Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the Skovoroda-300 forum in Pereiaslav, Ukraine (2022) | President of Ukraine / Public Domain
In the wake of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the international community rallied behind Ukrainians’ determination to defend their country. Vital financial aid was accompanied by efforts to better understand a nation that did not surrender in the face of the Russian military forces that overwhelmingly surpassed the Ukrainian capacities.
Immediately after the all-out assault, a number of volunteer educational initiatives were launched in the United States in the hopes of drawing attention to Ukrainians’ courageous resistance to Russia’s neo-imperial ambitions. At the same time, colleges across the country offered various courses focusing on Ukrainian history and culture that illustrated profound distinctiveness between Ukraine and Russia. These educational initiatives were essential because Russia’s denial of Ukraine and elimination of Ukrainian identity fueled Russia’s unprovoked assault against Ukraine and continues to generate Russian support for the ongoing war against Ukraine as the “liberation of the brotherly nation.”
The international interest in Ukraine included learning the Ukrainian language, with an uptick in the number of students enrolling in Ukrainian language courses across various US universities. However, this surge has yet to translate into a sustained increase.
What impedes students from investing their time in Ukrainian studies and, in particular, the Ukrainian language? The number of native speakers of Ukrainian globally could be a factor: native speakers of Russian, for instance, are much more numerous. But other factors are worth considering.
The first efforts to create a program in Ukrainian studies in the United States took place in 1957, which eventually led to the establishment of Ukrainian studies at Harvard University in 1968. Harvard professor Omeljan Pritsak pursued an ambitious plan to initiate a center of Ukrainian studies with three chairs: language, literature, and history. In 1973, the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute was established; it remains the world’s leading academic center on Ukrainian studies. When initiating the establishment of Ukrainian studies, Omeljan Pritsak specified the importance of learning the Ukrainian language:
Ukrainian identity, which is the basis of cultural and political activity as well as a force for growth for coming generations, cannot normally exist without the help of three ethnic-national disciplines. I mean here language, the common code of national creativity, without which Ukrainianhood would lose its reason for existence; literature, as the artistic shaping of the language and spiritual nourishment for the higher levels of culture; and finally, history, the common memory of the national community, without which it would be like a robot, lacking a vision and will of its own. It was natural that a scholarly center created at Harvard would have to embrace in the first place these three disciplines.
Since that time, more programs opened at other universities across the United States, and regular Ukrainian language courses were supplemented by intensive summer programs. Yet enrollment numbers could barely compete with Russian language programs. This situation has remained discouragingly steady. In part, it can be explained by the fact that Ukraine had been known as a country with a significant number of Russian speakers. The overall understanding was that it would be sufficient to know Russian if one wanted to visit Ukraine. However, such an attitude reduced Ukrainian culture to the knowledge of the Russian language only. But knowing Russian did not help language learners discover Ukrainian culture. On the contrary, it perpetuated Russia’s imperial efforts to Russify Ukraine. As a result, Ukraine has been absent on the international mnemonic and mental map. Not remembering Ukrainian culture as profoundly distinct from Russian culture exacerbated misrepresentations about Ukraine rooted in a distorted perception that Ukraine was “almost the same” as Russia. The resistance against Russia’s military advances proved that the pursuit of freedom and democracy has been deeply integrated into Ukrainians’ perception of their nationhood and statehood.
The Russian language certainly was one of the aspects of cultural diversity that Ukraine had long contained and offered. However, programs encouraging learning and speaking Russian in Ukraine should have mentioned that the Russian language was weaponized to eliminate Ukrainian identity. This colonizing aspect of the Russian language was largely dismissed outside the Ukrainian studies. Puzzlingly, the Ukrainian language—the official language of Ukraine—was dismissed in favor of Russian, which for centuries was promoted in and imposed on Ukraine to suppress Ukrainian culture and eliminate Ukrainian identity.
While the first efforts toward a Ukrainian program in the US weren’t made until the middle of the twentieth century, the first Russian language course in the United States was given at Harvard in 1896. Vassar College was another pioneer of Russian studies, offering its first course on Russian history 1907. By 1945, Vassar students could choose Russian studies as their major; in 1961, more than 250 students at the college majored in Russian studies.
The chronological gap between the first creation of Ukrainian and Russian programs in the US is significant, but it can hardly be the main reason for the lack of interest in Ukrainian studies.
The Ukrainian program at Harvard was initiated when the Russian language in Ukraine, then part of the Soviet Union, was promoted as the main language for career opportunities. The Ukrainian language suffered from prejudices of being “backward,” “peasant,” and “useless” if one wanted to leave rural areas for a career in one of the big cities.
This unfortunate reputation was widespread not only in Ukraine but well beyond the country. The first wave of Russian immigrants in the US, following the 1917 Revolution, included supporters of imperial Russia who fled the country when it was taken over by the Bolsheviks and turned into the beacon of communism. The Russian Empire sympathizers participated in the development of Russian studies in the US. As a result, not only did the Russian studies adopt some imperial and chauvinistic attitudes toward the former constituents of the Russian Empire, including Ukraine, but also contributed in a way to the longevity of Russian imperialism outside Russia.
When discussing the teaching of Ukrainian in the US, we also encounter a terminology problem. Due to low enrollment and an unfortunate misrepresentation of the Ukrainian language, Ukrainian for decades has been classified as a “less commonly taught language.” This terminology itself promotes inequality. If our goal is to create equal opportunities for cultures and languages, this categorization, albeit reflecting course and enrollment statistics, is outdated today. When a language is described as one that is not widely taught—and therefore not widely used in communication—students will naturally hesitate to devote a few years of their college studies to a language that is unlikely to secure them a wide variety of job opportunities upon graduation.
Another disadvantage facing Ukrainian programs today is restrictions on travel to Ukraine due to safety concerns. There is a real interest in Ukraine among today’s students. Many seek opportunities to immerse themselves in Ukrainian culture and language and embark on their research journeys. But for understandable reasons, universities are currently not providing funding for student travel and study in Ukraine. Although there are alternative pathways for research and language learning in neighboring countries, such as Poland, this is only a temporary solution, one with some drawbacks and limitations. To name one: many researchers interview Ukrainians in Poland, for instance, on their response to the Russo-Ukrainian war. But a displaced person who tries to seek shelter in a foreign country is in a profoundly different situation than a person who seeks shelter in a country that is bombarded daily with a barrage of missiles. Ukrainians living in Ukraine also witness an enormous loss of lives daily. Location significantly shapes the outcomes of interviews.
As Russia continues its military efforts in Ukraine, Ukrainian programs can get established outside of Ukraine, but it will take time and institutional support. And while Ukrainian study abroad programs remain few, Russian programs continue to grow in Armenia, Georgia, and Kazakhstan.
The number of academic openings dedicated to Ukrainian studies offered in the US in 2023 and 2024 remains overwhelmed by Russian studies positions—the latter of which often include a side note on teaching additional Slavic language or culture courses. This unfortunate practice perpetuates the dominance of Russian studies and the dismissal of other fields such as Ukrainian studies. Once again, students are encouraged to take Russian over any other Slavic language because Russian seems to bring more educational and professional opportunities in the future. Moreover, Russian studies are presented as something that requires time and persistence. At the same time, an impression is given d that candidates can present themselves as qualified experts in additional “minor” fields after taking a course or two in Ukrainian studies.
Profound changes are necessary in educational programs to address the lasting effects of imperial heritage. This pertains not only to Russian studies but to how education is organized and managed. This includes reevaluating terms like “less commonly taught languages,” which can discourage potential students and discriminate against speakers. Notably, Russian seems to have enjoyed a different reputation: it has been promoted as a difficult language associated with “great Russian culture,” fostering elitism and prestige.
In light of ongoing decolonization efforts, Slavic studies in the West face the challenge of producing new knowledge and providing a balanced representation of cultures previously overshadowed by Russian studies. This endeavor requires a willingness to reassess long-held perspectives. The changes in the field of Russian studies are overdue as well. Among many other things, expertise in Russia, for instance, should include an advanced knowledge of at least one more language in addition to Russian, and this proficiency cannot be limited to reading knowledge only.
Education takes time, effort, and patience. However, there is a sense of urgency for Ukrainian studies at the moment, and this urgency is about the history and story of a people who fight for their right to be free and independent. Most essentially, this story is about people fighting for their right to exist and to be remembered as a distinct nation with its own history and culture.
Thank you, Nataliya. You are doing a great job in the field of Ukrainian Studies!