1. See the L'viv ideological conference of SNUM in Molod Ukrainy, 18 June 1991 and the statement by the L'viv oblast SNUM “The Democrats have betrayed Ukraine,” in Napriam, No. 5, 1991.Google Scholar

2. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 20 February 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. See the draft programe of the Organisation for the Liberation of Ukraine in Samostiina Ukraina, No. 2, April 1990.Google Scholar

4. Text entitled “The Ukrainian National-Radical Party,” by Baltserowycz, Evhen, a L'viv-based analyst of the Ukrainian Republican Party, in the possession of the author.Google Scholar

5. See Motyl, Alexander J., The Turn to the Right: The Ideological Origins of Ukrainian Nationalism, 1919–1929. East European Monographs (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980).Google Scholar

6. See Armstrong, John A., Ukrainian Nationalism (Littleton, CO: Ukrainian Academic Press, 1980).Google Scholar

7. See Sosnovsky, Mykhailo, Dmytro Dontsov. Politychnyj Portret. Shevchenko Scientific Society, Vol. 33 (New York: Trident International, Inc., 1974).Google Scholar

8. See Kuzio, Taras, “OUN v Ukraini, Dmytro Dontsov i zakordonna chastyna OUN,” Suchasnist, No. 12, December 1992, pp. 33–38.Google Scholar

9. See Potichnyj, Peter J. and Shtendera, Yevhen, Political Thought of the Ukrainian Underground, 1943–1951 (Edmonton: Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, 1986).Google Scholar

10. See Rudnytsky, Ivan L., “The Political Thought of Soviet Ukrainian Dissent,” Journal of Ukrainian Studies, Vol. 5, No. 11, Fall 1981, pp. 3–16.Google Scholar

11. See Haynes, V., “Postmortem of the Ukrainian Helsinki Group,” Journal of Ukrainian Studies, Vol. 7, No. 15, Winter 1983, pp. 102–113.Google Scholar

12. See Kuzio, Taras and Wilson, Andrew, Ukraine: Perestroika to Independence (London: Macmillan, 1993), chapters 3–5.Google Scholar

13. See Kuzio, Taras and Solchanyk, Roman, “Democratic Political Blocs in Ukraine,” RFE/RL Research Report, Vol. 2, No. 16, 16 April 1993.Google Scholar

14. These included DSU, UNS, UNRP, UNP and SNUM. See Za vilnu Ukrainu, 19 March 1991.Google Scholar

15. Korobeynyk, V., a leading member of the Party of Democratic Revival of Ukraine, claimed that the organisations involved in the UNA had an “openly fascist orientation.” See Ukrainski Visti, 5 May 1991. This is why the PDVU, and the New Ukraine bloc, of which it was the main member, refused to join the Anti-Imperial, Anti-Communist Front, established in January 1993 to oppose the revival of communism in Ukraine because the UNA had joined it. Oksana Khomchuk argues that the radical right in Ukraine cannot be labelled as “fascist” because they are primarily statists, aiming to preserve the unity and independence of Ukraine on Ukrainian “ethnic territory.” See her, “The Far Right in Russia and Ukraine,” The Harriman Review, Vol. 8, No. 2, July 1995. They are, therefore, very different from the radical right in Russia.Google Scholar

16. Vitovych, Oleh, “Not Nazism, But a Change in Orientation,” Biblioteka Ukrainskoi Natsionalistychnoi Spilky. Zbirka Stattyi, July 1990, “Chastyna 1,” 1991. But the L'viv-based UNA newspaper Holos Natsii, No. 6, February 1993 includes at least one article by Benito Mussolini.Google Scholar

17. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 4, November 1991.Google Scholar

18. Zamkova Hora, No. 10, 1992.Google Scholar

19. Copies of all three leaflets are in the posession of the author. See also the UNS bulletin directed towards military officers entitled Kapitulatsiya, no date.Google Scholar

20. Natsionalist, No. 7, 1992.Google Scholar

21. See the article by Anatol Bedriy entitled “The enemies of Ukraine are also in Ukraine!” in Natsionalist, No. 2, 1992; and Shcherbatiuk, Anatoliy, “Fifth Columnists,” Nezaboryma Natsiia, No. 1, January 1994 on the pro-Russian separatist and Cossack groups active in Ukraine.Google Scholar

22. On UNSO see Holos Ukrainy, 1 March, 13 May, 26 June and 3 July; Nezavisimost, 26 June 1992.Google Scholar

23. Natsionalist, No. 2, 1992; and Nash Klych, Nos. 2–3, 1992.Google Scholar

24. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 4, November 1991.Google Scholar

25. Natsionalist, No. 7, 1992.Google Scholar

26. Moloda Halychyna, 30 April 1991. See the critique by Taras Chornovil of the integral nationalists in Moloda Ukraina, No. 12, 1990; and the criticism in Holos Ukrainy, 22 April 1992, both of which insinuate that either the security forces and/or Russia support these structures.Google Scholar

27. Natsionalist, No. 1, February 1991. This was formerly the organ of “Young Nationalists” but then became the journal of the Club in Support of Dmytro Dontsov (the leading pre-war Ukrainian integral nationalist thinker). The Club is a collective member of the UNA.Google Scholar

28. Natsionalist, No. 7, 1992.Google Scholar

29. See the interview with Slavko Artymenko in Ukrainsky Obrii, no date, 1991.Google Scholar

30. See the comment by Shukhevych: “The activities of the L'viv oblast council are not in the interests of Ukraine,” Moloda hvardiya, 14 May 1991.Google Scholar

31. Napriam, No. 5, 1991.Google Scholar

32. See the article “Ukrainian Perspective: Monarchy or Republic?” by Bondarenko, Les, a leading member of the SUM, in Nova Ukraina, No. 3, December 1991.Google Scholar

33. See Vasyl Barliadianu in Derzhavnist, No. 1, 1991.Google Scholar

34. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 2, September 1991. See also the map in Ukrainsky Chas, No. 1, December 1991.Google Scholar

35. Napriam, No. 5, 1991.Google Scholar

36. See his speech to a meeting of “Supporters of Nationalism,” Kyiv, 11 October 1991 (Neskorena Natsiya, No. 4, November 1991).Google Scholar

37. Pravda Ukrainy, 20 June 1991.Google Scholar

38. Do Natsii (Nezalezhny Natsionalistychny Vydanniu), No. 2, 1990. UNS organs, such as Zamkova Hora, often publish information on military knives, molotov cocktails and weapons.Google Scholar

39. Nash Klych, Nos. 2–3, 1992.Google Scholar

40. Zamkova Hora, Nos. 1 and 19, 1992.Google Scholar

41. Zamkova Hora, No. 1, 1992.Google Scholar

42. An exception was the arrest of two members of the UNA in Odesa on charges of calling for a “religious war against Muscovites and Yids.” See Robitnycha Hazeta, 24 March 1992.Google Scholar

43. Nova Ukraina, No. 3, December 1991.Google Scholar

44. Sobornist, No. 3, May 1992.Google Scholar

45. Korchynsky believes that the two enemies of Ukrainian nationalism are “the ideologies of cosmopolitanism and democracy.” See Kyivsky Klub, No. 1, 1992; and Natsionalist, No. 7, 1992.Google Scholar

46. A survey of Ukrainian attitudes towards other nationalities showed that only 3% of Kyivites harboured anti-Russian attitudes, while 51% expressed warm views. See Ukrainsky Ohliadach, No. 1, January 1992.Google Scholar

47. Nash Klych, No. 1, 1991.Google Scholar

48. Zamkova Hora, No. 10, 1992; and Vizti z Ukrainy, No. 35, 1992.Google Scholar

49. See Za vilnu Ukrainy, 26 September; Molod Ukrainy, 29 September; and Holos Ukrainy, 31 October 1992.Google Scholar

50. Pravda Ukrainy, 2 March; and Narodna Armiya, 18 March 1993.Google Scholar

51. On the congress and resolutions see Ukrainske Slovo, Kyiv, 21 May, 28 May and 4 June 1993.Google Scholar

52. See Rozbudova Derzhavy, No. 8, 1993.Google Scholar

53. Radio Ukraine, 19 October 1992. The UNA described the KUN as “uniting former democrats from the URP, Rukh, coupled with a section of the diaspora which ties itself to the activities of the OUN, but to which they have no relation to the armed struggle of the 1940s and 1950s …” Holos Natsii, No. 6, February 1993.Google Scholar

54. Shilakh Peremohy, 8 March; and Narodaya Armiya, 3 April 1992.Google Scholar

55. Privately Roman Koval was also pessimistic about “a fertile ground” being found for Ukrainian nationalism in Ukraine. Conversations with Koval, Kyiv, August 1992 and September 1995.Google Scholar

56. Samostiina Ukraina, No. 5, 10 February 1993.Google Scholar

57. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 24 April 1993.Google Scholar

58. Ukrainske Slovo, Kyiv, 11 May 1993.Google Scholar

59. Conversation with Zvarych, Kyiv, 29 September 1995. Zvarych believed that the OUNvU was a “ridiculous” invention.Google Scholar

60. Konferentsiia Ukrainskyh Natsionalistiv. Vybrani Materialy (Kyiv: Ukrainian Information Service, 1992).Google Scholar

61. Kyivska Pravda, 29 January 1993.Google Scholar

62. On the July 1993 congress of the KUN see Narodna Armiya, 8 July 1993 and Stetsko, Slava, Duzhy, Petro et al., eds, Materialy Pershoho Kongresu Ukrainskykh Natsionalistiv (Kyiv: Kongres Ukrainskykh Natsionalistiv, 1995).Google Scholar

63. The program of the congress was published in Shliakh Peremohy, 26 June 1993.Google Scholar

64. Vechirnyi Kyiv, 14 May 1994.Google Scholar

65. Visnyk UNP, No. 4. The program was published in Shlaikh Peremohy, 21 October 1990. The socio-economic and political conceptions of the UNP are outlined in Ukrainsky Chas, Vol. 1, No. 8, 1991, pp. 23–31.Google Scholar

66. See the report on the establishment of Kharkiv branch in Visti Slobozhanshina, No. 1, June-July 1990.Google Scholar

67. Moloda Halychyna, 10 April 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

68. The Ukrainian Review, Vol. 28, No. 2, Summer 1990, pp. 79–82.Google Scholar

69. Visnyk UNP, No. 4.Google Scholar

70. Op. cit.,Google Scholar

71. Visnyk UNP, No. 3, September 1990.Google Scholar

72. Informatsiiny Bulletin UNP, No. 3.Google Scholar

73. Visnyk UNP, No. 1, June 1990.Google Scholar

74. Interview with Pryhodko in The Ukrainian Weekly, 21 October 1990.Google Scholar

75. Pryhodko, H., “The Present Situation in Ukraine,” The Ukrainian Review, Vol. 38, No. 4, Winter 1990, p. 84.Google Scholar

76. Ratusha, 14–15 June 1991.Google Scholar

77. Moloda Halychyna, 10 April 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

78. Shliakh Peremohy, 22 and 29 April 1990; The Ukrainian Review, Vol. 38, No. 2, Summer 1990, pp. 71–79.Google Scholar

79. Prohrama Vseukrainskoho politychnoho obiednannia Derzhavna Samnostijnist Ukrainy (Kyiv-L'viv: DSU, 1990). See also Homin Voli, 26 January; and Za nezalezhnist, 2 March 1991. The statute is published in the same issue of Homin Voli; and Za nezalezhnist, 23 March 1991.Google Scholar

80. Statut i Prohrama DSU (Kyiv-L'viv, 1992). See also the appeal dated April-May 1991 in Shliakh Peremohy, 11 August 1991.Google Scholar

81. Narodna Armiya, 18 December 1992. The congress speeches and resolutions are printed in Neskorena Natsia, No. 1, 1993. A critical account is given in Holos Ukrainy, 23 December 1992.Google Scholar

82. Vechirnyi Kyiv, 30 March 1993.Google Scholar

83. See the interview with Kandyba in Za vilnu Ukrainu, 16 May 1991; and “Who are We?” in Neskorena Natsiya, No. 2, 1992.Google Scholar

84. Zahrava, No. 1, 20 April 1991.Google Scholar

85. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 26 December 1991.Google Scholar

86. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 7, April 1992. Supporters of the DSU, like the OUNr, are critically disposed towards the democratisation of the OUN which took place at its third extraordinary congress in 1943 in Ukraine. Different attitudes towards this democratization led to the second split in the OUN in 1954 in the emigration. See the article by Stanislav Ishenko in Napriam, No. 5, 1991.Google Scholar

87. Krasivskyi was imprisoned in the 1960s and 1970s for organising the Ukrainian National Front, which also followed in the traditions of the OUN and was primarily based in western Ukraine.Google Scholar

88. Moloda Halychyna, 18 September 1990.Google Scholar

89. As Stanislav Ishenko pointed out, although the DSU was the closest in Ukraine to the traditions of the OUNr, nevertheless, “you have to renew it, modernise nationalist ideology and raise its level of activity.” This was a major cause in the split between the émigré OUNr, its traditionalist allies (DSU) and the UNA. See Napriam, No. 9, 1991.Google Scholar

90. Holos Ukrainy, 4 July 1991. Accordng to Zvarych, the OUNr cut off its contacts and financial assistance to the UMPA/UNA in September 1991 because it no longer complied with the ideological tenets of the émigré OUNr. The OUNr did not, therefore, back the presidential campaign of Shushkevych launched by the UNA. Conversation with Zvarych, Kyiv, 29 September 1995.Google Scholar

91. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 2, September 1991.Google Scholar

92. Zamkova Hora, No. 18, 1992.Google Scholar

93. See the speech by the leader of the DSU, Ivan Kandyba, at the inaugural congress of the UKRP, in Neskorena Natsiya, No. 11, June 1992.Google Scholar

94. Visti UMA, No. 7, 25 October 1990.Google Scholar

95. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 3, 1992.Google Scholar

96. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 3, 1992. The URP constantly criticised the slogan “Ukraine for Ukrainians!” promoted by integral nationalists. See L'vivski Novyny, No. 21, 21 May 1991.Google Scholar

97. Moloda Halychyna, 18 September 1990.Google Scholar

98. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 2, September 1991.Google Scholar

99. Zahrava, No. 1, April 1991.Google Scholar

100. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 1, 1992; Derzhavnist, No. 2, April-June 1992, pp. 33–36; and Ukrainian Reporter, Vol. 2, Nos. 7–8, July-August 1992. All subsequent quotations are taken from this text.Google Scholar

101. See the interview with Zelenchuk in Halychyna, 22 July 1990.Google Scholar

102. See interview with Kandyba in Visnyk UNP, No. 1, June 1990.Google Scholar

103. Moloda Halychyna, 18 September 1990.Google Scholar

104. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 26 December 1991.Google Scholar

105. See the interview with Prypin, Yaroslav, head of the DSU in Sambir, L'viv oblast in Sambirsky Visti, 12 March 1991.Google Scholar

106. Originally, Kandyba had planned to simply re-name the DSU as the “OUN” but this had been opposed by those who had a continued interest in the DSU's further existence.Google Scholar

107. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 16, November 1993.Google Scholar

108. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 19, December 1993.Google Scholar

109. Molod Ukrainy, 10 April 1991.Google Scholar

110. By April 1991, they claimed to have registered 2.8 million people.Google Scholar

111. Klych Ukrainy, No. 1, 1991.Google Scholar

112. Open letter to the leadership of Rukh by P. Kahuy dated 5 February 1991, in the possession of the author.Google Scholar

113. Visti UMA, No. 4, 3 October 1990. Khmara, Stepan, then joint deputy head of the Ukrainian Republican Party, believed that only 20 deputies of the People's Council were in favour of independence. The remainder had become “collaborators,” little different from the Communist “Group of 239.” See Visti UMA, No. 6, 19 October 1990.Google Scholar

114. Visnyk Rukhu, No. 6.Google Scholar

115. The Ukrainian Weekly, 21 October 1990.Google Scholar

116. Pryhodko, H., “Three Months of Ukrainian Statehood.” Unpublished text, in the posession of the author.Google Scholar

117. Ukrainski Novyny, Warsaw, No. 261, 14 October 1990.Google Scholar

118. News from Ukraine, No. 31, 1990.Google Scholar

119. Visnyk UNP, No. 3, September 1990.Google Scholar

120. Ratusha, 18 October 1990.Google Scholar

121. Visti UMA, No. 3, 27 September 1990.Google Scholar

122. The Ukrainian Review, Vol. 38, No. 4, Winter 1990, p. 65.Google Scholar

123. Visti UMA, No. 4, October 1990.Google Scholar

124. Shliakh Peremohy, 11 October 1990; and Visti UMA, No. 5, 10 October 1990.Google Scholar

125. At both the second and third sessions of the UMPA the UN Declaration of Human Rights was called a “document foreign to us.” See Za vilnu Ukrainu, 5 July 1991.Google Scholar

126. Ukrainsky Novyny, No. 309, 30 December 1990.Google Scholar

127. Ratusha and Moloda Halychyna, 10 January 1991.Google Scholar

128. Radio Kyiv, 1 February 1991.Google Scholar

129. Visti z Ukrainy, No. 2, 1991.Google Scholar

130. Visti UMA, No. 3, April 1991.Google Scholar

131. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 17 April 1991. See also Visti UMA, No. 3, April 1991; and Shliakh Peremohy, 21 April 1991.Google Scholar

132. Holos Ukrainy, 4 July 1991.Google Scholar

133. The Ukrainian Review, Vol. 38, No. 4, Winter 1990, p. 53.Google Scholar

134. In fact, such a conference took place in May 1991 and led to the creation of VOST, but it allied itself with Rukh—not the UMPA. See Ukrainian Reporter, Vol. 1, No. 10, May 1991.Google Scholar

135. Visti UMA, No. 3, April 1991.Google Scholar

136. Ukrainian News, Kyiv, No. 35, 1992. The only organisation which came out in support of the strikers was the New Ukraine bloc. See Ukrainian News, Kyiv, No. 36, 1992.Google Scholar

137. Zamkova Hora, No. 8, 1992.Google Scholar

138. Vechirnyi Kyiv, 14 May 1992.Google Scholar

139. Zamkova Hora, No. 19, 1991.Google Scholar

140. Vechirnyi Kyiv, 17 September 1992.Google Scholar

141. Shkil, Andrij, head of L'viv oblast UNA and editor of Holos Natsii, at a meeting in Stryj attended by the author on 21 May 1995.Google Scholar

142. Holos Natsii, Nos. 3–4, January 1993.Google Scholar

143. Reuters, 30 December 1994.Google Scholar

144. See his speech in Holos Ukrainy, 21 May 1994.Google Scholar

145. Shkil, Andrij, head of L'viv oblast UNA and editor of Holos Natsii, at a meeting in Stryj attended by the author on 21 May 1995.Google Scholar

146. Holos Natsii, No. 7, February 1993.Google Scholar

147. The Guardian, 21 March 1994.Google Scholar

148. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 16 February 1993.Google Scholar

149. Za vilnu Ukrainu, 15 Febrary 1994.Google Scholar

150. Holos Natsii, No. 9, February 1994.Google Scholar

151. Conversation with Koval, Kyiv, 1 October 1995.Google Scholar

152. Conversation with Yuriy Tyma, a UNA member of parliament from Ternopil, in Kyiv, 19 May 1995.Google Scholar

153. Granitsa Rossii, No. 41, December 1995, p. 2.Google Scholar

154. Trudovoi Tyraspol, 17–23 February 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

155. Holos Natsii, Nos. 16–17, May 1994.Google Scholar

156. Vechirnyi Kyiv, 1 and 19 November 1994.Google Scholar

157. The remainder of the SNUM and the Association of Ukrainian Youth (SUM) united into one organisation in 1991 and cooperated with the DSU. In the West the SUM belongs to the OUNr orbit.Google Scholar

158. Ratusha, 3–4 July 1991.Google Scholar

159. See two articles by Kuzio, Taras, “Ukrainian Paramilitaries,” Jane's Intelligence Review, Vol. 4, No. 12, December 1992; and “Paramilitaries in Ukraine,” Jane's Intelligence Review, Vol. 6, No. 3, March 1994.Google Scholar

160. Holos, No. 17, 1991.Google Scholar

161. News from Ukraine, No. 41, 1991.Google Scholar

162. See the photograph in Holos Natsii, Nos. 16–17, May 1994.Google Scholar

163. The Washington Times, 25 February 1994.Google Scholar

164. See Holos Ukrainy, 24 and 25 April 1992.Google Scholar

165. See Nezavisimost, 6 March; and Holos Ukrainy, 7 March 1992.Google Scholar

166. Molod Ukrainy, 4 March 1992.Google Scholar

167. Nezavisimost, 26 June; and Holos Ukrainy, 3 July 1992. Korchynsky claimed that the counter-Sobor of those Bishops opposed to Filaret, who formed the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarch), had been funded by the Gorbachov Foundation.Google Scholar

168. Moscow News, No. 33, 1993.Google Scholar

169. Molod Ukrainy, 3 August 1993.Google Scholar

170. Personal Conversation with Mykolsky, Yury, deputy head of the UNA, February 1992, L'viv. Mykolsky was expelled from the URP where he had held the position of deputy head of the L'viv oblast branch.Google Scholar

171. Natsionalist, No. 2, 1992.Google Scholar

172. Comments by Korchynskyi in Neskorena Natsiya, No. 2, September 1991.Google Scholar

173. Neskorena Natsiya, No. 2, September 1991.Google Scholar

174. Zamkova Hora, No. 10, 1992; and Visti z Ukrainy, No. 35, 1992.Google Scholar

175. Natsionalist, No. 7, 1992.Google Scholar

176. Zvarych believes these allegations have some truth behind them: “In the previous administration there were some people interested in supporting on a political level the UNA for one reason—when Kravchuk has an extreme right and left he has a better foothold in the centre.” Conversation with Zvarych, Kyiv, 29 September 1995. Similar allegations of Soviet and since Russian state funding for the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia have surfaced in the Russian Federation.Google Scholar

177. Ukrainska Dumka (London), 14 May 1992. Serhei Zhizhko argued that the main reason why Ukrainian nationalist groups are still weak is the lack of a Ukrainian national consciousness (Slovo, No. 10, 1992). Artymenko, Slavko, meanwhile, argues that there is no civil society and class differentiation of society in Ukraine and, therefore, ethnic nationalism will not have a popular base, while political parties (in contrast to nationalist movements) do not yet have public constituencies. See Ukrainsky Obrii, no date, 1991.Google Scholar

178. Ratusha, 28 January 1991.Google Scholar

179. See the Ideological Platform of the UNS in Ukrainsky Obrii, No. 6, 1992.Google Scholar

180. Kyivsky Klub, No. 1, 1992; and Natsionalist, No. 7, 1992.Google Scholar

181. Motyl, Alexander J., Dilemmas of Independence. Ukraine After Totalitarianism (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1993), p. 173.Google Scholar

182. Bilous, Andrew Wilson and Artur, “Political Parties in Ukraine,” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 45, No. 4, 1993, p. 693.Google Scholar