Tatiana Zhurzhenko. Borderlands into Bordered Lands:
Geopolitics of Identity in Post-Soviet Ukraine. Stuttgart:
Ibidem-Verlag, 2010. 321 pp. + Images, Maps. $49.50. ISBN: 978-3-8382-0042-2.
Since 1991 Ukraine has become more important in the geopolitical
trajectory of Eastern Europe. The country showed considerable promise throughout
the decade, gaining independence from Soviet power and engaging in nation- and
state-building. Notwithstanding the occasional regressions toward
authoritarianism that marked the presidencies of "the two Leonids"
Kravchuk and Kuchma, Ukraine seemed on the right track toward territorial
sovereignty, economic stability, and the consolidation of Ukrainian national
identity. After the victory of the Orange coalition in 2004 Western observers
thought Ukraine was destined for European Union integration.
One major issue stood in the way, however: the case of the
Ukrainian-Russian border, the symbol of division between Europe and Asia, which
acts as the tinderbox for geopolitical instability between the two continents.
Border disputes between Ukraine and Russia and fears of regional separatism
shape political discourse, and enter into the regional and national identities
of these and neighboring countries:
The 'migration of borders' destroys old
communities and shapes new ones; it causes resettlements, deportations, and
even ethnic cleansing, while creating new minorities or homogenizing the
population inside the new borders. With these border changes, not only do the
political and legal systems become subjects of reform; school education,
official national symbols, dominant historical narratives, and even the
official language can change as well. Border shifts reshape the collective
memories and identities of populations, and challenge their loyalties and
emotional attachments. A new nation state usually requires a new national
history; it needs symbols and myths for the majority of its population to
identify with. (29)
The migrating borders and their impact on identity in regions of
the former Soviet Union are the main subject of Tatiana Zhurzhenko's
evocatively titled Borderlands into Bordered Lands: Geopolitics of Identity
in Post-Soviet Ukraine. Zhurzhenko employs various methodologies in her understanding
of post-Soviet border making, as well as state- and nation-building, chief
among them the political implications of border changes in Ukraine's proposed
EU integration, the sociological impact of Soviet nation-building on
populations today, and the discrepancies between international relations and
(ultra)-nationalist domestic politics. The border between Ukraine and Russia,
particularly the "Slobozhanshchyna" region (Kharkhiv oblast in
Ukraine, Belgorod oblast in the Russian Federation), is a stage where the
macro- and micro-dramas of post-Soviet politics, society, economics, and
culture are performed and transformed every day.
The border region between Ukraine and Russia is significant on
three primary levels of analysis: “(1) the symbolic geography and geopolitics
of the post-Soviet space/'new' Eastern Europe; (2) the Ukrainian-Russian border
in bilateral relations, in the nation and state building processes and in
regional politics, and (3) the micropolitics of border construction and the role
of the border in everyday life”; thus providing the basic structure of
Zhurzhenko’s book (38). The first level of analysis involves a discussion of
the historical role of borders, and the theoretical and philosophical
underpinnings of a geopolitical concept of post-Soviet identity construction.
This discussion is largely influenced by the historical developments of
Eurasianism and pan-Slavism, popularized throughout the twentieth century and
revived after the fall of the Soviet Union. In contemporary Ukrainian
discourse, however, pan-Slavism and especially Eurasianism are synonymous with
authoritarianism and Russian neo-imperialism, and stand in the way of closer
cooperation and integration with the West, as well as the stability and
development of Ukraine’s own institutions (73). Though neither theory is widely
accepted in the former Soviet Union nor Yugoslavia they exert much influence on
the political discourse surrounding nation-building, regional separatisms,
geopolitics, and international cooperation.
In the remaining two levels of analysis Zhurzhenko applies her
understanding of border politics to the borderlands between Ukraine and Russia,
a contiguous region that shares much of its history, economic life, and culture
in common, but is now separated by imposed international borders. This
discussion focuses on the effects of regionalism on nation- and state-building
processes, particularly the threats to regime stability presented by regional
and language separatisms, and the answers or proposed solutions provided by
political and societal actors. The interactions of Belarus and Russia (read:
the domination of the former by the latter) present both real and perceived
anxieties about the future of Ukraine. Zhurzhenko notes how the discourse of
pro-Western Ukrainian intellectuals on Belarus “was actually more about the
fate of Ukraine and could be summarized as ‘Today’s Belarus is tomorrow’s
Ukraine’” (102). Will Ukraine break free from Russian hegemony in the region
and pave its own course toward Western-style democracy, civil rights, and
sovereign economic institutions, or will the state continue its present slip
toward authoritarianism, the repression of civil liberties, and greater
economic cooperation with/dependence on Russia? What are the implications of
the border region for the larger geopolitical discourse of Eurasia? What is the
significance of the border for its inhabitants?
Ukraine’s border with Russia presents unique challenges for both
the region and the continent. Real problems do exist for states bordering
Russia, as the arms trade and various forms of trafficking are ubiquitous on
the Ukrainian-Russian border. Zhurzhenko does not go into any detail about the
issue of arms, drug, and human trafficking at the border. Rather, her work
focuses on instances of economic and strategic cooperation, which are faciliated
by relaxed travel and visa requirements, and common memories and shared
experiences throughout history. The Ukrainian-Russian border is typical of what
Zhurzhenko calls a “soft border” that is “shaped by identities,
representations, and images of ‘us’ and ‘them’, memories and stories. In other
words, soft borders are narrative constructs” (156). The discourse at the
Ukrainian-Russian border is Zhurzhenko’s primary concern, and the observations
she provides are telling of the past, present, and future relations of the two
populations.
The populations of Kharkiv and Belgorod called the
“Slobozhanshchyna” home long before the present-day borders were drawn, that
is, imposed from above by Soviet geographers. All too frequently similar
instances of top-down border drawing results in conflict, in which the
populations vie for control over a demarcated region’s resources. Zhurzhenko’s
careful treatment of the “Slobozhanshchyna” convincingly demonstrates that the
region is, unique and the discourse between populations is a phenomenon. The
region’s trajectory vis-à-vis recent social and political developments in
Ukraine and Russia (among other things, the promotion of Russian to second official
language in parts of Ukraine, re-re-reelection of Vladimir Putin and what his
presidency spells for democratic hopefuls in Russia) is unknown, but
Zhurzhenko’s book highlights an instance of cross-border cooperation, everyday
interaction and cohabitation at the regional level, on the periphery.
Zhurzhenko's book provides a welcome introduction for students of
nationalism and post-Soviet geopolitics. Observations about the history and
future of the "Slobozhanshchyna" region are well-presented and serve
to influence further studies of similarly significant border regions across the
globe. The various sociological, political, and geographic theories
employed throughout the work are explained in sufficient detail so as to engage
casual readers and serious scholars alike. Zhurzhenko’s prose is marred by a
number of editorial oversights, which are perhaps the result of simultaneous or
subsequent translations from native to publication languages. This issue does
not detract from the importance of Zhurzhenko’s study nor the strength of her
arguments throughout. Rather, the lack of “fine-tooth comb” editing is merely
an eye-sore in what is a compelling addition to the literature of post-Soviet
nation- and state-building, and the role of ideology and discourse in the
construction of post-Soviet society.
No comments:
Post a Comment