Memory Wars in Divided Societies:

The Political Uses of the Past in Contemporary Ukraine

Memory Wars in Divided Societies:

The Political Uses of the Past in Contemporary Ukraine

Saskia BrechenmacherPolitical Science Honors Thesis

Adviser: Linda Cook

Second Reader: Omer Bartov

Saskia BrechenmacherPolitical Science Honors Thesis

Adviser: Linda Cook

Second Reader: Omer Bartov

Memorial for the Famine of 1932-33 (Holodomor), KievMemorial for the Famine of 1932-33 (Holodomor), Kiev

OverviewOverview Research Question:

Why have political conflicts over divisive and difficult periods in the nation’s past become more salient in the second decade after Ukrainian independence

Why and to what extent do the uses of collective memory vary in Ukrainian politics?

>>What is the role of collective memory in Ukrainian post-Soviet politics?

Research Question: Why have political conflicts over divisive and

difficult periods in the nation’s past become more salient in the second decade after Ukrainian independence

Why and to what extent do the uses of collective memory vary in Ukrainian politics?

>>What is the role of collective memory in Ukrainian post-Soviet politics?

OverviewOverview Theoretical frameworks

Collective Memory Nationalism/Nation-building Politics of Transition/Transitional Justice Memory as a tool for political competition

2 Case Studies The Holodomor in 1932-33 The Second World War, in particular the role of Ukrainian

nationalists (OUN/UPA), the Soviet “Victory Myth” and the Holocaust.

Theoretical frameworks Collective Memory Nationalism/Nation-building Politics of Transition/Transitional Justice Memory as a tool for political competition

2 Case Studies The Holodomor in 1932-33 The Second World War, in particular the role of Ukrainian

nationalists (OUN/UPA), the Soviet “Victory Myth” and the Holocaust.

Ukraine (until 1939)Ukraine (until 1939)

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Ukraine (since 1991)Ukraine (since 1991)

Memory Politics in the1990sMemory Politics in the1990s

1. Lack of institutional break with the past prevents implementation of transitional justice policies

2. Fragility of the new state constrains the use of memory as a nation-building tool

3. Kravchuk and Kuchma use history for instrumentalist purposes

1. Lack of institutional break with the past prevents implementation of transitional justice policies

2. Fragility of the new state constrains the use of memory as a nation-building tool

3. Kravchuk and Kuchma use history for instrumentalist purposes

Political polarization: 2004 electionsPolitical polarization: 2004 elections

Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/ukraine/election-2004.htmSource: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/ukraine/election-2004.htm

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Yushchenko: A New Nation-Building Approach (2004-2010)

Yushchenko: A New Nation-Building Approach (2004-2010)

Yushchenko + Orange Revolution: promise of reform, reaction against Soviet legacies

Ukrainian victimhood and glorification of OUN-UPA, erasure of guilt and collaboration?

Ideology: National interpretation of the past = democratization, Westernization

Pragmatism: Political stalemate and government incompetence focus on symbolic politics

Yushchenko + Orange Revolution: promise of reform, reaction against Soviet legacies

Ukrainian victimhood and glorification of OUN-UPA, erasure of guilt and collaboration?

Ideology: National interpretation of the past = democratization, Westernization

Pragmatism: Political stalemate and government incompetence focus on symbolic politics

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

“[The commemoration of the Holodomor] is the manifesto of our invincibility, the manifesto of the truth of the Ukrainian people. The answer to all Ukrainophobes, to the hatred of our spirit.”

(Yushchenko, 2008)

“[The commemoration of the Holodomor] is the manifesto of our invincibility, the manifesto of the truth of the Ukrainian people. The answer to all Ukrainophobes, to the hatred of our spirit.”

(Yushchenko, 2008)

Yanukovych: “De-politicizing the past” (2010 - now)

Yanukovych: “De-politicizing the past” (2010 - now)

Electoral support base in the East and South Debates about the past represented as

polarizing, nationalist, politicized Instrumentalization of Soviet narratives and

stereotypes Radicalization of opposition: “the Russian

threat”

Electoral support base in the East and South Debates about the past represented as

polarizing, nationalist, politicized Instrumentalization of Soviet narratives and

stereotypes Radicalization of opposition: “the Russian

threat”

“The substitution of real politics with primitive populism, ideological shamanism, and leader cults [have] destabilized the situation [...]. Just like in the first years of independence, the society was once against artificially plunged into discussions about history that provoked new conflicts and misunderstandings.” (Yanukovych, 2011)

“The substitution of real politics with primitive populism, ideological shamanism, and leader cults [have] destabilized the situation [...]. Just like in the first years of independence, the society was once against artificially plunged into discussions about history that provoked new conflicts and misunderstandings.” (Yanukovych, 2011)

ConclusionsConclusions Substantial continuity in the political

instrumentalization of history Gradual radicalization of political rhetoric History as a battleground for competing

visions of Ukrainian national identity: perpetuating Soviet traditions or imposing a new nationalist myth

Substantial continuity in the political instrumentalization of history

Gradual radicalization of political rhetoric History as a battleground for competing

visions of Ukrainian national identity: perpetuating Soviet traditions or imposing a new nationalist myth

Implications Implications

No critical engagement with Soviet past on an official level

Silencing of historical narratives that contradict political agendas, top-down processes

Obstructs democratization of memory, historical scholarship and open societal discourse

Distracts from socio-economic woes Encourages public disengagement and extremism

No critical engagement with Soviet past on an official level

Silencing of historical narratives that contradict political agendas, top-down processes

Obstructs democratization of memory, historical scholarship and open societal discourse

Distracts from socio-economic woes Encourages public disengagement and extremism

Thank you!Thank you!