Neo-imperial policy of Russians in the temporarily occupied Ukrainian territories: the case of didactic history

Main Article Content

Yu. Prysiazhniuk
L. Syniavska

Abstract

Abstract. The aim of the article is to analyze the techniques of manipulative use of didactic history materials by Russian occupiers in the educational process in the temporarily occupied territories (hereinafter referred to as TOT) of Ukraine.


The scientific novelty. At least two innovative ideas are proposed. Firstly, new approaches to the interpretation of the conceptual framework are introduced. The «conceptual differentiation» of the historical designations of Russian statehood – the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union (USSR), and the Russian Federation (RF) – becomes fundamentally significant. Russian didactics mythologizes this tradition, deliberately (artificially) endowing it with a «continuous character». This approach serves as a «Launchpad» for ignoring the history of Ukraine, following a pattern similar to how the occupiers treat the histories of all conquered or controlled countries. The analysis of the materials recommended by the occupiers for student study in the TOT of Ukraine convincingly demonstrates this practice.


Secondly, the author addresses important methodological aspects of teaching, which, in fact, amount to speculation on history. Russians continue to abstractly apply all useful mythologized terms that have been shaped over the centuries. One of the most exploited notions is «Russians» («русские»). On the one hand, this serves to emphasize their «national superiority» over other peoples. On the other hand, it aims to diminish the national identity, pride, and uniqueness of Ukrainians. In the historical context imposed by the occupiers, Ukrainians are either presented as an inseparable part of the so-called «Russian peace» or, conversely, as «separatists», «fascists», «Nazis» and so on. The article provides sufficient facts and arguments to allow readers to clearly see that the occupiers interpret the entire history through the lens of contemporary neo-imperial myths, which they then impose unconditionally on the educational process in the TOT of Ukraine.


Conclusions. Since the second half of the 19th century, by incorporating Ukrainians into the concept of «Russians» («русские»), Russians have never again distinguished Ukrainians as a distinct national entity, that is, as a sovereign community of citizens of a particular state. This approach motivates the (imperial) political establishment to create the myth of a «brotherly people», which is subsequently used to justify further fabrications. This trend continued until the onset of the armed invasion of Ukraine, which began with the annexation of Crimea and the partial occupation of Luhansk and Donetsk regions in 2014, and then the occupation of parts of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions in 2022. One of the key methods used to «permanently» consolidate control over the seized territories is the intensive use of the education system. In the TOT of Ukraine, Russian forces simultaneously destroy Ukraine’s didactic experience and introduce a model for studying history according to the standards of the Russian Federation. In essence, the occupiers transform the educational process into a form of permanent propaganda campaign. Assimilation policy on the TOT of Ukraine, using history as a tool, effectively serves as preparatory groundwork for further acts of aggression.

Article Details

Section
Статті
Author Biographies

Yu. Prysiazhniuk

Yuriy PRYSIAZHNIUK – Doctor of Sciences (History), Professor, Professor of the Department of History of Ukraine, Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy, Cherkasy, Ukraine

L. Syniavska

Larysa SYNIAVSKA – Doctor of Sciences (History), Professor, Professor of the Department of History of Ukraine, Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy, Cherkasy, Ukraine

References

References

Hrytsak, Ya. (2022). How did the myth of «fraternal nations» arise and how to overcome it? Retrieved from: https://uinp.gov.ua/informaciyni-materialy/rosiysko-ukrayinska-viyna-istorychnyy-kontekst/yaroslav-grycak-yak-vynyk-mif-pro-bratni-narody [In Ukrainian].

Russian propaganda in game environments: an example of user content on Steam. (2024). Retrieved from: https://cedem.org.ua/analytics/rosiyska-propaganda-steam [In Ukrainian].

Torkunov, А. (ed.). History of Russia. (2019). 9th grade. Textbook for educational organizations. Part 1. Moscow [In Russian].

Oleksiy Mykhailovych. Retrieved from: https://uk.wikipedia.org [In Ukrainian].

Antelava, I. G. (1983). Georgians in the Patriotic War of 1812. Tbilisi [In Russian].

Kappeler, A. (2001). Mazepyns, Little Russians, Khokhlas: Ukrainians in the ethnic hierarchy of the Russian Empire. Kyivska starovyna [Kyiv antiquity], 5, 8–20 [In Ukrainian].

Donchenko, O. A., Romanenko, Yu. V. (2001). Archetypes of social life and politics (Deep regulations of psychopolitical everyday life)]. Kyiv [In Ukrainian].

FALSE: Ukraine was created by Lenin in 1922. (2022). Retrieved from: https://voxukraine.org/ru/nepravda-ukraynu-sozdal-lenyn-v-1922-godu [In Ukrainian].

Hrushevskyi, M. (1908). The end of the «Polish intrigue». Retrieved from: https://www.m-hrushevsky.name/uk/Publicistics/1908/KinecPolskojiIntrygy.html [In Ukrainian].

Galushko, K. (2017). Whose General Staff invented Ukraine? Retrieved from: https://zbruc.eu/node/61331 [In Ukrainian].

Prysiazhniuk, Yu. (2007). The Ukrainian peasantry of Dnieper Ukraine: socio-mental history of the second half of the 19th – beginning of the 20th century. Cherkasy [In Ukrainian].

Kostomarov, N. I. (1861). Response to the issues of the (Krakow) newspaper «Czas» and the magazine «Revue contemporaine». Osnova [Basis], 2, 121–135 [In Russian].

Beauvois, D. (1998). The battle for land in Ukraine 1863–1914. Poles in socio-ethnic conflicts. Kyiv [In Ukrainian].

Most read articles by the same author(s)