Abstract
After the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, Ukraine became an independent state. Despite an initial period of optimism regarding the future of the state, after twenty two years, Ukraine has continued to remain politically unstable. This has culminated in periods of civil unrest with the Orange revolution in 2004 and the ‘EuroMaidan’ protests of 2013.
In 1991, political scholars anticipated that the former Soviet republics would embark on a transition towards democracy. However, traditional theoretical frameworks have been proven to be ineffective for analysing the current political and social situation in Ukraine. Drawing on Taras Kuzio’s ‘quadruple transition’ framework, this thesis contents that it is the nation element of transition that prevents the consolidation of democracy in Ukraine.
This thesis argues that the current citizens of Ukraine are divided into two political cultures, with distinct perspectives of the raison d’être and the national identity of the Ukrainian state. A historical analysis of the history of Ukraine illustrates that this divide has been entrenched by the various imperial rulers of ethnic Ukrainians. This divide in political culture is then applied as a paradigm in order to understand the discourse of Ukrainian politics since independence. As democratic political systems depend upon their citizens for political legitimacy, the identity of the nation and citizenship laws are vital for creating a united demos. This research illustrates how Ukraine’s legislation regarding the identity of the state did not provide a clear definition of the Ukrainian demos.
Ultimately, my research concludes that Ukraine will continue to evade the consolidation of its democracy until it can establish a consensus on the Ukrainian demos.