Cultural Hegemony and National Cohesion: Examining the Ukrainian Experience

Abstract

This article investigates the historical and ongoing impact of Russian cultural policies on the development and strengthening of Ukrainian national unity. Drawing on theories of nationalism, social identity, and cultural hegemony, we analyze how deliberate attempts to suppress Ukrainian language, history, and religious institutions have, paradoxically, contributed to a more robust and unified Ukrainian national identity. The study examines various facets of this suppression, including linguistic Russification, historical revisionism, and religious subjugation, and explores the Ukrainian responses, from linguistic preservation efforts to the assertion of ecclesiastical independence. Ultimately, the article argues that Russian cultural suppression, rather than diminishing Ukrainian nationhood, has inadvertently fostered a collective memory of resistance and a stronger sense of shared identity among Ukrainians, particularly evident in contemporary times.

European International Journal of Philological Sciences
Source type: Journals
Years of coverage from 2021
inLibrary
Google Scholar
CC BY f
1-5
14

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
To share
Dr. Olena Kovalenko. (2025). Cultural Hegemony and National Cohesion: Examining the Ukrainian Experience. European International Journal of Philological Sciences, 5(06), 1–5. Retrieved from https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/eijps/article/view/108177
Crossref
Сrossref
Scopus
Scopus

Abstract

This article investigates the historical and ongoing impact of Russian cultural policies on the development and strengthening of Ukrainian national unity. Drawing on theories of nationalism, social identity, and cultural hegemony, we analyze how deliberate attempts to suppress Ukrainian language, history, and religious institutions have, paradoxically, contributed to a more robust and unified Ukrainian national identity. The study examines various facets of this suppression, including linguistic Russification, historical revisionism, and religious subjugation, and explores the Ukrainian responses, from linguistic preservation efforts to the assertion of ecclesiastical independence. Ultimately, the article argues that Russian cultural suppression, rather than diminishing Ukrainian nationhood, has inadvertently fostered a collective memory of resistance and a stronger sense of shared identity among Ukrainians, particularly evident in contemporary times.


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

01

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

TYPE

Original Research

PAGE NO.

1-5




OPEN ACCESS

SUBMITED

03 April 2025

ACCEPTED

02 May 2025

PUBLISHED

01 June 2025

VOLUME

Vol.05 Issue05 2025

COPYRIGHT

© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.

Cultural Hegemony and
National Cohesion:
Examining the Ukrainian
Experience

Dr. Olena Kovalenko

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine


Abstract:

This article investigates the historical and

ongoing impact of Russian cultural policies on the
development and strengthening of Ukrainian national
unity. Drawing on theories of nationalism, social
identity, and cultural hegemony, we analyze how
deliberate attempts to suppress Ukrainian language,
history, and religious institutions have, paradoxically,
contributed to a more robust and unified Ukrainian
national identity. The study examines various facets of
this suppression, including linguistic Russification,
historical revisionism, and religious subjugation, and
explores the Ukrainian responses, from linguistic
preservation efforts to the assertion of ecclesiastical
independence. Ultimately, the article argues that
Russian cultural suppression, rather than diminishing
Ukrainian nationhood, has inadvertently fostered a
collective memory of resistance and a stronger sense of
shared identity among Ukrainians, particularly evident
in contemporary times.

Keywords:

Cultural hegemony, national cohesion,

Ukrainian identity, post-Soviet space, nation-building,
language politics, media, propaganda, cultural conflict,
ethno-linguistic divisions, Russian influence, civic
nationalism, cultural resistance, hybrid warfare, soft
power, Ukrainian nationalism, identity politics,
geopolitical tensions, cultural integration, historical
memory, civil society.

Introduction:

National unity is a complex construct,

often forged through shared experiences, common
culture, and collective memory [1, 12, 38]. In the case of
Ukraine, its path to national cohesion has been
significantly shaped by centuries of external influence,
particularly from Russia. Historically, the Russian state


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

2

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

has pursued policies aimed at integrating Ukraine,
often through the forceful assimilation of its distinct
cultural elements. These policies, rooted in a
perception of Ukraine as an integral part of a "Russian
world" [8] or even denying its very existence [6, 26],
have manifested as systematic cultural suppression
across various domains. This suppression has included
the imposition of the Russian language, the
reinterpretation of Ukrainian history to align with
Russian narratives, and attempts to control Ukrainian
religious institutions [9, 17, 35].

This article aims to analyze the multifaceted impact of
these Russian cultural suppression efforts on Ukrainian
national unity. We hypothesize that rather than
successfully dissolving Ukrainian distinctiveness, these
suppressive measures have, in fact, catalyzed the
development of a more resilient and unified Ukrainian
national identity. This investigation is pertinent in
understanding the current geopolitical landscape and
the profound societal shifts occurring within Ukraine,
particularly in the context of recent conflicts [11]. We
will draw upon established theoretical frameworks,
including Benedict Anderson's concept of "imagined
communities" [1], Henri Tajfel and John Turner's social
identity theory [13, 36], and Antonio Gramsci's notion
of cultural hegemony [10, 37], to provide a
comprehensive analysis of this dynamic.

METHODOLOGY

This study employs a qualitative, historical-analytical
approach, drawing upon a range of primary and
secondary sources. We analyze historical decrees,
legislation, and official pronouncements related to
language, education, and religion in both the Russian
Empire, the Soviet Union, and independent Ukraine.
Contemporary scholarly works, journalistic accounts,
and official statements from Ukrainian and
international bodies are also examined to provide
context and evidence of the ongoing cultural struggle.
The methodological framework is further informed by
the aforementioned theoretical perspectives to
interpret the impact of cultural suppression on
national identity formation. The selection of
references was based on their relevance to the
historical and contemporary relationship between
Russian cultural policy and Ukrainian national identity,
covering aspects such as linguistics, religion,
education, and the broader concept of nation-building.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The historical trajectory of Russian cultural
suppression in Ukraine can be broadly categorized into
several key areas: linguistic Russification, historical
revisionism, and religious subjugation. Each of these
attempts to assert cultural hegemony [10] has had a

profound, often counterintuitive, impact on Ukrainian
national unity.

Linguistic Russification and Ukrainian Linguistic Revival

For centuries, the Russian Empire and later the Soviet
Union implemented policies designed to promote the
Russian language at the expense of Ukrainian. Edicts and
decrees frequently restricted the use of Ukrainian in
publishing, education, and public life. For example, the
Ems Ukaz of 1876 famously banned the publication and
import of Ukrainian-language books, except for belles-
lettres [35]. During the Soviet era, while ostensibly
promoting national languages, a process of "linguicide"
was observed, where Russian was elevated as the
language of prestige and advancement, leading to
significant Russification, particularly in urban areas [4, 9,
16]. The 1989 Law of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist
Republic "On Languages in the Ukrainian SSR" reflected
a complex linguistic landscape shaped by these policies
[18].

However, these suppressive measures did not
extinguish the Ukrainian language. Instead, they often
fostered a sense of resistance and a deep attachment to
the language as a marker of national identity. The
creation of Ukrainian-Russian dictionaries, even under
restrictive conditions, highlighted the distinctiveness of
the Ukrainian language [15]. Following independence,
Ukraine embarked on a deliberate path to strengthen
the position of Ukrainian as the sole state language,
enshrined in its Constitution [5]. The 2019 Law "On
Ensuring the Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as
the State Language" further solidified its status [19],
building on earlier attempts such as the 2012 Law "On
the Principles of State Language Policy" which initially
caused some controversy [21]. The appointment of a
Commissioner for the Protection of the State Language
in 2020 further underscores this commitment [30]. This
revival is not merely a linguistic shift but a profound act
of national self-assertion, demonstrating a collective
rejection of linguistic assimilation [2, 3, 4]. The ongoing
process of "de-Russification" of cultural institutions and
public discourse, including the renaming of artworks,
signifies a broader cultural reclaiming [27].

Historical Revisionism and the Assertion of Ukrainian
Narrative

Russian narratives have consistently sought to deny
Ukraine's distinct historical trajectory, portraying it as
an artificial construct or an inseparable part of a
"Greater Russia" [6, 26, 29]. This historical revisionism
often minimizes periods of Ukrainian statehood,
exaggerates shared historical roots, and distorts events
such as the Holodomor, which many scholars recognize
as a deliberate act of genocide against the Ukrainian
people [31, 33]. The concept of "Malorossiya" (Little


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

3

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

Russia) was a tool to diminish Ukrainian identity,
subsuming it under a larger Russian identity [35].

Yet, this constant external redefinition of their past has
spurred Ukrainians to actively reclaim and assert their
own historical narrative. The emphasis on collective
memory, as theorized by Halbwachs [12] and Wertsch
& Roediger [38], has become crucial. Educational
reforms, such as the "New Ukrainian School" initiative,
aim to foster a national consciousness rooted in
Ukrainian history and culture [7, 28]. The
condemnation of communist and Nazi totalitarian
regimes through legislation [20] is also a symbolic act
of severing ties with a past that often sought to erase
Ukrainian distinctiveness. The shared experiences of
oppression, particularly during the Soviet era, have
become powerful unifying elements, contributing to a
strong sense of "imagined community" [1] and social
identity [13, 36]. Scholars like Plokhy and Subtelny
have provided comprehensive historical accounts that
counter Russian narratives, further solidifying a distinct
Ukrainian historical consciousness [29, 35].

Religious Subjugation and Ecclesiastical Independence

The Russian Orthodox Church has historically served as
a tool of Russian state policy, extending its influence
into Ukraine and often hindering the development of
an independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church. For
centuries, Ukrainian Orthodox institutions were
subordinated to the Moscow Patriarchate, serving as a
means of cultural and political control [22].

However, the pursuit of religious independence has
been a significant aspect of Ukrainian national
awakening. The establishment of the autocephalous
(independent) Orthodox Church of Ukraine in 2018,
formally recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of
Constantinople, marked a momentous break from
centuries of Russian ecclesiastical dominance [14, 24].
This move was not merely a theological development
but a powerful statement of national sovereignty and
cultural autonomy. The conflict in Donbas further
underscored the role of the Ukrainian National Church
in affirming national identity [22]. This religious
assertion reflects a broader trend of Ukrainians
asserting their distinct identity across all societal
spheres, demonstrating a robust resistance to external
cultural and political influence.

CONCLUSION

The historical and ongoing attempts by Russia to
suppress

Ukrainian

culture

through

linguistic

Russification, historical revisionism, and religious
subjugation

have,

paradoxically,

strengthened

Ukrainian national unity. Rather than eroding a distinct
Ukrainian identity, these pressures have acted as a
catalyst, fostering a deeper sense of shared heritage,

collective memory of resistance, and a unified purpose
among Ukrainians. The assertion of the Ukrainian
language, the embrace of their authentic historical
narrative,

and

the

pursuit

of

ecclesiastical

independence are not merely reactive measures but
proactive affirmations of a resilient and vibrant national
identity.

The Ukrainian experience offers a compelling case study
of how external cultural hegemony, instead of leading
to assimilation, can inadvertently solidify national
cohesion. The current conflict, in particular, has
galvanized Ukrainian society, uniting diverse linguistic
and regional groups under a common banner of national
defense and cultural preservation [2, 39]. As Ukraine
continues to assert its sovereignty, its cultural
distinctiveness, forged in the crucible of historical
suppression, will undoubtedly remain a cornerstone of
its national unity and its future trajectory on the
international stage [34].

REFERENCES

Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections
on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.

Chaika, O. (2023). International cultural ecology:
Multicultural and multilingual risks (based on the
materials from the Russia-Ukraine war). In Ecology in
discourse. Natural and cultural landscape (pp. 31

64).

Slupsk: University of Pomerania in Slupsk.

Chaika, O. (2024). Polyculture vs Multiculture through

the Lens of Ukraine: What’s in the Concept? In

Materials

of the III International Interdisciplinary Conference

“Language,

Business

and

Law,

Intercultural

Communication: Challenges of Today”

(pp. 16

20). Kyiv:

National University of Life and Environmental Sciences
of Ukraine.

Chayinska, M., Kende, A., & Wohl, M. J. (2022). National
identity and beliefs about historical linguicide are
associated with support for exclusive language policies
among the Ukrainian linguistic majority. Group
Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(4), 924

940.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220985911

Constitution of Ukraine. (June, 1996). Retrieved from

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254%D0%BA/96
-%D0%B2%D1%80#Text

Düben, B. A. (2020). There is no Ukraine: Fact-checking

the Kremlin’s version of Ukrainian history. Retrieved

from

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lseih/2020/07/01/there-is-

no-ukraine-fact-checking-the-kremlins-version-of-
ukrainian-history/

Education

Reforms.

(2017).

Retrieved

from

https://www.kmu.gov.ua/reformi/rozvitok-lyudskogo-
kapitalu/reforma-osviti


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

4

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

Feklyunina, V. (2016). Soft power and identity: Russia,

Ukraine and the “Russian world(s)”.

European Journal

of

International

Relations,

22(4),

773

796.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066115601200

Gao, L. (2024). The national consciousness of Ukraine
and its evolution during the Soviet era. Journal of
Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 28, 140

145. https://doi.org/10.54097/4dfr5c77

Gramsci, A. (2020). Selections from the prison
notebooks. In The applied theatre reader (pp. 141

142). London: Routledge.

Green, J. A., Henderson, C., & Ruys, T. (2022). Russia’s

attack on Ukraine and the jus ad bellum. Journal on the
Use of Force and International Law, 9(1), 4

30.

https://doi.org/10.1080/20531702.2022.2056803

Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory. Chicago,
London: University of Chicago Press.

Hogg, M. A. (2016). Social identity theory. In
Understanding peace and conflict through social
identity theory: Contemporary global perspectives (pp.
3

17). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-

3-319-29869-6_1

Hunder, M., & Humphries, C. (2022). Moscow-led
Ukrainian Orthodox Church breaks ties with Russia.
Retrieved

from

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/moscow-
led-ukrainian-orthodox-church-breaks-ties-with-
russia-2022-05-28/

Iziumov, O. (1930). Ukrainian-Russian dictionary:
According to the new spelling. Kharkiv; Kyiv: State
Publishing House of Ukraine.

Kulyk, V. (2014). What is Russian in Ukraine? Popular
beliefs regarding the social roles of the language. In
The Russian language outside the nation (pp. 117

140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748668458.0
03.0005

Kuzio, T. (1998). Ukraine: Coming to terms with the
Soviet legacy. Journal of Communist Studies and
Transition

Politics,

14(4),

1

27.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13523279808415388

Law of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic No.
8312-

11 “On Languages in the Ukrainian SSR”.

(October,

1989).

Retrieved

from

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/8312-11#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 2704-

VIII “On Ensuring the

Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as the State

Language”.

(April,

2019).

Retrieved

from

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2704-19#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 317-

VIII “On the Condemnation of

Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) Totalitarian

Regimes in Ukraine and the Prohibition of Propaganda

of Their Symbols”. (April, 2015). Retrieved from

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/317-19#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 5029-

VI “On the Principles of State

Language Policy”. (July, 2012). Retrieved from

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/5029-17#Text

Leustean, L. N., & Samokhvalov, V. (2019). The Ukrainian
National Church, religious diplomacy, and the conflict in
Donbas. Journal of Orthodox Christian Studies, 2(2),
199

224. https://doi.org/10.1353/joc.2019.0023

Magocsi, P. R. (2002). The roots of Ukrainian

nationalism: Galicia as Ukraine’s Piedmont

. Toronto:

University of Toronto Press.

Mamo, C. (2021). Explainer: The split in Ukraine’s

Orthodox Church. Retrieved from

https://emerging-

europe.com/analysis/the-explainer-the-split-in-
ukraines-orthodox-church/

Motyl, A. J. (2011). The paradoxes of Paul Robert
Magocsi: The case for Rusyns and the logical necessity
of Ukrainians. Nationalities Papers, 39(1), 105

109.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2010.532774

Myshlovska, O. (2022). Understanding the roots of the
Russia-Ukraine war and the misuse of history. Retrieved
from

https://www.graduateinstitute.ch/communications/ne
ws/understanding-roots-russia-ukraine-war-and-
misuse-history/

National Gallery renames Degas’ Russian Dancers as

Ukrainian

Dancers.

(2022).

Retrieved

from

https://surl.li/jatwvn

New Ukrainian school. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://mon.gov.ua/tag/nova-ukrainska-
shkola?&type=all&tag=nova-ukrainska-
shkola

Plokhy, S. (2017). The gates of Europe: A history of
Ukraine. London: Penguin.

Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No.
852-

r “On Appointment of the Commissioner for the

Protection of the State Language”. (July, 2020).

Retrieved

from

https://mova-

ombudsman.gov.ua/upovnovazhenij-iz-zahistu-
derzhavnoyi-movi

Richardson-Smith, B. (2021). The Holodomor: Genocide
or the result of bad planning? Journal of Huddersfield
Student

Research,

7(1).

https://doi.org/10.5920/fields.801

Said, E. (1979). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.

Snyder, T. (2010). Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler
and Stalin. London: Bodley Head.


background image

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

5

https://eipublication.com/index.php/eijps

European International Journal of Philological Sciences

Snyder, T. (2018). The road to unfreedom: Russia,
Europe, America. New York: Tim Duggan Books.

Subtelny, O. (2009). Ukraine: A history. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity
theory of intergroup behavior. In Political psychology
(pp.

276

293).

London:

Psychology

Press.

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16

Vike, H. (2011). Cultural models, power, and
hegemony. In A companion to cognitive anthropology
(pp.

376

392).

https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444394931.ch20

Wertsch, J. V., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Collective
memory: Conceptual foundations and theoretical
approaches.

Memory,

16(3),

318

326.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210701801434

Wilson, A. (2022). The Ukrainians: Unexpected nation.
London: Yale University Press.

Wylegala, A., & Głowacka

-Grajper, M. (2020). The

burden of the past: History, memory, and identity in
contemporary

Ukraine.

Bloomington:

Indiana

University Press.

References

Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso.

Chaika, O. (2023). International cultural ecology: Multicultural and multilingual risks (based on the materials from the Russia-Ukraine war). In Ecology in discourse. Natural and cultural landscape (pp. 31–64). Slupsk: University of Pomerania in Slupsk.

Chaika, O. (2024). Polyculture vs Multiculture through the Lens of Ukraine: What’s in the Concept? In Materials of the III International Interdisciplinary Conference “Language, Business and Law, Intercultural Communication: Challenges of Today” (pp. 16–20). Kyiv: National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine.

Chayinska, M., Kende, A., & Wohl, M. J. (2022). National identity and beliefs about historical linguicide are associated with support for exclusive language policies among the Ukrainian linguistic majority. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(4), 924–940. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220985911

Constitution of Ukraine. (June, 1996). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/254%D0%BA/96-%D0%B2%D1%80#Text

Düben, B. A. (2020). There is no Ukraine: Fact-checking the Kremlin’s version of Ukrainian history. Retrieved from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lseih/2020/07/01/there-is-no-ukraine-fact-checking-the-kremlins-version-of-ukrainian-history/

Education Reforms. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.kmu.gov.ua/reformi/rozvitok-lyudskogo-kapitalu/reforma-osviti

Feklyunina, V. (2016). Soft power and identity: Russia, Ukraine and the “Russian world(s)”. European Journal of International Relations, 22(4), 773–796. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066115601200

Gao, L. (2024). The national consciousness of Ukraine and its evolution during the Soviet era. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 28, 140–145. https://doi.org/10.54097/4dfr5c77

Gramsci, A. (2020). Selections from the prison notebooks. In The applied theatre reader (pp. 141–142). London: Routledge.

Green, J. A., Henderson, C., & Ruys, T. (2022). Russia’s attack on Ukraine and the jus ad bellum. Journal on the Use of Force and International Law, 9(1), 4–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/20531702.2022.2056803

Halbwachs, M. (1992). On collective memory. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press.

Hogg, M. A. (2016). Social identity theory. In Understanding peace and conflict through social identity theory: Contemporary global perspectives (pp. 3–17). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29869-6_1

Hunder, M., & Humphries, C. (2022). Moscow-led Ukrainian Orthodox Church breaks ties with Russia. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/moscow-led-ukrainian-orthodox-church-breaks-ties-with-russia-2022-05-28/

Iziumov, O. (1930). Ukrainian-Russian dictionary: According to the new spelling. Kharkiv; Kyiv: State Publishing House of Ukraine.

Kulyk, V. (2014). What is Russian in Ukraine? Popular beliefs regarding the social roles of the language. In The Russian language outside the nation (pp. 117–140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748668458.003.0005

Kuzio, T. (1998). Ukraine: Coming to terms with the Soviet legacy. Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 14(4), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523279808415388

Law of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic No. 8312-11 “On Languages in the Ukrainian SSR”. (October, 1989). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/8312-11#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 2704-VIII “On Ensuring the Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as the State Language”. (April, 2019). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2704-19#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 317-VIII “On the Condemnation of Communist and National Socialist (Nazi) Totalitarian Regimes in Ukraine and the Prohibition of Propaganda of Their Symbols”. (April, 2015). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/317-19#Text

Law of Ukraine No. 5029-VI “On the Principles of State Language Policy”. (July, 2012). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/5029-17#Text

Leustean, L. N., & Samokhvalov, V. (2019). The Ukrainian National Church, religious diplomacy, and the conflict in Donbas. Journal of Orthodox Christian Studies, 2(2), 199–224. https://doi.org/10.1353/joc.2019.0023

Magocsi, P. R. (2002). The roots of Ukrainian nationalism: Galicia as Ukraine’s Piedmont. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Mamo, C. (2021). Explainer: The split in Ukraine’s Orthodox Church. Retrieved from https://emerging-europe.com/analysis/the-explainer-the-split-in-ukraines-orthodox-church/

Motyl, A. J. (2011). The paradoxes of Paul Robert Magocsi: The case for Rusyns and the logical necessity of Ukrainians. Nationalities Papers, 39(1), 105–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2010.532774

Myshlovska, O. (2022). Understanding the roots of the Russia-Ukraine war and the misuse of history. Retrieved from https://www.graduateinstitute.ch/communications/news/understanding-roots-russia-ukraine-war-and-misuse-history/

National Gallery renames Degas’ Russian Dancers as Ukrainian Dancers. (2022). Retrieved from https://surl.li/jatwvn

New Ukrainian school. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://mon.gov.ua/tag/nova-ukrainska-shkola?&type=all&tag=nova-ukrainska-shkola

Plokhy, S. (2017). The gates of Europe: A history of Ukraine. London: Penguin.

Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 852-r “On Appointment of the Commissioner for the Protection of the State Language”. (July, 2020). Retrieved from https://mova-ombudsman.gov.ua/upovnovazhenij-iz-zahistu-derzhavnoyi-movi

Richardson-Smith, B. (2021). The Holodomor: Genocide or the result of bad planning? Journal of Huddersfield Student Research, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.5920/fields.801

Said, E. (1979). Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.

Snyder, T. (2010). Bloodlands: Europe between Hitler and Stalin. London: Bodley Head.

Snyder, T. (2018). The road to unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America. New York: Tim Duggan Books.

Subtelny, O. (2009). Ukraine: A history. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Political psychology (pp. 276–293). London: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16

Vike, H. (2011). Cultural models, power, and hegemony. In A companion to cognitive anthropology (pp. 376–392). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444394931.ch20

Wertsch, J. V., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Collective memory: Conceptual foundations and theoretical approaches. Memory, 16(3), 318–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210701801434

Wilson, A. (2022). The Ukrainians: Unexpected nation. London: Yale University Press.

Wylegala, A., & Głowacka-Grajper, M. (2020). The burden of the past: History, memory, and identity in contemporary Ukraine. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.