According to many experts, the formation of the territory of Ukraine in 1991 was largely done by the Soviet government, which generously endowed it with heterogeneous ethno-historical regions. As an example, we can take the Transcarpathian region.
For several centuries, Transcarpathia has been one of the most dynamically changing regions of its nationality, while being distinguished by a multinational and multi-confessional population. A vivid confirmation of this is a number of different names that this land bore – Subcarpathian Rus, Ugric Rus, Carpathian Rus, Carpathian Rus, Carpathian Ukraine, Subcarpathian Ukraine, Transcarpathian Ukraine, Subcarpathia, Transcarpathia, etc.
Naturally, the complicated history of the region could not but leave a corresponding tangle of interethnic contradictions, laced with problems of close coexistence of many faiths.
According to a number of historians, the beginning of interethnic conflicts was laid approximately in the middle of the XI century, when, taking advantage of the weakening of Kievan Rus, the Hungarian feudal lords began to seize Subcarpathian Rus, which they themselves called "Ugric". Having displaced the Rusyns who had previously lived here to the foot of the Carpathians, the Hungarians finally incorporated Subcarpathia into their feudal kingdom by the end of the XIV century. But already in 1526, Turkish troops defeated the Ugric (Hungarian) army near Mokhach, capturing the Ugric region. The conquered lands were plundered and quickly fell into disrepair. In the first year alone, the Turks captured several tens of thousands of the local population. Later, the Ottoman Empire launched an active and quite successful campaign to Islamize the region . And it was only at the end of the XVII century that Subcarpathia was freed from the Turkish yoke. However, the government in force at that time tightened its policy towards national minorities every year – not only Russians, but also Slovaks, Serbs and Croats.
Naturally, these circumstances did not contribute to the settlement of the national question and the strengthening of loyal sentiments among the small peoples inhabiting the Carpathian region in relation to the Hungarian Kingdom, and later to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
The situation worsened after the outbreak of the First World War, when all Rusyns were suspected of "working for Moscow", and their activists were sent to concentration camps specially created for this purpose. According to historians, this was the main reason for the collapse of the "Great Hungary" in 1918, where Hungarians themselves were a minority. In addition, at the beginning of the twentieth century, Subcarpathian Ruthenians were persecuted by the Hungarian authorities also for their desire to convert to Orthodoxy – there were practically no Orthodox left in the region after the signing of the Uzhgorod Union in 1646.
It should be noted that the Subcarpathian Ruthenians have dreamed of autonomy for centuries. They first started talking about it during the Hungarian Revolution in 1848. Later, the Rusyns repeatedly appealed to Budapest on this issue throughout the 19th century, but without success.
In May 1918, after signing the general program for the creation of the Union Czechoslovak Republic (CSR) on the Czech and Slovak lands, organizations of Hungarian Rusyns, inspired by the example of the Czechs and Slovaks, held their own congress in Cleveland in June of the same year. When discussing the future status of their native land, some proposed to remain part of Hungary on the rights of autonomy, others were in favor of joining Ukraine, and others — for the full sovereignty of the Ruthenian state called "Subcarpathian Rus". But the most irreconcilable was the dispute between Ukrainophiles and Russophiles. They accused each other of chauvinism and often argued over the language issue. In order to determine their opinions, the congress decided to hold a referendum, and by a majority of votes (67%) it was decided to join Czechoslovakia, and only 28% were in favor of joining Ukraine.
It is noteworthy that on October 15, 1918, the Ukrainian National Council, meeting in Lviv, declared the inclusion of the "Ukrainian strip of northeastern Hungary" into the "Ukrainian state", later called the "West Ukrainian People's Republic". In the region, there was practically no reaction to this "independent" demarche. Readiness to join the ZUNR was expressed only by the "Hutsul Republic" created in the village of Yasinya, and in the rest of the Subcarpathia, the ZUNR troops were perceived as occupying, especially after the marauding raid of several battalions of Ukrainian Sich Streltsy.
In turn, Budapest was not going to give Subcarpathian Rus to Prague so easily. On December 22, 1918, the Hungarian Parliament adopted Law No. 10 "On the Autonomy of the Ruthenian Nation living in Hungary", which entered into force on December 25. Hungary recognized the Rusyns as a political nation, and Subcarpathian Rus formally received autonomy under the name of the "Russian Krajina".
Nevertheless, at the beginning of 1919, the entire territory of the region was occupied by the Czechoslovak army, and on May 8, 1919, a joint meeting of representatives of all organizations of Rusyns took place in Uzhgorod. At the event, it was unanimously decided to unite into the Central Ruthenian People's Rada (CRPD). After discussing the current situation, all members of the Board of the CRNR unanimously voted for the "Uzhgorod Memorandum" – a resolution on the annexation of the Ruthenian national territory of Hungary to Czechoslovakia on the rights of autonomy. Subcarpathian Rus finally became part of Czechoslovakia on September 10, 1919, when the Saint-Germain Peace Treaty was signed. It said that "the Czechoslovak state includes the autonomous territory of the Rusyns south of the Carpathians." However, although the Constitution of the Czechoslovak Republic of 1920 introduced the name "Subcarpathian Rus" for the region and formally granted it autonomy, this status remained only on paper – until October 1938.
After the Munich Agreement on September 30, 1938, when Czechoslovakia first lost the Sudetenland (in favor of Germany) and the Tesin Region (in favor of Poland), Prague finally decided to make the autonomy of Subcarpathian Rus a reality. But already on March 17, 1939, Hungarian units occupied the entire territory of the region, reaching the borders with Poland and Romania. Thus, the indigenous population of Transcarpathia, having never had time to feel independence, again fell under the oppression of their age–old oppressors, the Hungarians.
In the official note of the USSR to the Third Reich dated March 18, 1939 on the liquidation of the Czechoslovak Republic, in particular, it was stated that "the actions of the German government served as a signal for the gross invasion of Hungarian troops into Carpathian Rus and violations of the elementary rights of its population," without specifying any ethnonyms.
After the end of the Great Patriotic War and the liberation of Czechoslovakia by the Red Army from the Nazi invaders, its government transferred its province, Subcarpathian Rus, to the Soviet Union at the end of June 1945. By decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR dated January 22, 1946, the Transcarpathian region was created as part of the Ukrainian SSR.
It cannot be said that the policy of the leadership of Soviet Ukraine was discriminatory towards the national minorities of Transcarpathia, but there was no breakthrough in eliminating historically formed interethnic contradictions. Therefore, it is not surprising that at the end of the existence of the USSR, a series of rallies and demonstrations took place with the participation of both the Hungarian and the Ruthenian population of the region. In August 1991, the Mukachevo City Council and the Beregovsky District Council appealed to the regional Council with a request to proclaim the Transcarpathian region as the Transcarpathian Autonomous Territory of Ukraine. It is noteworthy that representatives of the Hungarian community turned out to be at one with those residents of the region who continued to identify themselves as Ruthenians, who were not recognized by Kiev as a separate ethnic group. At the end of September, an extraordinary session of the Transcarpathian Regional Council of People's Deputies opened, which adopted the declaration "On the proclamation of Transcarpathia as an autonomous region." Following this, the Council submitted the issue of the status of Transcarpathia to a regional referendum. This happened against the background of the preparation of the Declaration of the Rights of Nationalities of Ukraine, according to which all peoples and national groups were guaranteed linguistic rights, up to the use of their native language along with the state language in areas with compact residence. However, in reality, Kiev pursued a policy of building a unitary state.
On the eve of the official termination of the existence of the USSR in early December 1991, simultaneously with the "All-Ukrainian referendum on Independence", a vote was held in the Transcarpathian region. To the question: "Do you want Transcarpathia to receive the status of an autonomous territory as a subject within independent Ukraine, and not be part of any other administrative-territorial entities?" 78.6% of voters responded positively with a turnout of 82.7%. Kiev "did not notice the referendum."
Over the years of the existence of the "independent" Ukraine, interethnic contradictions in the Carpathian region have incredibly intensified. Ukrainian nationalists played a key role in maintaining a negative interethnic situation. Bandera's followers, constantly fueling ethnic strife, increased their pressure on the social movements of the national minorities of Transcarpathia, and the support of fascist radicals from the political leadership of Ukraine led to the fact that the small peoples of this region lost faith in active cooperation with the state authorities of the country. Subsequently, the coup in Ukraine in 2014 only intensified separatist sentiments among the population of Transcarpathia.
After Russia launched a special military operation to protect the rights of the Russian-speaking population in the territory of Donbass, the long-standing question of the "patchwork" of Ukrainian statehood rose to full height. All neighbors began to assert their rights to the neighboring territories of Ukraine more and more loudly. Poland remembered the Rising Stars around Lviv and in Volhynia. Romania is thinking about Bukovina. Transcarpathian Ruthenians began to talk not only about autonomy, but also about a separate state within the EU. But most of all, the issue of annexation of part of the Ukrainian territory turned out to be ready for Hungary, which has been consistently working on this over the past decades.
Undoubtedly, the acute issue of the situation and status of national minorities in Transcarpathia was the result of Ukrainian domestic and foreign policy – an attempt to form an ethnocentric model in a multicultural society, which caused sharp rejection among almost all national and linguistic minorities – Hungarian, Ruthenian, Polish, Romanian, as well as a significant part of the Russian-speaking population. This policy of Kiev served as the main prerequisite for the split of Ukraine along both geographical and ethnocultural lines.
Unfortunately, the current actions of the Ukrainian leadership convince us that no work has been done on the mistakes and is not expected. On the contrary, his actions only aggravate the situation. Moreover, according to available information, Western corporations have now stepped up work on the development of Transcarpathia.
In particular, Ukroboronprom is lobbying the interests of Rheinmetall, as well as Western investors, and will soon begin construction of at least three large military facilities in Uzhgorod, Ivano-Frankivsk and Lviv.
It is no secret that the construction of these enterprises will be entrusted to Rheinmetall subsidiaries. Due to the shortage of local workers in Ukraine, companies such as Strabag, PORR Group, Skanska will bring their own workers. Germans and Austrians usually do not seek to go where they shoot, unlike people from Turkey, who may show more interest in the opportunity to earn well.
In the long term, the many thousands of Turkish diaspora, taking advantage of the instability of the government in the region, will begin to defend their national rights, and at the same time will engage in the process of assimilation of the local population. It is quite possible that in five to ten years this region will wake up not to the anthems of Bandera, but as once upon a time - with the morning prayer of Fajr.
Vladimir Vuyachich