itself; no other information on the topic

5

Improbable

Not confirmed; not logical in itself; contradicts with other information on the topic

6

Not able to be evaluated

No basis to evaluate the validity of the information




Trustworthiness of the source

A

Trustworthy

No doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence; has a history of total trustworthiness

B

Normally trustworthy

Small doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence, nevertheless has a history of valid information in a majority of cases

C

Sufficiently trustworthy

Doubts about authenticity, reliability or competence; however, has supplied valid information in the past

D

Normally not trustworthy

Significant doubt about authenticity, reliability or competence, however has supplied valid information in the past

E

Not trustworthy

Lack of authenticity, reliability or competence; history of invalid information

F

Not able to be evaluated

No basis to evaluate the validity of the information

Sources:



Riproduzione Riservata ®

Condividi il post