Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:10:49.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cross-Border Cooperation and Transformation of Regional Identities in the Ukrainian–Russian Borderlands: Towards a Euroregion “Slobozhanshchyna”? Part 1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Tatiana Zhurzhenko
Tatiana Zhurzhenko*
Affiliation:
V.Karazin Kharkiv National University, School of Philosophy, Ukraine and Institute for East European History, University of Vienna, Austria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is well known that the idea and practice of cross-border cooperation have been developed in postwar Europe with the intention of overcoming the economic and social isolation of border regions and reconciling the hostilities between former enemies. But as a precondition for this process the new map of European borders had to be perceived as “final” and “just,” and as such it was legitimized on international and national levels. Moreover, it was the universal acceptance of the principle of the invariability of borders which made it possible for national governments to grant border regions more freedom in their contacts with the neighbours. The same applies in principle to the former socialist countries, where cross-border cooperation is supposed to help overcome the post-Cold-War division of Europe.

Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 2004 , pp. 207 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Natalia Parkhomenko and Oleksandr Sushko, “Kordony Ukrainy: symvol nezaver-shenoho derzhavotvorennia,” Dzerkalo tyzhnia, No. 26, 14–20 July, 2001.Google Scholar

2. “The Legal Status of the Russian-Ukrainian Border: Problems and Prospects,” Borders of Ukraine. Effective Policy Implementation. Center for Peace, Conversion and Foreign Policy of Ukraine, <http://borders.cpcfpu.org.ua/eng/analytics/index.shtml>..>Google Scholar

3. “Expert Assessments and Public Opinion Concerning the Border Policy of Ukraine,” Borders of Ukraine, op. cit. Google Scholar

4. Mykhaylo Mishchenko and Valeriy Khmelko, “Dynamika stavlennia hromadian Ukrainy do problem ukrainsko-rosiyskyh vidnosyn,” <www.kiis.com.ua/130303/main.html>..>Google Scholar

5. “Borders of Ukraine: An Unfinished Area of a Decade State Building,” Borders of Ukraine, op. cit. Google Scholar

6. Roman Szporluk, “Reflections on Ukraine after 1994: the Dilemmas of Nationhood,” in Roman Szporluk, Russia, Ukraine and the Breakup of the Soviet Union (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 2000), p. 332.Google Scholar

7. “The Legal Status of the Russian–Ukrainian Border: Problems and Prospects,” Borders of Ukraine, op. cit. Google Scholar

8. “Yevhen Marchuk: Terorysm i natsionalna bezpeka,” interview with Yevhen Marchuk, <www.marchuk.kiev.ua/ua/94p.html>..>Google Scholar

9. Vladimir Kolossov and Nikolay Mironenko, Geopolitika i politicheskaia geografia (Moscow: Aspekt-Press, 2002), p. 346.Google Scholar

10. Volodymyr Kravchenko, “Kamin spotykannia na ukrainsko-rosiiskomu prykordonni,” Dzerkalo tyzhnia, No. 3, 25–31 January, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Ivan Sahaidachny, “Samit neformaliv,” Dzerkalo tyzhnia, No. 4, 1–7 February, 2003.Google Scholar

12. Yulia Mostova, “Buldozery bez kravatok,” Dzerkalo tyzhnia, No. 41, 25–31 October, 2003.Google Scholar

13. Oleksandr Derhachov, “Vazhkyi khrest istorychnoi druzhby,” Dzerkalo tyzhnia, No. 44, 15–21 November, 2003.Google Scholar

14. Vladimir Kolossov and Aleksey Kiryukhin, “Prigranichnoe sotrudnichestvo v rossiysko-ukrainskikh otnosheniakh,” Politia, No. 1 (19), 2001, pp. 141–165.Google Scholar

15. Kolossov and Kiryukhin, “Prigranichnoe sotrudnichestvo v rossiysko-ukrainskikh otnosheniakh,” pp. 142–150.Google Scholar

16. V. Kuznichevskiy, “Pochemy delovye krygi Ukrainy interesuiut rossiyskogo prezidenta, a belorusskie—net?” Evraziyskiy vestnik, <www.e-journal.ru/p_soyz-st2-21.html>..>Google Scholar

17. Slobozhanskyi krai, 7 November 2002, p. 1.Google Scholar

18. Vladimir Kaganskiy, Kulturnyi ladshaft I sovetskoe obitaemoe prostranstvo (Moscow: NLO, 2001), p. 401.Google Scholar

19. Kolossov and Kiryukhin, “Prigranichnoe sotrudnichestvo v rossiysko-ukrainskikh otnosheniakh,” p. 153.Google Scholar

20. Derhachov, “Vazhkyi khrest istorychnoi druzhby.”Google Scholar

21. Mykola Riabchuk, “Dvoistist chy dvoznachnist: Ukraina iak politychna (de)konstruktsia,” Suchasnist', No. 11, 2002, pp. 50–63.Google Scholar

22. Inna Pidluska, “Ukraine and the EU: What Prospects for Integration,” in Ann Lewis, ed., The EU and Ukraine. Neighbors, Friends, Partners? (London: Federal Trust for Education and Research, 2002), pp. 183–197.Google Scholar

23. For the academic discussion on the perspectives of Ukraine's European integration see, for example, Juliane Besters-Dilger, Die Ukraine in Europa. Aktuelle Lage, Hinter-gruende und Perspektiven (Koeln/Weimar/Wien: Boehlau, 2003).Google Scholar

24. Bogumila Berdychowska, Przemyslaw Zurowskivel Grajewski and Grzegorz Gromadzki, New Neighborhood—New Association. Ukraine and the European Union at the Beginning of the 21st Century (Warsaw: Stefan Batory Foundation, 2002), p. 11.Google Scholar

25. Ibid. Google Scholar

26. Anatoliy Zlenko, “Ukraine and the EU. It Takes Two to Tango,” in Ann Lewis, ed., The EU and Ukraine. Neighbors, Friends, Partners? (London: Federal Trust for Education and Research, 2002), pp. 21, 24.Google Scholar

27. Petro Burkovsky, “Okhorontsi prozorosti. EC ta NATO daiut Ukraini shche odyn shans prykryty sebe zi skhodu,” Polityka i Kultura, No. 17, pp. 15–17, 2002.Google Scholar

28. As for Russia, it was stressed in the Communication that “a new neighborhood policy will only constitute one pillar of the overall EU/Russia strategic partnership” (Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, “Wider Europe—Neighborhood: A New Framework for Relations with Our Eastern and Southern Neighbors, Brussels, 11 March 2003, p. 5, <http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/we/doc/com03_104_en.pdf>.).)>Google Scholar

29. Breffni O'Rourke, “EU: Prodi Sets out Vision of ‘Ring of Friends', Closer Ties with Neighbors,” Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, <http://rferl.org/nca/features/2003/01/31012003192138.asp>..>Google Scholar

30. Country Strategy Paper 2002–2006, National Indicative Programme 2002–2003, p. 15, <http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/ukraine/csp/index.htm>..>Google Scholar

31. Inna Pidluska, “Justice and Home Affairs beyond enlargement. What Kind of Border?” in Ann Lewis, ed., The EU and Ukraine. Neighbors, Friends, Partners? (London: Federal Trust for Education and Research, 2002), p. 247.Google Scholar

32. Country Strategy Paper 2002–2006, p. 19.Google Scholar

33. Launched in 1991, the TACIS Programme is a European Union initiative for the New Independent States and Mongolia, which fosters the development of economic and political links between the European Union and these partner countries.Google Scholar

34. “Na rosiysko-ukrainskomu kordoni vyprobouiut komp'uternyi metod vylovu nelegaliv,” <http://ukr.for-ua.com/news/2002/04/19/144651.html>..>Google Scholar

35. Serhiy Khanin, “Ievrosoyuz dopomahaie ukrainskym prykordonnykam i sobi,” Den, No. 191, 19 October, 2002.Google Scholar

36. Marco Bojcun, “The European Union's Perspectives on the Ukrainian-Russian Border,” in Ukrainsko-rosiyske porubizzia: formuvannia sotsialnoho ta kulturnoho prostoru v istorii i suchasniy politytsi (Kyiv: Kennan Institute, 2003), pp. 17–33.Google Scholar

37. Anatoli Baronin, “Border Closed?” Central European Review, Vol. 3, No. 11, 2001, <www.ce-review.org/01/11/baronin11.html>..>Google Scholar

38. Halyna Iavorska, “Pro perspektyvy ‘statusu susidstva’ u vidnoshenniakh Ukrainy z EC, abo chy varto vidmovliatysia vid synytsi v rukakh, iakshcho za zhuravlem letity—marna pratsia,” Dzerkalo tyzhnia, No. 3, 25–31 January, 2003.Google Scholar

39. Serhiy Astakhov, “Prykordonni viyska Ukrainy tsikavliat Ievrosoyz,” Den, No. 18, 30 January, 2002.Google Scholar

40. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, “Wider Europe—Neighborhood: A New Framework for Relations with Our Eastern and Southern Neighbors,” p. 8.Google Scholar

41. “Chto takoe Russkiy Blok i chego on dobivaetsia. Ideologicheskie voprosy,” election campaign materials, 2002.Google Scholar

42. Vladimir Alekseev, “Vandeia,” in Nikolai Shulga et al., eds, Dialog ukrainskoi i russkoi kultur v Ukraine, Materialy IV mezhdunarodnoi prakticheskoi konferentsii (9-10 December 1999), (Kyiv: Funds for the Support of Russian Culture in Ukraine, 2000), pp. 66–75.Google Scholar

43. Vladimir Kolossov, “ ‘Primordialism’ i sovremennoe natsionalno-gosudarstvennoe stroitelstvo,” Polis, No. 3, 1998, p. 105.Google Scholar

44. Fedir Zastavnya, Ukrainski etnichni zemli (Lviv, Ukraine: Svit, 1993).Google Scholar

45. Yuri Loza, “Ukrainsko-rosiyska etnichna mezha i suchasni kordony ta terytorialni pretenzii,” Ukrainska spadshchyna, <www.heritage.com.ua/istorija/doslidzhennja/ukr-ros/ukrros01.htm>..>Google Scholar

46. UWC Commission on Human and Civil Rights, Memorandum to Max van der Stoel, OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities regarding the situation of the Ukrainian national minority in Russia, <http://ukrainianworldcongress.org./rights/sto00–08.shtml>..>Google Scholar

47. Yaroslava Muzychenko, “My vlashtuvaly sviy malenky: Radiansky Soyz,” Ukraina moloda, 21 January 2003.Google Scholar

48. Ibid. Google Scholar

49. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, “Kak nam obustroit Rossiu,” Komsomolskaia pravda, 18 September 1990; Aleksandr Dugin, Osnovy geopolitiki. Geopoliticheskoe budushchee Rossii (Moscow: Arctogeia-Tsentr, 1999).Google Scholar

50. Andrew Wilson, The Ukrainians: Unexpected Nation (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000), pp. 298–306.Google Scholar

51. But if reunification according to the Belarusian model is not possible, there is always an option for encouraging federalism and then secession of the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine—see, for example, the roundtable discussion “Ukraine—Strategic Partner, Geopolitical Competitor or Hostile State?” CIS Institute, <http://e-journal.ru/p_bzarub-st3–2.html>..>Google Scholar

52. Konstantin Zatulin and Aleksandr Sevastianov, “Rossiysko-ukrainskiy dogovor: obman veka,” Nezavisimaia Gazeta, 26 January 1999.Google Scholar

53. Konstantin Zatulin and Aleksandr Sevastianov, “ ‘Druzhba, sotrudnichestvo, partnerstvo’ mezhdy Rossiey i Ukrainoy … Dva goda spustia posle obmana v proshlom veke,” NG-Sodruzhestvo, 31 January 2001.Google Scholar

54. Oleg Varfolomeyev, “Notes from Kiev: Where Have All Those Russians gone?” Transitions Online, 5 February 2003, <www.tol.cz>..>Google Scholar

55. “Parlamentskie slushania. Rossiysko-ukrainskoe sotrudnichestvo: dinamika razvitia posle vstuplenia v silu Dogovora o druzhbe, sotrudnichestve i partnerstve mezhdu RF I Ukrainoy,” Analiticheskiy vestnik, No. 7 (119), 2000, pp. 34–36.Google Scholar