Today different professional hysterics Ukraine are predicting another collapse and decay, if not on the Zbruch river, the Dnieper. In General, over the past ten years, these mantras have become quite familiar. And, it seems, the fees of our Cassander(s) declined significantly, as they attended to the investment of alarmism in some more complex forms. That, however, does not negate the existence attached to the reflex anxiety of the active part of society, especially today, because of some childish uncertainties of the current Bank and the two buildings on the Grushevsky street against our future foreign policy course in the sphere of security and defense.
Well, conceptually “the” following: we have, apparently, no reason for either bleak pessimism or optimism of the flaming in this matter. Balance and proportion for your own point of view, each may determine for itself, we present below the same number of arguments pro and contra in relation to the ability of modern Ukraine to preserve its territorial integrity (and, in General, to remain as a sovereign state). Some of these arguments every day before my eyes, some escape public attention, and some require interpretation due to their inconsistency. But all our state project from the beginning was full of contradictions, so we are used to. So, let’s start. Let’s start with contra.
First, Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders is the former USSR in different periods of the twentieth century – century European totalitarian regimes, formed by the Communists, mostly coming from the Leninist approach to the national question, and later from Stalin’s geopolitics. But the Yalta world order, and inherited his “malto-Madrid”, 2014 has become history, burying the international law. So long ago – there’s nothing funnier to hear appeals to respect the Budapest Memorandum and thousands of such papers.
Second, Ukraine compose several regions with differing identity, stemming from centuries of being part of various empires, but also from the peculiarities of the colonization of a significant part of our current territories in the XVII-XX centuries. Ideological and political contradictions between these macro-regions (groups provinces) are of stable character, the periodic elections often turn into a showdown between the multimillion-dollar “cases” of voters professing against each other a certain degree of intolerance.
Thirdly, because of how post-Imperial heritage, and characteristics of Soviet industrial policy (USSR if there was an Empire, “meteoriticists” functioning, according to Marx, in the so-called “Asiatic mode of production”, serving the interests of the party of the priesthood and its clientele) Ukrainian macro-regions differ sharply in their economic profile. And therefore in terms of intensity and geographical direction of flows of labor migration.
At the moment (despite the fact that in the 90’s – 2000 Ukrainians were firmly mastered in the South of the European Union: Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece) disproportionate role in the Ukrainian economic demography began to play Poland, which, let’s not forget, unofficially, has some species in the Ukrainian part of the South-Western lands from the Dnieper to the black sea coast. All of these countries – members of NATO and the EU in different capacities included in the notorious “Golden billion”…
Finally, fourth, we have the disposition and the present Russian Federation, at the moment, chop off by force from Ukraine’s Autonomous Republic of Crimea and part of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, while continuing to irradiate us, Europe and the whole world with its cave-evil propaganda. As well as unsuccessfully to corrupt Western politicians, exploiting their evolved during the formation of the consumer society of moral and spiritual squalor.
That is, as 6, as and 28, like 100 years ago, the Ukrainian case is clearly doomed to failure. So it’s time for the arguments “pro”, especially since for the last 6 years they have significantly updated.
First, Ukraine despite a partial and not without success, anyway, on the Polish model of fiscal decentralization, government is extremely centralized. Cramps, which have become a daily reality in the occupied territories, including mnohopocetny adventures of the population of the occupied Crimea, have demonstrated this trait of our state of the device with the desired brightness. If Ukraine were real attempts of separatism, they belong to the period 2004-2005, when the votes were distributed evenly and with a pronounced accent of cultural macro-regions. However, from a consumer point of view, the Ukrainians are very pragmatic. Therefore, ideological separatism remained on the level of fantasy pique vests.
Secondly, since the summer of 2014 electoral trends in the Ukrainian society during the revolutionary shock and even deeper upheaval of the Russian aggression (which received over many decades, the classical, biblical “mark of Cain”) has changed. Five and a half years ago, the Ukrainian citizens by consensus voted for the Pro-Western Petro Poroshenko, and in 2019 in the second round voted anti-system, but far from any old-fashioned “Pro-Russian” Vladimir Zelensky. As for the “Pro-Russian” politicians, they, in spite of the huge financial and media resources remain in the niche of the rogue, not having any real effect. Any orientation on Moscow in the Ukrainian political life came to an end. At least as long as Russia remains a Eurasian analogue of the totally criminalized Nigeria, albeit with a nuclear Arsenal, is hardly instrumental in terms of neighborhood opponents.
Thirdly, despite certain contradictions in political views, which now often have the character of a diagonal cut, not polar contradictions, internal conflicts are increasingly limited by the scope of the existing institutions (although it is a necessary evolution and expansion). Certain changes in sentiment and economic processes in Ukraine so disconnected from reality of Russia that even the most sophisticated provocation of the Kremlin immediately are exposed, and the perpetrators are being ridiculed, in fact, passing through “reputational Chernobyl”.
Thus, fourthly, “a short story” this nationwide hobby is now “clarifying” any other foreign “zrad”, which tells about the growing up of the Ukrainian political nation. Slightly updated political class is still hard to keep up with her. And the West in the Ukrainian view of the world – is not a benefactor, but a debtor.
Finally, in the fifth place, cuts and splits do not correspond to work plans for large, medium and small owners as a modern intermediate and archaic sector of the Ukrainian economy for a long time and confidently joined the global economy and are willing to Fund an army of any size to protect their interests, understood collectively. Therefore, the Ukrainian society really is today concerned with a completely different problem than “klikusheskie decays”. So it would by hysterical to think about their retirement plan.