Next year will mark the 80th anniversary of an event that made a great impact on Ukrainian history and whose reverberations still excite the imagination of many Ukrainians. Toward the end of January 1929 the Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists was held in Vienna, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) was founded. The OUN long ago became the symbol of the Ukrainian nation’s struggle for its own state, and this social phenomenon is still the subject of concerted attention today. The organization occupies a special place in the history of the Ukrainian national liberation movement, marking one of the most organized and mass stages in the struggle of our nation for an independent state.
The OUN emerged against a background of extremely complex historical and political realities. The defeat of the Ukrainian National Republic (UNR) in 1922, Ukraine’s occupation by Bolshevik Russia, and the annexation of some Ukrainian lands by Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania meant the loss of prospects for Ukrainian national independence. The Ukrainian political elite of the early 1920s found itself in a state of deep political crisis and disillusionment exacerbated by the lack of a new world perception and ideological guidelines.
The nation’s main political and intellectual forces were concentrated in the emigration. Their bulk was the battle-hardened military element, the officers and men of the Army of the UNR. Ukrainian cultural and political centers started being created in Poland and Czechoslovakia, which maintained contacts with enslaved Ukraine and sought optimum solutions to pressing national problems.
The Ukrainian Military Organization (UVO) was one of the best-known and most influential centers. Founded in 1920, the UVO was based on the Ukrainian military tradition dating to the UNR period. Well-disciplined and respected, it was headed by Colonel Yevhen Konovalets, the former commander of the Corps of Sich Riflemen, part of the regular Ukrainian army.
The UVO was active not only in the emigration. It had considerable influence in Western Ukraine and tried to operate on the Left Bank of the Dnipro. The UVO professed revolutionary forms and methods of struggle, not excluding armed confrontations, and adhered to a hard-edged course aimed at creating a Ukrainian state. The UVO’s political credo was clear-cut and understandable to every Ukrainian. Its official organ Surma wrote, “The UVO is an organization for which only the interests of the Ukrainian nation have been and will remain decisive in its activities. The UVO does not intend to serve the interests of other nations.”
The UVO was the first nationalist organization that sought to place its struggle on firm ideological ground. The periodicals Novyi Shliakh and Surma were founded with this goal. Owing to Konovalets’s efforts, the Literaturno-naukovyi visnyk resumed publication under the editorship of Dmytro Dontsov, who formulated the main principles of the editorial policy at the very first staff meeting: “We must pull the national idea out of the chaos in which it is at risk of perishing, cleanse it of all dirt and give it clear, expressive content, turning it into a banner under which the entire nation would rally.”
In 1922 a group of young Ukrainians emerged from the ranks of the Ukrainian military in Liberec and Jozefov in Czechoslovakia. This organization focused on educational and ideological activities aimed at overcoming hostile Sovietophilic and conformist trends that now and then infiltrated into the emigre community and were widespread in Western Ukraine. This group was active in Western European university circles, but Prague remained its center.
The monthly Natsionalna dumka began publishing in 1924. It was marked by a keen perception of ideological issues and later served as the basis for the OUN’s official organ Rozbudova Natsii. Characteristically, this periodical was the first to work out the fundamentals of Ukrainian nationalist ideology, specifically the Nation, Unity of the Nation; the priority of general national interests over class or territorial ones; the inevitability of struggle rather than negotiations or coexistence with the enemies of the Ukrainian nation. This group of Ukrainian national youth interpreted Soviet Ukraine as a fictitious entity and called for Ukraine’s complete national independence and unity. Among its members were the prominent ideologue of the nationalist movement, Yulian Vassyian, and the author of the OUN’s unofficial anthem, Oles Babii.
The League of Ukrainian Nationalists (LUN) was founded in the spring of 1925 from the nucleus of smaller Ukrainian youth organizations based in Czechoslovakia. It was centered in the Czech city of Podebrady, particularly at the local Ukrainian Economic Academy, with its teeming Ukrainian scientific, cultural, and political life, and where most eastern Ukrainian emigres were enrolled. At first, the LUN was not as clear-cut an ideological structure as the UVO. For a while it was strongly influenced by the monarchists. Before long the LUN’s consistent studies and ideological work resulted in the league’s clearly nationalist coloration.
The LUN was one of the largest and well-structured Ukrainian organizations. It had offices in Paris, Luxembourg, Berlin, Vienna, and other European cities. The LUN was the first to adopt the salutation Slava Ukraini! (Glory to Ukraine!). It had its own coat of arms with a shield featuring the Ukrainian national colors and the trident. The shield depicted an encircling chain as a symbol of unity. The legend on the shield read: Dumka — dumkoiu, mech — mechem! (Thought is thought; the sword is the sword!). The LUN was the first organization to begin using the words “nationalist” and “nationalistic.” Olena Teliha was a noted LUN supporter, as was Mykola Stsiborsky, a prominent member of the nationalist movement and the author of the well-known work Natsiokratiia (Natiocracy).
From the LUN milieu sprang the idea of uniting organizationally diverse but ideologically similar organizations into a single influential force capable of liberating and uniting Ukraine.
Nationalist centers were also being formed in Western Ukraine. The first organization was founded in Lviv in 1925, and the UVO was directly involved in its creation. It was called the Hrupa derzhavnytskoi molodi (Group of Ukrainian National Youth). Its membership grew quickly, and the organization soon had branches in almost every educational establishment. It held meetings and debates, and disseminated nationalist literature.
It should also be noted that there were legitimate Ukrainian parties in Western Ukraine at the time. The Ukrainian National Democratic Alliance (UNDO) deserves separate mention. The UNDO, like other Ukrainian parties, rejected the revolutionary path of struggle and often adopted a conciliatory stand vis-a-vis the occupier, hoping that compromises would help improve the situation of Ukrainians, who were suffering under Polish oppression. This caused frequent misunderstandings between the democrats and the nationalists, which only served to generate a clearer formulation of the nationalist revolutionary liberation concept.
Another no less important process was unfolding along with the formation of nationalist structures: a modern nationalist worldview and modern Ukrainian nationalist ideology were being crystallized. At times this process was marked by sharp, sometimes ruthless, criticism of the “old gods” — Ukrainian populist, democratic, socialist, and liberal formations dating to the UNR period. They were accused of provincialism and the inability to raise themselves above local, provincial interests for the sake of the national ideal, an organic tendency toward symbiosis with stronger forces, and the habit of making do with the minimum without aspiring to the maximum. They were also accused of rationalism, pacifism, anarchy, and chaos in carrying out national-political work.
In contrast, the new nationalism set about cultivating its own world outlook and a new kind of philosophy that could help Ukrainians grasp the current realities. Stsiborsky aptly put it when he wrote: “Nationalism must replace the decayed cults of alien forces and the sickly, anemic expectations of manna from a foreign heaven with an ironclad fanatical cult of its own strength as a united nation by applying the following three invariable principles: belief in itself, belief in its nation, and belief in its future. Nationalism’s methodological work must be aimed at uniting not the living dead of the past but the active individuals and masses of the present.”
Toward the end of the 1920s it became clear that the numerous ideologically related organizations were unable to operate effectively. The question now arose of uniting them into a single organization whose structure and ideological foundations could secure the emergence of a new political force capable of raising the masses for the struggle for Ukraine’s national liberation.
Talks began between the Group of Ukrainian National Youth and the League of Ukrainian Nationalists. A joint ideological platform was adopted, along with the statute of the union of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, on the basis of which these two organizations were to unite. A meeting of the union convened on July 12, 1927. It elected its leadership headed by Stsiborsky. Neither organization was to be disbanded yet; both were preparing a joint conference to work out and unify the underlying principles of nationalist ideology as the groundwork for uniting all nationalist organizations.
This conference was held on Berlin, Nov. 3-7, 1927. There was nothing coincidental about the location, as this was the center of UVO’s leadership and the city where Konovalets lived. Among the delegates were people from all nationalist organizations active in the emigration and in Ukraine. The main result of the First Conference of Ukrainian Nationalists was the election of the Leadership of the Ukrainian Nationalists (PUN), including Yevhen Konovalets (head) and its members Dmytro Andriievsky, Volodymyr Martynets, and Mykola Stsiborsky. The Secretariat and referenturas (sections) were also created. The PUN set about founding its official organ, Rozbudova Natsii. Although the conference proclaimed its desire to unite all organizations, it did not specify whether it would be a single monolithic organization or a union of active organizations.
The process of consolidation continued. The next stage was the Second Conference held in Prague in early April 1928. This time, the representation was broader: besides delegates from nationalist organizations, there were also members of the nationalist press and private individuals. Two main problems were widely discussed: the creation of a single organization and the attitude to existing parties.
After an exchange of opinions and heated debates, a resolution was adopted whereby the PUN separated itself from the activities of the Ukrainian parties, which were at loggerheads. They often resorted to opportunism and demonstrated an inability to wage a revolutionary struggle for the liberation of Ukraine. The conference further resolved to hold a Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists to complete the process of forming a single organization.
The preparations for the unifying congress lasted a long time. The PUN carried out colossal work to organize it. The drafts of necessary documents were prepared, in particular, 10 main topics that were to be placed on the agenda of the congress: the current situation of the Ukrainian people; the fundamentals of Ukrainian nationalism; Ukrainian nationalism and other ideologies; the state order in Ukraine; the social question in Ukraine; issues pertaining to Ukraine’s culture and religion; Ukraine’s economy; military issues; and the founding of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists.
The congress was called to order in Prague on Jan. 28, 1929, ending on Feb. 3. It was attended by 30 delegates and guests. All the meetings were held in a well— organized fashion, which made it possible to broach a number of subjects on the agenda. The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists was created during this congress. Its leadership was elected: Yevhen Konovalets, the head, and members Mykola Stsiborsky, Dmytro Andriievsky, Volodymyr Martynets, Yulian Vassyian, Mykola Kapustiansky, Petro Kozhevnykiv, and Liubomyr Kostariv. Yaroslav Dub was elected chief justice and Yaroslav Moralevych, head of the Auditing Commission. The Statute of the OUN was adopted. Apart from defining its structure, this document reflected the OUN’s attitude to major political, social, economic, and cultural problems in Ukraine.
Referenturas were formed within the OUN framework. Stsiborsky headed the organizational section; Andriievsky, the political; Vassyian, ideology; Martynets, the press and propaganda; and Demchuk, liaison and finances.
The OUN’s Grand Assembly adopted a number of documents stating that the OUN would not restrict its activities to a certain territory; its influence would embrace all ethnographic Ukrainian lands. The OUN stressed that it would “conduct a policy aimed at all-Ukrainian statehood building,” and that it would oppose all party and class groups in Ukraine.
Rozbudova Natsii, the OUN’s official organ, summarized the newly founded organization’s political principles: “We must provide the national idea with the most appropriate foundations for it to be implemented in the form of an independent, united national Ukrainian state. On the one hand, Ukrainian nationalism will struggle for changes to the current state- political situation through national revolution; and on the other, for changes to domestic economic and social conditions through consistent reforms...None of the existing parties is capable of implementing the idea of Ukrainian nationalism, even if they agreed with its ideological program, because all of them are diverse local interests of part of the Ukrainian nation; shattered by party squabbles; [and] they serve the interests of class and not the nation as the sum total of all social groups.”
From the perspective of time, the OUN as a fact and factor in Ukrainian history may be evaluated in a variety of ways. However, the following conclusions appear to be indisputable to any unbiased researcher. First, it should be noted that the emergence of the OUN was a huge unifying action of Ukrainian patriotic forces, which even today serves as an example for the consolidation and cooperation among Ukrainian various state-building formations. The creation of the OUN was the result of painstaking efforts on the part of Konovalets and his associates, who in the conditions of political chaos, despair, and disillusionment succeeded in formulating the methodology of this unification, which eventually made it possible to create a powerful and prestigious organization.
A precondition for uniting the OUN into a single, solid organization was a shared nationalistic worldview. The national idea was regarded as a driving force of social progress, while its implementation — the building of an independent and united Ukrainian state — was supposed to be the final goal of the Ukrainian nation’s struggle. In other words, the effectiveness of unification has been and will remain viable only around an idea whose essence must be clearly defined and singled out from among other ideas, and efforts are subordinated to it in order to carry it out.
The unification process went through a phase of ideological disunity. Not coincidentally, the very existence of the OUN was a counterforce not only to Muscovite Bolshevism and Polish chauvinism but also to the liberal indulgence of the majority of legal Ukrainian democratic parties which, despite numerous acts of genocide against Ukrainians, were still seeking an “understanding” with the enemies. The founding of the OUN and its activities are also proof that the core, the foundation of any successful organization is, above all, people who are capable of consistently implementing its political course.
In some respects, the history of the founding of the OUN is reminiscent of current political processes. At any rate, the above-mentioned quotes are still valid. However, the main thing is lacking today: great ideas, prominent individuals, and the profound belief in the grandeur and strength of the Ukrainian nation.
