A Bitter Divorce: Narratives of Crimean Annexation and their Relation to Larger State Identifications

Abstract

This article uses interviews with inhabitants of Crimea to analyse individual-level narratives surrounding the annexation of the peninsula by Russia and locate these narratives in relation to recent research on changes in Ukrainian identity discourse. It investigates how the trauma of the 2014 political change affected respondents’ identifications and led to the reworking of earlier identity narratives as a means of re-establishing the subjects’ ontological integrity. As a result, three narratives (those of supporters of the change, non-supporters and ambivalent respondents) were established. The narratives of pro-Russian and ambivalent Crimeans were found to be similar, highlighting a sense of trauma that the imagined unity between Ukraine and Russia had been undermined. The narratives of pro-Ukrainian Crimeans focused on the loss of unity within the Crimean community.

Notes

1 For more details see Kuzio (2015a, 2015b) and Teper (2016).

2 The form of nationalism promoted by the Ukrainian state after Maidan remains unclear; Kulyk (2018) notes that there is some pressure on self-expression by Russian-speakers, while the policies on restriction of the Russian-language media and content, de-communisation and language status point to a competition between civic and ethnic elements in the public discourse.

3 Anonymous interview, male, 60–80 years, pensioner, Dzhankoy, 15 January 2016.

4 Anonymous interview, female, 40–60 years, small business owner, Dzhankoy, 21 January 2016.

5 Anonymous interview, female, 30–50 years, freelancer, Dzhankoy, 24 January 2016.

6 Anonymous interview, male, 20–40 years, public employee, Simferopol, 11 January 2016.

7 Anonymous interview, female, 20–40 years, private employee, Simferopol, 11 January 2016.

8 Anonymous interview, female, 30–50 years, freelancer, Dzhankoy, 14 January 2016.

9 Anonymous interview, female, 40–60 years, small business owner, Dzhankoy, 12 January 2016.

10 Anonymous interview, female, 30–50 years, freelancer, Dzhankoy, 12 January 2016.

11 Anonymous interview, female, 40–50 years, small business owner, Dzhankoy, 8 January 2016.

12 Anonymous interview, female, 30–50 years, freelancer, Dzhankoy, 4 January 2016.

13 Anonymous interview, female, 40–60 years, small business owner, Dzhankoy, 8 January 2016.

14 Anonymous interview, female, 30–50 years, freelancer, Dzhankoy, 4 January 2016.

15 Anonymous interview, male, 50–70 years, pensioner, Dzhankoy 3 January 2016.

16 Anonymous interview, male, 60–80 years, pensioner, Dzhankoy, 2 January 2016.

17 Anonymous interview, male, 60–80 years, pensioner, Dzhankoy, 4 January 2016.

18 Anonymous interview, male, 60–80 years, pensioner, Dzhankoy, 2 January 2016.

19 Anonymous interview, female, 20–40 years, public employee, Dzhankoy, 17 January 2016.

20 Anonymous interview, male, 60–80 years, pensioner, Dzhankoy, 17 January 2016.

21 Anonymous interview, female, 50–70 years, small business owner, Feodosia, 19 January 2016.

22 Anonymous interview, female, 50–70 years, private employee, Sevastopol, 20 January 2016.

23 Anonymous interview, female, 50–70 years, small business owner, Feodosia, 18 January 2016.

24 Anonymous interview, female, 20–40 years, public employee, Dzhankoy, 17 January 2016.

25 Anonymous interview, female, 20–40 years, private employee, Simferopol, 24 January 2016.

26 Anonymous interview, female, 20–40 years, public employee, Dzhankoy, 21 January 2016.

27 Anonymous interview, female, 30–50 years, freelancer, Dzhankoy, 22 January 2016.

28 Anonymous interview, female, 40–60 years, small business owner, Dzhankoy, 8 January 2016.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Eesti Teadusagentuur: [Grant Number personal research funding PUT1624].

Notes on contributors

Olena Nedozhogina

Olena Nedozhogina, Institute of Social Studies, University of Tartu, Jaama 34, 51009, Tartu, Estonia. Email: [email protected]