1. Anthony D. Smith, National Identity (London: Penguin, 1991), p. 14.Google Scholar

2. Lee Walker, “Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Soviet Transition,” in L. Drobizheva et al., eds, Ethnic Conflict in the Post-Soviet World: Case Studies and Analysis (Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 1996), p. 8.Google Scholar

3. “Democracy and nationalism were not opposed but complementary in the anti-communist revolution; only under the conditions of post-communism did a contradiction emerge between the two.” From Richard Sakwa, Russian Politics and Society (London and New York: Routledge, 1993), p. 98.Google Scholar

4. Karen Henderson and Neil Robinson, Postcommunist Politics: An Introduction (New York: Prentice Hall, 1997), p. 165.Google Scholar

5. Donna Bahry, Outside Moscow. Power, Politics, and Budgetary Policy in the Soviet Republics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987).Google Scholar

6. Cf. USSR Facts and Figures Annual (Gulf Breeze, FL: Academic International Press), Vol. 14, 1990, pp. 396–98, 400, 405; Vol. 15, 1991, p. 503.Google Scholar

Gregory V. Krasnov and Josef C. Brada, “Implicit Subsidies in Russian-Ukrainian Energy Trade,” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 49, No.5, 1997, p. 837.Google Scholar

7. Gregory V. Krasnov and Josef C. Brada, “Implicit Subsidies in Russian-Ukrainian Energy Trade,” Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 49, No.5, 1997, p. 837.Google Scholar

8. Beverly Crawford and Arend Lijphart, “Explaining Political and Economic Change in Post-Communist Eastern Europe: Old Legacies, New Institutions, Hegemonic Norms, and International Pressures,” Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 28, No. 2, 1995, p. 188.Google Scholar

9. Rogers Brubaker, “National Minorities, Nationalizing States, and External National Homelands in the New Europe,” Daedalus, Vol. 124, No. 2, 1995, pp. 107–132.Google Scholar

10. Stephen E. Hanson and Jeffrey S. Kopstein, “The Weimar/Russia Comparison,” Post-Soviet Affairs, Vol. 13, No. 3, 1997, pp. 252–283; Stephen Shenfield, “The Weimar/Russia Comparison: Reflections on Hanson and Kopstein,” Post-Soviet Affairs, Vol. 14, No. 4, 1998, pp. 355–368. Cf. “Is This Weimar Russia?” U. S. News & World Report, Vol. 125, No. 19, 1998, p. 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Jeff Chinn and Robert Kaiser, Russians as the New Minority; Ethnicity and Nationalism in the Soviet Successor States (Boulder: Westview Press, 1996), p. 28.Google Scholar

12. Anna Triandafyllidou, “National Identity and the ‘Other,’” Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 21, No. 4, 1998, pp. 593–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Graham Smith et al., Nation-Building in the Post-Soviet Borderlands: The Politics of National Identities (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. However, note a distinct anti-American strand in the ideology of most radically nationalist and Western-based UNA/UNSO (Ukrainian National Assembly/Ukrainian People's Self Defence), which even arrived at its own model of East Slavic Empire, though ruled from Kiev, not Moscow. The UNSO paramilitaries fought on the Russian (Slavic) side in the Trans-Dniester conflict with Moldova, and against Russians and pro-Russian separatists in Georgia and Chechnya. More on Ukraine's ultra-nationalists can be found in Taras Kuzio, “Radical Nationalist Parties and Movements in Contemporary Ukraine Before and After Independence: The Right and Its Politics, 1989–1994,” Nationalities Papers, Vol. 25, No. 2, 1997, pp. 211–242. The group's peculiar anti-establishment revolutionism and the accompanying hodgepodge of philosophy are well articulated by its leader: Dmytro Korchyns'kyi, Viina v Natovpi: Nash Dosvid Politychnoho Nasyl'stva (Kiev: RAF, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. Paul A. Goble, “Regions, Republics, and Russian Reform: Center-Periphery Relations in the Russian Federation,” in John W. Blaney, ed., The Successor States to the USSR (Washington: Congressional Quarterly, 1995), p. 163.Google Scholar

16. A more sanguine assessment of the prerevolutionary civil society in Russia can be found in Edith W. Clowes, Samuel D. Kassow and James L. West, eds, Between Tsar and People: Educated Society and the Quest for Public Identity in Late Imperial Russia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991); Nicolai N. Petro, The Rebirth of Russian Democracy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1995); David Wartenweiler, Civil Society and Academic Debate in Russia, 1905–1914 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).Google Scholar

17. Miroslav Hroch, Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985).Google Scholar

18. Liah Greenfeld, Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992).Google Scholar

19. Robert J. Kaiser, The Geography of Nationalism in Russia and the USSR (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 381.Google Scholar

20. Ibid., p. 382.Google Scholar

21. John Dunlop, “Russia: Confronting a Loss of Empire,” in Ian Bremmer and Ray Taras, eds, Nation and Politics in the Soviet Successor States (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 45.Google Scholar

22. Graham Smith, The Post-Soviet States. Mapping the Politics of Transition (London: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 34, 47.Google Scholar

23. Michael Hechter, Internal Colonialism. The Celtic Fringe in British National Development, 1536–1966 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975). A student of European regional nationalism has recently observed that seeing the creation of the UK “merely as the establishment of Greater England, or as a colonial venture” betrays the argument premised on “a strong teleological element … and a tendency to anachronism in projecting national identities back into the pre-national era” (Michael Keating, “Britain,” in Don MacIver, ed., The Politics of Multinational States (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999), p. 216.Google Scholar

24. Ronald Grigor Suny, The Revenge of the Past: Nationalism, Revolution, and the Collapse of the Soviet Union (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1993), p. 125.Google Scholar

25. Victor Zaslavsky, “Success and Collapse: Traditional Soviet Nationality Policy,” in Ian Bremmer and Ray Taras, Nation and Politics in the Soviet Successor States, pp. 33–34, 40.Google Scholar

26. Gregory Guroff and Alexander Guroff, “The Paradox of Russian National Identity,” in Roman Szporluk, ed., National Identity and Ethnicity in Russia and the New States of Eurasia (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1994), p. 86.Google Scholar

27. Theodore H. Friedgut, “Nations of the USSR: from Mobilized Participation to Autonomous Diversity,” in Alexander J. Motyl, ed., The Post-Soviet Nations: Perspectives on the Demise of the USSR (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992), p. 219.Google Scholar

28. John Dunlop, The New Russian Nationalism (New York: Praeger, 1985); idem, “Russia: Confronting a Loss of Empire.”Google Scholar

29. Iver B. Neumann, Russia and the Idea of Europe; A Study in Identity and International Relations (London: Routledge, 1996), p. 200.Google Scholar

30. Alex Pravda, “The Politics of Foreign Policy,” in Stephen White, Alex Pravda and Zvi Gitelman, eds, Developments in Russian and Post-Soviet Politics, 3rd edn (London: Macmillan, 1994), p. 223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31. Russia: A Country Study (Washington: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, 1998), p. xlvi.Google Scholar

32. Gennadii Ziuganov, Derzhava (Moscow: Informpechat', 1994), p. 103.Google Scholar

33. Kseniia Mialo, “Mezhdu zapadom i vostokom.” Moskva, No. 11, 1996, pp. 107–131; No. 12, 1996, pp. 83–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. G. A. Ziuganov, My Russia, ed. Vadim Medish (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1997), p. 17.Google Scholar

35. The author's calculations, based on published results of the elections.Google Scholar

36. Irina Kobrinskaia, “The Domestic Factors of Foreign Policy in Post-Communist Russia,” in Lilia Shevtsova, ed., Rossiia politicheskaia (Moscow: Carnegie Center, 1998), p. 317.Google Scholar

37. See more on commonalties between original and post-perestroika Eurasianism in Dmitry V. Shlapentokh, “Eurasianism: Past and Present,” Communist and Post-Communist Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2, 1997, pp. 129–151.Google Scholar

38. See S. G. Kara-Murza, Intelligentsiia na pepelishche Rossii (Moscow: Bylina, 1997); idem, Opiat' voprosy vozhdiam (Kiev: Oriiany, 1998).Google Scholar

39. Sergei Kortunov, “Imperskoe i natsional'noe v rossiiskom soznanii,” Mezhdunarodnaia zhizn, No. 5, 1998, p. 21.Google Scholar

40. See Gennadii Seleznev's address in Mezhdunarodnaia zhizn', No. 4, 1997, pp. 3–13.Google Scholar

41. Ilya Prizel, National Identity and Foreign Policy: Nationalism and Leadership in Poland, Russia and Ukraine (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42. Yevgenii M. Primakov, “Rossiia v mirovoi politike,” Mezhdunarodnaia zhizn', No. 5, 1998, p. 8.Google Scholar

43. Aleksei Podberezkin, “Russkii put': sdelai shag! (Nekotorye voprosy russkogo kommunizma),” Obozrevatel', No. 3, 1998, p. 167.Google Scholar

44. Unity, 72 seats; Communist Party of Russia, 113 seats; moderately nationalistic Fatherland - All Russia, 66 seats; Yabloko, 21 seats; Zhirinovsky Bloc, 17 seats. Essentially pro-governmental Union of Right-Wing Forces and Our Home Is Russia (both officially patriotic), 29 and 7 seats, respectively. RFE/RL online, “Final Results of Duma Elections Announced,” 10 January 2000 (http://www.rferl.org/elections/russia99results/index.html).Google Scholar

45. V. G. Gel'bras, “National Identification in Russia and China,” Polis, No.1, 1997, pp. 129–144.Google Scholar

46. V. Dubnov, “The Need to Understand New Realities,” New Times (Moscow), July 1997, pp. 12–13.Google Scholar

47. M. Wines, “Hostility to U. S. Is Now Popular in Moscow,” New York Times, 12 April 1999.Google Scholar

48. Results of a nationwide poll, as reported by VTsIOM (http://www.wciom.ru/HOMER. HTM).Google Scholar

49. Jamestown Foundation Monitor, 12 October 1999; Krasnaya Zvezda, 9 October 1999.Google Scholar

50. Erik Eckholm, “A Bristling Yeltsin Reminds Clinton of Russia's A-Arms,” New York Times, 10 December 1999.Google Scholar

51. As former U. S. National Security Adviser General Brent Scowcroft opined, “we are behaving toward them in a way that accentuates their sense of humiliation that they have as a result of the end of the Cold War. And we seem to ignore them, unless we need them for some particular thing. I think it is a very bad way to go. And I think it is giving rise to a strong nationalistic sentiment that is both anti-US and anti-Western.” Andre de Nesnera, “Russia-NATO,” Voice of America, 2 December 1999.Google Scholar

52. Alexander J. Motyl, “Making Sense of Ukraine,” Harriman Review, Vol. 10, No. 3, 1997, p. 6.Google Scholar

53. Joseph Stalin, a recognized Bolshevik authority on the “national question,” was particularly adept at the instrumental use of nationalism. An adamant centralizer, he nevertheless went along with Lenin's idea of federalization and indigenization of the cadres, the policy that continued until the early 1930s. Once indigenization bore its fruit, it was reversed to halt the possibility of secessionism. A similar U-turn occurred when the regime's attempt to stamp out Russian national feeling, labeled as “great-power chauvinism in the 1920–1930s,” was folded back to draw upon the sources of popular patriotism during World War II. Cf. Robert Conquest, ed., Soviet Nationalities Policy in Practice (New York: Praeger, 1967); Gerhard Simon, Nationalism and Policy toward the Nationalities in the Soviet Union (Boulder: Westview Press, 1991); Jeremy Smith, The Bolsheviks and the National Question, 1917–23 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999).Google Scholar

54. Paul A. Goble, “Gorbachev and the Soviet Nationality Problem,” in Maurice Friedberg and Hey ward Isham, eds, Soviet Society under Gorbachev (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1987), pp. 95–96.Google Scholar

55. David R. Marples, Ukraine under Perestroika: Ecology, Economics and the Workers' Revolt (London: Macmillan, 1991); Jane I. Dawson, Eco-nationalism: Anti-nuclear Activism and National Identity in Russia, Lithuania, and Ukraine (Durham: Duke University Press, 1996).Google Scholar

56. Health Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident (Geneva: World Health Organization, 1995).Google Scholar

57. Dominique Arel, “Language Politics in Independent Ukraine: Towards One or Two State Languages?” Nationalities Papers, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1995, pp. 597–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

58. More on that in Alexander J. Motyl, Dilemmas of Independence: Ukraine after Totalitarianism (New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1993).Google Scholar

59. Cf. Taras Kuzio and Andrew Wilson, Ukraine: Perestroika to Independence (Edmonton: Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies Press, 1994); Alexander J. Motyl, Dilemmas of Independence; Roman Szporluk, ed., National Identity and Ethnicity in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, pp. 3–17; Andrew Wilson, Ukrainian Nationalism in the 1990s: A Minority Faith (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).Google Scholar

60. Personal interview with members of the Kharkiv branch of the Inter-Regional Deputies Group, October 1991. Cf. Yu. N. Pakhomov and Ye. I. Golovakha, Politicheskaia kul'tura naseleniia Ukrainy (Kiev: Politychna Dumka, 1993), p. 100.Google Scholar

61. Volodymyr Lytvyn, Politychna arena Ukrainy; Dijovi osoby ta vykonavtsi (Kiev: Abrys, 1994), p. 280; Serhii Bilokin', “Ostannii shans? Z istorychnoho dosvidu derzhavotvorennia,” Literaturna Ukraina, 4 February 1993.Google Scholar

62. A textbook observes that “indeed, there was some relationship between nationalism and caution over economic reform because economic gradualism meant resisting pressure to reform from Russia” (Henderson and Robinson, Post-communist Politics, p. 201). A “mimicry of reform” might be a better choice of words than “economic gradualism,” at least for the period before the arrival of the new Ukrainian currency in 1996.Google Scholar

63. See more on corruption in Russia and Ukraine in Rozalina V. Ryvkina, “Social Roots of the Criminalization of Russian Society,” Russian Social Science Review, Vol. 39, No. 4, 1998, pp. 28–45; Valentyn Yakushyk, Charlotte Watson, James E. Mace and Kostyantyn Maleyev, “Corruption as Social Phenomenon,” Politychna dumka, No. 4, 1994, pp. 126–132; John Thornhill and Charles Clover, “The Robbery of Nations,” Financial Times, 21 August 1999; “Kuchma Can No Longer Back out of the War on Corruption,” Kyiv Post, 24 June 1999.Google Scholar

64. It would be naive to represent these subsidies to Ukraine as wholly free from material interest on the part of the sponsor. In Russian-Ukrainian relations, the practice of selling subsidized oil at world market prices with subsequent sharing of profits between suppliers in Moscow and resellers in Kiev is well established. See Sherman W. Garnett, Keystone in the Arch, pp. 70–71.Google Scholar

65. William L. Miller, Stephen White and Paul Heywood, Values and Political Change in Post communist Europe (Basingstoke: Macmillan; New York: St Martin's Press, 1998), p. 155.Google Scholar

66. Roman Szporluk, ed., National Identity and Ethnicity in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, p. 7.Google Scholar

67. More on that in Trevor Taylor, European Security and the Former Soviet Union: Dangers, Opportunities and Gambles (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1994); Taras Kuzio, Ukrainian Security Policy (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995); Tor Bukkvoll, Ukraine and European Security (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1997); Sherman W. Garnett, Keystone in the Arch: Ukraine in the Emerging Security Environment of Central and Eastern Europe (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1997); Nadia Schadlow, “The Denuclearization of Ukraine: Consolidating Ukrainian Security,” in Lubomyr A. Hajda, ed., Ukraine in the World (Cambridge,: Harvard University Press, 1998), pp. 271–287.Google Scholar

68. Address by President Leonid Kuchma of Ukraine at the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council Summit, Washington, 25 April 1999 (http://www.ukremb.com/presrel0426KUCH.htm).Google Scholar

69. Politychnyi portret Ukrainy, No. 18, 1997.Google Scholar

70. Electoral statistics for 1991–1994 can be found in Wilson, Ukrainian Nationalism in the 1990s. The results of the 1998 parliamentary elections were reported by the RFE/RL Newsline, 1 April 1998. See the analysis in the Ukrainian Weekly, Vol. 66, No. 52, 1998.Google Scholar

71. Politychnyi portret Ukrainy, No. 21, 1998. The sample of 1200 represented the adult population of Ukraine according to such indicators as sex, age, education, ethnicity, rural/urban division, and region.Google Scholar

72. The 1997 poll involved 420 members of the Ukrainian political, economic, media, business and other elites. Cited in Taras Kuzio, Ukraine: State and Nation Building (London: Routledge, 1998), p. 118.Google Scholar

73. The 1994–98 representative nationwide polls were conducted by the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, the Democratic Initiatives research center, and the SOCIS-Gallup (Ukraine), N between 1200 and 1810, p < 0.05.Google Scholar