Victor Yanukovych's Party of the Regions is pushing for a referendum on granting Russian official status as a national language, in addition to Ukrainian.
Taras of Ukrainiana points out the irrelevance of such an initiative by citing the 2001 census data:
[…] Nationwide, some 77.8 percent identified themselves as Ukrainians, while only 67.5 consider Ukrainian their native language.
Question: Which of the two languages needs protection?
In the comments section, Taras writes more on the language issue:
[…] If [Yanukovych] wants two languages, he should help his fellow Donbasians learn Ukrainian. He should also work with the Kremlin — not for the Kremlin — to do more for Russia’s 3-million Ukrainian community.
Instead, he and his Party of Regions thrive on the antagonisms and fault lines left by the Soviet policy of Russification.
[…]
As a Kyivite, I speak Ukrainian and Russian equally well. Never in my whole life have experienced any anxiety or constraints while speaking Russian either in public or in private. But I do remember those dirty looks that some people gave me when I spoke my native language in public at the dawn of Ukraine’s independence.
I have no aversion to any language. But I do have aversion to people who want Ukraine to be a colony of the Russian Empire, and are fishing for an excuse not learn Ukrainian, a non-language to them. […] Of course, not all people who speak Russian are unpatriotic. Kyiv, still largely a Russian-speaking city, voted Yushchenko 78 percent in the third round of the 2004 presidential election. […]
Further on, in a comment to Taras' post, Peteris Cedrins of Marginalia offers the Latvian approach to dealing with the language issue as an example and concludes:
[…] Learning another language is addition, not subtraction — protecting our national languages is about reducing asymmetrical bilingualism, not obliterating Russian.
Journalist Oleksandr Paskhover, who has recently interviewed Yanukovych for Korrespondent magazine, also writes (RUS) about Yanukovych's referendum initiative on his Korrespondent.net blog:
During the interview for Korrespondent […], Victor Yanukovych asked me more questions than I did. So I didn't really understand [who was interviewing who]. I asked him a question about why the election campaign had turned into mutual vilification, and he asked this in response: “Have you heard me insulting anyone, ever?” I asked him a question about the status of Russian as a national language. He asked me: “What's bad about granting the Russian language the official status?”
And I support this! But I approach the issue from a different direction. If the Russian language in Ukraine were given the status of a foreign language, it would've gained so much more from it than from the status of the second national language. Beginning this year, at the gymnasium that my son and daughter attend, they've reduced the number of Russian lessons. The space freed up by this is filled with French, in addition to English and German. I have nothing against the language of Dumas, Zidane and Le Pen, but I think that good Russian will be of more use to my children than half-literate French. The school authorities explained to us that since Russian isn't a foreign language, the ministry of education has cut the hours allotted to its study, in favor of a foreign language. Dear ministers, please return the status of a foreign language to Russian, and let my children study it along with English and German - five times a week.
The discussion of this post has been going on for over a week now; at some point, it has evolved into a brawl, and there's also a lengthy lecture on linguicide, posted in installments by one reader. Here's a translation of just a handful of them (UKR, RUS):
Ihor_Dudnyk:
I wonder if Victor Fedorovych [Yanukovych] has ever heard of Belgium, where there are several national languages, and the country is on the verge of splitting, and the language issue is one of the key reasons for this split.
Introducing a second national language in Ukraine - Russian - will place the country on the verge of a split (Belgium is an example) and will destroy the Ukrainian language (Belarus, where they've almost destroyed the Belarusian language, is an example).
Sasha, you should've advised Victor Fedorovych to learn more about the language situation in these countries, and perhaps then he wouldn't be asking questions like this.
Leading:
Ihor_Dudnyk, I think that the problem of Russian or any other language does not exist in Ukraine. This pseudo-problem is dragged out of the closet every time there is an election, dusted off and solemnly brought out in front of the roaring crowd. And after the election, it's put back into the closet, into the very same corner of it. […]
Petro-syanko:
[…] The language issue is impossible to resolve, because it requires 300 votes in favor of the changes in the Constitution. Of course, [the Party of the Regions] can bribe the deputies whose votes it's missing, but this money would be spent in vain and won't bring any dividends. What will be left for them to be screaming about at the next election […]?
Chif:
The problem of the Russian language is inflated as an air balloon and is exaggerated […]. There are folks from every corner of our motherland at our university. A good example: there are bestest friends in my group, from Lviv, Bila Tserkva and Sevastopol. And the language poses no problem to their friendship… [Javier] Solana has said it best today: Ukraine's got more significant problems than a referendum on the Russian language.
svs02:
It's just that no one has ever thought of … how much the second national language would cost. […] All laws, documents, etc. would have to be accessible in two languages, and so on. That is, I, as a citizen, have the right to come to any institution and interact (including through documentation) in either of the national languages, right? And no bureaucrat from Donetsk would be able to allow himself NOT to speak to me in Ukrainian, and, vice versa, in Ivano-Frankivsk, they wouldn't be able NOT to interact in Russian. Or am I misunderstanding the concept of the national language???
And street signs on the buildings… they probably have to be on both languages, nicht??? [sic]
Petro-syanko:
“And street signs on the buildings… they probably have to be on both languages, nicht???”
Oh, [it'd be great if they were there at all], even in one language, even in the unofficial one :-)
Gm:
I'm addressing supporters of the second national language here:
You say that you are “for” the Russian language.
This ain't so.
In fact, you're “against” the Ukrainian language.Nothing is threatening Russian in Ukraine. Besides, it's got its own base - the Russian Federation, where it will continue to develop.
But Ukrainian has nowhere to retreat.
Ukraine is its base.And this is why your position is amoral.
Gm:
I walked into EuroStar bookstore in Kyiv yesterday and eavesdropped on a conversation between a [male customer] and the young salesperson. The conversation was in Ukrainian - the man was asking if there was any science fiction in Ukrainian, and the salesman was politely saying that there was nothing - all books were published by Russian publishers and were available only in Russian. The man left empty-handed.
I asked the guy how many books in Ukrainian did the bookstore had overall - he said there were approximately 60-65 titles, and the rest - some 4,000-4,500 items - were in Russian. And then he added quietly that there have been no additions in the past month.
I asked him whether this was the company's acquisition policy. He said it looked like it was, and, in his opinion, this was being done deliberately, because there is a demand for Ukrainian-language books, even though they are more expensive than those published by Russian publishers.
Send this by E-mail
There is no reason why Ifrance could not and should not adopt two or more official languages. I speak english not Gaelic, shakespearean or the language of Jane Eyre. Language is for ever changing. More and more English words are entering both the Russian and Ukrainian vocabulary. May words are Latin or French. Over the centuries every nation has added to the Ukraine’s linguistic.
Canada, Switzerland and Finland all have multiple official languages.
No one is trying to stop Ukrainian being spoken or taught at schools. But language is more and more being used as a “Nationalistic political tool”.
IN Ukraine there are many linguistics groups. Russian, Polish, Hungarian, Romanian, Tarar, Swedish, German, Hutzal. True Ukrainian is only spoken in Poltava the Ukrainian in the west is a bastardization of Ukrainian.
Time to move on. The sooner Ukraine adopts a multiple language policy the sooner it can address the real political issues that divide this new nation. Its strength is in history and its diversity. Like it or not Russian is very much part of Ukrainian Culture.
This will be Ukraine’s second such referendum on the question of official language.
If a referendum is held then all sides should respect the outcome of the referendum.
With language comes culture. It will depend on who wants the culture. Do the Ukrainians want Russian culture or do they want Ukrainian culture? I understand that there are centuries of the two countries joined at the hip. Was this by free will or by the force or arms?
I’ve never been to Ukraine, it’s a universal question for all nations.
Ukraine Today,
How far have you progressed in implementing your policy in your home country?
Would you support this policy in Russia?
“True Ukrainian is only spoken in Poltava the Ukrainian in the west is a bastardization of Ukrainian.” I know some western Ukrainian who would very much resent the notion that they speak a bastardized form of Ukrainian.
Yet, at the same time there is a sort of language that mixes both Ukrainian and Russian that is spoken throughout Ukraine.
Not all western Ukrainians are so much against having a 2 national languages. What difference does it make if both languages are treated equally, they ask. In fact, I don’t remember anyone telling me that Ukrainian should be the only official language.
Yes, the real political issue is when will the political establishment in Ukraine start doing something for the people, the working classes, the small business persons and all the others, instead of worrying about their financial interests. The introduction of large business interests from the West is certainly not helping small businesses here. Imagine trying to run a business when a large German-owned “super-mart” plants itself next door. Comparable to a Wal-Mart opening up in a small town in the USA?
A question for those who have studied the history of the language. I am wondering how it has been determined that Ukrainian is spoken only in Poltava. How does the language spoken there differ from that spoken in Lviv for instance, or from any other oblast that primarily speaks Ukrainian? Serious questions. Please instruct this friend of Ukraine. Thanks, David Cottrell
Surzhyk is the hybrid Russo-Ukrainian dialect. The West Ukrainian dialect has German and Polish influences.
The above referenced Global Voices promoted blog post is overly one sided and doesn’t reflect the views of many of Ukraine’s citizenry, be they Russian or Ukrainian.
Canada is an officially bilingual country with Switzerland having three official language. Bias against the Russian language is a reality.
Discrimination against the Russia language has been evident.
Ukraine’s First Lady and the Ugly History of the Captive Nations Committee
http://www.russiablog.org/2006/04/yuschenkos_wife_and_the_ugly_h.php
There’ve also been attempts to propagandistically downplay the close ties between Russia and much of Ukraine.
Galicia and the Russian-Ukrainian Relationship
http://cc.msnscache.com/cache.aspx?q=8338088814982&mkt=en-US&lang=en-US&FORM=CVRE8
Canada is an officially bilingual country, yes — but the only province that’s officially bilingual is New Brunswick. The official language in Québec is French, which has used what Dominique Arel called “a barrage of legislation” to “reverse assimilatory trends.”
Switzerland, which hasn’t been a victim of imperialism for centuries, is a special case that is not particularly comparable to other multinational states. Belgium is deeply divided linguistically, to the point of possible disappearance. In Catalonia, within Spain, public education is almost entirely in Catalan.
I doubt that Ukraine can be stable unless it tackles asymmetrical bilingualism, as the Baltic states have done.
Thank you, Michael Averko.
Michael,
Where do you come from?
How many languages do you speak as fluently as you speak your native language?
How many official languages do you have in your home country?
Would you prescribe a multilingual policy to Russia?
Ann:
You’re quite welcome.
Taras:
I’m from America and I’ve many contacts throughout the former USSR.
How about Switzerland having three official languages and Canada two?
You didn’t address those points.
I know enough about Ukraine to know that a good number of its citizenry share my views.
Taras:
Let me add, that the instances of Switzerland, Canada and Kazakhstan prove that officially multi-lingual nations exist without any related problems.
Not all nations are the same. One can find different histories and different levels of linguistic diversity.
Regarding this subject with Ukraine: below is a link which replies to a recent Global Voices promoted blog post by Paul Goble:
http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@598.iTrcdTk5Vin@.77480649/8151
Excerpted from Peteris:
“Switzerland, which hasn’t been a victim of imperialism for centuries, is a special case that is not particularly comparable to other multinational states. Belgium is deeply divided linguistically, to the point of possible disappearance. In Catalonia, within Spain, public education is almost entirely in Catalan.
I doubt that Ukraine can be stable unless it tackles asymmetrical bilingualism, as the Baltic states have done.”
****
Peteris & Co:
Many Ukrainians don’t see Russia as an imperialist presence in their land and some of Latvia’s present day policies are nothing to laud and emulate.
Some related views on this:
http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=8576&IBLOCK_ID=35&phrase_id=1445
Thank you, Michael. No further questions:)
Justice Taras has excused me (at least for now).
Mike Averko wrote, among other things:
“Not all nations are the same. One can find different histories and different levels of linguistic diversity.”
That’s what I meant to suggest by dilating a tiny bit upon a few situations. That’s also why it is really not instructive to draw up a superficial list of officially bilingual or multilingual countries. As you say, the levels differ — so does most everything else, from the political system (e.g., federative, unitary, centralized, democratic, etc. ..and the degrees of these) to the demographics, the language and education policies, what a status entails, to the languages themselves — Irish is one of two official languages in the Republic of Ireland, for example, but it is endangered; English, not indigenous, dominates.
Belarusian and Russian are official in Lukashenko’s dictatorship — but, as Alexandra Goujon notes in one of her insightful studies: “The Belarusian language is rarely used in everyday inter-personal communication, schooling and the news media; Russian
dominates all these areas.”
I am quite accustomed to critics of Latvia’s language policies bringing up Canada, Belgium, and Finland as examples of why Russian should be an official language here. One can find points of comparison between most things, but but for such comparisons to be useful — they shouldn’t be superficial. The Swedish language, for example, does not threaten Finnish; it’s the mother tongue of less than 6% of the population. Switzerland bears no comparison to Ukraine or Latvia whatsoever. Belgium is coming apart at the seams.
A comparison to Canada is more instructive in many respects, but I see more comparisons between Québec and Ukraine than I do between Ukraine and Canada as a whole — there are, of course, profound differences, too. Canada was never totalitarian, as the USSR was, and British rule in Canada, however ugly at times, does not compare in hideousness to Russian imperialism. The demographics are very different — native Anglophones are less than 8% of the population.
Unlike Ukraine, Québec is not a sovereign country. The Québécois do form a nation, however, as even the Canadian Parliament has finally recognized — a nation within a united, federal Canada. Ukraine is an independent nation-state. It is not within a federation of other nations (sorry, the CIS is not a federation!), and the Russophones in Ukraine are Ukrainian nationals.
Mike Averko writes that “officially multi-lingual nations exist without any related problems” — this would depend upon what one means by “problems,” but I’d hardly look to Canada as an example of a lack of problems on the language front. Being hyper-democratic with a long tradition of a civil society, Canada has sought solutions to those problems — there are concepts like “the two solitudes” and “the Quiet Revolution” that might give one an idea of just how problematic the language question has been. Loi 101 was passed a full three decades ago — some aspects are at least as stringent as the language laws in the Baltic states.
French is a major language and not native to Canada. Ukrainian has only a single home that can be made comfortable, and that is Ukraine. Between 1971 and 1996, the percentage of Anglophones knowing French rose from 37% to 63%. That’s a profound shift — one that I suspect many if not most native speakers of Ukrainian would like to see.
I don’t plan to address the article by an American Gonzo expat in Moscow, a publisher of Limonov, recommending arson. It’s off topic and doesn’t contribute to serious debate. I’m well aware of the fact that many Ukrainians share Mike Averko’s views, and I’m not suggesting that there’s only one view. I do think that discussions of language in the former Russian/Soviet empire should address important questions like asymmetrical bilingualism, the language of prestige, coercive assimilation, Russification, etc. Otherwise it’s just blowing smoke. I think Ukrainian is a lot healthier than Belarusian, and I hope it becomes yet more robust. There are different ways to accomplish that.
Greetings from Belgium, still existing at the moment but the clock is ticking. :)
In my ountry, we have 3 official languages : Dutch, French and German and a rising influence of English in the city of Brussels because of the presence of tens of thousands EU administration workers, NATO people and families.
In the last 150 years, we have evolved from a country with one official language (french) to this situation, which has cost the blood and efforts of thousands of people.
At present we are indeed looking at a split of the country because the economic and social realities in the french and dutch part of the country have become so different.
Dutch and flemish people are already for years separated ‘in the minds’ because they have nothing in common except beer, chocolate and the royal family.
We will see what the future brings but Belgium will not be missed, that’s for sure.
About Ukraine : this may be the start of a -very- long proces altough the situation is more easy since Ukrainian and Russian are linguistic close to each other.
The problems will start only when ukrainian speaking people will refuse to speak russian and russian people will be forced to use ukrainian.
At that time, it will become dangerous.
Peteris:
When supporting Russian not being made an official language in Ukraine, you’ve no opposition to having the language situation in Belgium raised. On the other hand, you’re more dismissive on the comparison with other countries (Canada, Switzerland and Kazakhstan) when used to support making Russian an official language in Ukraine.
As for the language situation in Belarus, there’s no Belarusian Orthodox Church as well. I’ve relatives in Belarus, who prefer speaking Russian as does much of the population there. By the way, in the early years of Soviet rule, the Belarusian language was essentially developed as part of an attempt to have the image of a multi-national union. Russians and Belarusians are closely related to each other, with both of them overwhelmingly rejecting your slant. BTW, you’re aware that there’s an on paper Union State of Russia and Belarus? In an honest Belarusian referendum asking if its citizenry would like to join Russia, it wouldn’t surprise if the answer would be affirmative. Only Lukashenko prefers such an arrangement to be in a union arrangement as opposed to Belarus becoming a Russian republic under the current RF provisions. He doesn’t want to lose clout. This is why Slovak leaders favored leaving Czechia, with many in Czechia not wanting to be affiliated with the poorer Slovakia. This same issue relates to Moldova and Romania not reunifying.
Those trumping up “Russification” omit noting the attempt to linguistically Ukrainianize territory where Russian was the desired tongue. This happened in the late 19 twenties/early thirties. I suspect that this attempt helped popularize the Russo-Ukrainian dialect known as Surzhyk.
Putting aside some of Mark Ames’ views, he raises some valid points about the imperfections evident in present day Latvia and Estonia.
Put simply, the question is whether one wants a Ukrainian language to survive at all.
We live in an era of “strong” languages - English, French, etc. - and weak ones: tongues that are dying out because they are unprestigious and the young will not learn them. See how many speak Welsh in Wales, for instance.
To put Russian in equal status to Ukrainian in Ukraine is to sign the death warrant of Ukrainian. Can anyone doubt this? With Russian as a state language there would be no incentive to learn Ukrainian at all, and because of Russia’s greater clout, every incentive to fortify Russian dominance.
In fact, even with no official status for Russian the prospects for Ukrainian look challenging at best: A language traditionally perceived as one for “country bumpkins” has got to somehow attain the prestige of a world-class language.
If it can be done it would take great effort. With Russian as a state language, Ukrainian goes the way of Belarusian, or even Wendish!
In that my question about the assertion that Poltava is the only place where Ukrainian is spoken has met with resounding silence I must conclude that the assertion is false. Apparently Ukrainian can be found in other places. So much for that.
The fact is, there is a strong undercurrent of dislike and distrust between the Russian speaking East and the “bastardized” Ukrainians in the West. Please note the use of “bastard” is not my contrivence, it has been introduced by others in this thread. You have to listen carefully to the dialogue which comes out when the parties east and west have to speak in English about these relationships. Perhaps this is so because having to discuss in English forces the comments to be more basic and from the gut.
My thinking is: Russian culture is far removed from Western Europe and constantly moving further away. Making Russian an official language in Ukraine will solidify the longing of the Russian speaking regions to return to the Russian fold. Ukraine will split. A house devided against itself can not stand. In this case it’s more than just words snd grammar for they are of no consequence. It’s a matter of culture. A young western Ukrainian lady said it best, “We don’t like the Russians.”
From the looks of things most of Ukraine’s citizenry seek the two language route. Having Ukrainian as the sole language can arguably/eventually end Russian language use in Ukraine against how most feel there.
If I correctly recall, it was earlier stated that modern day or “canon” (if you may) Ukrainian is the one typically spoken in the Poltava/Kiev central area of Ukraine where Russian is also spoken. Keep in mind that during the so called “Orange Revolution,” most of the pro-Orange demonstration placards were in Russian. As earlier mentioned in this thread, there’re two dialects in Ukraine which can be considered as languages: the Russo-Ukrainian Surzhyk, prevalent in the east of the country and a western Ukrainian dialect influenced with German and Polish words. In addition, there’s the language of the Carpatho-Rusyns in Trans-Carpathia. A group which isn’t officially recognized as a ethnic group in Ukraine.
I found this article to be quite informative on the matter of languages in Ukraine:
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/8484-11.cfm
I take issue with this recently posted thought: “Russian culture is far removed from Western Europe and constantly moving further away.” Don’t confuse Russian disagreement with neo-liberal and neo-conservative policies as a sign of Russia moving further away from the West. Furthermore, if anything, Russia is more “European” than Hungary vis-à-vis race (without meaning to appear Hitlerian) and language. Geographically, it’s arguably more “European” than the British Isles.
****
On a somewhat different issue related to Global Voices, I’ve been unsuccessful in posting a reply to Douglas Muir’s most recent piece dealing with the former Moldavian SSR (Moldova and Pridnestrovie). Among other things (like how some of the leading Pridnestrovian politicans have a cleaner track record than the Kosovo Albanian ones), I wanted to bring to the attention of GV readers the thoughts expressed in these two recent articles:
Half of Moldova’s Workers Have Left Moldova
http://tiraspoltimes.com/opinion/half_of_moldovas_workers_have_left_the_country.html
The above linked article is from a Moldovan in Moldova, who acknowledges the reasons why most Pridnestroivans don’t desire having the Moldovan government rule over them and express reluctance at being reunited with Moldova (especially one which steers away from closer ties with Russia).
Press Freedom Curtailed as Moldova Shuts Down TV Station
http://www.tiraspoltimes.com/node/1286
As per the two above linked articles, Id’ like to be informed about any inaccuracies.
Michael Averko wrote, among other things:
“When supporting Russian not being made an official language in Ukraine, you’ve no opposition to having the language situation in Belgium raised.”
I don’t know what you’re talking about, Mike, sorry. Please reread what I wrote. There are no such languages as “Belgian” or “Swiss” or “Canadian.” There is such a language as “Ukrainian.” One can make all sorts of comparisons to all sorts of changing linguistic environments, and I would urge everybody to do so, extensively and particularly. All I am suggesting is that one ought to be very careful with such comparisons, in the specifics both historical and linguistic — and I don’t think you are.
Michael Averko also wrote:
“Having Ukrainian as the sole language can arguably/eventually end Russian language use in Ukraine against how most feel there.”
All sorts of stuff could eventually or arguably turn into most anything else. Let’s talk about the here and now. Russian in Ukraine isn’t threatened. Ukrainian is. Most Russophones do not know Ukrainian. Most Ukrainians know Russian.
In Latvia, after almost 15 years of pro-active language legislation and sole official language status for Latvian, more people speak Russian than speak Latvian, even now, despite the demographics — what that means at “ground level” is that I am often forced to speak Russian whilst most Russophones are hardly ever forced to speak the national language.
Mike Averko also said:
“Furthermore, if anything, Russia is more “European” than Hungary vis-à-vis race (without meaning to appear Hitlerian) and language.”
And how is that not Hitlerian? Re language — then the Finns and Estonians are not “European” in your view, either?
I do believe that the point is that the Russian Federation is moving further and further away from European norms. Russia aided China in diluting sanctions against the murderous regime in Burma/Myanmar, for instance.
Russia does not share European values. This refers to the government, of course, not to the culture or the people. Unfortunately, Russia is anti-democratic, as it has almost always been, a few brief interludes aside.
Peteris:
In reply to some of your recent points:
Kievan Rus was called Kievan Rus and not Kievan Uke. The modern day concept of Ukrainian nationalism is a relatively new development. You’ve a definite bias against Russocentric concerns. I understand Latvia’s history of being dominated in the past by the Soviet Union, Russia and others. I also know that as far as major powers go, Russia has had a relatively tolerant attitude towards others. You can make specific references to Russian wrongs while overlooking the positives and I in turn can show those positives and the manner of other powers towards their subjects. Ukraine isn’t Latvia and for objectivity sake, you should make more of an effort to understand that Ukraine isn’t Latvia.
Russian language use in Ukraine is under threat. A point which many in Ukraine are against. Let the overall will of the people there decide. There’s no denying that others states exist with more than one official language. Comparatively speaking, Ukraine should be the same.
Your views of democracy and morals are questionable. Ukrainian politics remains heavily influenced by oligarchs. Georgia isn’t more democratic than Russia. Some Western diplomatic moves are morally flawed. Like supporting independence for an ethnically cleansed, crime ridden Albanian nationalist “Kosova”, while denying Pridnestrovie’s better case for independence. Contrary to what you suggest, Latvia and Estonia have some unpleasant aspects that Mark Ames and some others have noted.
It can be considered somewhat Hitlerian to claim that Russia isn’t a part of Europe. It definitely is on the Hilerian side to honor WW II era non-German Nazi allies, who in some instances behaved very Nazi like.
To further underscore on the points raised in my last submitted set of comments: modern day Russia and Ukraine have a shared history, culture and close linguistic relationship, much unlike the history of Russia and Latvia, or Ukraine and Latvia. As an example, Gogol is a Russian and Ukrainian literary figure.
Hence, Peteris’ comparative example(s) aren’t as valid as mine.
Thanks to Michael Averko for the link about the language history - unfortunately it wouldn’t open for me. I’ll try again later.
As to Russia moving further away from Europe, I will allow modification to my thoughts and statement. In the political sphere I do believe the “West” does argue that Russia is regressing. One must be careful here and I wasn’t, with apologies. The good people of Russia are like people most everywhere in our basic natures. However, governence does rest on what the culture will accept so it is indeed a tangled issue.
This language issue is about power. Who has it, how can it be maintained and who wants it. We’re not going to solve it. The undercurrent in these discussions is very clear - it’s really about pro and con Russia. Nothing else.
For me I’m 8,000 Km away from the argument and it’s up to the Ukrainians. I wish my dear friends there all the best in their decisions. The Ukrainians are a beautiful, intelligent and educated people still suffering in many ways from centuries of Russian domination. I refer once again to Taras Shevschenko as having said all that needs to be said.
David, Russia isn’t regressing. It’s advancing. Most Russians I know display a very open minded attitude which includes wanting to engage those who are critical of their country. A most democratic spirit, which I often find lacking in some Western circles.
“Russian domination” over Ukraine can be interpreted in two extremes. One sees Ukraine as a kind of different entity from Russia which has been dominated against its will. The other acknowledges Russia as having become an overall more developed society/economy from Ukraine.
Taras Shevshenko was a pan-Slavic advocate who sympathized with the idea of forming a decentralized union of Slavic states.
David, you’ve referenced an anti-Russian West Ukrainian lady. How well do you know the Russocentric Ukrainian view?
You will be hard pressed finding someone with a Latvian name like Peteris Cederins to refer to himself as an ethnic Russian. On the other hand, you will find a good number of people with “Ukrainian” names like Taras Protopenko refer to themselves as Russians. Likewise, there’re those with “Russian” names like Ivan Mikhailov, who classify themselves to a Ukrainian ethnic identity.
It’s no coincidence that the least Russia friendly of observers go out of their way to downplay the close ties bonding many Ukrainians and Russians.
This brings to mind a recent Global Voices promoted post by Paul Goble referenced and commented on at this link (forgive my repeating it from an earlier post of mine at this thread):
http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@756.DtVid0rSZey@.77480649/8151
David
As per the below linked blog, the person posting under the moniker “Untermensch” is someone of Ukrainian origin. While being proud of his Ukrainian identity, he’s not fond of the kind of Russia hating views found among some (stress some) in Western Ukraine (notably Galicia) and (to a lesser degree) other parts of Ukraine. In addition to him, I personally know a good number of ethnic Ukrainians who feel the same.
Not making Russian an official language and encouraging anti-Russian biases encourages the breakup up of that former Soviet republic. On the BBC, Taras Kuzio recently acknowledged that Ukraine needs to balance the differing perspectives on such matter. Along with Adrian Karatnycky, Kuzio said that Russo-Ukrainian differences aren’t violently along the lines of what’s found among some other former Communist bloc peoples.
Keep in mind that in Quebec City, French is the overwhelmingly spoken language.
Thanks to everyone for the education - like I said I’m far removed from the argument. In that I have no facility with either Russian or Ukrainian I have no first hand knowledge therefore I have to listen very carefully to what is being said in English. Unfortunately my experience is not broad but when I listen carefully I hear or read (in English) an undercurrent that to me is disturbing.
Background - I was born and raised in the “South”, ie the south east of the US. That area lost a war to the “North” (thank God) in the mid 1860’s. That war emotionally lasted at least into the late 1950’s when I was a teenager in high school. These things take a long time to work out.
As to Russia, my opinions were formed by stupid things like bomb shelters anticipating the final war - the atonmic war with Russia. I spent too many nights on cold and sleepless guard duty in the US army in Germany in the early 1960’s, looking East and wondering when the Russians would be conming across at us. The mission of the 3rd Armored Cavalry was to try to delay and slowly fall back, cross the Rhine to the Western side and hope for reinforcements.
I do watch the Russians with some suspecion as to motives and I am sure they watch us - they should. Personally, I have deep feelings of good will toward all Ukrainians East and West, no matter their “native” language. I do know this - and history shows it - give the Russians a seat at the table in Ukraine and they will take the meal.
Taras railed at the Russian Tsar. Taras had to know he was a dead man walking and that is exactly what he became.
All the best to Ukraine and the good people there. Please do visit http://www.ukraineorphans.net. There you will see that I include all - up front and personal, with fondness and respect.
Apologies about the typos. David
“I do watch the Russians with some suspicion as to motives and I am sure they watch us - they should. Personally, I have deep feelings of good will toward all Ukrainians East and West, no matter their ‘native’ language. I do know this - and history shows it - give the Russians a seat at the table in Ukraine and they will take the meal.”
Taras railed at the Russian Tsar. Taras had to know he was a dead man walking and that is exactly what he became.
All the best to Ukraine and the good people there. Please do visit http://www.ukraineorphans.net. There you will see that I include all - up front and personal, with fondness and respect.”
****
Such are the predominating biases, due in large part to the preferred imagery found in English language mass media, academia and body politic. Ukrainians GOOD, whereas Russians are to be viewed with SUSPICION. Never mind that most Ukrainians don’t see it that way. In fact, a good many of them would side with the Russians against the Russia haters.
Some have problems at divorcing themselves from the less than truthful aspects of that environment.
Shevchenko’s opposition to the Czar doesn’t negate the fact that he supported a pan-Slavic union involving Russia, Ukraine and some others.
History doesn’t “show” the above quoted points to be correct. If anything, the contrary has been shown to be true. In any event, history and politcal “science” aren’t hard sciences in that they’re open to interpretation, with some views having better validity over others.
Michael, Peace! What we don’t want is war. This is a groping toward the truth. Now, let’s see what the Ukrainian’s have to say with their vote. This election is a good lesson for us all in democracy. People on both sides will wish they had gotten up off their back sides and voted. I hope the US will learn something from his. Trouble is, hardly any of us other than the State Department and Ukrainian-Americans will pay any attention.
As to he debate we were, and I emphasize “were”, having will not be resolved here - there are authorities on both sides and the arguments go from emotional to the absurd.
Give us a common ground on which you and I can stand. Have any ideas? Just don’t ask me to learn Russian, I’m have enough trouble trying to learn a few words of Ukrainian. But I have translated for myself one of his short poems.
Best Regards Michael
I don’t know why the web address I posted won’t connect -maybe it needs http://www.ukraineorphans.net We’ll see.
Michael, Yes, it needed http://www.ukraineorphans.net. Stop by for a few minutes and let me know what you think - in all fairness. Ok?
David:
I previously clicked into that site without problems. Now, I get this message:
“This domain is missing from the Web server configuration
The domain name is correctly pointing at a valid Web server. This Web server does not recognize this domain name as a valid Web site.
If you are the Webmaster please contact Technical Support.”
****
In some circles, America is known as a one party system divided between Repubs. and Dems., of which there’s arguably not so much of a difference between the two.
My read of Ukrainian politics is that many Ukrainian citizens, regardless of their allegiances are disgusted with the top choices. The voting while holding your nose route is a problematical aspect in a number of democratic countries.
BTW, in this most recent Ukrainian election, the Orange forces within the Ukrainian political establishment succeeded in inhibiting Pridnestrovie’s (Trans-Dniester’s) Ukrainian citizens from participating. This wasn’t the case in prior elections. Note that Pridnestrovie’s Ukrainian citizens overwhelmingly vote Blue and that Pridnestrovie’s Russian and Ukrainian population get along quite well.
Peaceful intent should include not fostering divisive views about a given group. Caricaturing the Russocentric sympathies in Ukraine isn’t in the best interests of maintaining the whole of Ukraine.
Thanks Michael, I don’t know what the deal is with that second link to http://ukraineorphans.net , the one mentioned just above it works fine and they look the same to me. Maybe not, there is a hot period after net and I bet that ruins the second one.
I will have to learn a bit more about Pridnestrovie and that region - I don’t pretend to know very much about the fascinating land and people that comprise Ukraine.
Let me ask, what’s wrong with a Ukrainocentric view in Ukraine? I’m still lost here. Maybe I’m just simple minded in my concept but the borders are fairly well set and within those borders it says Ukraine. I know a lot of Russian people got caught within those borders when the Russians (I pretty much equate Soviet with Russia)drew a circle on the map. So what’s the solution - do they physically move to Russia? Do the borders move? Do they become Ukrainians? Do they become a nation state within the borders of Ukraine?
I’m still looking for a common ground here. And yes, because we do are somewhat united in our culture to an outsider the Republicans and Democrats seem almost the same. To me they don’t!
If you look down the opening page you will see links to the Russian speaking Ukraine (That just sounds so strange to me!). There is a young lady down towards the bottom - Russian speaking - that Anne Linden (also on the first page) is trying to promote in the hopes we can find support for Irina to go back to school if she wishes. If you read Russian, which I must assume you do, you can go to that website - links right there - and read it all in Russian.
So much for my supposed dislike of Russian speaking Ukrainians.
David:
A more pertinent question relates to what’s wrong with the Russocentric view in Ukraine? At this thread, I’ve replied to some not so Russia friendly views.
It’s arrogant for some folks from the western part of Ukraine to believe their views to be the more accurate. That region was occupied for a lengthy period from forces not historically akin to Kievan Rus, which has been be referred to as either ancient Russia and-or ancient Ukraine.
It’s also historically incorrect to link everything Soviet with Russia.
Many Americans don’t see much of a difference between Repubs. and Dems.
I am an American with Ukrainian roots. I actaully live in Kraków, Poland now. However, as a Ukrainian with an outsiders view of the language issue in Ukraine I think that language is one of the basic constructs of a culture. It is a source of unity and pride and eventually with time I would like to see Ukrainian restored as the national language not only on paper though out the Ukraine but also in use. I think would be better in the long run for national unity and development of a unique culture that would contribute to the world. I write alot on my blog about Ukrainian http://www.claritaslux.com/blog language and even how , the Ukrainian language is gaining strength.
Ukrainian is already the official language of Ukraine. No one of influence is seeking to eliminate that reality. At issue, are the rights of more than one language or languages that’s very much akin to many in a given nation.
The examples of Canada, Switzerland and Kazakstan were previously presented. There’re other examples as well.
Thank you Mark Biernat!
Regardless of how many times people have tried to say it what is under discussion is a vote in Ukraine to make Russian an official language. The issue is not how many Ukrainians speak, read or write Russian. Who cares? The issue is making Russian an official language. There is a big difference.
Here in the US I could care less if all the immigrants, legal or illegal, want to speak their native language. Making their language official is an entirely different discussion. Once again Mark, thank you.
Kudos to the idea of making Russian an official language in Ukraine.
With respect Michael, nice try but no cigar.
You’re referring to yourself since I’ve successfully presented my views with facts.
A second language proposal for Ukraine that I can support! I read recently that Lviv is working on a campaign to encourage more tourism to the area. Part of the effort will be to include English with Ukrainian on certain street signs.
I see it this way, street signs are done by the government and by using English with Ukrainian they are making English an official language in Ukraine! Isn’t this great; a second official language for Ukraine that I can endorse.
Kudos to Michael for strongly supporting a second official language for Ukraine! Thanks
No kudos is in store for David, who continues to show a lack of respect for the way many in Ukraine feel.