“The Ukrainian national idea in the globalized world of the 21st century lies in overcoming the syndrome of backwardness and not losing one’s individuality.” This is the answer that The Day’s editor in chief Larysa Ivshyna gave to a traditional question from Ukrainian students at Mechnikov Odesa National University, which hosted the roundtable debate “Ukraine’s National Unity and Choice of Civilization.”
The forum, timed to the 12 th anniversary of the university’s Institute of Social Sciences, was a high-profile event not only for Odesa students. Political science students from National University of Ostroh Academy, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, and Kharkiv’s Karazin National University were also invited to discuss such topics as national identification and unity as well as Ukraine’s integration into international institutions.
This was the third meeting for the students of Ostroh, Odesa, and Kyiv universities. The first took place in June 2006 at Ostroh Academy, where students invited by Ms. Ivshyna to discuss the national idea realized that, although the problem of Ukraine’s supposed disunity has been artificially imposed on society, it still worries young people and needs to be discussed. In her view, the artificially drawn borderlines can only be erased by Ukrainians contacting and getting to know each other better, which was proved at the Ostroh meeting. With this goal in mind, it was decided to found an Ostroh club to encourage free and informal communication among young people, a place where students from Ukraine’s diverse regions can meet and discuss acute sociopolitical problems. The Ostroh roundtable was thus a logical continuation of the movement for national unity launched by the students of Ostroh Academy.
Gathering students from eastern, western, central, and southern Ukraine, the students from Odesa wanted to discuss the problem of our state’s external and internal integration. Although most of the participants were very much aware that it would be difficult to reach a consensus during the first meeting, they all hoped that at least one side would be prepared to understand the other. However, the decades-old stereotypes of Ukraine’s dissimilarity and the overemphasized feeling of having to immediately integrate “into something” have erased our basic mental trait that, to a certain extent, made it possible to preserve the Ukrainian nation: we stopped listening to ideas that differ from ours and seeing faces that are looking in a different direction. The heated debate, which occasionally threatened to turn into an outright quarrel, not only failed to produce any results but also drove the participants into a deadlock. Has the unwillingness and inability of politicians to solve the problem of national unity also made society incapable of self-integration?
When the students, who came here in the hopes of discovering like-minded people, went to the Odesa Ukrainian Music and Drama Theater, the next item on the agenda drawn up by the resourceful Odesites, they felt inner emptiness, uncertainty, and the loss of something very important. “It would be naive to think that you will instantly arrive at a shared opinion,” Ivsyna said. “It is as if you were getting postoperative treatment: the first steps are very painful, but if you don’t take them, you will never be able to walk again.”
But, clearly, the Ukrainian students were so eager to “walk fast” that they could not avoid taking the first step. By the evening, sitting in a cafe, they were speaking in the same language, or, to be more exact, they were listening to each other, often agreeing with a peer from a different part of the country. Discussing well into the night subjects that worry all Ukrainian students, the participants of the Odesa roundtable proved the axiom that was articulated by Larysa Ivshyna long ago, but which in fact does not need to be proved: human contacts erase borders.
In the next few days, the debaters shared a dormitory, went on a six- hour sightseeing tour of Odesa, attended a concert dedicated to the 12
th anniversary of the Institute of Social Sciences, visited a discotheque, and strolled along the seashore. These excursions not only removed the last vestiges of the barriers that had seemed so impregnable just two days earlier but also filled the forum with warmth and sincerity. From now on, the members of the Ostroh Club will refrain from ignoring the views of Ukrainians from other regions because the ideas of your friends, whether or not you agree with them, are always close and important to you.
The students decided to hold the next session of the Ostroh Club on Unification Day, Jan. 22, at the National University of Ostroh Academy. A few more universities will be invited to participate in order to gradually widen the geography of the forum, and a Web site will be created to keep the public informed. The Ostroh Club is chiefly aimed at attracting as many participants as possible and bringing young people together.
It is obvious that the club reached its objective in the course of two sessions. Bidding farewell to each other at the railway station, the students promised to travel all over Ukraine to convince Ukrainians that human contacts erase borders.
Ivan KAPSAMUN, student, Institute of Social Sciences, Mechnikov Odesa National University:
“On Nov. 24, 2006, the Institute of Social Sciences marked its 12th anniversary: for our students and faculty this is an exciting major event. The annual gala concert to celebrate this day always draws a full house. Talented people, assisted by professional theater producers, demonstrate their skills on stage to spectators, among whom are not only students, their parents, and members of the general public but also VIP guests of our university. I decided to combine pleasure with utility and suggested to the institute director that we hold a roundtable debate a day before the concert, thus reinforcing our celebration with an intellectual event. The administration supported me and, thanks to the efforts of the boys and girls in the current study year and some other friends, the roundtable debate became a reality. Attending the debate were political science students from National University of Ostroh Academy, Kharkiv’s Karazin National University, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, and our chief guest, and Larysa Ivshyna, the editor in chief of the national Ukrainian newspaper The Day.
“This lineup was not new except for the Kharkiv boys and girls whom we invited as representatives of eastern Ukraine for the first time. I met Ms. Ivshyna when she was launching the book Ukraina Incognita at the Maksim Gorky State Research Library in Odesa. There I asked a question about the Ukrainian national idea, to which Ms. Ivshyna replied that the national idea can be formulated even when people simply try to know one another better. She then suggested that my friends and I visit Ostroh Academy, where Ostroh and Kyiv students had met for the first time.
“The Odesa roundtable also focused on the national idea: “The National Idea and Ukraine’s Choice of Civilization.” I would like to say that the main result of such meetings is that the members of our younger generation are getting to know one another better and forming their own opinions of each other without having to toe the line. Ms. Ivshyna’s participation only strengthened and instilled confidence in us, students. What is also important for me is that you have to keep your word, and Ms. Ivshyna proved this when she invited us to Ostroh. I think I also proved this when I invited all the boys and girls, as well as Ms. Ivshyna, to Odesa. This is not easy but it is very important, especially for our country.
“On the whole, I would like to express tremendous gratitude to all those who visited our university, especially Ms. Ivshyna, the organizer and inspirer of our contacts. I hope our circle of friends expands through the participation of other universities and that our debates on ‘internal Ukrainian integration’ become a tradition.”
Maryna PASHKOVSKA, student, National University of Ostroh Academy:
“We often hear the media reporting on roundtables, workshops, and scholarly conferences devoted to the urgent problems of Ukraine’s foreign and domestic policies. These events usually end with lengthy debates among the participants, without producing any tangible results.
“The Odesa roundtable had an entirely different format. Apart from maintaining official contacts, the participants could mingle informally and find out whether we, representatives of Ukraine’s diverse regions, are really so different and what can bring us together.
“I think every participant found an answer to these questions. Proof of this was the friendly atmosphere, complete mutual understanding, and the tears in our eyes when we were saying goodbye to each other.
“I would like to say that this was one of the most valuable lessons of my life. I realized that it is not enough just to sit in a classroom and try to find out the causes behind such contradictory viewpoints on Ukraine’s future. So much for shifting the blame on somebody else: each of us must do something to bring together the eastern, western, northern, and southern Ukrainians.
“You have to listen closely to your opponents, draw conclusions, and stand your ground through concrete actions, and, above all, remember that you won’t get anywhere with idle talk.
“I am proud of being a tiny part of the grand project called the ‘Unification of All Ukrainians.’ I am convinced that such contacts will be the first step towards the eventual formation of the Ukrainian nation. With tears in my eyes and pride in my heart I can say confidently that we are Ukrainians irrespective of our place of residence, faith, or language of communication, and that nothing can eradicate this truth!”
Olha TARASOVA, student, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy:
“The Odesa conference of political science students was full of contrasts. The guests from Kharkiv, Ostroh, and Kyiv, and our Odesa hosts had many things in common, so harmony reigned in their personal relationships. But the views of our country’s destiny proved to be so different that the debates sometimes turned into bitter disputes. We had to face the harsh reality: our society is so heavily ideologized that even we, students, people with the same interests and way of life, find it difficult to reach a consensus. The roundtable resembled a battlefield: biting questions, responses that sometimes turned into a screaming match, and absolute rejection of the opponent’s position. After 15 minutes of this kind of ‘debating’ we felt uncomfortable: everyone had expected a different kind of dialogue. Sometimes, when someone made a comment, the rest would fly into a rage and come to a totally wrong conclusion.
“Our main problem was a banal inability to listen to each other. This discovery looked like sacrilege against the backdrop of the friendly personal relationships that emerged among the participants by the end of the conference — as though a surgeon, who is cruel because of his profession, had excised a terrible tumor that everybody would have preferred to ignore. But one must not ignore tumors: they have to be cured; otherwise they grow and finally eat up the body.
“The body of our society is infected with a terrible disease: we suffer from intolerance and extreme individualism. We are flying like atoms through space to nowhere, and when we bump into others, we shove them away. The Odesa conference handed down this horrible diagnosis. But far more important, it instilled in us determination to combat this malady, i.e., to learn to understand one another, seek consensus, and respect and appreciate somebody else’s opinion even if it is diametrically opposed to yours. I hope that at the next conferences students from different cities and regions of Ukraine will learn to understand one another.”
Olha BURLAKA, student, Institute of Social Sciences, Mechnikov Odesa National University:
“The idea of holding a roundtable was born in the students’ milieu and was realized thanks to the efforts and persistence of the students themselves. I think the institute’s administration and faculty had a proper appreciation of this project and offered all kinds of support to bring it off. Essentially, a roundtable, which is an opportunity for students from different regions of Ukraine to discuss problems that interest them, is an act of civic initiative, the foundation of any civil society, as we know. And disputes and debates among the representatives of the social sciences can prove to anybody that civil society in Ukraine is not at all dormant. It is doing its utmost to cohere in the face of the problems that have come to a head.
“So I would like to thank the political science students who came to my native Odesa, because we have taken one more step towards consolidation of the Ukrainian intelligentsia and nation.”
Natalia YAKYMCHUK, student, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy:
“I would like to say thank you for this meeting and to note that, in contrast to all the promises and ‘efforts’ of our respected bureaucrats, who are only capable of empty talk and bombast, these kinds of conferences produce better results because they create the impression of concern and willingness to do something, not just talk. After analyzing the participants’ speeches, I must say that almost all of them agreed that we should immediately seek a national idea. In my view, Huntington’s theory should be applied to present-day Ukraine, especially the following provision: to understand who we are, we should know who we are not, and in order to understand what we are striving for, we should above all be aware of what we really do not want.
“There were discussions about Ukraine’s external integration, but what we badly need is internal integration. As for external integration, I think that we must take a risk and finally make a choice. We’ve already had the experience of the Soviet state, so we should try to chart a new course of development in a different direction, with due account of common values. But first of all, we should find a single national idea because there cannot be one national idea in western Ukraine, a second in eastern Ukraine, and a third in southern Ukraine. It is called a national idea because it combines the interests, desires, and ideas of the entire nation. Therefore, everybody must feel, first of all, that there is a single national spirit and the same Ukrainian state, and that nationwide interests prevail over regional ones. I believe that the conference was successful if only for the simple reason that it succeeded in integrating students from Ukraine’s different universities. The conference ended to the sounds of the national anthem of Ukraine sung quite informally on the railway station platform when the Ostroh Academy students were boarding the train. The only conclusion to be drawn is that representatives of many other higher educational institutions should be invited to this kind of student conference.”
