Intro
‘Welcome back to Ukraine’s Story – a History Buff series in which we chart Ukraine’s national story, from the mediaeval Kyivan Rus right up to independence and the current Russo-Ukrainian War. Last time we talked about the Chornobyl disaster and its implications for Ukraine, the wider Soviet Union and the world. Today, on the ninth episode, we are going to talk about the collapse of the Soviet Union, how Ukraine reacted and its first years as an independent, sovereign state.’
The USSR’s final years
‘The era of Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika (or “restructuring”) reforms, introduced in the Soviet Union in the eighties, played a pivotal role in shaping Ukraine’s destiny. Intended to rejuvenate the Soviet system, render it more sustainable, establish a rule-of-law state, and cultivate a society with a proficient economy, perestroika ultimately precipitated the collapse of the USSR. This period was marked by considerable tension and dynamism in terms of reforms. Broadly speaking, these reforms were implemented to improve the financial situation and mitigate the social and economic problems the Soviet Union was facing. The controversial adoption of the anti-alcohol campaign was a notable aspect. At the same time, the glasnost (or “openness”) political reforms were in progress, encompassing the rehabilitation and release of all political prisoners, the conduct of political elections for the people’s deputies of the USSR on an alternative basis, and so forth.
‘Between 1988 and 1990, there was a substantial surge in national-patriotic activity in Ukraine. Numerous national democratic organisations sprang up, operating independently of the official Soviet authorities. Prominent among these organisations were the Ukrainian Cultural Club in Kyiv, the Memorial Historical and Educational Society, the Green World Environmental Organization, and the Taras Shevchenko Ukrainian Language Society. Additionally, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church resumed its activities during this period.
‘The first opposition organisation to emerge in Ukraine was the People’s Movement of Ukraine for Perestroika, led by Ivan Drach. Drach successfully brought together representatives from various political forces with a shared goal of reinstating an independent Ukrainian state. Between 1989 and 1991, the first political parties in Ukraine were established through a multi-party election system, with the majority of these parties aspiring for Ukrainian independence. In March 1990, the first elections to the Verkhovna Rada (the Ukrainian parliament) resulted in the renewal of 90% of the parliament’s composition.
‘The opposition forces were spearheaded by the People’s Council party, while the communist nomenklatura formed its own political bloc known as “For Sovereign Soviet Ukraine” or “Group 239.”’
‘By the close of the 1980s, several nations including Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Azerbaijan, and Moldova had already declared state sovereignty. On 16 July 1990, the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine. This declaration outlined the full and indivisible power of the Ukrainian republic within its territorial boundaries, the division of state power into judicial, legislative, and executive branches, and the assertion of Ukraine’s independence across economic, environmental, educational, scientific, and cultural domains. It also affirmed independence and equality in international relations, a commitment to peaceful foreign policy, neutrality, nationality, and freedom of religion.
‘Although the 16 July Declaration laid the foundation for a new Ukrainian constitution, its implementation process was slow. A wave of rallies and protests swept across the country as people resisted signing a new treaty proposed by Gorbachev, which entailed joining a renewed Soviet Union. The so-called “Revolution on Granite” saw mass rallies and a hunger strike by students in Kyiv. Ultimately, Ukrainians succeeded in their efforts, and in a referendum on 17 March 1991, an overwhelming majority of the Ukrainian population voted in favour of Ukrainian sovereignty, with approximately 80.2% voting in favour.’
The declaration of an independent Ukraine and the collapse of the Soviet Union
‘Between 19-21 August 1991, reactionary forces within the USSR orchestrated a coup d’état in an attempt to halt democratic processes and compel all Soviet republics to sign a new alliance agreement with the USSR. Moscow was gripped by tension, prompting the declaration of a state of emergency and the deployment of troops into the city. A significant uprising and massive rebellion against the central Soviet government ensued in Russia, spearheaded by Russian President Boris Yeltsin. Yeltsin was supported by troops initially assigned to quell the rebellion. The turmoil disrupted the signing of a new union treaty.
‘Seizing the historic opportunity, Ukraine took decisive action. On 24 August 1991, the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR adopted the Act of Independence of Ukraine. Subsequently, on 1 December 1991, an all-Ukrainian referendum was conducted, with an overwhelming 90.3% of participants endorsing the Act of Independence of Ukraine. In Crimea, more than 55% also supported this act. On the same day, Leonid Kravchuk was elected as the first President of Ukraine.
‘On 8 December 1991, the presidents of Ukraine, Russia, and the Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Republic of Belarus made a historic announcement, declaring the establishment of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
‘Perestroika had been initiated to try and save the USSR but it had instead done the exact opposite and hastened its collapse. On 25 December 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev resigned as President of the Soviet Union as it collapsed around him. It was officially dissolved the following day, and Boris Yeltsin took over as President of the Russian Federation in Moscow.’
Ukrainian independence – early years
‘Achieving independence marked a significant milestone for Ukraine, but it also signalled the beginning of a new chapter that required substantial efforts. The dismantling of Soviet political structures was imperative, paving the way for the establishment of a democratic state founded on the principles of the rule of law. Simultaneously, efforts were needed to integrate Ukraine into the international political arena and establish new diplomatic relations. This period of transition and nation-building presented formidable challenges, but it was a crucial step in shaping Ukraine’s identity on the global stage.
‘I just want to briefly mention here, before we go any further, that over the course of the twentieth century in most of the English speaking world, people often referred to Ukraine as “the Ukraine”, because ukraina means “borderland” in Ukrainian. People today still mistakenly refer to it as “the Ukraine”, but this is grammatically and politically incorrect. Its correct name is just “Ukraine”.’
‘Now, in the critical period of 1991-1992, Ukraine undertook the foundational task of forming its legislative and executive branches of government. The process of forming the legislature was underway, marked by significant legislative milestones. On 6 December 1991, the law on the Armed Forces of Ukraine was adopted, laying the groundwork for the country’s military structure. In October 1993, a pivotal moment occurred with the adoption of the military doctrine, articulating Ukraine’s stance that it did not consider any state as a potential enemy. However, it’s noteworthy that in 2015, this doctrine underwent a revision, acknowledging the Russian Federation as a new potential threat to Ukraine.
‘At the same time, efforts were directed towards the establishment of local authorities, contributing to the decentralisation of governance. In 1992, a constitutional court was instituted, playing a crucial role in interpreting and upholding the principles of the Ukrainian constitution. These institutional developments were essential steps in the consolidation of Ukraine as a sovereign and democratic nation.
‘Under President Kravchuk’s leadership, Ukraine faced significant challenges in its domestic political landscape. Promises of new elections went unfulfilled, contributing to a sense of political instability. Mismanagement resulted in hyperinflation, and the country struggled with a socio-economic crisis marked by pyramid schemes and scams. In response to these issues, a snap presidential election was called in 1994, leading to the election of Leonid Kuchma as the new president. Kuchma secured re-election in 1999, defeating his communist rival.
‘During Kuchma’s presidency, there were both positive and negative aspects. On the positive side, Kuchma implemented policies that curbed hyperinflation, introduced a new currency, the hryvnia, took measures to control organised crime, and initiated agrarian and educational reforms. Viktor Yushchenko’s tenure as the head of the National Bank of Ukraine in the same period contributed to economic growth.
‘However, Kuchma’s presidency was marred by challenges, including a perceived slow pace of social and economic reforms, political instability, non-transparent privatisation, corruption, and a lack of clear political orientation, often described as “multi-vectorism.” Another controversial aspect was Kuchma’s nuclear disarmament policy, which remains a subject of debate among contemporary historians and politicians. Opinions on this policy vary, reflecting the complexity of the political landscape during that time.
‘Between 2000 and 2002, Ukraine faced a significant political crisis characterised by various factors. President Kuchma’s ambitions to expand his powers, coupled with Russia’s perceived interference in Ukraine’s internal political affairs, contributed to the escalating tensions. The crisis deepened with the mysterious disappearance of Georgian-Ukrainian journalist Georgiy Gongadze, a vocal critic of President Kuchma’s policies. In what would become known as “the Cassette scandal”, where secretly recorded conversations in the president’s office made by a Ukrainian security service major became public , President Kuchma was heard to express ill views of Gongadze. Talking of his killing was however not mentioned and there have been doubts cast on the authenticity of these tapes.
‘These events however prompted widespread public protests against President Kuchma, leading to a notable decline in public trust, which reportedly plummeted to as low as 3%. The combination of political manoeuvring, allegations of corruption, and concerns about the erosion of democratic principles intensified the atmosphere of discontent and unrest during this period. The political crisis of 2000-2002 marked a tumultuous chapter in Ukraine’s post-Soviet history.’
The Orange Revolution and its aftermath
‘The presidential election of 2004 in Ukraine was marked by a fierce rivalry between the pro-government Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who had two criminal convictions, and the opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko. The election results initially declared Yanukovych as the president through what was widely perceived as election fraud. In response to this, massive protests erupted in Kyiv on 22 November, centred around Independence Square and various other locations.
‘These protests, known as the Orange Revolution, gained momentum rapidly, with participants expressing their support for Viktor Yushchenko and calling for new, fair elections. The colour orange became the symbol of the movement, borrowed from the colour of citrus fruits popular in winter. Orange was prominently featured on posters, flags, shoulder pins, bracelets, and various other symbols. Key slogans during the protests included “Yushchenko, yes” and “Yushchenko is our president.”
‘Geographically, Yushchenko enjoyed the strongest support in the western and central regions of Ukraine, while Yanukovych found greater backing in the southern and eastern regions. The Orange Revolution would go on to reshape Ukraine’s political landscape and have a lasting impact on the country’s democratic development.’
‘The culmination of the Orange Revolution was marked by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine acknowledging the fraudulent nature of the initial presidential election. As a result, new elections were held on 26 December 2004. In this re-vote, Viktor Yushchenko was duly recognized as the President of Ukraine, securing more than 51% of the vote, while Viktor Yanukovych garnered only 44%.
‘Noteworthy for its peaceful and non-violent nature, the Orange Revolution achieved its primary goals of ensuring a fair and democratic electoral process. The movement represented a significant turning point in Ukraine’s history, emphasising the power of civil society in shaping the country’s political trajectory and promoting democratic principles.
‘Following the Orange Revolution, President Yushchenko instituted a parliamentary-presidential form of government, marking a shift towards a new democratic image for Ukraine characterised by the rule of law. This move aimed to create a conducive environment for investment, fostering transparent market relations. Under Yushchenko’s leadership, freedom of speech expanded, and there was a noticeable growth in national consciousness. Yulia Tymoshenko became Ukraine’s first, and to this day only, female prime minister in 2005.
‘Despite these positive changes, challenges persisted. A transparent personnel policy was not effectively implemented, and a clear separation between government and business was lacking. Yushchenko faced difficulties in combating corruption, and there was a perceived absence of well-defined political guidelines and an action plan. The political landscape became increasingly tumultuous, leading to a growing political crisis.
‘During this period, the Party of Regions, which had previously supported Yanukovych’s policies, gained influence, further contributing to the complexities of Ukrainian politics. The evolving dynamics underscored the ongoing struggle to establish a stable and transparent governance framework in the aftermath of the Orange Revolution.
‘The assessment of Yushchenko’s presidency is characterised by ambiguity. He struggled to forge effective cooperation with both the government and parliament, and he was unable to capitalise on the initial trust extended by Ukrainians and the international community at the outset of his presidency. Nevertheless, during Yushchenko’s tenure, the Verkhovna Rada passed the law “On the Holodomor of 1932-1933,” a significant legislative milestone that officially acknowledges the Holodomor as genocide against the Ukrainian people.’
Final thoughts
‘Thanks to Gorbachev’s perestroika reforms, Ukraine seized a historic opportunity and attained independence. As a fledgling state, Ukraine confronted numerous challenges in its early years, particularly a political and social crisis that leaders like Kravchuk, Kuchma, and Yushchenko sought to address. Yushchenko ascended to power through the Orange Revolution, a peaceful protest that elevated the country’s democratic standing. Despite his efforts, Yushchenko struggled to yield significant results. While he remained untainted by corruption, his approach to combating it was deemed insufficient. Ukraine’s hard-won independence came at a considerable cost, and maintaining stability and fostering development proved elusive. However, the most formidable challenges for the nascent Ukrainian nation state were yet to come.’
Outro
‘Join us next time when we talk about a crucial crossroads for Ukraine, a defining moment where the nation had to decide its identity and direction. In the next episode we will talk about the Revolution of Dignity, or Euromaiden, which became a battle between a pro-European future and ties with the country’s Russian and Soviet past, embodying a fundamental choice about Ukraine’s national identity and trajectory.
‘Many thanks for listening, and join us for the next exciting episode. Goodbye and Slava Ukraini!’