Back in January, Vladimir Putin declared 2002 “The Year of
Ukraine” in Russia. Actually, it’s the Year of the Horse, according to the
Chinese calendar that’s popular among Ukrainians and Russians.
Maybe
the Russians want to start their own zodiac, using the names of the 12
republics that remain within their sphere of influence. Imagine some of the
characteristics associated with the various “signs.”
The
Year of Ukraine: Those born under this sign can never make up their minds
whether to go ahead and make that big change in their lives, or to go on
cheating a little here and there as long as no one catches them. Lesson: Grow up and
get a life.
The
Year of Kazakhstan: Those born under this sign have lots of natural talents but
they keep thinking they have to make it in Moscow. Lesson: Sell some oil and take a
vacation in Hawaii this year.
The
Year of Russia: Those born under this sign have everything on their side –
money, history and the bomb – but they’re still not happy. Lesson: Find yourselves a
better sign… maybe Tadjikistan?
In
any case, most Ukrainians saw this “Year of Ukraine” as a sop, not a threat.
Predictably, this friendly declaration involved setting up an intergovernmental
commission to “improve relations.” A little hand-holding went on, but nothing
that the press of either country paid much attention to.
Then
in May 24, a working group led by the two countries’ vice premiers was set up
to “jointly prepare new Ukrainian and Russian history textbooks.” Russia’s
Matviyenko said the reason was “the need to review the contemporary
interpretation of history textbooks in the light of the changes of recent
years.”
When
this became public knowledge, it caused an immediate stir. “What do you mean, a
joint history written with Russians?” a lot of Ukrainians asked aloud.
There
were demonstrations and protests in Kyiv. On Constitution Day, the
Administration responded by lining the streets with soldiers and policemen.
“These
officials are not professional historians,” read an open letter to Ukraine’s
leaders from historians, academics and civic leaders, signed by historian
Yaroslav Dashkevych, “so they have no moral right to be sitting judgment on
Ukrainian history books.”
“Ukraine
has just managed to move away from politically driven interpretations of its
history during this period,” the letter went on. In other words, its history
was no longer being written in Moscow.
Even
so, the country’s leaders cannot face up to all of its history. “Justice has
not been fully achieved,” the letter went on. “Ukraine’s leaders still have not
been able to acknowledge the OUN-UPA as a Ukrainian liberation movement that
was also a warring side in World War II.”
Ukrainians
across the big pond also responded. “Given what I have seen in Russian
textbooks on the history of Rus’ over the past decade,” wrote Robert De Lossa
of the Harvard Ukrainian Studies program, “I doubt that the influence of the
‘harmonization’ will flow northward and eastward.”
A
hot and heavy debate pulled together by the TV Press Club on July 4 reflected
the key problems. History professors and department heads showed up from the
NAS Institute of History, the University of Kyiv Mohyla-Academy, Kyiv State
University, and Kyiv International University.
Mohyla’s Dean of History, Yuriy Mytsyk noted that the Council of Europe has declared history a mandatory
subject for secondary schools. “That’s why the Russians are so involved in the
process of rewriting,” he said. “Otherwise, our children will know the truth
about relations between these two countries.”
“The
commission aims to settle conflicting points in the history of Ukraine and
Russia,” declared NAS-IH’s Deputy Chair Stanislav Kulchytskiy. “No one’s going
to rewrite history.”
They
don’t have to. According to Prof. Mytsyk, the Russian
Embassy has already started negotiations to present Russian textbooks to
Ukrainian schools free of charge.
“The
Russian side most definitely has some spots that they want to rewrite,” added
KSU’s History professor, Viktor Korol. “First of these is Hetman Ivan Mazepa.
Russians consider him a traitor, although from Ukraine’s point of view, he was
fighting for national independence. Second, the Russians don’t want the famine
of 1931-3 to be mentioned at all. And thirdly, they don’t want to say anything
about the forced exile of millions of Ukrainians to Siberia.”
Imagine
if Germans demanded a say in the writing of Jewish history in the 20th century
and refused to include the Holocaust or the Stern Gang?
In
fact, the first contemporary history text used in independent Ukraine was “A
History of Ukraine,” written by Canadian historian Orest Subtelny. It was a big
hit.
“Subtelny’s
History of Ukraine was
published very quickly, on time, and had a huge circulation,” explained KIU’s
Prof. Raïsa Ivanchenko. “But the secret of its popularity was that Subtelny was
the first author who offered a point of view on Ukrainian history that differed
from the official versions.”
Prof.
Kulchytskiy clearly didn’t like this. “The history of a country should be
written by citizens of that country, by those who were born here, who have the
national mentality and way of thinking. A foreign citizen can’t describe the
history of a country he wasn’t born in.”
So
much for a big chunk of great writing on the history of the world, including
Paul Johnson, Barbara Tuchman and Livy.
“I
have long thought of adding a history dimension to the USA/Ukraine Program,” Bohdan
Oryshkevich wrote June 16. “With anywhere from 3.5 to 4.5 students from the
Russian Federation to 1.0 students from Ukraine at any one time studying in the
US, Russians are still dominating the social sciences in American universities…
And there are probably more students from Ukraine studying history in Russia,
according to old methods, than in the West.
“Only
by educating highly qualified and ethical historians are Ukrainians likely to
succeed in persuading the world – and the Ukrainian population – of the
character of Ukrainian history.”
Harmony
works best when two voices of equal power sing different notes. •
–from the
notebooks of Pan O.
No comments:
Post a Comment