 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Russian Ties
Ukraine’s most controversial cultural tension concerns its affiliation with Russia, stemming from its Soviet past. For almost 70 years, Ukraine was a Soviet Union member-state, and the effects can still be seen in Ukrainian culture today. Efforts have grown increasingly strong to move away from its larger neighbor. This is not a cohesive decision, however. The western and northern parts of the country are developing a stronger sense of nationalism. Meanwhile, a large portion of the eastern and southern regions in Ukraine maintains pro-Russian sentiment.
Perhaps the most unique feature of Ukraine’s current media environment is the fact that it is bilingual, featuring publications and broadcasts in both Russian and Ukrainian across the country. Ukrainian is the national language, but the public, politicians, and media continue to use Russian in many instances. Again, the western and eastern halves of the nation remain highly divided. A 2001 census reported that 91.6% of Ukrainians in western regions use Ukrainian for everyday communication. This number steadily decreases as one moves west; in Southeast Ukraine only 13% of the people use Ukrainian (2).
Although there is an obvious discrepancy, Ukrainian TV, film, and print media tend to present an idealistic notion of peaceful coexistence between the two languages. On Inter, Ukraine’s most popular TV channel, the sitcom Wake up, Ukraine! features two newlyweds, one of whom speaks Ukrainian, the other Russian. Magazine publications such as Your Baby, published in Kiev, contain content in both Ukrainian and Russian. As author Alla Nedashikivska writes, the forced coexistence “downplays the actual rivalry between the two languages" (2).
Politicians also recognize this regional divide, although their opinions differ on the matter. During his presidency, Viktor Yushchenko was an active promoter of the Ukrainian language. Fittingly, he garnered support primarily from the North and West. Current president Viktor Yanukovych, on the other hand, is more ambivalent towards Russian. In 2006 he ran with the slogan “2 languages, one nation.” As one can see, his support came from the South and East (10).
Ukrainian citizen and resident Lena commented upon language use near her home in Cherkassy, in the center of the country. She said that she and most of her friends speak Russian, and confirmed the regional stratification of languages.
“There are some contradictions between people,” Lena said, “but usually between radical Russian speaking [people], who don’t want to speak Ukrainian and Ukrainian Nationalist[s] who [are] against everything that [is] connected to Russia.”
Ukraine’s affiliation with Russia has also created a difference in the way the nation remembers its own history, a division reflected by the media. As a member of the Soviet Union, Ukraine received its historical narrative primarily through a Soviet filter. Thanks to a newly emerged nationalist version of Ukraine’s history, there is what author Volodomyr Kulyk calls a “diversity of memory" (4). Two competing narratives of the past have taken hold in Ukraine. In the western provinces, many people view Ukraine’s membership in the USSR as one of foreign occupation, which Kulyk calls the nationalist narrative. The eastern half of the country, which contains a larger concentration of people of Russian descent, holds to the traditional Soviet narrative, which presents the Ukraine people happily united with Russia.
 |
| The interpretation of the Ukrainian rebel army, UPA, is one of the ways the nation's historical narrative is divided by Russian ties. |
The media reflect the differences of region in order to appeal to their desired audiences. Kulyk looks specifically at three tabloid newspapers across the country. The western publication, HPU, promotes the nationalist narrative, but as Kulyk looks east he sees see increasing elements of the Soviet narrative, in the publications GPK and Segodnia. The differences in philosophy are reflected in three main areas of coverage: periods of history, country/region, and representation of WWII.
Author David Marples provides one key example of the two ways the sides can clas: in the interpretation of the Ukraine Insurgent Army, UPA. The UPA was a group of Ukrainians that fought against Soviet occupation. The Soviet Union, of course, depicted the army as a treasonous, violent group of rebels, a view that still holds influence in the East. Conversely, the nationalist narrative in the West portrays the UPA’s action as a heroic liberation struggle.
Marples and Kulyk both point out that even high-ranking politicians hold firm beliefs about Ukraine’s history. Marples claims that Viktor Yushchenko subscribed to idea of the UPA as heroes, adopting a changed interpretation of the past. The current President, Viktor Yanukovych, is opposed the veneration of the rebels, siding with the Soviet narrative.
Even Ukraine’s media can be found taking sides. The TV channel 1+1 was founded with a strong Western and European vision. It is currently Ukraine’s second most popular channel, and reaches 98.7% of the county’s inhabitants. Conversely, the channel INTER looks to Russian investment partners. It is Ukraine’s most popular channel, reaching an estimated 99.4% of urban audiences (10).
These types of clash have been problematic for Ukraine, as they inhibit the formation of a cohesive national identity. Without a common language, historical identity, or cultural affiliation, Ukrainians find it exceedingly difficult to find common ground.