Friday, September 19, 2014

On Ukraine

"Ukraine" itself is an artificial country, with two very different conceptions of what nationhood entails. Such a divided nation cannot sustain itself for long. Why people insist on treating Ukraine as such an indissolvable, inviolable political unit is simply beyond my powers of comprehension. An eventual partition of the country in question along ethno-linguistic lines is going to be inevitable at some point in time, whether now at Putin’s behest or a century from now. This Progressive project of forcing varying peoples into artificial cultures is both ironic (see: Wilson and self-determination) and destined to fail. Current rhetoric from both sides is at a fever pitch and has been for some time, even since before the events of Euromaidan. Nothing short of partition will suffice to end the conflict in a cost- and life-effective manner.

Given that much of western Ukraine has little to no cultural affinity for Russia (and far more in common with Poles, Czechs, etc. than with their fellow citizens in the south and east), it is only natural that this region (Lviv, Chernovtsy, Kyiv) should form a more coherent national entity. At the same time, folks in Karkov, the Crimea, Donetsk, and so forth are for all intents and purposes Russian, and given their attitude towards Euromaidan, they'd likely be happier (and better off) being annexed by Russia than being forced to stay in a loveless union with the Ukrainians to their west.



No comments:

Post a Comment