Suchergebnisse

Summary. The aim of the research – on the basis of the source base and the historiographic work to highlight the reasons the struggle process for provisions between the Soviet partisans and Ukrainian insurgents in 1943 – 1944 in Volyn region. The principles of a scientific objectivity and historicism are the methodological basis of the study. The scientific novelty of the obtained results is determined by the fact that for the first time in a domestic and foreign historiography the struggle for provisions between the Soviet partisans and the Ukrainian insurgents in Volyn during the specified period has been analyzed, as well as the unpublished archival documents and the materials have been introduced into the scientific circulation. Conclusions. The struggle for the provisions between the Soviet partisans and the units of the Ukrainian Insurgents Army was the result of their confrontation aggravation over the range of influence. The unsettled rear support of the Soviet partisans pushed them into carrying out the preplanned «provisions» («food») operations of the peaceful and armed character, a forced alienation of food from the population, loyal to the Ukrainian nationalists. Acting this way, the Soviet partisans tried to deprive the latter of their food supplies and level off the Ukrainian insurgents' main advantage in Volyn region – the support from a part of the local residents, who became the members of Ukrainian Insurgents Army (UPA), and to cause the significant economic losses to the insurgent rear. An effective way of depriving the UPA and the OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) underground of the provisions and property was the requisition of their food warehouses. The Soviet Union partisans had a significant distribution of the provisions in this way since the end of 1943, and especially in the first half of 1944, when the number of the partisan associations increased in connection with the approaching of the front in Volyn. Under such conditions, the Ukrainian nationalist underground lowered its activity, and the insurgents divisions, in order to avoid losses, crashed into the smaller groups. Thus, the local population turned out to be the hostage of the situation, having fallen under the pressure of both «the forest armies», since both the Soviet partisans and the members of UPA put their back and food on it. The replenishment of the food stocks by the hostile forces often turned into the military operations.

Summary. The aim of the research – on the basis of the source base and the historiographic work to highlight the reasons the struggle process for provisions between the Soviet partisans and Ukrainian insurgents in 1943 – 1944 in Volyn region. The principles of a scientific objectivity and historicism are the methodological basis of the study. The scientific novelty of the obtained results is determined by the fact that for the first time in a domestic and foreign historiography the struggle for provisions between the Soviet partisans and the Ukrainian insurgents in Volyn during the specified period has been analyzed, as well as the unpublished archival documents and the materials have been introduced into the scientific circulation. Conclusions. The struggle for the provisions between the Soviet partisans and the units of the Ukrainian Insurgents Army was the result of their confrontation aggravation over the range of influence. The unsettled rear support of the Soviet partisans pushed them into carrying out the preplanned «provisions» («food») operations of the peaceful and armed character, a forced alienation of food from the population, loyal to the Ukrainian nationalists. Acting this way, the Soviet partisans tried to deprive the latter of their food supplies and level off the Ukrainian insurgents' main advantage in Volyn region – the support from a part of the local residents, who became the members of Ukrainian Insurgents Army (UPA), and to cause the significant economic losses to the insurgent rear. An effective way of depriving the UPA and the OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) underground of the provisions and property was the requisition of their food warehouses. The Soviet Union partisans had a significant distribution of the provisions in this way since the end of 1943, and especially in the first half of 1944, when the number of the partisan associations increased in connection with the approaching of the front in Volyn. Under such conditions, the Ukrainian nationalist underground lowered its activity, and the insurgents divisions, in order to avoid losses, crashed into the smaller groups. Thus, the local population turned out to be the hostage of the situation, having fallen under the pressure of both «the forest armies», since both the Soviet partisans and the members of UPA put their back and food on it. The replenishment of the food stocks by the hostile forces often turned into the military operations.

Summary. The aim of the research – on the basis of the source base and the historiographic work to highlight the reasons the struggle process for provisions between the Soviet partisans and Ukrainian insurgents in 1943 – 1944 in Volyn region. The principles of a scientific objectivity and historicism are the methodological basis of the study. The scientific novelty of the obtained results is determined by the fact that for the first time in a domestic and foreign historiography the struggle for provisions between the Soviet partisans and the Ukrainian insurgents in Volyn during the specified period has been analyzed, as well as the unpublished archival documents and the materials have been introduced into the scientific circulation. Conclusions. The struggle for the provisions between the Soviet partisans and the units of the Ukrainian Insurgents Army was the result of their confrontation aggravation over the range of influence. The unsettled rear support of the Soviet partisans pushed them into carrying out the preplanned «provisions» («food») operations of the peaceful and armed character, a forced alienation of food from the population, loyal to the Ukrainian nationalists. Acting this way, the Soviet partisans tried to deprive the latter of their food supplies and level off the Ukrainian insurgents' main advantage in Volyn region – the support from a part of the local residents, who became the members of Ukrainian Insurgents Army (UPA), and to cause the significant economic losses to the insurgent rear. An effective way of depriving the UPA and the OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) underground of the provisions and property was the requisition of their food warehouses. The Soviet Union partisans had a significant distribution of the provisions in this way since the end of 1943, and especially in the first half of 1944, when the number of the partisan associations increased in connection with the approaching of the front in Volyn. Under such conditions, the Ukrainian nationalist underground lowered its activity, and the insurgents divisions, in order to avoid losses, crashed into the smaller groups. Thus, the local population turned out to be the hostage of the situation, having fallen under the pressure of both «the forest armies», since both the Soviet partisans and the members of UPA put their back and food on it. The replenishment of the food stocks by the hostile forces often turned into the military operations.

The article analyses the historiographical process related to the history of Ukrainian nationalism, namely the activities of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army in the 1930s–1950s. Drawing on the chronological-terri-torial and conceptual-methodological principles, the authors divide the secondary sources into five main groups: writings by authors of the Ukrainian diaspora, works of Soviet scientists and publicists, post-independence Ukrainian historiography, communist and contemporary Polish historiography, Western history writing. Within each group, key publications are examined through the prism of documentary sources, methodologies, and conceptual approaches, as well as the socio-political context in which they were created.

SUMMARY:
В настоящей подборке представлены оригиналы четырех полемических текстов Джона-Пола Химки, ранее выходивших либо в украинском переводе, либо в интернет-изданиях. Все они посвящены вопросу о возможности строительства современной украинской идентичности вокруг наследия ОУН-УПА. Первые два текста являются ответом Химки на выступления ведущего канадского историка Украины, Зенона Когута. Следующий текст представляет собой ответ Химки на обвинения бывшего председателя Всемирного конгресса украинцев Аскольда Лозинского. Суть претензий состояла в том, что Химка бездоказательно приписал ОУН участие в уничтожении украинских евреев. Химка, проводивший исследования в Музее Холокоста в Вашингтоне, обвинялся в обслуживании еврейских интересов. Последний текст ранее публиковался только по-украински. Он представляет дискуссию Химки с украинскими историками, Андреем Портновым и Владимиром Кулыком, которые допускали, что элементы украинского национального движения времен Второй мировой войны вполне могут быть включены в комплекс постсоветской украинской идентичности (при критическом и правдивом освещении негативных и преступных аспектов этого движения). Дискуссия вращается вокруг таких тем, как фашизм и ОУН-УПА, образ независимого моноэтничного украинского государства, за которое эти организации вели борьбу; дефиниции национализма и фашизма; ответственность современных украинских интеллектуалов и политиков за политизацию прошлого; современный этап изучения Холокоста, а также польско-украинского противостояния в 1943–1944 гг., наконец – идеологическая позиция украинской диаспоры по вопросу о наследии ОУН-УПА. Химка подчеркивает, что для него эта дискуссия не о евреях и прочих "соседях" украинцев времен Второй мировой войны, а прежде всего о самих украинцах, и не только об их прошлом, но, что важнее, об их будущем.

The time and place of the postwar struggle of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) against the Soviet regime in West Ukraine contradicted two foundational myths of late Soviet society: (1) the myth of the Great Patriotic War, and (2) the myth of
the Friendship of the Peoples. This article examines how Soviet-Russian mass media dealt with these contradictions in the decades leading up to perestroika. The Soviet state attempted to excise the OUN/UPA's postwar activities from collective memory through omission until the late 1970s, when it launched a propaganda campaign to expose and demonize the OUN/UPA. The new political circumstances of the "Second Cold War" account for the timing of this campaign, but the well-worn language and arguments it employed reflected the stagnation of the Party's postwar ideology, which posited the unity and incorruptibility of the "new historical community of the
Soviet people," and accordingly denationalized the OUN/UPA's "treachery."

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukrainian society faced a new reality. The new reality involved consolidation and transformation of collective identities. The reinvigoration of national identity led to a change in the emphasis on how the past was dealt with – many things which were regarded as negative by the Soviet regime became presented as positive in independent Ukraine. The war-time nationalist movement, represented by the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), became one of the re-configured themes of history. While most of the studies of memory of the OUN and UPA concentrated on the use of the history of the OUN and UPA by nationalist parties, this study goes beyond the analysis of such use of history and scrutinizes the meaning of this history in nation- and state-building processes in relation to memory work realized on the small-scale regional and local levels with the main focus on Rivne and Rivne oblast'. Moreover, this book focusses not only on the "producers" of memory, but also on the "consumers" of memory, the area which is largely understudied in the field of memory studies. In the book the main emphasis is put on monuments which are regarded as catalysts and symptoms of memory. The present study showed that the OUN and UPA are used more as the metaphors of the anti-Soviet and anti-communist struggle for independence than as historical entities. This past is largely mythologized. Functioning as a myth the memory of the OUN and UPA obliterates difficult knowledge that the historical research reveals on the questionable activities and ideology of those organizations. As a result, the past of the OUN and UPA is re-imagined, re-filled with new meanings so that it is used along even with the democratic and pro-European claims in the present. It was especially well-observed during the Orange Revolution in 2004 and during the Euromaidan in 2013-2014, when the European Union's flags were seen next to the OUN's red-and-black flags or when the pro-European slogans were proclaimed alongside the OUN and UPA slogans. At the same time, the results demonstrated an intricate complexity of memory work shaped by intensive dynamics of private and public, grassroots and official, local and national encounters. Although there have been attempts made by political actors to draw a direct link between the national identity, political allegiances and proposed heroic version of memory, the study showed, that such attempts did not really work. In the pluralistic context the meanings are too fluid and adherence to one version of history does not preclude adherences to other versions of history which are presented as diametrically opposite in the political sphere. As result, on the recipients' grassroots level, the memory reveals its amalgamated characteristics. Drawing on studies about post-colonial subjectivities and theories of remediation developed in memory studies, this book explores the changes in memory culture of contemporary Ukraine and examines the role of memory in producing new meanings under the rapidly changing conditions after the collapse of the Soviet Union up to 2014. The book contributes to the studies of memory culture in post-Communist countries as well as to the studies of society in contemporary Ukraine.