Global responses to efforts by Russia to label Ukrainians as Nazis have ranged from polite disbelief to cynical laughter over yet another clumsy propagandist attempt to justify its need to invade Ukraine. The label has served as a way of dehumanizing a people for daring to oppose what Putin believes to be Russia’s destiny. This opposition is, in reality, an expression of nationalism, an ideology that emphasizes loyalty, devotion or allegiance to a nation according to Britannica. Ukrainian resistance to Russian oppression has existed since the time of the Russian Empire dating back to the 18th and 19th centuries but, in the present day, it is convenient for Putin’s regime to conflate Ukraine’s sense of nationhood with fascist ideology.
It is fair to say that most if not all nations have had and may continue to have factions with far-right ultranationalist labels. This was certainly true in Ukraine prior to and during the Stalinist period when Ukraine was subjected to a genocide in the 1930s brought about by a forced agricultural policy that produced starvation on a scale never witnessed previously in a land so fertile. An anti-Russian partisan movement materialized in the 1920s and 30s under both ultranationalist and more moderate leadership that challenged Russian authority using guerilla tactics, largely in the countryside. The roots of such a partisan effort had its origins in notions of nationalism that date back to the 16th and 17th centuries. The current conflict in Ukraine, however, has more to do with what occurred in the 20th century and so we start there first.
Russia’s alliance with Nazi Germany at the outbreak of World War II (WWII), its atrocities in nearby Poland and Ukraine committed soon afterward, and the Nazi invasion of both Ukraine and Russia in 1941 threw the entire region into chaos. Different factions of Ukrainians now were fighting Nazis alongside Russians and fighting Russians alongside Nazis, all with the intent of ridding the country of both intruders. A partial resolution came about with the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945, allowing resumption of underground activity into the 1950s once more solely directed against Russia. Much of this activity was subdued by the time of Stalin’s death in 1953. Throughout the remaining existence of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.) until 1991, a Ukrainian nationalist sentiment continued both within the country and abroad among the Ukrainian diaspora following the war. A pro-Russian element, however, also persisted particularly within the eastern region of Ukraine where Russian settlement was more apparent. This has led to challenges for Ukraine as it emerged as a sovereign entity in 1991 upon the dissolution of the U.S.S.R.
In 2013, the pro-Russian president of Ukraine, Victor Yanukovych, broke with his electoral promise to join the European Union. The subsequent Euromaidan Protest resulted in the ouster of Yanukovych and his flight to Russia. New elections brought first Petro Poroshenko to power for five years followed by Volodymyr Zelensky. The Russian invasion of Crimea came shortly after the fall of the Yanukovych government. A referendum of questionable value led to Crimea’s illegitimate annexation by Russia in 2014. The militarization of a pro-Russian separatist movement in eastern Ukraine was underway soon afterward and it became clear that Ukraine had to stand its ground or forfeit a substantial landmass to an undeserving nation. Anti-Russian activism materialized in a variety of ways and included the formation of paramilitary organizations to fight alongside the Ukrainian military.
The Azov Regiment initially emerged as one of these organizations. Vladimir Putin’s propaganda machine has focused upon it as a neo-Nazi entity. The regiment was founded by ultranationalists as a volunteer militia group in 2014 specifically to fight pro-Russian separatists in the Donbas region and was based in Mariupol. It was integrated within the Ukrainian National Guard by late 2014 where it came under a more comprehensive command structure. This prompted the removal of far-right nationalist elements from within its ranks, allowing its assimilation as an effective fighting unit within the military. Any political affiliations with right-wing factions were left far behind. Its ranks came to be composed of not only Ukrainians but of Jews, Russians and Crimean Tatars who have been required to abide by the National Guard’s Disciplinary Statute to “respect human rights, honor and dignity.” The regiment’s well-publicized battle with Russian forces in Mariupol ended with a protracted last stand at the Azovstal Iron and Steel Works where it was forced to surrender in May 2022 upon orders from its central command. Recruitment to the regiment has remained very popular because of the respect it has gained in the process.
The same activism that originally expressed itself militarily had already done so politically. A professed far-right nationalist movement, the Social-National Party of Ukraine (S.N.P.U.), arose between 1999 and 2004. The S.N.P.U. changed its name to Svoboda (“Freedom”) in 2004 and took on a less strident tone to attract a broader base of the electorate. A breakaway faction of the S.N.P.U., the “Patriot of Ukraine,” did maintain its original stance as a “vanguard” of a nationalist movement. Its mission remains to support active resistance toward Russian interference in the affairs of Ukraine. In 2011, far-right activists were arrested for planning to blow-up a statue of Vladimir Lenin in the Kyiv oblast city of Boryspil. During the Euromaidan Protest which began in late 2013, militants from within the Patriot of Ukraine along with other nationalist parties confronted riot police and attacked the pro-Russian Party of Regions headquarters in Kyiv. Current generations of Ukrainians have become more acutely aware of Russian intentions of forcing them in a direction they are averse to by meddling in their nation’s political, economic, and cultural institutions. Resistance to this has become entrenched. But this is not a new thing.
The desire for independence and self-determination within that part of the territory of present-day Ukraine controlled by the Cossack Hetmanate has existed since the 16th and 17th centuries. At the time, much of Ukraine as we know it today lay within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and, specifically, under the control of land-holding Polish nobility. A series of three partitions of Poland by the dominant surrounding powers of Prussia, Austria, and Russia between 1772 and 1795 resulted in the ceding of much of central and eastern Ukraine to Russia. In the same manner, the western Ukrainian-speaking territories of Galicia and Bukovina would join Transcarpathia in the Austro-Hungarian Empire where all three would remain for 125 years until its collapse following World War I (WWI). Crimea, which had been part of the Ottoman Empire, had been assimilated within the Russian Empire in 1783.
The Russian Orthodox Church was imposed as the dominant faith in Ukraine, and it quickly became the means by which Russification policies were instituted to undermine the Ukrainian language and culture. A Ukrainian national revival, however, emerged despite this through the growth of literature stimulated by such talents as Taras Shevchenko (1814-1861) who influenced Ukrainian political thought for several generations beyond his time. His poetry stood as an indictment of the social oppression witnessed in Ukraine at the time and reminded Ukrainians of their Cossack heritage and the egalitarian principles that resided in its warrior society. Russian reaction to this movement led to the banning of publications in Ukrainian, as well as theater productions. Restrictions in education were imposed that led to a high rate of illiteracy among Ukrainians. Russian historians provided the tsarist regime with a storyline that adopted what had belonged to the much older dominant Kyivan Rus period of Ukraine into a narrative that saw Russia’s own ascendency from a time dating several centuries into the past. By this means, Russia glorified its own past while relegating Ukrainians to the status of “Little Russians,” more-or-less as bystanders in the grand scheme of global affairs.
Clandestine literary societies (“hromadas”) emerged in several cities promoting political, cultural, and educational endeavors that emphasized a nationalist agenda for Ukraine during the latter half of the 19th century. The Revolutionary Ukrainian Party emerged around the turn of the century and called for a single independent Ukraine. The 1905 Russian Revolution transformed the tsarist autocracy into a quasi-constitutional monarchy that provided some latitude for Ukrainian-language publications, theater productions and scholarship that reinvigorated the sense of nationalism. Political action, however, failed to bring about substantial change in the years preceding and during WWI (1914-1918). The 1917 Russian Revolution saw the toppling of the tsarist regime altogether followed by a protracted civil war that involved the entirety of the Russian Empire. At its end, the Bolsheviks introduced an even more brutal suppression of nationalist aspirations that would last several decades.
By contrast, that part of western Ukraine that became part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire experienced much greater opportunity for national recognition. This was particularly the case in the predominantly Ukrainian territories of Galicia and Bukovina. Social and governmental reforms allowed greater freedom for peasants with opportunities for advancement, in both rural and urban environments. Educational reforms introduced Ukrainian language instruction in parochial schools. Greater religious tolerance provided for the practice of Roman Catholicism among Ukrainians. A Ukrainian professional class arose and this mixed with writers escaping the oppression of the Russian Empire in the east. By the mid-19th century, a political effort sprung up that advocated for the union of Ukrainian-speaking Galicia with Bukovina and Transcarpathia. A national guard unit was created, and the first Ukrainian-language newspaper was published. Numerous associations arose that advanced Ukrainian literature along with notable writers of the likes of Ivan Franko (1856-1916) and Lesya Ukrainka (1871-1913). Women’s and youth organizations contributed to the dialogue advancing both social and political aims that furthered a nationalist sentiment.
At the outbreak of WWI, Ukrainian cultural organizations were shuttered and national figures arrested with some exiled within the Russian Empire. When Russian troops occupied Galicia, the Ukrainian language was prohibited and institutions closed. This Russification effort was reversed when the territory was taken back by the Austrians. A provisional government in Russia was established following the 1917 Russian Revolution which allowed for a brief period of national revival in Ukraine that included the reintroduction of a press and cultural associations. An All-Ukrainian National Congress was convened. It provided the recently formed Central Rada (“Council”) with national authority and elected Mykhailo Hrushevsky as its head. Complete territorial autonomy for Ukraine was sought. Not unexpectedly, relations with Russia deteriorated when the Central Rada refused to accept the authority of Russia’s Provisional Government over Ukraine and went on to proclaim a Ukrainian National Republic (U.N.R.) with total independence set for January 22, 1918. At this stage, WWI had not yet ended and the Central Rada began separate peace negotiations with Germany and Austro-Hungary that led to the signing of the Peace Treaty of Brest-Litovsk on February 9. Russian forces retreated from Ukraine by April when a new German-Austrian offensive was initiated.
Before the surrender of the Central Powers, a separate Western Ukrainian National Republic (W.U.N.R.) that included Galicia, northern Bukovina and Transcarpathia was declared in October 1918 but led to a territorial dispute and conflict with the Poles. A subsequent act of union of the two Ukrainian states proved difficult when the Poles overtook Galicia forcing the leadership of the W.U.N.R. into exile. Soon afterward, in Kyiv, the U.N.R. was restored in December 1918 following a German-supported coup which had taken place in April of that year. The newly formed U.N.R., however, failed to secure control over its territory amidst the chaos of the Russian civil war. Both Red and White Russian forces were engaged in conflict on Ukrainian territory. Added to these, were U.N.R. forces and partisan groups assembled separately among the peasantry and whose allegiances were divided in support of either the Red or White forces or for U.N.R. itself.
The U.N.R. forces themselves were confronted by Poles in the west, the Reds in the north and the Whites in the south. To meet the challenge, they turned to guerrilla warfare much like their peasant compatriots and negotiations were begun with the Polish government of Jozef Pilsudski. A Polish-Ukrainian alliance was achieved in April 1920 but was supplanted by a subsequent agreement between Poland and Soviet Russia in March 1921 that recognized only a Soviet Ukraine and allowed Poland to retain Galicia and western Volhynia. The brief sovereignty of the U.N.R. (1918-1921) now came to an end. Its head, Symon Petlyura, sought refuge in Poland where he was protected from extradition demanded by Soviet Russia. He made his way to Paris by 1924 where he established a Ukrainian language newspaper but was ultimately assassinated in 1926 by the Russian secret service, The People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs or, in its Russian translation, the N.K.V.D.
The Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic was first declared by the Bolsheviks in December 1917 to counter rising Ukrainian nationalism. This created a parallel governmental entity that would challenge the U.N.R. as the presiding authority in Ukraine with the civil war still very much in play. The latter finally ended in 1922 with the proclamation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (U.S.S.R.) consisting of Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and the Transcaucasian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic (S.F.S.R.). In so doing, the governance of Soviet Ukraine and the other republics was restricted to domestic affairs whereas authority over the military, commerce, transportation and foreign relations was ceded to Moscow; in effect, to Soviet Russia and the Communist Party. The individual right to secede from the U.S.S.R. proved a fallacy. Ironically, at its inception, the Communist Party of Ukraine was only 7% Ukrainian by ethnicity, the majority comprised of Russian Bolsheviks largely from within the eastern regions. Overall, with a population that was 80% Ukrainian, there was very limited support indeed for Bolshevism.
In an attempt to further quell nationalist sentiment among non-Russian ethnicities, Soviet authorities now began to introduce programs that supported national cultural identity. Ukrainian-language schools reappeared, and literary publications reemerged. The movement gave voice for some to promote closer relations with Europe. This process of Ukrainianization raised some alarm within Soviet leadership at a time when Stalin emerged its dominant figure as General Secretary of the Communist Party, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union, eventually to become dictator in the 1930s. A profound reversal of the progress that had been made toward national self-identity now occurred and was replaced by a program that would undo it entirely. A five-year economic plan was instituted in 1928 that collectivized farmland, eliminated private land ownership and enforced requisitioning of grain to feed Russian cities. By 1931-33, the program resulted in the death of millions of Ukrainians. This tragedy would soon be followed by Stalin’s Great Terror that resulted in the murders or exile of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian professional, religious, military and academic figures during the late 1930s preceding the outbreak of WWII.
The struggle for national identity had existed now for the better part of 250 years and the idea has managed to survive despite the oppression imposed upon it by the Russian Empire. It was allowed to express itself to a large measure in western Ukraine within the Austro-Hungarian Empire, enough to provide it a sufficient presence to face the horror that was to come to pass in the first half of the 20th century and then continue throughout the remaining Soviet era. Alongside it has been an innate capacity within the nation’s citizenry, historically, its predominant peasantry, to carry the standard of nationhood on its own, if necessary, to resist oppression by armed rebellion or through the establishment of a relentless underground partisan network.
So, it is in the present day. Guerilla warfare is well-ingrained in the nation’s psyche such that the response to aggression is spontaneous and immediate. Support of Ukrainian nationalism in this current conflict with Russia has assumed many forms but has not included neo-Nazism of the sort that Russia has manifested within its own ranks and its society. Ukrainian partisans now operate within Russian-controlled areas of Ukraine striking military bases in Crimea and in the Donbas; identifying Russian targets for artillery and rocket attacks; disrupting railways; and assassinating military and government operatives. Training of new civilian recruits by the Ukrainian military and paramilitary groups has been in operation throughout the time of the eight-year war with Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine. It continues and will remain as long as Russia continues its war of aggression, reminding the occupiers that they cannot sleep safely on this land.
Copyright @Kost Elisevich, MD, PhD 2023. All rights reserved. Any illegal reproduction of this content will result in immediate legal action.
