Santraukos Final
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VILNIUS UNIVERSITY Jovita Pranevi čiūt÷ FACTORS OF NATIONAL IDENTITY FORMATION IN CIS AREA: BELARUS AND UKRAINE CASE STUDY Summary of doctoral dissertation Social science, political science (02S) Vilnius, 2009 0 The dissertation was prepared at Vilnius University, Institute of International Relations and Political Science, 2004 – 2008. Academic supervisor: prof. habil. dr. Evaldas Nekrašas (Vilnius University, social science, political science – 02 S) Council of Defence Chairman: Prof. dr. Raimundas Lopata (Vilnius University, social science, political science – 02 S) Members: Prof. dr. Alvydas Jokubaitis (Vilnius University, social science, political science – 02 S) Prof. dr. Gediminas Vitkus (Lithuanian Military Academy, Vilnius University, social science, political science – 02 S) Assoc. dr. Vladas Sirutavi čius (Lithuanian Institute of History, humanities, history – 05 H) Assoc. dr. Tomas Janeli ūnas (Vilnius University, social science, political science – 02 S) Opponents: Prof. dr. Algis Krupavi čius (Kaunas University of Technology, social science, political science – 02 S) Assoc. dr. Dovil ÷ Jakni ūnait ÷ (Vilnius University, social science, political science – 02 S) The public defence of the dissertation will be held at 3 p.m. on the 19th June, 2009 at the Institute of International Relations and Political Science, Vilnius University. Address: Vokie čių g. 10, LT- 01130, Vilnius, Lithuania The summary of the doctoral dissertation was sent out on the 19th May, 2009. Dissertation is available at Vilnius University Library. 1 VILNIAUS UNIVERSITETAS Jovita Pranevi čiūt÷ NACIONALIN öS TAPATYB öS FORMAVIMOSI VEIKSNIAI NVS ERDV öJE: BALTARUSIJOS IR UKRAINOS ATVEJ Ų ANALIZ ö Daktaro disertacijos santrauka Socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai (02 S) Vilnius, 2009 2 Disertacija rengta 2004 – 2008 metais Vilniaus universitete Mokslinis vadovas: prof. habil. dr. Evaldas Nekrašas (Vilniaus universitetas, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai– 02 S) Disertacija ginama Vilniaus universiteto Politikos moksl ų krypties taryboje: Pirmininkas Prof. dr. Raimundas Lopata (Vilniaus universitetas, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai – 02 S) Nariai: Prof. dr. Alvydas Jokubaitis ( Vilniaus universitetas , Vilniaus universitetas, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai – 02 S ) Prof. dr. Gediminas Vitkus (Lietuvos karo akademija, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai - 02 S ) Doc. dr. Vladas Sirutavi čius (Lietuvos istorijos institutas, humanitariniai mokslai, istorija – 05 H) Doc. dr. Tomas Janeli ūnas ( Vilniaus universitetas, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai - 02 S ) Oponentai: Prof. dr. Algis Krupavi čius (Kauno technologijos universitetas, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai – 02 S ) Doc. dr. Dovil ÷ Jakni ūnait ÷ ( Vilniaus universitetas, socialiniai mokslai, politikos mokslai – 02 S ) Disertacija ginama viešame Politikos moksl ų krypties tarybos pos ÷dyje 2009 m. birželio 19 d. (penktadienis) 15 val. VU Tarptautini ų santyki ų ir politikos moksl ų institute, Vokie čių g. 10, 402 aud. Disertacijos santrauka išsiuntin ÷ta: 2009 m. geguž ÷s 19 d. Disertacij ą galima perži ūr÷ti Vilniaus universiteto bibliotekoje. 3 FACTORS OF NATIONAL IDENTITY FORMATION IN CIS AREA: BELARUS AND UKRAINE CASE STUDY Summary Research problem and relevance In recent years the importance of identity formation process was brought back from the margins of international relation to the analysis mainstream. The deciding events were first of all the collapse of the Soviet Union, secondly, the September 11, 2001. The inability of scholars to predict those events brought back the analysis of identity to the main focus of the research of the theorist of international relations, helped to emphasize the forgotten importance of the nationalism studies. On one hand, the identity has become as important object of analysis as security, usage of conventional and non-conventional armaments, foreign policy process or the international organization. On the other hand, for some theorists’ the identity has become a constitutive part of the analysis and the main explaining factors of the changes in the international relations. Depending on author or paradigm the authors are attributed, the identity could be treated both way as dependent and independent variable, having in mind that the different levels of analysis could be used in order to understand the identity. While analyzing existing academic works and research papers on identity the biggest problem is the theoretical specialization: different authors choose to analyze one or two separate aspects of identity ignoring the rest of possible aspects. This normative decision is taken in order to escape the broadness of the identity concept. This lead to narrow analysis or specialization on one or two aspects of the identity, which makes difficult to compare two different cases of identity analysis and leads to the relativist conclusion that the context is the only one deciding factors. Brubaker, Bugrova, Graham Smith and other propose to analyze not identity as the concept, but the process of the identity formation. Brubaker and Cooper use the concept of identification. This process could be influences by number of factors, which, on one hand, could be common for several countries in one region, on the other hand, do not let to underestimate the influence of the combination of several factors. Although the specialization and narrow analysis of the certain aspects of the identity or only some parts of the multi-level process of the identity formation proved 4 the predictions of the spread of radical nationalism in the post-Soviet area to be wrong too. Nonetheless in this area there are some examples of the clashes of ethnic interests and local military conflicts over the territory. The least successive analysis still are those case studies were nor civic neither ethnic identity has been consolidated. Complicated identity formation process in Belarus and Ukraine are two of those cases. Analyzing identity of Belarus and Ukraine, scholars try to answer the question why the process of nation-building in today’s Belarusian and Ukrainian territory is so different, why national identity is so fragmented in Ukraine and why Belarus is called denationalized state, how policy, economic and cultural issues influence the formation of identity in those countries. There are numerous competing theories explaining this situation in Belarus and Ukraine. In this dissertation the factors influencing identity formation are analyzed. I claim that the specialized one aspect analysis of the interior and exterior as well as nonmaterial (ideal) and material factors of identity formation does not explain the situation in Belarus and Ukraine. The goal of the work is to prove that in order to explain the processes of the identity formation in Belarus and Ukraine all factors should be analyzed and the list of the most important factors has to be proposed. In other words one factor analysis lacks explanatory ability, especially in post soviet area. Research goal and objectives The overall goal of the work is to explain the differences of the formation of identity in the post soviet area, through the analysis of the material and non material as well as internal and external factors of the identity formation in Belarus and Ukraine. The main objectives of this dissertation are: 1. To segregate the factors of identity formation from the theoretical literature. 2. To propose the typology of the identity formation factors. 3. To propose the matrix of the identity factors – geographical, military, legal, economical, political and cultural. 4. Using the proposed theoretical matrix to analyze the identity formation factors of Belarus and Ukraine: a. By researching the process of state-building in Belarus and Ukraine; b. By analyzing the opinion of ruling regime and opposition towards the process of state building and ethnic policy; 5 c. By analyzing Russian public opinion on Belarus and Ukraine as well as by analyzing the foreign policy of Russia towards Belarus and Ukraine; d. By analyzing public opinion of the societies of Belarus and Ukraine on ethnicity, state and foreign policy issues especially with Russia. 5. To draw the priority list of the identity formation factors in Belarus and Ukraine. Thesis: 1. Ethnic identity in the post soviet area (CIS countries) is inseparable from the state-building process: a. In CIS countries governments have an proactive ethnic policy; b. In CIS countries government and opposition compete for the different ethnic policies to be institutionalized. 2. The most important identity formation factors in Belarus are external and internal material factors: a. Internal political factors (political institutions and ideology) dominates over the internal cultural factors (history, stateness tradition, language) in Belarus. b. The economical welfare is the most important identification factor in Belarus, which makes external material factors (Russian economical and energy policies) able to influence the whole national identity formation process. 3. The most important identity formation factors in Ukraine are internal nonmaterial factors such as political and cultural: a. The internal cultural factors (language, culture, traditions, history narratives) defines not only the Ukrainian nation, but as well the state of Ukraine; b. The domination of internal nonmaterial factors (mostly political factors such as idea of state and nation, political values) over the material internal factors (political institutions, economical factors)