# History of Ukraine

The history of Ukraine spans thousands of years, tracing its roots to the Pontic steppe—one of the key centers of the Chalcolithic and Bronze Ages, Indo-European migrations, and early horse domestication. In antiquity, the region was home to the Scythians, followed by the gradual expansion of Slavic tribes. The northern Black Sea coast saw the influence of Greek and Roman colonies, leaving a lasting cultural legacy. Over time, these diverse influences contributed to the development of early political and cultural structures.
Ukraine enters into written history with the establishment of the medieval state of Kievan Rus'. In Dnieper Ukraine, the tribe of Polans played a key role in the formation of the state, adopting the name Rus' by the 9th century. The term is believed to have connections to the Varangians, who contributed to the state’s early political and military structure. By the 10th–11th centuries, Kievan Rus' had grown into one of the most powerful and culturally advanced states in Europe, reaching its golden age under Volodymyr the Great and Yaroslav the Wise, who introduced Christianity and strengthened political institutions. However, internal conflicts among Kyivan rulers, along with increasing pressure from Turkic nomads in Southern Ukraine, gradually weakened the state. In the 13th century, Kievan Rus' suffered devastating destruction during the Mongol invasion, particularly in its Dnieper heartlands. While much of the former Rus' territory fell under Mongol control, the Kingdom of Ruthenia (Galicia-Volhynia) emerged as its successor, continuing political and cultural traditions under King Daniel.
In the 14th and 15th centuries, the majority of Ukrainian territories became part of Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia and Samogitia, while Galicia and Transcarpathia came under Polish and Hungarian rule. Lithuania kept the local Ruthenian traditions, and was gradually influenced by Ruthenian language, law and culture, until Lithuania itself came under Polish influence, following the Union of Krewo and Union of Lublin, resulting in two countries merging into Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, leaving Ukrainian lands under the dominance of Polish crown. Meanwhile Southern Ukraine was dominated by Golden Horde and then Crimean Khanate, which came under protection of the Ottoman Empire, major regional power in and around Black Sea, which also had some of its own directly-administrated areas as well.
In the 17th century, the Cossack rebellion led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky marked a turning point in the Ukraine' history. The uprising, which began in 1648, was fueled by grievances against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth's nobility, religious tensions, and social inequalities. This rebellion led to the creation of the Cossack Hetmanate, a semi-autonomous polity in central and eastern Ukraine. In 1654, the Cossack Hetmanate allied with the Tsardom of Moscow through the Pereiaslav Agreement. The nature of this alliance has been widely debated by historians. Some argue that it established a protectorate relationship, with Russia offering military support in exchange for loyalty, while others believe it symbolized the subordination of the Hetmanate to the Tsar. The ambiguity of the treaty's terms and differing interpretations contributed to tensions over the following decades. Over time, the relationship between the Cossack Hetmanate and Russia evolved, with Russia increasingly asserting dominance. This process intensified in the late 17th and 18th centuries, especially after the Truce of Andrusovo, which divided Ukraine between the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Russia.
The Cossack Hetmanate's autonomy was progressively eroded, culminating in its abolition by Catherine the Great in the late 18th century. Simultaneously, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth's internal decline and external pressures from neighboring powers facilitated the partitions of Poland. These partitions allowed the Russian Empire to incorporate vast Ukrainian territories, including those previously under Polish control. Western Ukraine, however, came under the rule of the Habsburg monarchy. This division set the stage for the different historical trajectories of Ukrainian lands under Russian and Austrian influence.
The 20th century began with a renewed struggle for Ukrainian statehood. Following the collapse of empires during World War I, the Ukrainian People’s Republic (UPR) was proclaimed in 1917 with Kyiv as its capital. Meanwhile, in the western territories, the West Ukrainian People’s Republic (WUPR) was established in 1918, centered in Lviv. Both republics sought to unite, forming the Unification Act (Act Zluky) on 22 January 1919. However, their independence was short-lived. The UPR faced constant military conflict with Bolshevik forces, Poland, and White Army factions. By 1921, following the Soviet-Ukrainian War, Ukrainian lands were divided: the eastern territories became the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (part of the USSR), while western Ukraine was absorbed by Poland, Romania, and Czechoslovakia.
Under Soviet rule, initial policies of Ukrainianization gave way to oppressive Russification. The Holodomor famine of 1932–1933, a man-made disaster, caused the deaths of 4-5 millions Ukrainians.$^{:§§8.1.3}$ During World War II, Ukraine endured brutal occupations by both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) fought for independence, though parts of Ukrainian society also collaborated with occupying forces. Post-war, Soviet control was reestablished, and Crimea was transferred to Ukraine in 1954.
Ukraine became independent when the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991. This started a period of transition to a market economy, in which Ukraine suffered an eight-year recession. Subsequently however, the economy experienced a high increase in GDP growth until it plunged during the Great Recession. This period was marked by economic challenges, the rise of nationalism, and growing tensions with Russian Federation. In 2013, the Euromaidan protests began in response to President Viktor Yanukovych’s rejection of an EU association agreement. The Revolution of Dignity followed, leading to Yanukovych’s ousting. Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and supported separatist movements in Donbas, initiating the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War. This escalated on 24 February 2022, with Russia’s full-scale invasion, marking a critical phase in Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty and territorial integrity.

## Prehistory
### Paleolithic and Mesolithic Age

The discovery of 1.4-million-year-old stone tools in Korolevo, located in western Ukraine, marks one of the earliest securely dated presences of hominins in Europe. These tools offer crucial insights into the behaviors and adaptive strategies of early members of the genus Homo, likely Homo erectus, as they expanded into the continent during the Lower Paleolithic period. The Neanderthal presence in Ukraine is well-documented through archaeological findings, particularly at the Molodova sites, which are located in the modern-day Chernivtsi region in southwestern Ukraine. These sites, dating to the Middle Paleolithic period (c. 45000 – c. 43000 BC), provide significant evidence of Neanderthal activity. Molodova is known for its rich cultural layers attributed to the Mousterian tradition, showcasing the use of fire, mammoth bone processing, and possible construction of primitive shelters. These sites, located along the Dniester River, are particularly notable for their evidence of advanced behavior. One remarkable feature is the discovery of a dwelling constructed from mammoth bones, a testament to Neanderthal ingenuity and adaptation to harsh Ice Age environments. These structures highlight their ability to organize resources and create durable shelters.
The Crimean Mountains hold significant evidence of early modern humans (Homo sapiens) during the Upper Paleolithic period. The Buran-Kaya cave sites have yielded artifacts, such as tools and ornaments, along with skeletal remains, dating to approximately 32,000 BC. These Gravettian settlements reflect a sophisticated hunter-gatherer culture, known for their blade-based lithic technologies and artistic expression. The region likely served as a vital hub for human activity, offering both shelter and access to diverse ecological resources. The archaeological record in Ukraine highlights the area's importance as a crossroads for early human populations migrating through Europe. From the earliest stone tools to evidence of complex social structures and artistic traditions, Ukraine offers a valuable lens into the evolution and adaptation of early humans over hundreds of thousands of years.

### Neolithic and Bronze Age

The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture (c. 5050 – c. 2950 BC), centered in modern-day Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine, represents one of the most advanced Neolithic civilizations in Europe. These people were known for their impressive settlements, some of which were among the largest in the world at the time, with populations reaching up to 10,000 inhabitants. They built concentric layouts of houses, often using clay and wood, demonstrating advanced planning. They are renowned for their intricate painted ceramics, featuring geometric and symbolic designs in red, black, and white. Their economy was primarily agrarian, complemented by animal husbandry and small-scale trade. Archaeological findings suggest a focus on fertility cults, as evidenced by numerous figurines and symbolic artifacts. The Cucuteni–Trypillia culture began to decline around 3000 BC, possibly due to environmental changes, resource depletion, or pressures from neighboring steppe cultures.
The Sredny Stog culture (c. 4500 – c. 3500 BC) emerged to the east of the Cucuteni–Trypillian zone, on the Pontic–Caspian steppe. It marked a transitional phase between the Neolithic and the emergence of the early Bronze Age steppe cultures. This culture is among the earliest to show evidence of horse domestication, which became a defining feature of steppe societies. Early indications of mound burial (kurgans) began to appear, reflecting evolving social hierarchies and ritual practices. The Sredny Stog culture played a significant role in the genesis of the later Yamna culture.
The Yamna culture (c. 3300 – c. 2600 BC), also known as the Pit Grave culture, was a dominant force in the early Bronze Age across the Pontic–Caspian steppe. This culture is often linked with the spread of Indo-European languages and reflects a shift toward a more mobile, pastoralist lifestyle. The Yamna culture is characterized by its kurgans, often accompanied by grave goods such as weapons, ornaments, and animal sacrifices. The economy relied heavily on livestock, including sheep, cattle, and horses, which supported a semi-nomadic lifestyle. They utilized copper and bronze tools and weapons, demonstrating early metallurgical skills. Many scholars associate the Yamna culture with Proto-Indo-European speakers, as their migrations and cultural diffusion likely influenced vast areas of Europe and Asia.
Following the Yamna culture, the Catacomb culture (c. 2500 – c. 1950 BC) emerged, encompassing much of the same geographic area. It is distinguished by its unique burial practices, where bodies were interred in specially carved niches within grave pits. They further advanced bronze metallurgy, producing a variety of tools, weapons, and ornaments. The Catacomb culture maintained many traditions of the Yamna culture while also interacting with neighboring groups to the west and south.
* Cucuteni-Typillia ceramic vessel (National Museum of the History of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine)
* Yamna stone stele, c. 2600 BC
* Catacomb culture wagon models

## Antiquity
### Scythian settlement, Greek colonization, and Roman domination

During the Iron Age, the region witnessed the rise and interaction of diverse peoples and cultures. Following earlier Bronze Age societies, the Dacians, alongside nomadic groups such as the Cimmerians (associated with the Novocherkassk archaeological culture), Scythians, and Sarmatians, dominated the landscape. Among these, the Scythians established a powerful kingdom that flourished between 750 and 250 BC, characterized by their mastery of mounted warfare and trade networks spanning vast territories.
One of the notable events in Scythian history was the campaign of Darius the Great in 513 BC. The Achaemenid Persian king led an expedition aimed at subjugating the Scythians. While the Scythians employed their signature scorched-earth and guerrilla tactics to evade outright defeat, the campaign resulted in the Persian domination of several Thracian peoples and regions along the Black Sea’s northern coast. These territories, encompassing parts of modern-day Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, and southern Russia, were incorporated into the vast Achaemenid sphere of influence, though direct control remained tenuous.
Meanwhile, Greek colonization left a lasting imprint on the region. Beginning in the 7th or 6th century BC during the Archaic period, Greek settlers established colonies along the northern Black Sea coast, including Crimea and parts of modern Ukraine. These colonies, such as Chersonesus and Olbia, served as hubs of trade, cultural exchange, and Hellenic influence. The Bosporan Kingdom, a Greco-Scythian polity formed in this context, became a regional power, blending Greek traditions with local elements. It thrived until the 4th century AD, when invasions by the Goths and later the Huns disrupted its stability.
The Roman Empire, expanding its reach into the region, briefly annexed the Bosporan Kingdom from 62 to 68 AD under Emperor Nero. During this period, the reigning Bosporan king, Tiberius Julius Cotys I, was deposed, and the kingdom was directly administered by Rome. Following Nero’s rule, the Bosporan Kingdom was restored as a Roman client state, retaining local governance but under Roman military oversight. This arrangement ensured the region remained within Rome’s economic and strategic sphere during the middle of the 1st century AD.

### Arrival of the Goths and Huns

In the 3rd century AD, the Goths, a Germanic people originally from Scandinavia, began migrating toward Eastern Europe. By approximately 250 to 375 AD, they had settled in the area of modern Ukraine, which they referred to as Oium. This region is linked to the archaeological Chernyakhov culture, known for its unique mix of local and Gothic influences.
The Goths in this region soon divided into two main groups: the Visigoths (Western Goths) and the Ostrogoths (Eastern Goths). The Ostrogoths established a stronghold in Ukraine but faced significant changes in the 370s with the arrival of the Huns, a nomadic group from Central Asia. The Huns were powerful warriors and ultimately brought the Ostrogoths under their control, leading to major shifts in Gothic society and governance.
To the north of the Ostrogothic territory was the Kyiv culture, a Slavic archaeological culture that thrived from the 2nd to the 5th centuries AD. As the Huns expanded their influence across Eastern Europe, this culture also came under threat. Many Slavic and other local groups were affected by the Hunnic invasions, resulting in changes in settlement patterns and local governance.
In 454 AD, a decisive battle known as the Battle of Nedao marked a turning point. The Ostrogoths, along with other Germanic tribes, rebelled against the Huns and contributed to their defeat. Following this victory, the Ostrogoths were permitted by the Romans to settle in Pannonia (modern-day Hungary), marking their departure from the Ukrainian lands.
Meanwhile, the Black Sea’s northeastern shores were dotted with ancient Greek colonies, such as Tyras, Pontic Olbia, and Hermonassa. Established as early as the 6th century BC, these colonies developed into important cultural and trading centers under Roman and later Byzantine rule. These cities continued to thrive until the 6th century AD, when Byzantine influence began to wane.
In the early 6th century AD, the Bosporan Kingdom on the Crimean Peninsula came under the rule of a Hunnic king named Gordas. Gordas maintained friendly relations with the Byzantine emperor Justinian I, but this ended when Gordas was killed in a local revolt around 527 AD. Justinian seized the opportunity to intervene, occupying the Bosporan Kingdom and further extending Byzantine influence over the region. However, even into the 12th century, Byzantine emperors continued to claim dominion over the Crimean region, known as the Cimmerian Bosporus.

## Middle Ages
### Early Slavs

Following the power vacuum left by the fall of Hunnic and Gothic dominance, the Early Slavs began to expand over much of the territory that is now Ukraine during the 5th century, continuing their migration into the Balkans in the 6th century. The exact origins of the Early Slavs remain uncertain, though several theories suggest they may have originated near the Polesia region, a marshy area between modern-day Belarus and Ukraine. This period marks a transition from the Kyiv culture to the establishment of Slavic tribes across Eastern Europe.
In the 5th and 6th centuries, the Antes Union (a tribal confederation) is generally believed to have been situated in present-day Ukraine. The Antes are considered ancestors of several Slavic tribes that would later form the Ukrainians, including the Polans, Severians, Drevlians, White Croats, Dulebes, Ulichs, and Tivertsi. The migration of these tribes from Ukraine throughout the Balkans contributed to the foundation of several South Slavic nations, while northern migrations, reaching as far as Lake Ilmen, gave rise to the Ilmen Slavs, Krivichs, and Radimichs.
The collapse of the Antes Union in 602, following a devastating raid by the Pannonian Avars, led to a fragmentation of the early Slavic federation. Despite this, many of these tribes maintained their distinct identities until the formation of larger political entities in the early second millennium, such as Kievan Rus', which began to consolidate Slavic lands.
The Early Slavs were primarily agrarian, relying on subsistence farming, and lived in semi-nomadic communities. Over time, they developed a complex social structure, with local chieftains leading tribal groups. They also practiced paganism, with a pantheon of gods tied to nature, such as Perun (god of thunder) and Dazhbog (sun god). By the time of the Antes Union's decline, the cultural and religious practices of the Slavs had already begun to influence neighboring peoples, laying the groundwork for the Slavic cultural sphere that would emerge later in Eastern and Southeastern Europe.

### Arrival of the Bulgars and Khazars

In the 7th century, the territory of modern Ukraine was at the core of the state of the Bulgars, often referred to as Old Great Bulgaria. This state, with its capital at Phanagoria (located in what is now the Taman Peninsula), controlled a significant part of the northern Black Sea region. The Bulgars, a semi-nomadic people from Central Asia, were known for their sophisticated society, military organization, and far-reaching influence.
By the end of the 7th century, the Bulgars faced increasing pressure from neighboring tribes and empires. Most of the Bulgar tribes migrated in various directions—some settled in the Balkans, where they eventually established the First Bulgarian Empire. Other groups moved towards the Volga region, forming Volga Bulgaria, which became a prominent center of trade and culture. The remaining parts of Old Great Bulgaria were eventually absorbed by the Khazars, another semi-nomadic people from Central Asia.
The Khazars founded the Khazar Khaganate, a powerful and influential state near the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus. The Khaganate's territory expanded to include parts of modern-day western Kazakhstan, eastern Ukraine, southern Russia, and northern Azerbaijan. The Khazars were noted for their religious tolerance and political pragmatism, famously adopting Judaism as their state religion in the 8th century, although Christianity, Islam, and other faiths were also practiced within their borders.
The Khazars played a key role in the politics and economy of Eastern Europe and the Pontic–Caspian steppe. Their control over trade routes contributed to the establishment of the Pax Khazarica, a period of relative peace and stability that fostered safe long-distance trade. This stability allowed traders, including the Radhanite Jews, to operate along vast routes that stretched from China to the Byzantine Empire. These trade routes facilitated the exchange of goods, culture, and ideas across Eurasia.

### Kievan Rus' (9th century–1240)
#### Origin and foundation of state

The origins of the Kievan state and the etymology of its name, Rus', continue to be subjects of scholarly debate. One theory, often called the 'Norman theory', posits that the term Rus' originated from the Scandinavian Varangians, who were active in trade and military ventures across Eastern Europe in the early medieval period. Proponents of this theory argue that the Varangians, also known as the Rus', initially brought a political and military influence that shaped the emerging state structure, with the term Rus' eventually becoming synonymous with the region and its people.
In contrast, the 'anti-Norman theory' suggests that the term Rus' has indigenous Slavic roots, developing independently of Scandinavian influence. Advocates of this theory assert that Eastern Slavic tribes already had established political and social frameworks before any contact with the Varangians, and that these tribes were naturally progressing toward political consolidation. According to this perspective, the name Rus' could be linked to the Ros River, a historically significant waterway flowing through present-day Ukraine, which was home to various Slavic communities. In this view, Rus' may have referred to a collective identity tied to a specific geographic region or a union of native tribes, rather than to foreign invaders or rulers.
The first reliable mention of the Rus' dates back to the year 839 in the Frankish chronicle Annals of St. Bertin, where members of an embassy from the north, arriving in the Byzantine Empire, referred to themselves as Rus'. The second notable mention of the Rus' occurred in 860, when they launched a bold and unexpected naval raid on Constantinople. Commanding a fleet across the Black Sea, the Rus' forces struck at the very heart of the Byzantine Empire, quickly reaching the city’s outskirts. According to accounts from Greek eyewitnesses, the Rus' not only managed to pillage the suburbs of Constantinople but also instilled widespread fear among its residents. The Byzantine defenses were unprepared, allowing the Rus' to withdraw without significant resistance.
The earliest source about the history of the Dnieper Ukraine region is the Tale of Bygone Years (or Primary Chronicle), written no earlier than the 11th century. In its 'legendary' part, it narrates the Rus' raid on Constantinople and the formation of a state centered in Kiev during the second half of the 9th century. The Chronicle, in particular, mentions the names of the leaders of the raid on Constantinople — Askold and Dir — and calls them retainers of the Scandinavian Rurik dynasty. According to the Chronicle, a representative of this dynasty, Oleg the Wise, allegedly came to Kiev from Novgorod in 882, killed Askold and Dir, and took control of the Kiev state. This narrative contains chronological errors—for example, it incorrectly dates the Constantinople raid to 867—and lacks corroboration from archaeological evidence, which suggests that Novgorod itself was only established in the 10th century. Therefore, modern historians view the Chronicle's account of the 9th century as largely speculative and likely a later construction by the Chronicle's author.
Scholars associate the state-building processes in the Middle Dnieper region with the emergence of the well-known trade route from Scandinavia to Constantinople, known as the 'Route from the Varangians to the Greeks'. A significant section of this route ran along the Dnieper River, and Kiev was an important transshipment point, allowing control over trade along the Dnieper, Pripyat, and Desna rivers. The Middle Dnieper region began to serve as a political, cultural, and economic center for the East Slavic world. It eventually came to be known as the Rus' land in the narrow sense of this term. According to The Tale of Bygone Years, the East Slavic tribe of the Polans, inhabitants of the Middle Dnieper region, adopted the name Rus' for their land and were regarded as the most advanced among the East Slavs. Thus, they played a central role in forming a new tribal union centered around Kiev.
From the first half of the 10th century, the first confirmed ruler of the Kievan state, as documented in foreign sources, was Igor the Old, whom the Primary Chronicle identifies as a prince. Information in the Chronicle regarding governance during this period is considered relatively reliable. The princely retinue played a significant role in governance, accompanying rulers on campaigns and collecting tribute from subjugated local Slavic tribes. The collected tribute (such as furs, honey, hides, wax, and slaves) was mainly exported to Byzantium, with the proceeds used to purchase weapons, luxury goods, and wine—constituting the core of imports. When trade conditions no longer met the prince's expectations, he led an unsuccessful campaign against Constantinople in 941, which eventually resulted in a new Rus-Byzantine trade treaty in 944. The Tale of Bygone Years recounts Igor's attempt to levy additional tribute from the subdued Slavs, which led to a rebellion by the Drevlians, who killed him in 945.
Following Igor's death in 945, his widow, Princess Olga, assumed the role of regent for their young son, Sviatoslav, who was still too young to rule. Olga is best known for her calculated and fierce retaliation against the Drevlians, a campaign that culminated in the annexation of their lands into the expanding Kievan Rus'. Olga also implemented significant reforms, particularly by restructuring the tribute collection system known as poliudie. This new system made revenue collection more systematic and centralized, reducing the likelihood of rebellion by ensuring a more balanced distribution of power. In a landmark decision, Olga became the first ruler of Kievan Rus' to embrace Christianity around 957 during a diplomatic visit to Constantinople. However, despite her conversion, the state under her rule remained predominantly pagan, with Christianity gaining influence only later under her descendants.
When Sviatoslav assumed rule over Kievan Rus', he launched an ambitious military expansion. His most notable achievement was the decisive defeat of the Khazar Khaganate, a once-dominant regional power that had controlled key trade routes for centuries. The fall of the Khazars opened opportunities for Kievan Rus' to extend its influence into the Caucasus and beyond. In addition to his campaigns in the east, Sviatoslav waged numerous battles against the Byzantine Empire, seeking to establish Kievan Rus' as a formidable power in the Balkans. His primary goal was to create a lasting base in Bulgaria, strengthening his strategic position in southeastern Europe. However, his ambitions in the Balkans were thwarted after a Byzantine counterattack. In 972, while returning from his Balkan campaign, Sviatoslav was ambushed and killed by the Pechenegs near the Dnieper River.
After Sviatoslav's death, a power struggle ensued among his sons. Yaropolk, Sviatoslav's eldest son, assumed the title of Grand Prince of Kiev and worked to consolidate power across the vast territory, leading to conflicts with his brothers. Oleg, Sviatoslav's second son, governed the Drevlian lands, and rivalry between him and Yaropolk escalated into open warfare. During one of their clashes around 977, Oleg was killed, further intensifying the conflict. Initially, Vladimir, Sviatoslav's youngest son, fled to avoid being entangled in the conflict. However, after Oleg's death, he returned with a Varangian army. By 980, Vladimir had defeated Yaropolk and consolidated power, becoming the sole ruler of Kievan Rus'.

#### Golden Age and Christianisation

During the reign of Vladimir the Great, Kievan Rus' expanded significantly, notably through the conquest and annexation of Red Ruthenia, Transcarpathia, and Korsun. These territorial gains made Kievan Rus' the largest state in Europe at the time, covering over 800,000 square kilometers and boasting a population of more than 5 million. The socio-economic structure of Kievan Rus' was similar to that of other European states of the period, characterized by a natural economy, communal land ownership, and reliance on slash-and-burn agriculture, and animal husbandry.
Vladimir reformed local governance by abolishing the traditional tribal autonomies and installing his own appointed governors, further centralizing his authority. Under his rule, Kiev emerged as one of the wealthiest commercial centers in Europe during the 10th and 11th centuries, benefiting from its strategic location on trade routes and its growing political influence. Initially, Vladimir supported the worship of Slavic deities such as Perun. However, in 988, he made a historic decision to convert Kievan Rus' to Christianity, adopting Eastern Orthodoxy from the Byzantine Empire. He personally led the mass baptism of the people of Kiev in the Pochaina River and built the first stone church in Kievan Rus' — Church of the Tithes. He also introduced the Charter on Church Courts and Tithes, thereby securing a strong relationship between the church and state. Unlike the earlier attempts of his grandmother, Princess Olga, Vladimir's reforms had a lasting impact, deeply influencing the religious and cultural development of the region.
Vladimir's rule also saw administrative, monetary, and military reforms. He appointed governors and entrusted his sons with ruling major cities, also minted his own gold (Zolotnik) and silver (Serebryanik) coins, and granted borderlands to loyal vassals in exchange for military defense. To protect the realm, Vladimir oversaw the construction of an extensive system of defensive fortifications, known as the Serpent's Walls, which stretched for 1,000 kilometers, safeguarding Kievan Rus' from external threats.
Despite these accomplishments, Kievan Rus' entered a turbulent period of internal strife following Vladimir's death in 1015, as his sons fought for control. This era of internecine conflict lasted until 1019, when Yaroslav the Wise emerged victorious and assumed the throne. Ruling jointly with his brother Mstislav until 1036, Yaroslav presided over what is often regarded as the golden age of Kievan Rus'. One of Yaroslav's key achievements was his decisive defeat of the Pechenegs, who had long been a threat to the state. To commemorate this victory, Yaroslav ordered the construction of the Saint Sophia Cathedral in Kiev, a structure that still stands as a symbol of this prosperous era. He also founded the Kyiv Pechersk Lavra and supported the election of Hilarion of Kiev as the Kyiv Metropolitan, marking a significant step in the independence of the Kievan church. Yaroslav's reign was also notable for the introduction of the first written legal code — Rus' Truth, which established a foundation for legal governance in the state. Additionally, Yaroslav engaged in extensive marriage diplomacy, forming alliances by arranging marriages between his daughters and European royalty. However, after Yaroslav's death, Kievan Rus' began to fragment, as his sons divided the territory among themselves, leading to further internecine conflicts and the eventual decline of centralized power.

#### Feudal fragmentation

The feudal fragmentation of Kievan Rus' began in the late 11th century, driven by a complex interplay of internal and external factors. One significant factor was the rotational succession system, allowing power to pass among male relatives instead of directly from father to son. This system often sparked conflicts, as competing claims to power emerged. With princes often granted specific territories, autonomous principalities began to emerge clearly. Regional cities such as Chernihiv, Polotsk, and Novgorod gained power and asserted their independence, with local elites increasing their influence. By this time, the authority of the Grand Prince of Kiev was notably weakening. Regional princes, bolstered by local resources and armies, began to resist central control. Additionally, the vast geography and economic diversity of Rus' impeded unity, as various regions developed their own trade routes and systems. External threats from nomadic groups, such as the Pechenegs and Polovtsy (Cumans), further exacerbated regionalism, compelling local rulers to focus on defending their territories.
After Yaroslav the Wise's death, his sons divided the lands, which significantly accelerated political fragmentation. Although his succession plan aimed to prevent conflict, it ultimately sowed the seeds of feudal division. The Council of Liubech, convened by several princes, including Vladimir Monomakh, sought to settle disputes and clarify the inheritance of principalities. This agreement formalized Kievan Rus's division into regional hereditary principalities, thereby legalizing fragmentation. The adage "Let everyone hold his own" emerged, signifying that each prince would govern his own territory without interference from others.
Vladimir Monomakh, who served as Grand Prince of Kiev from 1113 to 1125, is remembered as one of Kievan Rus' most capable leaders. He ascended the throne amid internal strife and external threats, yet worked diligently to stabilize the fragmented territories of Rus'. Monomakh's reign achieved relative unity through efforts to reduce feuds among princes and reinforce central authority. His military successes, particularly against the Polovtsy (Cumans), secured the region's borders. Diplomatically, he forged strong ties with Europe, notably through his marriage to Gytha of Wessex, the daughter of English King Harold II. As an educated ruler, Monomakh authored The Instruction of Vladimir Monomakh, offering insights on governance, morality, and leadership. His reign is often regarded as one of the last periods of unity before Rus' descended further into division.
Monomakh's son, Mstislav the Great, preserved some unity during his reign from 1125 to 1132. However, following his death, the principality fractured. The division of lands among Monomakh's sons and other relatives resulted in multiple competing power centers. The process of feudal fragmentation marked a turning point in the history of Rus', culminating in its eventual decline and the rise of smaller, more independent states. These would later evolve into the medieval powers of the Kingdom of Ruthenia, the Principality of Polotsk, the Novgorod Republic, and others.

#### Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus'

In 1222, a new wave of nomads—the warlike Mongols—arrived in the Black Sea steppes and defeated the Polovtsians as part of the Mongol Empire's westward expansion. The Polovtsians, who had family ties with the Rus' princes, turned to Rus' for help. A joint Rus'-Polovtsian force marched into the steppes, where the Battle of the Kalka River took place in 1223. Following the battle, the Mongols retreated eastward for approximately 15 years.
In the late 1230s, the Mongols returned with significantly larger forces under the leadership of Batu Khan and his general Subutai. The Mongols first attacked the eastern regions of the state, using superior siege tactics to overwhelm local defenses. Between 1239 and 1240, the Mongols shifted their focus to the southern territories. In 1240, they laid siege to Kiev, which ultimately fell after a brutal assault, marking the final collapse of Kievan Rus' as a unified political entity.
As a result of this invasion, Kievan Rus' was extensively destroyed, depopulated, and fragmented. Following their conquest, the Mongols established dominion over the region through the Golden Horde, transforming most of the Rus' principalities into tributary states. Under Mongol rule, the Rus' were required to pay heavy taxes and submit to Mongol authority. The invasion severely stunted the region's political, cultural, and economic development, and the effects of Mongol domination reverberated for centuries. Despite its devastation, the Eastern Orthodox Church played an important role in preserving cultural identity during Mongol rule.

#### Kingdom of Galicia–Volhynia

The Principality—later the Kingdom of Galicia–Volhynia (Ruthenia)—emerged from the disintegration of Kievan Rus'. Its rulers continued the political and cultural legacy of Kiev, preserving the traditions and governance of the Rus' state even as Kiev fell to Mongol control. Previously, Vladimir the Great had established the cities of Halych and Volodymyr as regional capitals, setting the foundation for future political entities in the region. The area was originally inhabited by the Dulebes, Tivertsi, and White Croats tribes. Initially, Volhynia and Galicia existed as separate principalities, each ruled by descendants of Yaroslav the Wise. Galicia was governed by the Rostislavich dynasty, while Volhynia was initially ruled by the Igorevichs and eventually by the Iziaslavich dynasty. During the reign of Yaroslav Osmomysl (1153–1187), Galicia expanded its influence, extending as far as the Black Sea.
Rivalry between the rulers of these principalities often revolved around efforts to assert dominance over one another. This conflict was finally resolved by Roman the Great (1197–1205), who not only succeeded in uniting Galicia and Volhynia under his rule but also briefly extended his authority over Kiev. Roman's consolidation of power laid the groundwork for the rise of the Principality of Galicia–Volhynia, which became a significant political force in the region.
Following Roman's death, a period of unrest ensued, lasting until his son Daniel Romanovich reclaimed the throne in 1238. Daniel successfully restored his father's state, including Kiev. In 1240, the Mongol Empire, led by Batu Khan, unleashed devastating invasions across Kievan Rus'. Cities like Kiev were sacked, leaving much of the region in ruins. Daniel's decisive victory at the Battle of Yaroslavl in 1245 ended internal conflicts and firmly secured his control over the state. By 1246, Daniel was compelled to recognize Mongol supremacy to safeguard his state. Though this submission was humiliating, it allowed Daniel to retain some degree of autonomy, provided he paid tribute to the Mongol khan.
Despite this subjugation, Daniel remained determined to free Ruthenia from Mongol dominance. He sought support from Western Europe, forging diplomatic ties with the Papacy, Poland, Hungary, and the Holy Roman Empire. In 1253, Daniel was crowned King of Ruthenia (Latin: Rex Rusiae) by a papal legate in Drohiczyn, receiving formal recognition from Pope Innocent IV. This coronation symbolized Ruthenia's alignment with Western Europe and its Christian identity, while still adhering to the Orthodox faith. The crowning also carried the hope of an anti-Mongol alliance, though such a coalition never materialized due to political divisions in Western Europe. King Daniel also founded numerous cities that became hubs of trade, culture, and military strength. Among his most notable achievements were the establishments of Lviv, named after his son Lev, and Kholm. These urban centers not only revitalized the kingdom's economy but also helped Daniel consolidate his political authority over the region.
After King Daniel Romanovych's death in 1264, the kingdom was inherited by his son, Lev Danylovych. Lev I ruled from 1269 to 1301 and relocated the capital from Kholm to Lviv. He continued his father's policies of defending the kingdom against external threats, particularly from the Mongols, while also striving to maintain alliances with Poland and Lithuania to counterbalance Mongol influence. Although Lev managed to preserve the state's territorial integrity, the kingdom's power gradually eroded under the relentless pressure from the Mongol Golden Horde and ongoing internal political challenges. Following Lev's death in 1301, his son, Yuri Lvovych, ascended the throne and ruled until 1308. During his reign, Yuri I succeeded in maintaining relative stability, yet the kingdom's political position had significantly weakened compared to the time of Daniel. Despite his efforts, Yuri's reign was short-lived, and after his death, the kingdom entered a period of fragmentation.
Yuri's sons, Andrew and Lev II, attempted to co-rule, but their efforts to sustain the kingdom's unity and strength ultimately failed. The Mongol Golden Horde continued to exert substantial influence over the weakened Kingdom of Ruthenia throughout the 14th century. After the deaths of the co-rulers around 1323, the kingdom found itself without strong leadership. Yuri II Boleslav, the last ruler of the Kingdom of Ruthenia, took power following the demise of the Romanovych line. Reigning from 1323 to 1340, he was a member of the Polish Piast dynasty, chosen as king due to his maternal connection to the Ruthenian royal family—his mother, Maria, was the daughter of Lev I. Upon ascending the throne, Boleslav converted to Orthodox Christianity and adopted the name Yuriy to garner support from the local Orthodox nobility. However, his reign was fraught with tension due to his Catholic background, which clashed with the predominantly Orthodox Ruthenian elite. During his rule, Yuriy II struggled to balance the competing interests of Poland, Lithuania, and the Mongol Golden Horde, while also introducing pro-Catholic policies that alienated the local nobility. His rule culminated in his assassination in 1340 by Ruthenian nobles discontented with his leadership. His death triggered a fierce power struggle between Poland and Lithuania for control over the region. Soon after, Galicia was annexed by Poland, and Volhynia fell under Lithuanian rule, marking the end of the independent Kingdom of Ruthenia.

### Foreign domination

From the 13th century onwards, parts of Ukraine’s Black Sea called Genoese Gazaria came under the influence of the Republic of Genoa, which established fortified trading colonies. These included key settlements such as Caffa (modern Feodosia), Soldaia (modern Sudak), and others in today’s Odesa Oblast. These fortresses, heavily guarded by Genoese garrisons, functioned as hubs for maritime trade and ensured Genoa's control over Black Sea commerce. The Genoese dominance, however, faced challenges from neighboring powers and ended with the Ottoman conquest in 1475.
In 1322, Pope John XXII established a Catholic diocese in Caffa (modern-day Feodosia), marking the only Catholic stronghold within Mongol-controlled territories. It served as a central religious authority from the Balkans to the capital of the Golden Horde, Sarai. The Genoese settlements were not only economic centers but also a point of cultural and religious interaction between Europe, the Mongol Empire, and the Middle East.
By the mid-14th century, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania expanded into the territories of modern Ukraine. After the decisive Battle of the Blue Waters against the Golden Horde (1362/63), Lithuania annexed Polotsk, Volhynia, Chernihiv, and Kyiv. Lithuanian rulers adhered to the principle “We do not disturb the old, nor do we introduce the new”, which allowed local Ruthenian (Ukrainian) traditions, religion, and administration to remain largely intact. The Lithuanian rulers styled themselves as “rulers of Rus’”, integrating Ruthenian traditions and governance into their system. This integration included Ruthenian aristocrats, like the Olelkovich family, who became influential in the Lithuanian administration. Old Church Slavonic and Ruthenian served as primary administrative languages alongside Latin.
Simultaneously, Poland began asserting influence over western Ukraine. Red Ruthenia, parts of Volhynia, and Podolia were incorporated into the Kingdom of Poland, and the Polish monarch adopted the title "lord and heir of Ruthenia" (Latin: Russiae dominus et Heres). Meanwhile, Kingdom of Hungary also maintained influence, particularly over Zakarpattia (Transcarpathia) and parts of Bessarabia. The Hungarian Crown controlled these regions, fostering Magyarization and Catholic influence while integrating them into the Hungary’s political and economic system.
Since the 14th century, Poland and Lithuania had developed a unique and evolving relationship, often defined by dynastic unions, military alliances, and shared geopolitical interests, particularly in countering external threats. These included the aggressive expansion of the Teutonic Knights in the Baltic region and the rise of the Principality of Moscow to the east. The need for mutual support in the face of these common enemies gradually led the two states toward closer cooperation. This relationship reached a decisive turning point with the Union of Krewo in 1385, which marked the beginning of a new political era. Through the marriage of Jadwiga of Poland, the Queen of Poland, and Władysław II Jagiełło, the Grand Duke of Lithuania, the Lithuanian Grand Duchy was brought under Polish influence. This union was not just a political arrangement but a dynastic consolidation, with Jagiełło converting to Christianity and agreeing to unite Lithuania with Poland under his rule. This union established the Jagiellonian dynasty, which would go on to rule both Poland and Lithuania for several generations. The creation of this shared monarchy laid the foundation for an increasingly intertwined relationship between the two states, leading to greater cooperation in military, political, and cultural matters.
In the early 15th century, tensions within the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia and Samogitia over the governance of the Rus' lands intensified. These tensions escalated into a power struggle following the death of Grand Duke Vytautas in 1430. Vytautas had been a powerful and unifying figure, and his passing left a power vacuum that deepened divisions within the Lithuanian elite. Two main contenders for the throne emerged: Švitrigaila, who had the support of the Orthodox Rus' nobility, and Sigismund Kęstutaitis, who represented the Catholic Lithuanian elite. In 1432, Sigismund Kęstutaitis declared himself the new Grand Duke of Lithuania. To consolidate his rule and gain favor with the Rus' lands, he proclaimed the creation of a new political entity—the Grand Principality of Rus' (1432—1435). This new formation was intended to include several important regions, such as Volhynia, Podolia, Siveria, Berestia, and Kyivshchyna, with Kyiv as its capital. Despite this declaration, Švitrigaila remained formally the head of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and sought to transform the Rus' lands into an independent state under his control. His ambition to sever the ties with the rest of the Grand Duchy sparked a civil war that raged from 1432 to 1435, plunging Lithuania into internal conflict.
Švitrigaila's forces, which included early Cossack, sought external support from the Teutonic Order, which had its own interests in weakening both Poland and Lithuania. The Teutonic Order's involvement further complicated the political situation. However, Sigismund Kęstutaitis found strong backing from Polish King Władysław II Jagiełło (Jogaila), as well as from the majority of the Lithuanian nobility. This external support proved pivotal in the conflict, tipping the scales in Sigismund's favor. The turning point in the war came with the Battle of Wiłkomierz (modern-day Ukmergė, Lithuania) on September 1, 1435. This battle was one of the largest and most decisive military engagements in Eastern Europe during the 15th century. Švitrigaila's forces were decisively defeated, suffering a crushing blow that effectively ended the Grand Principality of Rus'. The defeat led to the collapse of Švitrigaila's short-lived state and ensured the continuation of Lithuanian rule over the Rus' lands. With the victory, Sigismund Kęstutaitis solidified his power as Grand Duke, and the Rus' territories were once again integrated into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. However, these lands would now be firmly under Lithuanian control, with no significant autonomy for the Rus' people. The failure of the Grand Principality of Rus' also marked a significant shift in the governance of the region, as the aspirations of the Rus' nobility for greater independence were suppressed.
Southwestern Crimea saw the emergence of the Principality of Theodoro, also known as Gothia, a Byzantine successor state. Centered in Doros (modern Mangup), Theodoro was a multi-ethnic entity populated by Greeks, Goths, Alans, and others. Its rulers maintained close ties with the Byzantine Empire and the Empire of Trebizond. The principality acted as a buffer between Genoese colonies and the expanding Crimean Khanate. Despite its strong fortifications, Theodoro was conquered by the Ottoman Empire in 1475, as the Ottomans sought full dominance over the Black Sea region.
The increasing dominance of the Polish nobility over Ukrainian lands in the late 15th century sparked resistance, most notably Mukha’s Rebellion in 1490. Led by Petro Mukha and supported by Moldavian Prince Stephen the Great, the uprising involved early Cossacks, Hutsuls, and Romanians (Moldavians). Mukha’s forces captured several towns in Pokuttya and advanced toward Lviv, though they failed to take the city. The rebellion, while ultimately suppressed, revealed growing dissatisfaction among Ukrainians under foreign rule and foreshadowed future uprisings in the region.
As the Golden Horde declined in the 15th century, the Crimean Khanate emerged as a dominant power in the southern Ukrainian steppe. Centered around the city of Bakhchisarai, the Khanate controlled much of the Black Sea coastline, including key ports and strategic territories in what is today southern Ukraine. This rise to power marked a significant shift in the region, as the Crimean Khanate not only played a key military and political role but also became a vital player in the economy of the Black Sea and beyond.
From the early 16th century to the late 18th century, the Crimean Khanate was deeply involved in the region’s slave trade, which became one of its main economic drivers. The Khanate, often acting as an intermediary between the steppes and the Ottoman Empire, exported an estimated 2 million slaves to slavery in the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East between 1500 and 1700. These slaves, many of whom were captured in raids on neighboring lands, were primarily sold to the Ottoman Empire, where they were used in various sectors, including the military, households, and harems.
Despite its growing power, the Crimean Khanate remained a vassal state of the Ottoman Empire throughout much of its history. This relationship provided the Khanate with military support and protection, but also limited its autonomy. The Crimean Khanate’s role as a vassal did not diminish its influence, however, and it continued to exert significant control over the Black Sea region until the late 18th century.

## Early modern period
### Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth

After the Union of Lublin in 1569, which united the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania into the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, Ukrainian lands transitioned under Polish administration, becoming part of the Crown of the Kingdom of Poland. The union was driven by the need to counter external threats, primarily the growing aggression of Tsardom of Moscow and persistent raids by the Teutonic Order, prompting both states to consolidate their resources and strengthen their defenses. This political shift marked a significant transformation of Ukraine's social, economic, and cultural landscape. Polish authorities initiated large-scale colonization efforts, resulting in the foundation of numerous new towns and villages, particularly in the steppe regions. Settlers brought new legal norms, governance practices, and economic models, integrating Ukrainian lands more closely into the Commonwealth's political system.
At the same time, Renaissance ideas began to permeate Ukrainian society, driven by the spread of new schools and educational institutions, which were often established by the Jesuits. The arrival of Polish settlers in large numbers led to cultural assimilation. Over time, a significant portion of the Ukrainian nobility became 'polonized', adopting Polish customs, language, and converting to Roman Catholicism. However, the majority of Ruthenian-speaking peasants remained loyal to the Eastern Orthodox Church, which caused growing social and religious tensions. Polish influence extended not only politically but also culturally. Some polonized Ukrainian nobles, such as Stanisław Orzechowski, made notable contributions to Polish intellectual and cultural life, writing influential works on theology, law, and politics. These changes contributed to the fragmentation of Ukrainian society, as the gap between the Catholic, Polish-speaking nobility and the Orthodox, Ruthenian-speaking peasants widened, creating the foundations for future conflicts.
The incorporation of Kyiv, Volhynia, Podolia, and Bratslav lands into the Crown also strengthened internal connections between various Ukrainian regions. New trade routes and urban centers facilitated greater economic, social, and cultural interaction across these previously fragmented territories, fostering regional cohesion. However, despite the spread of Polish culture and governance, the Ukrainian population maintained a distinct identity rooted in Orthodox traditions and Ruthenian language, which became a key factor in their resistance to cultural assimilation.
At the same time, the harsh conditions imposed on Ruthenian peasants by the Polish nobility sparked widespread resistance. As serfdom expanded and economic exploitation intensified, many peasants fled to the borderlands of the Dnipro region, seeking freedom and a better life. These frontier settlers became known as Cossacks, forming a distinct social and military group known for their martial prowess, independence, and deep ties to the Orthodox faith. The Cossacks quickly gained a reputation as skilled warriors, adept at defending the southeastern borders of the Commonwealth from Tatar raids. Recognizing their military value, the Polish authorities enlisted Cossacks into the Commonwealth’s army, particularly for the defense of frontier regions, and granted them limited privileges through the creation of the Registered Cossacks in the late 16th century. Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny, one of the most prominent Cossack leaders, played a decisive role in the Battle of Khotyn in 1621, where the Commonwealth, with Cossack support, repelled a massive Ottoman army. His leadership and diplomatic efforts also strengthened ties with the Orthodox Church, as he sought to restore the Church’s influence in Ukrainian society.
However, despite their significant contributions to the Commonwealth’s military victories, the Cossacks were denied substantial political or social autonomy. The Szlachta (Polish nobility), which dominated the Commonwealth’s political system, viewed the Cossacks as a disruptive and uncontrollable force, refusing to recognize them as a distinct social class. Instead, the nobility made repeated attempts to reduce the Cossacks to the status of serfs, depriving them of their privileges and freedoms. This ongoing marginalization and denial of rights led to a series of Cossack uprisings, as they sought to defend their autonomy, way of life, and religious identity. Notable rebellions included the Kosiński Uprising (1591-1593) and the Nalyvaiko Uprising (1594-1596), both of which were brutally suppressed by the Polish authorities. These rebellions, however, underscored the growing discontent among the Cossacks and highlighted the tension between the Commonwealth’s central government and the frontier population.
By the early 17th century, the situation became increasingly volatile, with Cossack demands for recognition of their rights being continuously ignored. The Commonwealth's refusal to integrate the Cossacks politically and respect their distinct cultural and religious identity ultimately set the stage for larger conflicts, most notably the Khmelnytsky Uprising of 1648, also known as the Cossack–Polish War, which profoundly reshaped the political landscape of Eastern Europe.
Size and population of the voivodeships in the 16th century :
| Voivodeship | Voivodeship | Square kilometers | Population (est.) |
| Galicia | Galicia | 45,000 | 446,000 |
| Volhynia | Volhynia | 42,000 | 294,000 |
| Podilia | Podilia | 19,000 | 98,000 |
| Bratslav | Bratslav | 35,000 | 311,000 |
| Kyiv | Kyiv | 117,000 | 234,000 |
| Belz (two regions) | Kholm | 19,000 | 133,000 |
| Belz (two regions) | Pidliassia | 10,000 | 233,000 |

### Cossack era
#### Cossack Hetmanate (1649–1764)

The Cossack Hetmanate, also known as the Hetmanate of Ukraine, was a self-governing Cossack state that existed between 1649 and 1764. It arose during a particularly volatile era in Eastern European history, following the seismic upheaval of the Khmelnytsky Uprising. This revolt, led by the charismatic and astute military leader Bohdan Khmelnytsky, sought to liberate Ukrainian lands from the dominion of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. The rebellion not only destabilized one of Europe’s most prominent states at the time but also triggered a broader period of chaos in the region, known in Ukrainian history as the "Ruin", while in Polish historiography it is referred to as "the Deluge".
The establishment of the Cossack Hetmanate in 1649 marked a pivotal shift in the political landscape of Eastern Europe. Officially recognized through the Treaty of Zboriv that same year, the Hetmanate emerged as a semi-autonomous entity within the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Yet, this fragile self-governance was immediately tested by a turbulent geopolitical environment. The state found itself entangled in a web of diplomatic and military conflicts involving major regional powers, including the Ottoman Empire, the Commonwealth, the Crimean Khanate, and the Tsardom of Moscow. For these competing entities, the Hetmanate was not just a potential ally, but also a strategic prize, which complicated its quest for sovereignty and stability.
As ruler of the Hetmanate, Khmelnytsky engaged in state-building across multiple spheres: military, administration, finance, economics, and culture. He invested the Zaporozhian Host under the leadership of its hetman with supreme power in the new Ruthenian state, and he unified all the spheres of Ukrainian society under his authority. This involved building a government system and a developed military and civilian administration out of Cossack officers and Ruthenian nobles, as well as the establishment of an elite within the Cossack Hetman state.
In 1654, under the continuous pressure of Poland and in pursuit of a more secure route to sovereignty, the Cossack leadership, headed by Bohdan Khmelnytsky, entered into the Pereyaslav Agreement with the Tsardom of Russia. This pact positioned the Hetmanate under the Russian protection, signaling a significant shift in the region’s balance of power. While the agreement initially promised mutual military support and guaranteed a degree of autonomy for the Cossacks, it also laid the groundwork for Russia's gradual encroachment on Ukrainian governance. Over time, the aspirations of the Hetmanate for true independence were systematically undermined, as the Tsardom’s ambitions to consolidate control over the territory took precedence.
Efforts to reclaim autonomy and negotiate favorable terms with neighboring powers continued, culminating in the 1658 Treaty of Hadiach. This ambitious agreement aimed to elevate the Hetmanate to the status of the Grand Principality of Rus', an equal partner within the Commonwealth alongside Poland and Lithuania. While the treaty represented a significant step toward reconciliation, it was ultimately derailed by fierce Russian opposition and deep-seated divisions within the Ukrainian leadership. Moreover, the agreement failed to stabilize the region, as ongoing conflicts, including Russian military campaigns and internal unrest, plunged the Hetmanate into over a decade of turmoil, leaving its aspirations for autonomy unfulfilled.
The Truce of Andrusovo in 1667 marked a pivotal moment in Ukrainian history, as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Tsardom of Russia formalized an agreement to partition the Hetmanate's territories along the Dnieper River. Under the terms of the treaty, Right-Bank Ukraine was returned to Polish control, while Left-Bank Ukraine, including Kyiv, was ceded to Russia. Although the Hetmanate retained a nominal degree of autonomy on the Left Bank, this autonomy was heavily constrained by Russian oversight. The division not only symbolized the beginning of a new long-term foreign domination of Ukrainian lands, but also violated the unity of the Cossack state. This fragmentation further weakened the Hetmanate's capacity to resist external pressures and maintain its independence, leaving it increasingly vulnerable to the ambitions of neighboring powers.
The late 17th century was characterized by civil strife, foreign intervention, and territorial shifts. From 1657 to 1686, the region was embroiled in nearly constant conflict, with neighboring powers, including the Ottoman Empire, Poland, and Russia, capitalizing on Ukraine's vulnerability. During this period, Hetman Petro Doroshenko, a prominent Cossack leader, sought to consolidate control over key territories such as Kyiv and Bratslav. However, his ambitions were thwarted as these areas fell under Turkish occupation, further complicating the geopolitical landscape.
In the broader context, the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699 played a pivotal role in redefining territorial control. It resulted in the return of much of the land previously held by the Ottomans to Polish authority. Despite this, Ukrainian Cossack forces, especially in the frontier regions of Zaporizhzhia and Sloboda Ukraine, managed to maintain a degree of autonomy. Semi-independent Cossack republics in these areas continued to challenge both Polish and Russian dominance, asserting their independence and preserving distinct cultural and political identities.
In addition to political turbulence, the Hetmanate played a pivotal role in the cultural and intellectual development of both Ukraine and Russia during the late 17th and early 18th centuries. Ukrainian clerics, scholars, and intellectuals, many of whom were educated at the esteemed Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, served as key agents of cultural exchange and reform. Their influence was particularly pronounced during the reign of Peter the Great, as they introduced new ideas and approaches that helped modernize Russian society. Figures such as Theophan Prokopovich and Stefan Yavorsky, both leading members of the Most Holy Synod, played an important role in shaping religious and educational reforms in Russia. The intellectual movement often referred to as the 'Ukrainian school' left a lasting imprint on Russian literature, theology, and pedagogy, becoming a dominant force in the region's cultural landscape.
A critical turning point in Ukraine's religious history occurred in 1686, when the Metropolis of Kyiv was annexed by the Moscow Patriarchate. This event symbolized the consolidation of Moscow's influence over Ukrainian religious and cultural life. This annexation was a significant step towards the gradual erosion of Ukrainian ecclesiastical independence. Nonetheless, the Hetmanate’s leadership continued to assert their autonomy, navigating complex political realities to safeguard their unique identity and governance. The interplay between cooperation and resistance defined this era, highlighting Ukraine's dual role as both a cultural sponsor of Moscovy's reforms and a defender of its own sovereignty.
The Hetmanate reached its peak of independence under the leadership of Hetman Ivan Mazepa, a complex and ambitious figure in Ukrainian history. Seeking to assert the autonomy of the Hetmanate, Mazepa pursued an alliance with the Swedish Empire during the Great Northern War (1700–1721), hoping to break free from Russian dominance. His decision to align with Charles XII of Sweden was a bold but perilous move, rooted in the desire to safeguard Ukrainian sovereignty and escape the tightening grip of Moscow.
The turning point came in 1708, when the Moscovy’s army, under orders from Tsar Peter I, sacked the Hetmanate’s capital city, Baturyn. The brutal assault resulted in the massacre of thousands of defenders and civilians, with many burned alive or executed in other horrific ways. This act of retribution was a devastating blow to Mazepa’s efforts, as it not only destroyed the administrative and military center of the Hetmanate but also served as a warning to other potential dissenters. Mazepa's rebellion culminated in the catastrophic defeat at the Battle of Poltava in 1709, where the combined Swedish-Ukrainian forces were decisively crushed by Peter’s army. The aftermath of Poltava marked the end of Mazepa’s aspirations for Ukrainian independence and significantly tightened Russia's control over the Hetmanate. The rebellion’s failure also signaled a shift in the balance of power in Eastern Europe, consolidating Russia’s dominance in the region and diminishing the Hetmanate’s autonomy.
After the defeat at Poltava, Ivan Skoropadsky led the Hetmanate (1708–1722) during a challenging period of diminishing autonomy. While he sought to navigate the growing pressures from Russia, his efforts were significantly undermined in 1722 when Peter I established the Little Russian Collegium. This administrative body, composed largely of imperial officials, was tasked with supervising the Hetmanate’s governance, effectively curtailing Skoropadsky’s authority and undermining traditional Cossack institutions. His death in 1722 left the Hetmanate vulnerable to further imperial centralization. Following Skoropadsky’s death, Pavlo Polubotok, serving as acting Hetman, attempted to resist Moscow’s encroachments. Polubotok appealed to Peter I to honor the Hetmanate’s earlier agreements, particularly those guaranteeing autonomy. However, his resistance led to his arrest and imprisonment in the Peter and Paul Fortress, where he died in 1724. Polubotok’s fate symbolized the futility of overt resistance during this phase, as the imperial government tightened its grip on the region.
A brief resurgence of autonomy occurred under Danylo Apostol (1727–1734), whose election marked a temporary relaxation of imperial policies following Peter I’s death. Apostol negotiated limited autonomy for the Hetmanate, securing greater control over local taxation and governance. He also implemented administrative and judicial reforms aimed at strengthening internal stability. Despite these achievements, Apostol’s death led to another period of direct imperial administration under the Governing Council of the Hetman Office, a body dominated by Russian officials. This period (1734–1750) deepened the integration of the Hetmanate into the imperial administrative structure.
In 1750, the Hetmanate was restored under Kyrylo Rozumovsky, a politically savvy leader with close ties to the Russian court. Rozumovsky sought to modernize the Hetmanate by reforming its administration, judiciary, and military while working to strengthen its autonomy. He relocated the Hetmanate’s capital to Hlukhiv, transforming it into a political and cultural center. Rozumovsky also initiated ambitious projects, including plans to establish a university, reflecting his vision of the Hetmanate as a semi-autonomous, modernized polity within the Russian Empire. However, his growing influence and calls for greater independence alarmed Catherine the Great, who was determined to centralize power.
In 1764, Catherine the Great formally abolished the Hetmanate, transferring its governance to the Little Russian Collegium. This move marked the end of the Hetmanate’s semi-autonomous status and its complete incorporation into the administrative structure of the Russian Empire. The abolition not only dismantled the Hetmanate’s unique political and military institutions but also signified the culmination of a broader imperial strategy to suppress regional autonomy in favor of centralized governance.

#### Liquidation of the Zaporozhian Sich

During the 18th century, the Russian Empire transitioned from providing nominal "protection" to exerting direct control over central Ukraine, progressively eroding the autonomy of the Cossacks. The Cossack uprisings, which had once been directed against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, now shifted focus to the Russian authorities. By the late 18th century, these uprisings had largely subsided, their potency undermined by the overwhelming might of the Russian Empire and deep divisions within the Cossack leadership.
The Russo-Turkish War of 1768–1774 marked a pivotal moment for the Ukrainian Cossacks and their role within the Russian Empire. The Cossacks had provided crucial support during the war, significantly contributing to Russian victories. The conflict culminated in the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, which granted Russia significant territorial acquisitions along the Black Sea coast, further consolidating its influence in the region. This success reduced the strategic importance of the Zaporozhian Sich, as the borderlands the Cossacks had long defended were now firmly under Russian control. The geopolitical realignment weakened the Cossacks’ traditional role, setting the stage for their eventual demise.
In 1775, Empress Catherine the Great took decisive action to eliminate what she perceived as a potential threat to her centralized rule. The Zaporozhian Sich, with its semi-autonomous status and militarized society, stood as a symbol of independence that clashed with the empire’s drive toward unification. Acting on her orders, General Peter Tekeli led a massive military force to suppress the Sich. On June 15, 1775, Tekeli’s forces, composed of 45,000 troops—including 8 cavalry regiments, 10 infantry regiments, 20 hussar squadrons, 17 pike squadrons, and 13 squadrons of Don Cossacks—overwhelmed the Sich. Defended by a mere 3,000 Cossacks, the Sich fell with little resistance. The destruction of the Zaporozhian Sich marked the end of an era, effectively dismantling one of the last vestiges of Ukrainian self-rule.
The last Kosh Otaman, Petro Kalnyshevsky, was arrested and exiled to the Solovetsky Islands in the far north, where he spent the remainder of his life in harsh conditions, dying in captivity. Following the destruction, a smaller group of Cossacks fled to the lands of the Ottoman Empire, settling beyond the Danube, where they formed the Danubian Sich. Others relocated to the Kuban region in the Russian Empire, where they helped establish the Kuban Cossack Host. However, the majority of the Ukrainian Cossacks were deported to remote parts of the Russian Empire, including Siberia, in a move that sought to break their power and disperse their population. In addition to the loss of Cossack autonomy, the Russian troops seized over 30,000 documents, along with weapons and other valuables, representing the history of Ukraine from the 16th to the 18th centuries. These items were stored in the fortress of St. Elizabeth, which had been the primary military base of the Russian Imperial Army in Ukraine. These historical artifacts remained in St. Elizabeth’s fortress until they were eventually transferred to Kyiv in 1918, providing valuable insights into the rich history of the Ukrainian Cossacks.
Meanwhile, in right-bank Ukraine, dissatisfaction with Polish rule had been growing for decades. Increased corvée (forced labor) obligations, along with the abuse of power by Polish magnates, nobles, and their Jewish stewards, led to widespread unrest. The peasants, many of whom were Orthodox Christians, resented the imposition of taxes and labor on their lands, as well as the presence of Roman Catholic and Uniate clergy. The resulting discontent gave rise to a series of Haidamak uprisings, in which bands of rebels attacked and looted towns, targeting the estates of nobles, clergy, and Jewish populations. Major uprisings occurred in 1734, 1750, and the largest—known as Koliyivschyna—took place in 1768. This revolt was a culmination of decades of accumulated grievances, sparked by rumors of impending changes in religious and social policies that threatened the Orthodox community. The rebellion saw widespread attacks across towns and estates, resulting in significant loss of life and property. While the Haidamaks initially achieved some successes, the uprising was ultimately brutally suppressed by Polish forces with the assistance of Russian troops.
By the end of the century, Catherine the Great’s policies had reshaped the political landscape of Ukraine. The Cossack's role in defending the borderlands was no longer necessary, as the Russian Empire now controlled the Black Sea and Crimea. In 1783, the Crimean Khanate was formally annexed by Russia, cementing control over the northern Black Sea region. A few years earlier, in 1778, a mass emigration of Christians from Crimea occurred, further altering the demographic balance of the region. Finally, in 1793, following the Second Partition of Poland, right-bank Ukraine was officially incorporated into the Russian Empire. By the end of Catherine’s reign, most of Ukraine had fallen under Russian control, bringing an end to the centuries-old struggle for autonomy and leaving the Ukrainian people under the rule of the imperial power.

## Modern history
### Empires and Ukrainian National Revival

Under the reign of Alexander I (1801–1825), the Russian presence in Ukraine was largely limited to the imperial army and its bureaucracy. However, by the reign of Nicholas I (1825–1855), Russia had established a centralized administration in Ukraine. After suppressing the November Uprising of 1830, the tsarist regime implemented Russification policies, particularly on the Right-bank Ukraine. These policies not only suppressed the Ukrainian language but also aimed to weaken local traditions by emphasizing loyalty to the Russian Orthodox Church, which actively promoted Russification in contrast to the Uniate Church's earlier influence in Western Ukraine.
The 1861 emancipation of serfs had a profound effect on Ukraine, as 42% of its population were serfs. By the late 19th century, heavy taxes, rapid population growth, and land shortages led to widespread impoverishment among the peasantry. Many rural Ukrainians began migrating to cities, where industrialization and urban development created new economic opportunities but also fostered a growing sense of class consciousness. The construction of the first railway track in 1866 not only integrated Ukraine’s economy into the Russian imperial system but also facilitated the mobility of workers and goods. Despite their hardships, Ukrainian peasants and workers contributed significantly to the empire’s economy, with the steppe regions producing 20% of the world's wheat and 80% of the empire's sugar.
The Ukrainian national revival began in the late 18th century with the emergence of modern Ukrainian literature, spearheaded by Ivan Kotliarevsky. Prominent 19th-century Ukrainian authors included Taras Shevchenko, Mykhailo Kotsiubynsky, and Lesya Ukrainka in the Russian Empire, and Ivan Franko in Austria-Hungary. The rise of a Ukrainian intelligentsia, increasingly composed of commoners and peasants, challenged the dominance of the traditional nobility and fueled the movement for national rights and social justice. However, fearing the rise of separatism, the Russian government imposed strict limits on Ukrainian language and culture. In 1863, the Valuev Circular banned the use of Ukrainian in religious and educational texts. Further repression came with the Ems Ukaz in 1876, which prohibited Ukrainian-language publications, the import of Ukrainian books from abroad, the use of Ukrainian in theater, and even public readings. Ukrainian schools were also suppressed. These policies prompted many Ukrainian intellectuals, such as Mykhailo Drahomanov and Mykhailo Hrushevsky, to flee to Austrian-ruled Western Ukraine. In addition, the development of underground educational organizations, such as the "Prosvita" society, played a critical role in preserving Ukrainian culture. Despite the restrictions, Ukrainians within the Russian Empire sometimes succeeded in advancing within the system, often blending loyalty to the tsar with a subtle promotion of their heritage.
The fate of Ukrainians under the Austrian Empire was markedly different. In Austrian-ruled Galicia, Ukrainians found themselves in a delicate position within the broader Russian-Austrian rivalry for influence in Central and Southern Europe. Unlike in the Russian Empire, Galicia’s ruling elite were primarily of Austrian or Polish descent, while the Ruthenian population remained predominantly peasant. During the 19th century, Russophilia was initially common among Galicia’s Slavic population. However, the influx of Ukrainian intellectuals fleeing Russian repression, combined with Austrian intervention, gradually replaced Russophilia with a growing Ukrainophilia. This sentiment spread back into Russian-ruled Ukraine, fueling the national revival.
The 2.4 million Ukrainians under Habsburg rule lived primarily in Eastern Galicia, with 95% of them being peasants. The region remained one of the poorest in Europe, with persistent land shortages and limited industrialization. Nevertheless, the Greek Catholic Church in Galicia became a key institution in preserving Ukrainian culture and fostering national identity. The first Ukrainian-language newspaper, Zoria Halytska, launched in 1848, symbolized the growing national awakening. Many Ukrainians from Galicia and other Austrian territories also emigrated to North America and South America during this period, seeking economic opportunities and escaping poverty.
The late 19th century witnessed a slow but steady growth of Ukrainian urban populations and the beginnings of a political awakening. Ukrainians in Galicia formed the Supreme Ruthenian Council and began advocating for autonomy and reforms, such as land redistribution. In Russian Ukraine, underground networks spread literature, education, and national ideas among the peasantry, contributing to the resilience of Ukrainian identity under challenging conditions.

### War of Independence (1917–1922)

World War I and the wave of revolutions that swept across Europe—including the October Revolution in Russia—shattered empires such as the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires, leaving Ukraine caught in the midst of geopolitical upheaval. Between 1917 and 1919, several Ukrainian republics declared independence, marking the emergence of a complex array of states and territories seeking sovereignty. Among these were the Ukrainian People's Republic, the Ukrainian State, the West Ukrainian People's Republic, the Makhnovshchina, the Kholodny Yar Republic, and the Kuban People's Republic. Concurrently, a number of Bolshevik revolutionary committees, or revkoms, sought to establish Soviet power, leading to the formation of various Soviet-aligned entities, including the Ukrainian People's Republic of Soviets, the Odessa Soviet Republic, the Donetsk–Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, the Taurida Soviet Socialist Republic, the Galician Soviet Socialist Republic, and the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Each of these republics and regimes represented different visions for Ukraine's future, reflecting the era's ideological and territorial conflicts that would profoundly impact the region.

#### Ukrainian People's Republic

The Ukrainian People's Republic (UPR) was officially proclaimed on November 20, 1917, amidst the turmoil of the Russian Revolution and the disintegration of the Russian Empire. Initially, the Ukrainian Central Council (Rada), comprising influential Ukrainian political figures, pursued autonomy within a federated Russia. However, as the political situation in Russia grew increasingly unstable, the UPR took a decisive step by declaring full independence on January 22, 1918.
From its inception, the fledgling UPR faced significant challenges. Internally, political divisions among various factions, including socialists, nationalists, and federalists, complicated governance and decision-making. Economically, the nascent republic struggled with the transition from imperial control to an independent administration, resulting in shortages, inflation, and a weakened infrastructure. Externally, the UPR faced threats from multiple sides, primarily from the Bolsheviks, who regarded Ukraine as essential to their revolutionary agenda. As a result, they launched a series of military campaigns to assert control over Ukrainian territories, triggering prolonged and intense conflicts with UPR forces.

#### The first Bolshevik revolutionary committees

As the Bolsheviks sought to expand their influence across the former territories of the Russian Empire, Ukraine became a significant battleground. In December 1917, amidst the chaos of the Russian Revolution and the collapse of imperial power, the Ukrainian People's Republic of Soviets was proclaimed. This was a direct challenge to the Ukrainian People's Republic, which had declared its independence from the Russian Empire earlier that year. The UPR, led by nationalists and democrats, sought to build an independent Ukrainian state. In contrast, the Bolshevik-backed People's Republic of Soviets aimed to bring Ukraine under Soviet control and align it with the goals of the Russian Bolsheviks.
In March 1918, this newly established republic merged with two other short-lived Soviet republics in the region: the Donetsk–Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic and the Odessa Soviet Republic. These republics were formed by local Bolshevik groups seeking to establish Soviet power across key industrial and strategic regions of Ukraine. The result of this merger was the Ukrainian Soviet Republic, a state that was aligned with Soviet Russia and part of the larger efforts of the Bolsheviks to secure control over Ukraine during the chaotic period of civil war and foreign intervention. This period was marked by fierce conflicts between various Ukrainian factions, including the Ukrainian People's Republic, anarchists, and foreign powers, alongside the advancing Bolshevik forces, contributing to the overall instability of the region. When the Bolshevik troops retreated from the territory, on April 18, 1918, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic was officially dissolved.

#### Ukrainian State

Amid growing unrest, a coup d'état led by General Pavlo Skoropadskyi on April 29, 1918, dismantled the UPR and established the Ukrainian State, also known as the Hetmanate. Skoropadskyi, a former officer in the Russian Imperial Army, assumed the title of Hetman of all Ukraine, aiming to create a strong, centralized state with close ties to the German Empire and Austria-Hungary. His vision for the Hetmanate included restoring order, promoting economic development, and implementing agrarian reforms to stabilize the economy and society.
While the Hetmanate initially brought some stability, Skoropadskyi's alignment with the Central Powers and his authoritarian policies alienated many Ukrainians. Nationalists, socialists, and peasant groups grew increasingly discontented, perceiving his regime as prioritizing foreign interests over Ukrainian sovereignty. Additionally, Skoropadskyi's agricultural reforms, which often favored large landowners and reinstated some pre-revolutionary land policies, furthered resentment among the rural populace.
As the Central Powers began to crumble in late 1918 with their defeat in World War I, opposition to Skoropadskyi's rule surged. In November 1918, a coalition of anti-Hetmanate forces known as The Directorate, led by Symon Petliura, Volodymyr Vynnychenko, and other prominent Ukrainian leaders, initiated a successful uprising against Skoropadskyi’s government. By December 1918, Skoropadskyi was forced to abdicate, dissolving the Ukrainian State and restoring the Ukrainian People's Republic.

#### West Ukrainian People's Republic

Simultaneously, a separate Ukrainian state was established in the western part of the country. The West Ukrainian People's Republic (WUPR) was proclaimed on October 19, 1918, following the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. This new state centered around Eastern Galicia, including the key city of Lviv, Transcarpathia and extended into parts of Bukovina, areas with substantial Ukrainian populations. The WUPR government, led by Yevhen Petrushevych, aspired to build an independent Ukrainian state in Western Ukraine, distinct from both Polish and Russian influences.
The WUPR quickly developed its administrative structures, forming the Ukrainian Galician Army to defend its territories and introducing social and economic reforms to stabilize the new state. However, the WUPR’s claim over Eastern Galicia sparked immediate conflict with the re-established Polish state, which also sought control over the region. This territorial dispute erupted into the Polish-Ukrainian War (1918-1919), beginning with fierce fighting in Lviv, where Polish paramilitary forces resisted Ukrainian authority.
Although Ukrainian forces initially gained some ground, the Polish Army, bolstered by material support from the Entente Powers, soon regained momentum. By mid-1919, the Polish Army launched a major offensive, pushing back the Ukrainian Galician Army and regaining control over contested areas. Facing overwhelming opposition, WUPR forces retreated into Ukrainian People's Republic (UPR) territory by July 1919, marking the end of the WUPR as an independent state.

#### Unification Act

In an effort to consolidate their positions during a tumultuous period, UPR and WUPR formally united on January 22, 1919, through the signing of the Unification Act (Act Zluky). This historic declaration symbolized the unification of the two republics into a single Ukrainian state. Despite its significance as a milestone for Ukrainian national aspirations, the unification remained largely symbolic in practice. The lack of effective integration between the UPR and WUPR resulted in minimal military coordination or mutual support. Both entities were preoccupied with their respective military challenges: the UPR was engaged in a desperate struggle against advancing Bolshevik forces, while the WUPR was embroiled in a conflict with Polish troops over territorial claims in Eastern Galicia.

#### Other Ukrainian states and movements

The Makhnovshchina, which existed from 1918 to 1921, was a revolutionary anarchist movement in southern Ukraine led by Nestor Makhno. It emerged during the chaos of the Russian Civil War. The Makhnovists aimed to establish a stateless, self-managed society based on anarchist principles, where peasants and workers controlled the land and factories. Makhno's forces fought against various powers, including the Bolsheviks, the White Army, and foreign invaders. Despite initial successes, the movement was eventually crushed by the Bolsheviks.
The Kholodny Yar Republic, which existed from 1919 to 1922, was a small Ukrainian insurgent state located in the Chyhyryn region. It was formed by local resistance fighters and peasants who opposed both the Bolshevik Red Army and White Army forces during the Russian Civil War. Inspired by Ukrainian independence and nationalist ideals, the republic remained independent for a few years but was eventually overwhelmed by Bolshevik forces.
In May 1919, in central Ukraine began the Hryhoriv Uprising, largest anti-soviet Uprising in Ukraine, which was brutally suppressed by regular troops.
The Kuban People's Republic, which existed from 1918 to 1920, was a short-lived state established by Cossacks in the Kuban region, near the Black Sea. In the wake of the Russian Empire's collapse during the revolution, the Kuban Cossacks declared independence and formed the Kuban Rada to govern. Their goal was to preserve their cultural identity and retain control over their land amid the Russian Civil War. The republic allied with the White Army against the Bolsheviks and sought to unite with the Ukrainian People's Republic (UPR) due to shared Cossack heritage and mutual strategic interests. However, these negotiations never culminated in a formal union, as the republic, isolated at the time, fell to the advancing Bolshevik Red Army in 1920, ending its brief independence.

#### Continued struggle and exile of the UPR government

After being driven out of Kyiv by Bolshevik forces in early 1919, the UPR government, led by Symon Petliura, continued to resist Bolshevik advances and Polish encroachment. By 1920, facing insurmountable odds and a deteriorating military position, Petliura sought an alliance with Poland. In April 1920, the Treaty of Warsaw was signed, under which the UPR agreed to recognize Polish control over Western Ukraine in exchange for Polish military support against the Bolsheviks.
The joint Polish-Ukrainian campaign initially achieved some success, including the temporary recapture of Kyiv in May 1920. However, the Bolshevik counter-offensive soon pushed back the allied forces. The situation for the UPR became even more precarious when Poland sought a peace agreement with Soviet Russia, culminating in the signing of the Treaty of Riga in March 1921. The treaty effectively partitioned Ukraine, leaving most of its territory under Soviet control and the western parts under Polish administration.
With the signing of the Treaty of Riga, the UPR government went into exile, primarily in Poland and other European countries. Ukrainian leaders continued their efforts to advocate for Ukrainian independence in the international arena, but without a territorial base or significant military forces, their influence was limited. Symon Petliura, a key figure in the UPR, continued his political activities in exile until his assassination in Paris in 1926.
Canadian scholar Orest Subtelny says:
    In 1919 total chaos engulfed Ukraine. Indeed, in the modern history of Europe no country experienced such complete anarchy, bitter civil strife, and total collapse of authority as did Ukraine at this time. Six different armies – those of the Ukrainians, the Bolsheviks, the Whites, the Entente [French], the Poles and the anarchists – operated on its territory. Kiev changed hands five times in less than a year. Cities and regions were cut off from each other by the numerous fronts. Communications with the outside world broke down almost completely. The starving cities emptied as people moved into the countryside in their search for food.
Historian Paul Kubicek says:
    Between 1917 and 1920, several entities that aspired to be independent Ukrainian states came into existence. This period, however, was extremely chaotic, characterized by revolution, international and civil war, and lack of strong central authority. Many factions competed for power in the area that is today's Ukraine, and not all groups desired a separate Ukrainian state. Ultimately, Ukrainian independence was short-lived, as most Ukrainian lands were incorporated into the Soviet Union and the remainder, in western Ukraine, was divided among Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania.

#### Formation of the Ukrainian SSR

As both the UPR and WUPR faced defeat, the Bolshevik forces consolidated their control over Ukraine. On December 30, 1919, the Bolsheviks proclaimed the establishment of the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic (Ukrainian SSR), positioning it as a satellite of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR). The new Soviet government aimed to establish complete Soviet authority over all Ukrainian territories, incorporating Ukraine into the broader framework of Soviet expansion.
The creation of the Ukrainian SSR marked the beginning of Soviet rule in Ukraine. Over the next two years, the Red Army systematically subdued remaining Ukrainian forces, nationalist resistance movements, and other anti-Bolshevik factions. By 1921, Bolshevik forces had largely crushed organized resistance, paving the way for the integration of the Ukrainian SSR as one of the founding republics of the Soviet Union in 1922.

### Ukraine in Soviet Union (1922–1991)
#### Ukrainization and New Economic Policy

In the 1920s, the Soviet government implemented a policy of "Ukrainization" as part of its broader strategy to strengthen support for the Soviet regime in non-Russian republics. This policy encouraged the use of the Ukrainian language in education, government, and media. Ukrainian culture and history were promoted to win over the local population and intellectual elite. Ukrainization allowed a degree of cultural revival after years of Russian dominance in Ukraine. Ukrainian literature, theater, and arts experienced significant growth, and schools began teaching in the Ukrainian language. However, this policy was carefully controlled by the Communist Party, ensuring that cultural development aligned with Soviet ideology.
Following the devastation of war and revolution, the Soviet government introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP) to stabilize the economy. It represented a temporary retreat from pure socialist policies, allowing some elements of private enterprise and market mechanisms to function alongside state-controlled industries. The NEP had a mixed impact on Ukraine. On one hand, it allowed limited economic recovery, especially in agriculture and small-scale industry. Peasants were permitted to sell surplus products on the market, and small businesses could operate under certain conditions. On the other hand, large-scale industries remained under state control, and the heavy industrial sector, which Ukraine relied on, remained inefficient and slow to recover. While the NEP offered some relief to peasants, many remained suspicious of Soviet power, particularly after the harsh grain requisition policies during the civil war. Tensions between the peasantry and the Soviet regime continued to simmer.
During this period, the Communist Party tightened its control over Ukraine. The Communist Party of Ukraine (CPU) became a key instrument in enforcing Soviet policies and maintaining order. Political power was highly centralized, with decisions made in Moscow dictating policy in Ukraine. Despite the relative cultural freedom of Ukrainization, any political opposition to the Soviet regime was harshly repressed. Former nationalists, intellectuals, and opponents of Soviet power were marginalized, and any movement toward true Ukrainian autonomy was quickly suppressed.
In the early Soviet years, there was a strong emphasis on rebuilding Ukraine's war-ravaged economy. Ukraine was a critical industrial center, especially in coal, steel, and machinery production. While some infrastructure was rebuilt, economic challenges remained due to the inefficiency of state control and the lingering effects of war. Ukraine, being an agriculturally rich region, faced difficulties as the peasants were subjected to state control over grain production. Despite the NEP, rural areas continued to suffer from poverty, which would later fuel resistance to Soviet policies.
By the late 1920s, the NEP was being phased out as the Soviet Union prepared for a shift towards more centralized and state-controlled economic policies under Stalin. The focus was moving toward heavy industrialization and forced collectivization, setting the stage for the dramatic and tragic events of the 1930s, including the Holodomor. Although Ukrainization was relatively successful in the 1920s, by the end of the decade, Stalin's regime began to reverse this policy, with a focus on Russian centralization. The coming years would see a crackdown on Ukrainian nationalism and culture as part of Stalin's larger efforts to solidify control over the Soviet republics.

#### Forced collectivization, industrialization and Holodomor

In 1929, Joseph Stalin launched a campaign of forced collectivization across the Soviet Union, including Ukraine. The policy aimed to consolidate individual peasant farms into large, state-controlled collective farms (kolkhozes) to increase agricultural productivity and secure grain supplies for rapid industrialization. Ukrainian peasants, particularly wealthier ones known as "kulaks", resisted collectivization. The Soviet regime responded with brutal force, seizing land, livestock, and grain, and deporting or executing those who resisted. Collectivization led to widespread chaos in rural areas. Agricultural output plummeted due to poor planning, lack of incentives, and resistance from the peasantry. The disruption of traditional farming practices and the state's requisition of grain exacerbated food shortages.
In 1932-33, Holodomor, derived from the Ukrainian words for "hunger" (holod) and "extermination" (moryty), was a man-made famine that resulted from the Soviet government's grain requisition policies and punitive measures against those who resisted collectivization. Millions of Ukrainians died from starvation during the Holodomor. Entire villages were decimated, and the event remains one of the most tragic episodes in Ukrainian history. The Soviet government denied the famine's existence and continued exporting grain during the crisis. The Holodomor not only devastated the rural population but also weakened Ukrainian national identity and culture. It served as a stark warning against any resistance to Soviet authority.
Stalin's economic strategy included a series of Five-Year Plans aimed at rapidly industrializing the Soviet Union. Ukraine, with its rich natural resources and strategic location, was a key focus of these plans. Ukraine became a major center for heavy industry, particularly in coal mining, steel production, and machine building. Cities like Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk (now Dnipro), and Stalino (now Donetsk) were transformed into industrial hubs. The rapid growth of industry led to significant urbanization. Millions of Ukrainians moved from rural areas to cities in search of work, fundamentally altering the demographic and social landscape.

#### Political repression and the Great Purge

Throughout the 1930s, Stalin's regime became increasingly marked by paranoia and a relentless drive to eradicate any perceived threats to his authority. This climate of suspicion fueled widespread political repression across the Soviet Union, profoundly impacting every layer of society in Ukraine. The purges specifically targeted Ukrainian intellectuals, artists, political leaders, and ordinary citizens suspected of harboring nationalist sympathies or potential dissenting views. Stalin’s objective was clear: to eliminate any possible source of opposition to Soviet rule, no matter how tenuous or imagined.
The Great Purge, reaching its zenith between 1936 and 1938, devastated Ukraine. During this period, tens of thousands were arrested, tortured, and executed, or sent to forced labor camps (the Gulag) in remote Soviet regions. The Ukrainian intelligentsia, initially supported during the Soviet policy of Ukrainization in the 1920s, became a particular target as they were increasingly viewed as a threat to Soviet ideological conformity. In a systematic crackdown, the NKVD, Stalin’s secret police, dismantled the Ukrainian cultural and intellectual community. Most members of this intelligentsia were either imprisoned, executed, or driven to despair and suicide. One notable site, the Slovo Building in Kharkiv, where many prominent Ukrainian intellectuals resided, became infamous as a place where residents were closely surveilled, then rounded up in these purges.
The terror also took a horrific toll on Kyiv, which became the capital of the Ukrainian SSR in 1934, replacing Kharkiv. Tens of thousands of Kyiv’s citizens were abducted by Soviet security forces, tortured, and summarily executed on fabricated charges. Victims were accused of treason, espionage, or nationalist activities without evidence and sentenced to death in sham trials. Their bodies were secretly buried in Bykivnia, a wooded area near Kyiv, which later became one of the largest mass grave sites in Ukraine. After Ukraine’s independence and the declassification of KGB archives, thousands of graves were discovered in Bykivnia, leading to the establishment of the Bykivnia Graves Memorial Complex. Soviet authorities had long denied the truth, claiming instead that Nazi atrocities had caused the mass burials.
These purges were marked by infamous show trials, where prominent figures were coerced, often through brutal interrogation, into confessing to invented charges of anti-Soviet activity. The loss of Ukraine's educated and skilled citizens stifled intellectual, cultural, and social progress for decades, creating a legacy of fear that has hampered Ukraine's development and left a scar that is remembered in Ukraine to this day.

#### World War II and the Nazi Occupation

In October 1938, following the Munich Agreement, Carpatho-Ukraine, also known as Subcarpathian Ruthenia, gained autonomy within Czechoslovakia. This allowed the formation of a local government led by Avhustyn Voloshyn. However, this period of autonomy was brief.
In March 1939, as Czechoslovakia disintegrated under pressure from Nazi Germany, Carpathian Ukraine declared independence as the Republic of Carpatho-Ukraine. The government envisioned this small, mountainous region as the nucleus of a future independent Ukrainian state. This independence was short-lived. Within days, Hungarian forces, supported by Nazi Germany, invaded and occupied the region. The occupation was brutal, and many Ukrainian leaders were arrested or executed. Carpathian Ukraine remained under Hungarian control.
On 1 September 1939, World War II began with Nazi Germany’s invasion of western Poland. Sixteen days later, the Soviet Union invaded eastern Poland under the terms of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, dividing Eastern Europe into spheres of influence between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The eastern part of Poland, which included Western Ukraine (Galicia and Volhynia), was annexed into the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. As Soviet forces occupied these territories, they quickly implemented Sovietization policies, repressing nationalist movements and religious institutions, which fueled local resentment.
On 22 June 1941, Nazi Germany and its allies launched Operation Barbarossa, invading the Soviet Union. Ukraine became one of the main battlegrounds during the conflict, as Nazi forces occupied large parts of the country, including major cities such as Kyiv, Odesa, and Lviv. The German occupation, while initially seen by some as a potential liberation from the oppressive Soviet regime, quickly turned brutal. Nazi ideology viewed Ukraine as a critical part of its plan for Lebensraum (living space) and exploitation of resources.
Around 4.5 to 6 million Ukrainians fought in the Soviet Red Army against Nazi Germany, contributing significantly to the eventual Soviet victory. At the same time, Ukraine became a center of partisan resistance. Some Ukrainians collaborated with the Germans, hoping to secure independence, while others joined the resistance movement. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), formed by the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), fought for an independent Ukraine, engaging in conflict with both the Nazis and the Soviet forces. This dual struggle was motivated by a desire to free Ukraine from foreign domination, but the complexity of alliances and enmities made this a multi-sided war.
Meanwhile, some factions within the Ukrainian nationalist movement, such as the Ukrainian National Democratic Alliance (UNDA), sought autonomy within a pro-Polish framework before the war. However, Polish policies of forced assimilation marginalized these efforts, leading to growing tensions between Poles and Ukrainians. During the German occupation, these tensions escalated into violent ethnic conflicts in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia, known as the Volhynian-Galician tragedy. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and Polish underground forces, including the Armia Krajowa, engaged in a simultaneous campaign of mutual violence during 1943–1944. The UPA targeted Polish civilians in Volhynia and Eastern Galicia, resulting in the deaths of up to 100,000 Poles, while Polish forces carried out attacks on Ukrainian civilians, killing tens of thousands of Ukrainians. These events, driven by competing nationalist ambitions, caused immense suffering on both sides and remain a deeply painful chapter in Ukrainian-Polish history.
The Nazi occupation of Ukraine was marked by extreme brutality, especially towards Jews. Around 1.5 million Jews were murdered during the Holocaust in Ukraine, with atrocities such as the Babi Yar massacre, where tens of thousands of Jews were executed near Kyiv. The occupation also saw widespread repression of other groups, including Roma, communists, and Ukrainian nationalists.
By 1943, following the Battle of Stalingrad, the tide of the war began to turn in favor of the Soviet Union. Soviet forces began to push the Germans out of Ukraine, and by 1944, the entire country was back under Soviet control. However, Soviet "liberation" did not bring freedom for many Ukrainians. The Soviet government imposed harsh reprisals against those suspected of collaboration with the Nazis or support for Ukrainian independence. The NKVD (Soviet secret police) conducted mass arrests, deportations, and executions. Small groups of UPA partisans continued their armed resistance against the Soviet regime well into the late 1940s and early 1950s, particularly in Western Ukraine, though the Soviet authorities eventually crushed this insurgency.
Carpathian Ukraine, during the Hungarian occupation, faced significant repression, particularly against its Jewish and Ukrainian populations. Thousands of Jews from the region were deported to Nazi concentration camps, and many Ukrainian nationalists were imprisoned or killed. In 1944, the Soviet Red Army "liberated" Carpathian Ukraine from Hungarian and German forces.
In addition to the annexation of Galicia and Volhynia, several other territories were incorporated into the Ukrainian SSR as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and subsequent wartime events. These included Northern Bukovina, Carpathian Ukraine (Transcarpathia), and parts of Northern and South Bessarabia, regions with a predominantly Ukrainian population.

#### Post-war Ukrainian SSR, limited reforms and continuation of repressions

After World War II, amendments to the Constitution of the Ukrainian SSR were accepted, which allowed it to act as a separate subject of international law in some cases and to a certain extent, remaining a part of the Soviet Union at the same time. In particular, these amendments allowed the Ukrainian SSR to become one of the founding members of the United Nations (UN) together with the Soviet Union and the Byelorussian SSR. This was part of a deal with the United States to ensure a degree of balance in the General Assembly, which, the USSR opined, was unbalanced in favor of the Western Bloc. In its capacity as a member of the UN, the Ukrainian SSR was an elected member of the United Nations Security Council in 1948–1949 and 1984–1985.
However, this period was also marked by severe repression and social upheaval. The famine of 1946-1947 devastated large parts of Ukraine, as the Soviet government requisitioned the entirety of the grain harvest, exacerbating food shortages. Western Ukraine, however, was less affected by the famine, largely due to the resistance efforts of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UIA). In response, the Soviet regime launched Operation "West" in 1947, forcibly deporting over 77,000 individuals—men, women, and children—from Western Ukraine to Siberia. These deportees later played a critical role in organizing uprisings within the Soviet Gulag system, including the notable Norilsk Uprising, which hastened the decline of the forced labor camp network.
After Stalin's death in 1953 and the rise of Nikita Khrushchev to power, a significant number of political prisoners were released from the Gulag, including many Ukrainian nationalists and intellectuals. However, those deemed a threat to Soviet authority often remained under close surveillance. While some victims of Stalinist purges were formally rehabilitated, this process was selective and incomplete, with many individuals still excluded from full reintegration into society.
Khrushchev, focusing on agricultural development, emphasized the importance of Ukraine’s fertile soil in Soviet food production. This was particularly significant in the context of the Virgin Lands Campaign, which saw resources and personnel diverted to develop agricultural lands in Kazakhstan and Siberia. While the campaign had long-term effects on the Ukrainian agricultural sector, Ukrainian collective farms remained inefficient, plagued by bureaucratic mismanagement that hampered the potential benefits of these reforms. During this period, industrial growth continued, with particular emphasis on heavy industries like steel production and mining. However, outdated infrastructure and poor planning often undermined progress, and economic inefficiency persisted throughout the country.
The Khrushchev Thaw, a period of relative cultural liberalization, also allowed for a limited expression of Ukrainian identity, especially through literature, the arts, and historical studies. Prominent Ukrainian writers such as Oles Honchar and Lina Kostenko emerged, reflecting themes of national identity and social change. Their work offered subtle resistance to Soviet ideologies, though they had to navigate a highly censored environment. Industrialization also sparked rapid urbanization, with many Ukrainians moving to cities for factory and mining jobs. This period saw a rise in literacy rates and access to education, contributing to the development of a more technically skilled population. However, the curricula remained ideologically driven, prioritizing loyalty to the Communist Party over independent thought or national identity.
In 1954, the Crimean Peninsula was transferred from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) to the Ukrainian SSR. The transfer was largely administrative, as both the RSFSR and the Ukrainian SSR were part of the Soviet Union, and it was part of Khrushchev's broader strategy, rather than a gesture of genuine autonomy for Ukraine. Meanwhile, Ukrainian nationalists, including remnants of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), continued to face persecution. While the UPA’s armed resistance had been largely crushed by the early 1950s, nationalist sentiments remained a clandestine force, particularly among intellectuals and rural populations. Those who strayed too far from Soviet ideology faced censorship, harassment, and sometimes imprisonment. Despite the brief cultural revival and improvements in living standards, the era was marked by continued economic inefficiency and political repression. The limited freedoms allowed under Khrushchev's rule fostered a new generation of Ukrainian intellectuals who began to explore national identity in ways that would later fuel the dissident movement. However, despite these small steps toward cultural and intellectual freedom, Ukraine remained firmly under Soviet control, with little political autonomy or room for genuine national development.
The transfer of power from Nikita Khrushchev to Leonid Brezhnev in 1964 was a result of a coup orchestrated by the Communist Party leadership. Khrushchev's policies, such as de-Stalinization and economic reforms, had created dissatisfaction among party elites due to their perceived instability and inefficiency. In October 1964, during a Politburo meeting, Khrushchev was accused of policy failures and forced to resign. Leonid Brezhnev, who had gained the trust of party conservatives, replaced Khrushchev as General Secretary. Brezhnev’s leadership marked a return to collective decision-making, stability, and more conservative policies, emphasizing continuity and avoiding the bold reforms associated with Khrushchev.
Under Brezhnev, often associated with the "stagnation" period, Ukraine faced significant challenges. Centralized control from Moscow left Ukrainian Communist Party leaders, such as Volodymyr Shcherbytsky, as mere executors of Kremlin policies. Russification policies intensified, sidelining the Ukrainian language and culture in favor of Soviet Russian dominance. Ukrainian literature, art, and history were heavily censored, with works reflecting national identity banned or rewritten. Political repression was severe. The KGB targeted dissidents, intellectuals, and cultural figures advocating for Ukrainian autonomy or identity. Figures like Vasyl Stus, Ivan Dziuba, and Viacheslav Chornovil faced harassment, imprisonment, or exile. Despite repression, underground movements persisted, using samizdat to circulate banned works and raise awareness of Soviet human rights violations.
Economically, Ukraine remained an industrial powerhouse, producing steel, coal, and machinery, and serving as the Soviet Union's "breadbasket". However, inefficient planning, outdated infrastructure, and environmental degradation plagued the economy. Poor agricultural yields and bureaucratic mismanagement led to food shortages. Urbanization grew, but housing shortages and inadequate services highlighted the stagnation. Environmental issues worsened, particularly in industrial regions like Donbas, where pollution severely impacted public health. Rural areas were neglected, fueling urban migration. Despite Ukraine’s contributions to the Soviet space program and industrial output, minimal modernization occurred.
The suppression of Ukrainian identity and the struggles of dissidents sowed seeds of resistance. Activists like Vasyl Stus and the Ukrainian Helsinki Group exposed Soviet human rights abuses, though they faced harsh punishments. From the 1960s through the 1980s, Ukraine became a focal point for dissident activity within the USSR. A disproportionately high number of Ukrainian intellectuals, activists, and cultural figures were imprisoned, exiled, or subjected to punitive psychiatry for opposing the regime. These movements not only highlighted systemic oppression in the Soviet Union, but also laid the foundation for a national awakening that ultimately fueled Ukraine's quest for independence.
After the death of Leonid Brezhnev in 1982, the Soviet Union experienced a period of short-lived leadership under Yuri Andropov (1982–1984) and Konstantin Chernenko (1984–1985), before Mikhail Gorbachev assumed power in 1985. Gorbachev's introduction of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) marked a turning point, fostering an atmosphere of reform and amplifying public dissatisfaction with Soviet governance. Glasnost opened the door for greater freedom of expression, allowing Ukrainian intellectuals, activists, and dissidents to publicly address long-suppressed issues such as Russification, environmental degradation, and historical atrocities like the Holodomor. During this time, organizations like the Ukrainian Helsinki Group, and movements like Rukh (the People’s Movement of Ukraine, established in 1989) emerged as key advocates for greater autonomy, cultural revival, and ultimately, independence. As a major industrial and agricultural hub within the USSR, Ukraine bore the brunt of the broader Soviet economic stagnation. Inefficient central planning, a lack of innovation, and overexploitation of resources resulted in widespread economic inefficiencies and severe environmental damage.
On 26 April 1986, the Ukrainian town of Pripyat became the site of one of the worst nuclear disasters in history when Reactor 4 of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant exploded. This released a significant amount of radioactive material into the atmosphere, which was carried across Europe by wind currents. The resulting radioactive fallout contaminated vast areas of northern Ukraine and neighboring Belarus. The immediate aftermath of the explosion was devastating. Two plant workers died on the night of the accident, and in the weeks that followed, 28 emergency workers succumbed to acute radiation sickness. The disaster forced the evacuation of over 100,000 people from Pripyat and surrounding areas, leaving behind ghost towns and a contaminated Chernobyl exclusion zone that remains uninhabitable to this day. This tragedy had profound environmental, health, and political consequences. The Chernobyl disaster galvanized local independence movements, such as Rukh, which gained significant momentum in the late 1980s and contributed to the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union.
The late 1980s witnessed a cultural awakening in Ukraine, characterized by a renewed interest in the Ukrainian language, traditions, and history. Efforts to revive Ukrainian cultural identity challenged decades of Soviet policies aimed at suppressing it. The reestablishment of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church and movements advocating for an independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church underscored growing dissatisfaction with Soviet atheism and fueled nationalist sentiment. These developments signaled a rising tide of Ukrainian self-awareness and a determination to reclaim national identity and sovereignty.

#### The Path to Independence

By 1990, calls for Ukrainian sovereignty reached a fever pitch, fueled by decades of cultural suppression, economic exploitation, and a growing national consciousness among Ukrainians. On 21 January 1990, one of the most iconic demonstrations of unity and determination occurred when over 300,000 Ukrainians formed the "human chain" stretching from Kyiv to Lviv. This symbolic act, known as the "Chain of Unity", marked the anniversary of the Unification Act of the Ukrainian People's Republic and the West Ukrainian People's Republic in 1919. It highlighted the nation's steadfast commitment to reclaiming its independence, emphasizing the unity between eastern and western Ukraine.
In March 1991, a referendum on preserving the Soviet Union was held, and in Ukraine, the majority of voters approved the new Union Treaty, supporting the idea of joining the Soviet Union based on Ukraine's Declaration of State Sovereignty. Voters were specifically asked, "Do you agree that Ukraine should be part of a Union of Soviet sovereign states on the basis of the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine?" The proposal was approved by 81.7% of voters.
However, a few months later, events occurred that radically changed the situation. In August 1991, the so-called August Coup took place in Moscow, an attempt by conservative communists to seize power and regain tight control within the USSR. The coup failed, but it seriously undermined trust in the central government in the USSR, provoking a wave of declarations of independence among the republics.

## Contemporary history
### Independent Ukraine (1991–present)
#### Post-Soviet transition: building the foundations of independence

On August 24, 1991, the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian Parliament) declared Ukraine’s independence from the Soviet Union, a decisive step taken in the wake of the failed August Coup. This historic decision was reinforced by a nationwide referendum on December 1, 1991, where 90.32% of voters supported independence, with majorities in every region (including 54.19% in Crimea). That same day, Ukraine held its first presidential election, a pivotal moment in its post-Soviet history. Leonid Kravchuk, a former high-ranking Soviet official, won the election, becoming first President of Ukraine. During his tenure, Kravchuk worked to maintain stability, distance Ukraine from Moscow’s influence, and manage internal political challenges.
The dissolution of the USSR was formalized in the Białowieża Forest in Belarus, where the leaders of Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia—Leonid Kravchuk, Stanislav Shushkevich, and Boris Yeltsin—signed the Belovezha Accords on 8 December 1991. These accords declared the Soviet Union defunct and established the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) as a loose association of former Soviet republics. By 26 December 1991, the USSR officially ceased to exist, and Ukraine's independence gained de jure recognition from the international community.
After declaring independence, Ukraine began a complex post-Soviet transition, shaping its identity as a new independent nation. From 1991 to 1996, Ukraine experienced significant political, economic, and social transformations aimed at establishing itself as a sovereign state on the global stage.
In the early years of independence, the Verkhovna Rada played a key role in establishing the country’s legal and political framework. As Ukraine’s legislative body, the Rada was responsible for drafting and passing laws to build the foundation of Ukraine’s political and economic structures. However, it faced ideological divides as members debated Ukraine’s path—whether to orient toward Western integration or maintain stronger ties with Russian Federation. These debates mirrored broader societal divides and significantly influenced legislative reform.
To solidify its national identity, Ukraine adopted state symbols that resonated with historical and cultural significance. The Parliament selected the blue-and-yellow flag and the tryzub (trident) as national emblems, which became powerful representations of Ukrainian sovereignty and unity.
A significant historical moment of this period was the transfer of powers from the President of the Ukrainian People's Republic in exile, Mykola Plaviuk, to the newly elected President of independent Ukraine, Leonid Kravchuk, during the solemn session of the Verkhovna Rada on August 22, 1992 in Kyiv. This transfer, while largely symbolic, marked a continuity of the Ukrainian struggle for independence, linking the efforts of past leaders to those of the new government. This act represented the culmination of over 70 years of Ukrainian national aspirations and signaled a deepening commitment to the state’s sovereignty and historical continuity. In his declaration, Plaviuk proclaimed that the current Ukrainian state is the lawful successor to the Ukrainian People's Republic and a continuation of its authority and state traditions.
The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed on December 5, 1994, by Ukraine, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom, was a critical agreement in post-Soviet geopolitics. It formalized the process by which Ukraine surrendered the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal, inherited after the Soviet Union's collapse, which included approximately 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads. Although these weapons were stationed on Ukrainian territory, they were operationally controlled by Moscow, and Ukraine’s possession of such an arsenal posed significant concerns for global non-proliferation efforts. In return for surrendering the weapons, the signatory powers provided assurances of Ukraine's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence. The memorandum guaranteed that no force or threats of force would be used against Ukraine, and no economic or political pressure would be employed to undermine its status. It also affirmed that the United Nations Security Council would intervene in case of aggression against Ukraine. However, the assurances were political commitments, not legally binding guarantees, which made their enforcement dependent on the goodwill of the signatories.
The transition to a market economy was compounded by inflation and political instability. The absence of immediate reforms led to widespread frustration, culminating in a snap presidential election in 1994, where Leonid Kravchuk was succeeded by Leonid Kuchma, an engineer and former Soviet official. Kuchma’s presidency aimed at modernizing Ukraine’s economy and fostering a balanced relationship with both Russia and Western Europe, a delicate approach to preserving Ukraine’s independence amid complex geopolitical pressures.
Trying to stabilize the economy, back in 1992, Ukraine introduced a temporary currency, the Ukrainian karbovanets. This currency was intended to serve as a stopgap measure until a more permanent solution could be implemented. The karbovanets quickly devalued, contributing to growing economic instability. In 1996, Ukraine introduced the Hryvnia as the national currency, marking a significant milestone in the country’s economic transition and further solidifying its independence. It is named after a measure of weight used in Kievan Rus'.
Despite disputes in the Verkhovna Rada, which at the time struggled to reach consensus on reform initiatives and reconcile the interests of pro-Western and pro-Russian factions, Ukraine took a decisive step in defining its legal structure by adopting the Constitution of Ukraine on June 28, 1996. This document established Ukraine as a democratic, law-based state with a presidential-parliamentary system, clearly delineating the separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Drafted with input from various political factions and scholars, the Constitution enshrined Ukraine’s commitment to legal governance and human rights, becoming a cornerstone for Ukraine’s development as an independent nation.
At the end of its transition, Ukraine created the main components of its independence. With its own currency, Constitution, national symbols, and a growing sense of national identity, Ukraine began to chart its course as a sovereign state. Despite the fact that the post-Soviet transition period caused numerous economic and political challenges, this formative period played an important role in shaping the direction and identity of modern Ukraine.
* Declaration of Independence of Ukraine. As printed on the ballot for the national referendum on December 1, 1991.
* Leonid Kravchuk, the first President of Ukraine, in 1992
* Leonid Kuchma, the second President of Ukraine, in 2001
* Constitution of Ukraine

#### Strengthening and growing contradictions

The third presidential election in Ukraine took place in 1999, resulting in a victory for Leonid Kuchma, who defeated Petro Symonenko in the run-off. This secured Kuchma a second consecutive term. However, his second term was plagued by widespread controversies, including allegations of authoritarianism, pervasive corruption scandals, curtailment of media freedoms, and large-scale public protests that challenged his leadership and legitimacy.
One of the darkest episodes of Kuchma’s presidency was the "Cassette Scandal", which erupted after recordings allegedly made by his former bodyguard, Mykola Melnychenko, were leaked. These recordings implicated Kuchma in severe abuses of power, including involvement in the murder of journalist Georgiy Gongadze, as well as corruption and electoral manipulations. The scandal provoked massive public outrage, culminating in the "Ukraine without Kuchma" protests of 2000–2001. These protests, marked by their intensity and broad support, severely undermined Kuchma's standing both domestically and internationally.
During his presidency, Kuchma’s administration was accused of suppressing opposition media outlets and harassing journalists and political opponents. High-profile figures like Viacheslav Chornovil died under mysterious circumstances, further fueling suspicions of state complicity. Historian Serhy Yekelchyk observed that Kuchma's government "employed electoral fraud freely", particularly during the 1999 presidential elections and the 2000 constitutional referendum.
Amid these challenges, Viktor Yushchenko, a respected economist and reformer, rose to prominence. His tenure as the Governor of the National Bank of Ukraine earned him recognition for his professionalism and integrity, which led to his appointment as Prime Minister in 1999, during Kuchma's re-election campaign. Yushchenko was perceived as a technocratic leader capable of addressing Ukraine’s economic stagnation and corruption.
Initially, Yushchenko's government embarked on an ambitious reform agenda. These reforms included fiscal discipline, restructuring of key industries, and efforts to stabilize the economy, which had suffered during Kuchma’s first term. However, Yushchenko's policies soon clashed with the entrenched oligarchic networks that had flourished under Kuchma's protection. These oligarchic factions, wielding significant influence in Parliament and the Kuchma administration, actively resisted reforms that threatened their monopolistic practices and access to state resources.
One of the most contentious episodes of Yushchenko’s premiership was the dismissal of his deputy prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, in 2001. Tymoshenko, who spearheaded anti-corruption initiatives and energy sector reforms, posed a significant challenge to oligarchic interests. Under pressure from Kuchma and oligarchic allies, Yushchenko was forced to dismiss Tymoshenko, a move that symbolized the constraints on reform under Kuchma’s presidency. Shortly after, the Verkhovna Rada, dominated by pro-Kuchma factions, passed a vote of no confidence in Yushchenko’s government, effectively ending his tenure as Prime Minister. Kuchma’s lack of support during this political crisis highlighted the deepening rift between the two leaders.
Following his dismissal, Yushchenko became a potent symbol of reform and anti-corruption, gaining significant public support. In 2002, he founded the "Our Ukraine" (Nasha Ukrayina) political coalition, which championed pro-Western and democratic ideals. This bloc emerged as a key opposition force against Kuchma’s policies and set the stage for the pivotal 2004 presidential election. In this election, Yushchenko, as the leading opposition candidate, challenged Viktor Yanukovych, Kuchma’s chosen successor, in a contest that would shape Ukraine’s political trajectory for years to come.
* Georgiy Gongadze, journalist, founder of a popular Internet newspaper Ukrainska Pravda, who was kidnapped and murdered in 2000
* Leonid Kuchma with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev
* Yulia Tymoshenko, Yushchenko's deputy prime minister, in 2002

#### Orange Revolution and post-revolution challenges

In 2004, Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma announced he would not seek re-election after serving two terms in office. This decision created a political vacuum that set the stage for a highly contested 2004 presidential election between two main candidates. Viktor Yanukovych, the incumbent Prime Minister, was supported by Kuchma and the Russian Federation. He advocated closer ties with Russia. On the other hand, Viktor Yushchenko, the opposition leader, campaigned as a reformist, emphasizing democratic changes and closer integration with the European Union.
The campaign highlighted deep regional and cultural divisions within Ukraine. The western and central regions of the country rallied behind Yushchenko, while the eastern and southern regions strongly supported Yanukovych. A prominent figure in Yushchenko's coalition was Yulia Tymoshenko, a charismatic and polarizing politician. Known for her iconic braided hairstyle and fiery rhetoric, Tymoshenko played a pivotal role in galvanizing support for the opposition. Her speeches and leadership became symbols of the movement for change.
The second round of the presidential election, held on November 21, 2004, officially declared Viktor Yanukovych as the winner. However, widespread allegations of electoral fraud, including ballot-stuffing, voter intimidation, and falsification of results, led to a political crisis. The situation was further intensified by the attempted poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko with dioxin during the campaign, which left him severely disfigured. This attack garnered widespread sympathy for Yushchenko and galvanized his supporters.
The announcement of Yanukovych’s victory sparked massive protests, marking the beginning of the Orange Revolution, a landmark event in Ukraine’s modern history. From November 22, 2004, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians gathered at Kyiv’s Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square), demanding justice, democracy, and fair elections. The protesters adopted the color orange, symbolizing Yushchenko’s campaign and the broader ideals of hope and resistance to corruption and authoritarianism.
Yulia Tymoshenko emerged as a central figure in the revolution, inspiring crowds with her impassioned speeches and coordinating efforts to sustain the movement. The protests remained largely peaceful, with participants emphasizing nonviolence and civil disobedience, despite provocations aimed at inciting unrest. On December 3, 2004, Ukraine’s Supreme Court invalidated the election results due to evidence of fraud and ordered a re-run of the runoff. This repeat election, held on December 26, 2004, resulted in Viktor Yushchenko's victory with 52% of the vote. Yanukovych resigned as Prime Minister, and his cabinet was dismissed on January 5, 2005. Yushchenko's inauguration as president marked the culmination of the Orange Revolution.
In February 2005, Yulia Tymoshenko was appointed Prime Minister, cementing her role as a key political figure in post-revolution Ukraine. However, the Orange coalition faced internal struggles during Yushchenko’s presidency. Relations between Yushchenko and Tymoshenko began to deteriorate, weakening the government’s ability to implement reforms. In September 2005, Yushchenko dismissed Tymoshenko from her position as Prime Minister, creating a rift that would have lasting effects on Ukrainian politics.
Under Yushchenko, Ukraine’s foreign policy shifted toward strengthening ties with the European Union, often at the expense of its relationship with Russia. This realignment caused tensions, particularly over energy issues. In 2005, a dispute over natural gas prices with Russia resulted in shortages across Europe, as Ukraine served as a critical transit country for gas supplies. A compromise was reached in January 2006, but the incident underscored the fragility of Ukraine's relations with its eastern neighbor.
The 2006 parliamentary elections in Ukraine reflected a deeply fragmented political landscape. The elections were marked by the re-emergence of Viktor Yanukovych, a rival of President Viktor Yushchenko and a proponent of closer ties with Russia. Yanukovych’s Party of Regions secured significant support, enabling him to become Prime Minister. This marked a shift in Ukraine’s political orientation, with Yanukovych advocating for a more pro-Russian agenda in contrast to Yushchenko’s pro-European stance. The elections exacerbated tensions between the presidency and parliament, as the balance of power between the two branches of government became a central issue. Frequent political deadlocks ensued, paralyzing governance and delaying key reforms. The strained relationship between Yushchenko and Yanukovych led to a standoff, which ultimately resulted in snap elections in 2007. The snap elections led to the formation of a coalition opposed to Yanukovych’s agenda. Yulia Tymoshenko returned as Prime Minister, yet the political environment remained fraught with instability. Conflicts between Yushchenko and Tymoshenko, which had begun earlier, persisted, further weakening the government and contributing to widespread public frustration.
Tensions reached a breaking point in September 2008, triggering a major political crisis. The crisis began when Yushchenko’s Our Ukraine–People’s Self-Defense Bloc (NU-NS) withdrew from the governing coalition after the Bloc Yulia Tymoshenko (BYuT) sided with the opposition Party of Regions in supporting a bill on 4 September 2008 that sought to curtail the president’s powers in favor of the prime minister and parliament. Yushchenko saw this as a direct challenge to his authority, accusing Tymoshenko of betraying the coalition’s principles and aligning with pro-Russian forces. On 16 September 2008, the official collapse of the BYuT/NU-NS coalition was announced. As attempts to restore the alliance failed, this led to a deepening political stalemate.
The crisis finally ended on 9 December 2008, when the Orange Coalition was reformed, now including Lytvyn Bloc. This followed the election of Volodymyr Lytvyn as parliamentary speaker on 8 December, securing his faction’s support for a new governing majority. Shortly after, on 16 December 2008, a new government was formed, representing a 245-seat parliamentary majority composed of the Lytvyn Bloc, the Bloc Yulia Tymoshenko, and Our Ukraine–People's Self-Defense Bloc. Though this coalition temporarily stabilized the political landscape, deep divisions among Ukraine’s leadership persisted, continuing to undermine governance and public confidence.
Ukraine was severely impacted by the global financial crisis of 2008-2009. The crisis led to a sharp economic downturn, with GDP contracting significantly as demand for Ukraine’s key exports, such as steel, plummeted. The government faced a budgetary crisis and had to rely on a bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to stabilize the economy. The IMF package came with stringent conditions, including fiscal austerity measures and structural reforms, which sparked domestic controversy. Adding to Ukraine’s economic woes was an escalating energy dispute with Russia. Ukraine, as a major transit country for Russian natural gas to Europe, found itself at the center of geopolitical tensions. Disagreements over gas pricing and transit fees between Ukraine’s Naftogaz and Russia’s Gazprom reached a boiling point in 2009.
The 2009 gas conflict was a major standoff that highlighted Ukraine’s vulnerability and its dependence on Russian energy. The dispute centered on allegations of unpaid bills and demands by Russia for higher gas prices. In January 2009, Gazprom cut off gas supplies to Europe via Ukraine, plunging several European countries into an energy crisis during the winter. Negotiations eventually resulted in a new agreement, but the episode underscored the fragility of Ukraine’s energy security. The crisis damaged Ukraine’s reputation as a reliable transit country and strained its relations with both Russia and the European Union. It also placed significant financial pressure on the government, further destabilizing the economy.
Throughout this period, the rivalry between Yushchenko and Tymoshenko continued to destabilize Ukrainian politics. Their clashes over policy, governance, and political priorities created a climate of dysfunction. Tymoshenko accused Yushchenko of obstructing her efforts to address economic and social issues, while Yushchenko criticized her populist policies as reckless and counterproductive. These internal conflicts not only hindered progress but also deepened public disillusionment with the political elite.
* Official portrait of Viktor Yushchenko, the 3rd president of Ukraine
* Yulia Tymoshenko in Parliament, 4 February 2005
* Yushchenko meeting U.S. President George W. Bush at an April 2005 press conference
* Viktor Yushchenko with Yulia Tymoshenko in 2009

#### Period of political turbulence

By the time of Ukraine's 2010 presidential election, the alliance between Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko, key figures of the Orange Revolution, had disintegrated. Tymoshenko competed against both Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych in a tightly contested three-way race. With Yushchenko’s approval rating drastically weakened, many pro-Orange voters abstained, leading to a runoff between Tymoshenko and Yanukovych. In the final round, Yanukovych secured the presidency with 48% of the vote, while Tymoshenko received 45%.
Upon taking office, Yanukovych and his Party of Regions swiftly moved to consolidate power. In March 2010, the newly formed parliamentary majority, the "Coalition of Stability and Reforms", dismissed Tymoshenko as Prime Minister, replacing her with Yanukovych’s longtime ally, Mykola Azarov. His administration pursued closer ties with Russia, notably signing the controversial Kharkiv Pact, which extended Russia’s Black Sea Fleet lease in Sevastopol until 2042 in exchange for discounted gas prices. The deal sparked protests from pro-European and nationalist groups, who saw it as a threat to Ukraine’s sovereignty.
In the 2012 parliamentary elections, the Party of Regions further strengthened its grip on power, securing the largest number of seats despite widespread allegations of vote-rigging, administrative pressure, and misuse of state resources. The opposition remained fragmented, though it made notable gains. The newly formed UDAR party, led by heavyweight boxing champion Vitali Klitschko, positioned itself as a pro-European force, while the nationalist Svoboda party, previously on the political margins, unexpectedly surpassed the electoral threshold, capitalizing on growing dissatisfaction with Yanukovych’s rule.
The largest opposition bloc, Batkivshchyna, led by Arseniy Yatsenyuk in Tymoshenko’s absence, struggled to counterbalance the ruling party’s dominance. By this time, Tymoshenko had been imprisoned since 2011 on charges of abuse of office, a case widely condemned by Western governments and human rights organizations as politically motivated. Her imprisonment, along with the selective prosecution of other opposition figures, was cited as a key reason for the European Union's reluctance to deepen ties with Ukraine under Yanukovych’s leadership.

#### Euromaidan and the Revolution of Dignity

In November 2013, President Yanukovych did not sign the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement and instead pursued closer ties with Russia. This move sparked protests on the streets of Kyiv and, ultimately, the Revolution of Dignity. Protesters set up camps in Kyiv's Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square), and in December 2013 and January 2014 protesters started taking over various government buildings, first in Kyiv, and later in Western Ukraine. Battles between protesters and police resulted in about 80 deaths in February 2014.
Following the violence, the Ukrainian parliament on 22 February voted to remove Yanukovych from power (on the grounds that his whereabouts were unknown and he thus could not fulfil his duties), and to free Yulia Tymoshenko from prison. On the same day, Yanukovych supporter Volodymyr Rybak resigned as speaker of the Parliament, and was replaced by Tymoshenko loyalist Oleksandr Turchynov, who was subsequently installed as interim President. Yanukovych had fled Kyiv, and subsequently gave a press conference in the Russian city of Rostov-on-Don.

#### Russo-Ukrainian War and Western integration

In March 2014, the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation occurred. Although official results of a referendum on Crimean reunification with Russia were reported as showing a large majority in favor of the proposition, the vote was organized under Russian military occupation and was denounced by the European Union and the United States as illegal.
The Crimean crisis was followed by pro-Russian unrest in east Ukraine and south Ukraine. In April 2014 Ukrainian separatists self-proclaimed the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic and held referendums on 11 May 2014; the separatists claimed nearly 90% voted in favor of independence. Later in April 2014, fighting between the Ukrainian army and pro-Ukrainian volunteer battalions on one side, and forces supporting the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics on the other side, escalated into the war in Donbas. By December 2014, more than 6,400 people had died in this conflict, and according to United Nations figures it led to over half a million people becoming internally displaced within Ukraine and two hundred thousand refugees to flee to (mostly) Russia and other neighboring countries. During the same period, political (including adoption of the law on lustration and the law on decommunization) and economic reforms started. On 25 May 2014, Petro Poroshenko was elected president in the first round of the presidential election. By the second half of 2015, independent observers noted that reforms in Ukraine had considerably slowed down, corruption did not subside, and the economy of Ukraine was still in a deep crisis. By December 2015, more than 9,100 people had died (largely civilians) in the war in Donbas, according to United Nations figures.
The Budapest Memorandum's fragility became evident in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea and began supporting separatist movements in Ukraine's Donetsk and Luhansk regions. These actions violated the agreement’s commitments to respect Ukraine's borders and sovereignty. Russia justified its actions by claiming they were protecting Russian-speaking populations, a rationale widely rejected by the international community. Despite protests from Ukraine and Western powers, no direct action was taken to compel Russia to adhere to the memorandum. The crisis exposed the limitations of non-binding agreements, leaving Ukraine in a precarious position and reshaping the global conversation about security assurances and the reliability of international commitments.
On 1 January 2016, Ukraine joined the DCFTA with the EU. Ukrainian citizens were granted visa-free travel to the Schengen Area for up to 90 days during any 180-day period on 11 June 2017, and the Association Agreement formally came into effect on 1 September 2017. Significant achievements in the foreign policy arena include support for anti-Russian sanctions, obtaining a visa-free regime with the countries of the European Union, and better recognition of the need to overcome extremely difficult tasks within the country. However, the old local authorities did not want any changes; they were cleansed of anti-Maidan activists (lustration), but only in part. The fight against corruption was launched, but was limited to sentences of petty officials and electronic declarations, and the newly established NABU and NACP were marked by scandals in their work. Judicial reform was combined with the appointment of old, compromised judges. The investigation of crimes against Maidan residents was delayed. In order to counteract the massive global Russian anti-Ukrainian propaganda of the "information war", the Ministry of Information Policy was created, which for 5 years did not show effective work, except for the ban on Kaspersky Lab, Dr.Web, 1С, Mail.ru, Yandex and Russian social networks VKontakte or Odnoklassniki and propaganda media. In 2017, the president signed the law "On Education", which met with opposition from national minorities, and quarreled with the Government of Hungary..
On 19 May 2018, Poroshenko signed a Decree which put into effect the decision of the National Security and Defense Council on the final termination of Ukraine's participation in the statutory bodies of the Commonwealth of Independent States. As of February 2019, Ukraine minimized its participation in the Commonwealth of Independent States to a critical minimum and effectively completed its withdrawal. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine did not ratify the accession, i.e. Ukraine has never been a member of the CIS.
The Kerch Strait incident occurred on 25 November 2018 when the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) coast guard fired upon and captured three Ukrainian Navy vessels attempting to pass from the Black Sea into the Sea of Azov through the Kerch Strait on their way to the port of Mariupol.
On 6 January 2019, in Fener, a delegation of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine with the participation of President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko received a Tomos on autocephaly. The Tomos was presented to the head of the OCU, Metropolitan Epiphanius, during a joint liturgy with the Ecumenical Patriarch. The next day, Tomos was brought to Ukraine for a demonstration at St. Sophia Cathedral. On 9 January, all members of the Synod of the Constantinople Orthodox Church signed the Tomos during the scheduled meeting of the Synod.
On 21 February 2019, the Constitution of Ukraine was amended, with the norms on the strategic course of Ukraine for membership in the European Union and NATO being enshrined in the preamble of the Basic Law, three articles and transitional provisions.
On 21 April 2019, Volodymyr Zelenskyy was elected president in the second round of the presidential election. Early parliamentary elections on 21 July allowed the newly formed pro-presidential Servant of the People party to win an absolute majority of seats for the first time in the history of independent Ukraine (248). Dmytro Razumkov, the party's chairman, was elected speaker of parliament. The majority was able to form a government on 29 August on its own, without forming coalitions, and approved Oleksii Honcharuk as prime minister. On 4 March 2020, due to a 1.5% drop in GDP (instead of a 4.5% increase at the time of the election), the Verkhovna Rada fired Honcharuk's government and Denys Shmyhal became the new Prime Minister.
On 28 July 2020, in Lublin, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine created the Lublin Triangle initiative, which aims to create further cooperation between the three historical countries of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and further Ukraine's integration and accession to the EU and NATO.
On 2 February 2021, a presidential decree banned the television broadcasting of the pro-Russian TV channels 112 Ukraine, NewsOne and ZIK. The decision of the National Security and Defense Council and the Presidential Decree of 19 February 2021 imposed sanctions on 8 individuals and 19 legal entities, including Putin's pro-Russian politician and Putin's godfather Viktor Medvedchuk and his wife Oksana Marchenko.
On 17 May 2021, the Association Trio was formed by signing a joint memorandum between the Foreign Ministers of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. Association Trio is tripartite format for the enhanced cooperation, coordination, and dialogue between the three countries (that have signed the Association Agreement with the EU) with the European Union on issues of common interest related to European integration, enhancing cooperation within the framework of the Eastern Partnership, and committing to the prospect of joining the European Union.
At the June 2021 Brussels Summit, NATO leaders reiterated the decision taken at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine would become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP) as an integral part of the process and Ukraine's right to determine its own future and foreign policy without outside interference.
Throughout 2021, Russian forces built up along the Russia-Ukraine Border, in occupied Crimea and Donbas, and in Belarus. On 24 February 2022, Russian forces invaded Ukraine. Russia quickly occupied much of the east and south of the country, but failed to advance past the city of Mykolaiv towards Odesa, and were forced to retreat from the north after failing to occupy Kyiv, Chernihiv, Sumy, and Kharkiv. After failing to gain further territories and being driven out of Kharkiv Oblast by a fast-paced Ukrainian counteroffensive, Russia officially annexed the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic, along with most of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts on 30 September. The invasion was met with international condemnation. The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution condemning the invasion and demanding a full Russian withdrawal in March 2022. The International Court of Justice ordered Russia to suspend military operations and the Council of Europe expelled Russia. Many countries imposed sanctions on Russia and its ally Belarus, and provided humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine. The Baltic states all declared Russia a terrorist state. Protests occurred around the world, along with mass arrests of anti-war protesters in Russia, which also enacted a law enabling greater media censorship. Over 1,000 companies closed their operations in Russia and Belarus as a result of the invasion.
On the eve of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the country was the poorest in Europe, a handicap whose cause was attributed to high corruption levels and the slow pace of economic liberalization and institutional reform. Russia's invasion of the country damaged Ukraine's economy and future prospects of improvement to such an extent, that the GDP of the country was projected to shrink by as much as 35% in its first year alone after the invasion.
Ukraine was originally preparing to formally apply for EU membership in 2024, but instead signed an application for membership in February 2022.

## National historiography

Knowledge about Ukraine in other parts of the world came chiefly from Russian secondary sources until relatively recently. After the second half of the seventeenth century, when Muscovy and later the Russian Empire came to control much of Ukrainian territory, Russian writers included Ukraine as part of Russian history. This included referring to medieval Kievan Rus' as "Kievan Russia" and its Old East Slavic culture and inhabitants as "Kievan Russian" or "Old Russian". Later Ukraine or its parts were called "Little Russia", "South Russia", "West Russia" (with Belarus), or "New Russia" (the Black Sea coast and southeastern steppe). But parts of Ukraine beyond Russia's reach were called Ruthenia and its people Ruthenians. The names chosen to refer to Ukraine and Ukrainians have often reflected a certain political position, and sometimes even to deny the existence of Ukrainian nationality.$^{:10–11}$ The Russian point-of-view of Ukrainian history became the prevailing one in Western academia, and although the bias was identified as early as the 1950s, many scholars of Slavic studies and history believe significant changes are still necessary to correct the Moscow-centric view.
The scholarly study of Ukraine's history emerged from romantic impulses in the late 19th century when German Romanticism spread to Eastern Europe. The outstanding leaders were Volodymyr Antonovych (1834–1908), based in Kiev, and his student Mykhailo Hrushevsky (1866–1934). The first serious challenge to the Russian view of Ukraine was Hrushevsky's 1904 article "The Traditional Scheme of 'Russian' History and the Problem of the Rational organization of the History of the Eastern Slavs". For the first time full-scale scholarly studies based on archival sources, modern research techniques, and modern historical theories became possible. However, the demands of government officials—Tsarist, to a lesser degree Austro-Hungarian and Polish, and later Soviet—made it difficult to disseminate ideas that ran counter to the central government. Therefore, exile schools of historians emerged in central Europe and Canada after 1920.
Strikingly different interpretations of the medieval state of Kievan Rus' appear in the four schools of historiography within Ukraine: Russophile, Sovietophile, Eastern Slavic, and Ukrainophile. In the Soviet Union, there was a radical break after 1921, led by Mikhail Pokrovsky. Until 1934, history was generally not regarded as chauvinistic, but was rewritten in the style of Marxist historiography. National "pasts" were rewritten as social and national liberation for non-Russians, and social liberation for Russians, in a process that ended in 1917. Under Stalin, the state and its official historiography were given a distinct Russian character and a certain Russocentrism. Imperial history was rewritten such that non-Russian love caused an emulation and deference to "join" the Russian people by becoming part of the (tsarist) Russian state, and in return, Russian state interests were driven by altruism and concern for neighboring people. Russophile and Sovietophile schools have become marginalized in independent Ukraine, with the Ukrainophile school being dominant in the early 21st century. The Ukrainophile school promotes an identity that is mutually exclusive of Russia. It has come to dominate the nation's educational system, security forces, and national symbols and monuments, although it has been dismissed as nationalist by Western historians. The East Slavic school, an eclectic compromise between Ukrainophiles and Russophilism, has a weaker ideological and symbolic base, although it is preferred by Ukraine's centrist former elites.
Many historians in recent years have sought alternatives to national histories, and Ukrainian history invited approaches that looked beyond a national paradigm. Multiethnic history recognises the numerous peoples in Ukraine; transnational history portrays Ukraine as a border zone for various empires; and area studies categorises Ukraine as part of East-Central Europe or, less often, as part of Eurasia. Serhii Plokhy argues that looking beyond the country's national history has made possible a richer understanding of Ukraine, its people, and the surrounding regions. since 2015, there has been renewed interest in integrating a "territorial-civic" and "linguistic-ethnic" history of Ukraine. For example, the history of the Crimean Tatars and the more distant history of the Crimea peninsula is now integrated into Ukrainian school history. This is part of the constitutionally mandated "people of Ukraine" rather than "Ukrainian people". Slowly, the histories of Poles and Jews are also being reintegrated. However, due to the current political climate caused by territorial sovereignty breaches by Russia, the role of Russians as "co-host" has been greatly minimized, and there are still unresolved difficult issues of the past, for example, the role of Ukrainians during the Holodomor.$^{:98}$
After 1991, historical memory was a powerful tool in the political mobilization and legitimation of the post-Soviet Ukrainian state, as well as the division of selectively used memory along the lines of the political division of Ukrainian society. Ukraine did not experience the restorationist paradigm typical of some other post-Soviet nations, for example the three Baltic countries—Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia—although the multifaceted history of independence, the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, Soviet-era repressions, mass famine, and World War II collaboration were used to provide a different constitutive frame for developing Ukrainian nationhood. The politics of identity (which includes the production of history textbooks and the authorization of commemorative practices) has remained fragmented and tailored to reflect the ideological anxieties and concerns of individual regions of Ukraine.

### Canadian historiography on Ukraine

In Soviet Ukraine, twentieth-century historians were strictly limited in the range of models and topics they could cover, with Moscow insisting on an official Marxist approach. However, émigré Ukrainians in Canada developed an independent scholarship that ignored Marxism, and shared the Western tendencies in historiography. George W. Simpson and Orest Subtelny were leaders promoting Ukrainian studies in Canadian academe. The lack of independence in Ukraine meant that traditional historiographical emphases on diplomacy and politics were handicapped. The flourishing of social history after 1960 opened many new approaches for researchers in Canada; Subtelny used the modernization model. Later historiographical trends were quickly adapted to the Ukrainian evidence, with special focus on Ukrainian nationalism. The new cultural history, post-colonial studies, and the "linguistic turn" augmenting, if not replacing social history, allowed for multiple angles of approach. By 1991, historians in Canada had freely explored a wide range of approaches regarding the emergence of a national identity. After independence, a high priority in Canada was assisting in the freeing of Ukrainian scholarship from Soviet-Marxist orthodoxy—which downplayed Ukrainian nationalism and insisted that true Ukrainians were always trying to reunite with Russia. Independence from Moscow meant freedom from an orthodoxy that was never well suited to Ukrainian developments. Scholars in Ukraine welcomed the "national paradigm" that Canadian historians had helped develop. Since 1991, the study of Ukrainian nation-building became an increasingly global and collaborative enterprise, with scholars from Ukraine studying and working in Canada, and with conferences on related topics attracting scholars from around the world.