When the West Meets the East: Exploring Ethnic Diversity in Eastern Europe^*

Abstract

The economic and political pressures which eventually led to the collapse of the communist system between 1989 and 1991 also contributed to the disintegration of all three of the multinational socialist federations-the USSR, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. The political vacuum caused by the demise of the communist political systems triggered a wave of demands for "national self-determination," which led to the formation of a number of new states. This desire for independent statehood followed the predictable and indeed only legitimate model of statehood in Europe, the nationstate, namely one in which the state is associated with one people (nation). In practice, however, like most states, these new states had to contend with a different reality, namely one of ethnic diversity rather than homogeneity. Moreover, belated state-and nation-formation processes mixed together with frequent border changes account for the particularly complex and sensitive nature of ethnic diversity in the region. Clearly, imperial rule was a major contributor to the ethnic and regional diversity of the region in Eastern Europe (EE). In Western Europe, stable dynastic states, such as Britain, France and Spain, emerged with relatively fixed boundaries, which, when allied to their centralizing tendencies, tended to subdue regional differences. In these cases, nations formed within existing states. In contrast, in EE the dominant political form was an empire comprising many different ethno-national groups, cultures and religions. According to Hroch, in the process of "national awakening" of EE, the nationalism of the so-called non-dominant ethnic groups developed in opposition to the host state (empires).' In the nineteenth and early twentieth century, there was a mosaic of ethnic groups, often living side by side, which were mobilized by different national movements. In the process, ties based on common kinship, ethnicity, neighbourhood, religion, language, customs and "mentality," rather than common political institutions and territory, became the basis for nationhood.

Establishing a Baseline Measurement of Intercultural Competence of Ukrainian Faculty: Setting the Stage for Domestic and Global Intercultural Understanding

“…Consequently, the official policies of many post-Soviet states included a blend of Western and Soviet theoretical approaches that resulted in an incoherent ethno-cultural political agenda (Wolczuk & Yemelianova, 2008). Such inconsistency in national politics presents at least one reasonable explanation of involuntary adoption of multiculturalism by the post-Soviet states outlined by Marty and Appleby (1997).…”

“…It should be noted that Soviet policy makers and scholars coined their own ethnonational terminology that reflected the contribution of socialism and their leading nationalism theory of Marxism-Leninism to juxtapose or replace Western terminology (Wolczuk & Yemelianova, 2008). Therefore, many Western terms, such as multiculturalism or intercultural education were not a part of the Soviet vocabulary.…”

“…A discussion of the differences between four groupings of academic discipline in predicting intercultural competence follows further. While the concept of intercultural education in its Western understanding did not exist during the Soviet times, the concepts of multinational or international education were used then to promote the values of equality of all nations and cultural pluralism (Haarman & Holman, 1997;Muradov, 1974;Wolczuk & Yemelianova, 2008). Yet in contrast to the proclaimed equality of all the languages, cultures, and ethnicities as well as the nations' right to self-determination, the Soviet policies fostered authoritarian monoculturalism in form of Sovietization, Russification, and internatsionalizatsiya (Soviet internationalism) of Ukraine that was greatly reflected in curriculum and instruction during that time (Bilinsky, 1981;Haarman & Holman, 1997;Karjaharm, 2006;Kysla, 2009;Rosen, 1971;Tsvetkova, 2008).…”

“…The Soviet internationalization intertwines Sovietization and Russification practices, with an aim of "spreading Soviet social patterns and ideas among the nonRussian population of the Soviet Union through the intermediary of Russian" (Haarman & Holman, 1997, p. 121). Some of the examples of the policy of internationalization were the introduction of unified Cyrillic alphabet for all the republics and the promotion of the Russian language as the language of international communication and higher education (Wolczuk & Yemelianova, 2008).…”

“…The Soviet understanding of nation was determined by Stalin's theory of nation, which defined a nation being people who shared common territory, language, ethnicity, and mentality and had more than 100,000 population (Wolczuk & Yemelianova, 2008). Other central Soviet terms and concepts used were "natsional'nost (nationality), ethnos (a wider ethnic community), ethnographic group, narod (people), [and] narodnost' (numerically small people)" (Wolczuk & Yemelianova, 2008, p. 181).…”