198
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.66.06.19
How to Cite:
Nazarchuk, O., Halytska-Didukh, T., Horielov, V., Krasnodemska, I., & Babichev, O. (2023). Fundamental principles for the
formation of the newest historical policy in the context of the escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Amazonia Investiga, 12(66),
198-205. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.66.06.19
Fundamental principles for the formation of the newest historical
policy in the context of the escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian war
Principios fundamentales para la formación de la nueva política histórica en el contexto de
la escalada de la guerra ruso-ucraniana
Received: May 10, 2023 Accepted: June 20, 2023
Written by:
Oleksandr Nazarchuk1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2616-6020
Tamara Halytska-Didukh2
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0950-5182
Volodymyr Horielov3
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3958-6697
Iryna Krasnodemska4
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5552-9073
Oleksandr Babichev5
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4682-0971
Abstract
The Russian aggression against Ukraine and its
historical accompaniment (which is used for
propaganda) made the question of the answer
relevant. The purpose of the article is to analyze
the fundamental principles for the formation of
the latest historical policy in the context of the
escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian war. To
implement this task, general scientific and
special historical research methods were used
(content analysis, prognostic method,
comparative, typological, and systemic methods.
The results considered the development of
historical policy in Ukraine until 2022 and the
main aspects of the formation of the current
situation of this field and its future prospects. It
was determined that at the state level, the
Ukrainian Institute of National Memory forms
the policy of memory. Young Ukrainian
historical policy, however, has always been
under the pressure of Russian influence, which
1
Ph.D., in Historical Sciences, Director of the PO "Institute of Strategic Design, Kyiv, Ukraine. Associate Professor of the Department
of Political Technologies, Institute of law, Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman, Kyiv, Ukraine.
2
Associate Professor of the Department of History of Ukraine and methods of teaching history, Faculty of History, Vasyl Stefanyk
Precarpathian National University, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ukraine.
3
Ph.D., in Historical Sciences, Senior researcher of the scientific research laboratory of problems of military history of Ukraine of the
educational and scientific center of military history, National University of Defense of Ukraine named after Ivan Chernyakhovsky,
Kyiv, Ukraine.
4
PhD in Historical Sciences, Head of the department of Hitorical and Legal, Theoretical and Methodological Problems of Ukrainian
Studies, Research Institute of Ukrainian Studies, Ukrainian, Kyiv, Ukraine.
5
PhD in History, Associate Professor, Department of History of Ukraine, Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University, Poltava,
Ukraine.
Nazarchuk, O., Halytska-Didukh, T., Horielov, V., Krasnodemska, I., Babichev, O. / Volume 12 - Issue 66: 198-205 /
June, 2023
Volume 12 - Issue 66
/ June 2023
199
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
directed a part of society against the
decommunization and de-Sovietization of the
historical past. In the future, it is important to
review the existence of former Soviet institutions
and their socio-cultural activities. An important
stage is the official registration of decolonization
processes at the legislative level. The
conclusions draw attention to the importance of
not only contemporary events getting into
Ukrainian historical politics.
Keywords: historical politics, Russian-
Ukrainian war, decommunization, history of
Ukraine.
Introduction
The formation of historical policy in Central and
Eastern Europe has been actualized since 1991,
when, after the fall of the Soviet Union, new
opportunities for independent work of historians
opened up. This led to the actualization of old
problems and the emergence of a new dimension
- the search for historical dialogue between
neighboring states that had long been part of the
socialist bloc or even directly part of the USSR.
Ukraine, as one of the largest republics of the
former Soviet Union, also developed certain
aspects of the phenomenon of “historical policy,”
but due to the general state of the state as a
mechanism, the effective results of this process
were already tangible at the beginning of the
twenty-first century (for example, the first
textbooks on the history of Ukraine written
during the period of independence appeared only
in 1994-1995, indicating inertia in perceiving the
realities of the collapse of the unified Soviet
world). The main role among the state
institutions responsible for formulating historical
policy belongs to the Ukrainian Institute of
National Memory, which was established only in
2006. At the same time, all other historians at the
private level are also involved in the formation of
historical policy, but they conduct dialogue with
colleagues only on their own behalf or on behalf
of the institutions they represent. Under such
circumstances, Ukrainian historical communities
have lost significantly to the Russian model of
shaping historical memory, which, after a brief
democratization, returned to the ideals of
forming a unified state at the beginning of the
twenty-first century. A practical manifestation of
this trend was the events of 2014, when the
Kremlin authoritarian regime decided to occupy
Crimea and launch separatist movements in
eastern Ukraine. The continuation of anti-
Ukrainian hysteria in Russian historical
scholarship was also intended to justify Russia's
aggression in 2022.
The purpose of the article is to explore the
fundamental principles of the formation of
modern historical policy through the prism of
analyzing the escalation of the Russian-
Ukrainian war. Accordingly, the key issues
addressed in the article are:
1. Historical policy in Ukrainian realities until
2022.
2. Fundamental principles of the formation of
the newest historical policy of Ukraine.
Theoretical Framework or Literature Review
The study of historical politics is a relatively new
phenomenon for European social science. The
term “historical politics” (or Geschichtspolitik
(Udod, 2018) appeared in Germany during the
so-called “battle of the historians” of the 1980s
and 1990s in connection with the development of
the policy of “moral and political turn” by
Minister Gerhard Kohl to define the main actions
aimed at imposing a specific version of the
historical past on society. Subsequently, it
expanded in Poland, gaining mostly negative
connotations in the politics of the right-wing
forces of this country.
The space of new research on the formation of
historical policy is very broad and difficult to
cover and interpret. If we analyze the most
significant trends of the last quarter century, they
can be characterized as follows:
1. Characterization of the European
civilizational orientation towards the
rapprochement of peoples. Contained in the
works of the following modern prominent
researchers.
2. The study of tolerance, multicultural
processes (Frazer, 2018).
200
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
3. Analysis of globalization processes and the
impact of historical conditions on its
development (Scott, Le Goff &
Gauthier, 2023).
It is worth noting that, according to
contemporary research, globalization has clearly
come into conflict with nationalism with its
phenomenon of identity and separateness,
sometimes even intolerance towards other
cultures. A modern factor in the entry of politics
into history and its use has been the irreversible
increase in the importance and role of
information and its dissemination capabilities
(Jacques, 1992). We are talking about the so-
called “information revolution,” which
contributes to the emergence of broad
manipulative mechanisms for manipulating the
consciousness of individuals, groups, or the
entire society (Skotheim & Fischer, 1971).
Nowadays, historical politics is characteristic of
almost all countries of the world, and its study
has significantly intensified in recent years.
Blau (2020), in his paper “How (Not) to Use the
History of Political Thought for Contemporary
Purposes,” explored the key aspects of using
historical ideas in contemporary processes. This
paper discusses in detail the various ways in
which historical ideas can gain new
contemporary relevance. The connection
between politics and history is presented in the
monographic study by Geuss (2001). Kuo &
Marwick (2021) characterized the power of
history in modern political processes, proving
that modern political forces or individual
politicians speculate on the past, especially
during election campaigns. Similar conclusions
are contained in Bello Hutt (2018). At the same
time, Frazer (2018) described the role of
intellectual historical thought in the development
of modern politics, and the researcher
characterized their connection to the
development of modern socio-cultural processes.
Zaretsky (2013) outlined the theoretical
foundations of the phenomenon of historical
politics and described the key mechanisms of its
formation. The methodological basis of the
article is also formed by works that characterize
the peculiarities of the Russian-Ukrainian
confrontation through the centuries. In particular,
Kuzio (2022) study highlights the key aspects of
the Russian-Ukrainian confrontation and
describes its historical background. The
transformational changes in the national
consciousness of Ukrainians were described by
Kulyk (2017). This researcher described changes
in the key national identification attitudes of the
Russian-speaking population in Ukraine. The
results of Kulyk (2017) demonstrate that the
predominantly Russian-speaking population of
Ukraine, as a result of the aggressive policy of
the Russian Federation, has become “fully
Ukrainian” and rejected the Russian (or Soviet)
vision. The work of contemporary historians is
also important for this study. In particular,
Gromenko (2022) studied the peculiarities of
implementing the strategy of historical policy
and analyzed the key areas of its development.
On the other hand, the work of Morozov (2019)
is valuable, characterizing the peculiarities of the
constitutional formation of the Ukrainian state.
Parshyn (2018) describes key aspects of the
development of medieval Ukraine in the context
of its diplomatic relations. Yakovenko (2009)
studied the formation of Ukrainian statehood
from ancient times to the end of the eighteenth
century.However, the process of forming
historical policy in the context of the Russian-
Ukrainian war is still poorly understood.
Therefore, an important task of modern studies is
to outline the basic principles and foundations of
its formation, on the basis of which subsequent
research will be modified.
Methodology
The work uses special historical and general
scientific research methods. A detailed analysis
of the latest studies by Ukrainian and European
researchers was carried out using content
analysis. The application of the prognostic
research method allowed to identify possible
ways and directions for the implementation of
further historical policy, taking into account the
impact of Russian aggression. Among the
historical research methods used were
comparative, typological, and systematic. In
particular, the historical-comparative method
was used to revise some generally accepted
views on the peculiarities of interpreting and
studying past events in Ukraine. The historical
and typological method was used to describe the
basic principles of future historical policy with a
Ukrainian-centered (or decolonization)
orientation. The paper also uses the principles of
systematicity and objectivity.
Results
Historical Policy in Ukrainian Realities until
2022
Today, historical politics is a characteristic
feature of all developed countries, as modern
governments cannot stand aside from the trends
of cultural conflict that have become more acute
in European countries that have pursued a course
Volume 12 - Issue 66
/ June 2023
201
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
of multiculturalism and interethnic tolerance
(Zaretsky, 2013). But the old “historical scores”
between neighbors have a particularly rich
conflict potential (Skotheim & Fischer, 1971).
There is practically no country in Europe that
does not have “old” historical wounds with its
neighbors (Frazer, 2018). Such situations have
already been analyzed in many publications,
including the well-known international work
“Europe and its painful pasts”. Most researchers
interpret historical politics as a type of policy
intended for the purposeful formation and
practical application of “historical memory” and
other types of collective forms of perception of
the past and its representation in politics (Geuss,
2001). First of all, we are talking about
representatives of professional historiography.
Historical politics can be implemented on behalf
of political, cultural, ethnic, and social leadership
of social groups in the course of confrontation for
power, its retention, or division. Researchers also
identify the important essence of memory policy,
which is seen as part of historical policy
(Kasianov, 2014). The policy of historical
memory is a somewhat narrower concept that
combines commemorative practices and is
primarily related to the formation of collective
historical perceptions. It does not require
intervention in the services of professional
historians, didactics, and pedagogy (Gorinov &
Mereniuk, 2022). Such theoretical statements
have long dominated in Ukrainian realities, given
the foundations of the formation of certain
governing bodies and institutions that
implemented historical policy (in particular, the
Ukrainian Institute of National Memory), their
interaction with academic and university
institutions engaged in historical
science.Misunderstandings between academic
historians and the Ukrainian Institute of National
Memory arise from a failure to take into account
the differences between historical policy and its
specific forms of implementation. The Ukrainian
situation is complicated by the late establishment
of the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory-
fifteen years after Ukraine's independence-and
the even later start of a massive
decommunization policy in April 2015. At the
same time, while historical scholarship was
decommunized in 1988-1992, decommunization
measures (renaming, glorification of the deeds
and activities of the OUN and UPA, dismantling
of Soviet-era monuments, banning of communist
and Soviet symbols in general, etc.) were
introduced only in 2015.European historical
science is characterized by the functioning of
certain components of historical policy (Jacques,
1992; Still, 2020). They may differ from country
to country and context to context, but in general,
we can summarize them as follows:
1. Historiography policy is the determination
of which historical events and figures are
subject to research and interpretation and
which are not. One example of such a policy
is certain prohibitions on the study and role
of Nazi leaders, their documentary,
biographical, literary, and research heritage,
etc.
2. Commemorative policy is the determination
of which historical events and figures
deserve to be honored and remembered
through monuments, monuments, museums,
and other symbolic forms. For example, in
the United States, there are no monuments to
the English kings who ruled the land for a
long time.
3. Educational policy is the definition of how
history is taught in schools and universities,
which historical events and figures are
included in the curriculum, and which
aspects of history are most emphasized in
the educational process.
4. The multiple politics of memory is the
definition of how different groups and
communities of memory have the right to
express their views and interpretations of
history and how these rights are realized in
practice (Bello Hutt, 2018).
5. The transnational politics of memory is the
determination of how countries interact with
each other in understanding history, what
mechanisms of cooperation between
international organizations and states are
used to resolve historical issues (Kuo &
Marwick, 2021).
In particular, we can point to the formula “we
forgive and ask for forgiveness,” which became
expressive in the French-German reconciliation
of the second half of the 20th century.
In the Ukrainian reality, only a few elements of
the historical policy were implemented since the
actual start of the policy in 2006, which is also
characterized by a certain incompleteness of the
relevant reforms (Ostrovyy, 2022). In particular,
emphasis was placed on the Ukrainian centrality
of historical studies, the coverage of Ukrainian
historical figures, and the rehabilitation of those
stigmatized by the Soviet regime. The Ukrainian
Institute of National Remembrance devoted a
great deal of work to uncovering the genocide of
Ukrainians in 1932-1933, and to covering the
politics of the interwar period and the Second
World War. Decommunization (commemorative
policy) began only in 2015, when, after the
202
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
occupation of Crimea and support for separatists
in eastern Ukraine, it was decided to abandon a
number of old communist names and
monuments. This direction, even though it was
partially implemented, was then perceived by a
part of society as openly hostile. The reason for
this was the opposition to Russian propaganda,
Russian influence on Ukrainian political life, and
the inertia of a part of Ukrainian society
(Moseiko, 2022) that did not accept the realities
of the undeclared war.
The educational policy in the field of history has
probably been quite effective. The educational
sector developed on the basis of the modern
achievements of Ukrainian historians so that
during lectures or other classes, teachers were
able to provide relevant information to the
general student population without interference
from the authorities. The relevance of this
information was that by 2014 it had been largely
decommunized and de-Russified (Kulyk, 2017).
Based on independent research, an idea of the
history of Ukraine was formed as a separate field
of study that examines events in a particular
country through the prism of centuries. As a
result, even the rather conservative field of
school textbooks has undergone certain
transformations, although they have accelerated
significantly since 2014.
At the same time, for a long time, the multiple
politics of memory and transnational politics of
memory were hardly addressed at all. Attempts
to establish contacts with Polish historians were
extremely slow. There was no development of a
common vision of the past with Russian
historical scholarship (Kuzio, 2022), primarily
due to the reluctance of Russian scholarship to
build common lines of understanding.
Fundamental Principles of Formation of the
Modern Historical Policy of Ukraine
Ukraine is a young democratic country trying to
overcome the post-Soviet legacy. In any
democratic state where freedom of thought and
speech prevails, there cannot be a single correct
“official history” developed by the relevant
executive body. Therefore, it is necessary to
gradually abandon “historical policy” and deepen
the study of “public history” and its role in
preserving historical memory and national
identity (Scott et al., 2023).
Scientists and researchers, including the Institute
of History of Ukraine of the National Academy
of Sciences of Ukraine and the Institute of
Ukrainian Archaeology and Source Studies of
the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, in
cooperation with many other researchers, are
actively working on the study of “public history”
in Ukraine, publishing popular science books on
highly specialized topics (Gromenko, 2022). The
key promising areas of state policy for the
development of public history and the
preservation of historical memory are as follows:
1. revision of state requirements for the
humanitarian component of the training of
higher education students;
2. review of commemorative events at the state
level, i.e. those that emphasize the
importance of history for modern
development and security of society;
3. mandatory involvement of a wide range of
representatives of the academic community
in the development and testing of legislation,
projects, and research by executive
authorities, in particular, in the work of the
Ukrainian Institute of National Memory;
4. expanding state funding for events and
commemorative dates, local government
programs that help improve the image of
provincial territories, their tourist
attractiveness, and thus stimulate economic
development in the regions;
5. opening or at least expanding public access
to sources of information of national
historical significance;
6. regulatory, organizational, and material
support for organizations involved in the
preservation of cultural heritage, centers for
tourism and patriotic education, and non-
governmental organizations;
7. expanding the network of training of
specialists in public history and promoting
their international professional
development.
8. decommunization and decolonization
aspects of historical policy.
We believe that in formulating historical policy,
the focus should be on the decommunization
aspects of historical policy (Gromenko, 2022).
Although an active stage of street renaming is
currently underway, the main attention should be
paid to revising the Soviet institutional principles
of socio-cultural activity. Obviously, such a step
will help to eradicate Soviet principles of
organizing any activity from many government
institutions. At the same time, an important step
will be the formalization of decolonization
processes, as it is important to remove from
public space certain monuments or street names,
or certain institutions associated with the
Ukrainian lands being part of a particular empire.
However, in this context, it is important to create
Volume 12 - Issue 66
/ June 2023
203
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
new monuments in honor of modern-day heroes
of Ukraine, heroes of the Russian-Ukrainian war.
This will influence the consolidation of the
national idea and remind ordinary Ukrainians of
the honor and dignity of Ukrainian defenders
(Gromenko, 2022).
Contemporary researchers consider political and
ideological instrumentalization, the use of
history and historical memory for certain
unscientific purposes, to be an important feature
of historical policy. Public authorities, as the
main actors of historical policy, must keep all
elements of collective (national) memory under
control, including historical science, in order to
fulfill their own political goals. This organic
feature is relevant for historical policy, and it has
become the only one and decisive in the
formation of both scientific and civic positions
among professional historians.
Discussion
Many scholars have been interested in the
formation of historical policy and its
interpretation. Gromenko (2022) described in
detail why modern Ukraine needs an effective
historical policy. Wood et al., (2015) outlined the
basic principles of humanitarian policy formation
based on an analysis of the historical features of
its formation.
Although these works mention certain
decolonization aspects, they are analyzed in a
purely general practical way. Today,
contemporary Ukrainian historians are faced
with an extremely difficult task, first of all, not of
“nationalization” but of “decolonization” of the
Ukrainian past itself. Obviously, much can be
written about the main issues of such
decolonization. We will limit ourselves to the
primary proposal and several major “gaps” in the
history of Ukraine that require a thorough
methodological and subject-historical rethinking.
In particular, modern Ukrainian society today
needs a scientific academic history of Ukraine. It
is not so much a multi-volume history as a multi-
sense one.
An important aspect is also the subject research,
in particular, the emphasis on the events of the
XX and XXI centuries. Undoubtedly, in the
context of Russian aggression, the priority study
of the “painful” problems of the Soviet
colonization of Ukraine is extremely relevant. At
the same time, the roots of the problem (which
led to the Soviet enslavement of Ukrainian lands)
are much deeper, at least going back to early
modern times or even the Middle Ages
(Yakovenko, 2009; Parshyn, 2018). The current
historical policy of Ukraine does not mention the
importance of studying Rus, although this
medieval country with its capital in Kyiv, ruled
by a grand duke, is ruthlessly exploited by
Russians for their propaganda. They even
emphasize the consonance between the Latin
versions of the current name Russia and the Latin
names Ruscia and Russia, which were used by
medieval chroniclers to describe the possessions
of the Rurik dynasty. The inactivity of Ukrainian
historical policy in this area has led to the fact
that in many European academic publications of
the twentieth and even the twenty-first centuries,
the history of Kievan Rus is associated with
Moscow. Only in recent publications have
researchers begun to use the designation
“Rus'ians” rather than “Russians.” Obviously,
“pre-communist times” should also become an
object of Ukrainian historical policy, especially
against the backdrop of Russian military
aggression.
The discussion on the formation of such a
synthesis has been active since 2012, in
particular on the pages of the Ukrainian
Historical Journal. The key authors of the
discussion propose to define the history of
Ukraine not only in the context of the history of
struggles between different strata, confessions,
ethnic groups, or states but also as a territory of
interaction and mutual enrichment of cultures
and civilizations. A striking example is the work
of Parshyn & Mereniuk (2022), which
characterizes the peculiarities of Muslim life in
medieval Lviv. Thus, under such conditions, we
are talking about the history of the “lands” and
“territories” occupied by modern Ukraine, about
the civilizational processes of the peoples who
inhabited it. However, even in this context, a
significant problem arises: whether we are
talking about Ukraine or a certain conglomerate
of cultures in this context.
Obviously, the legitimizing, identifying
principles of such a narrative can also have a
destructive impact on the formation of social
consciousness. Therefore, in this context, we
agree with Gromenko (2022) that the historian
should remember that the narrative to some
extent shapes a person who is trying his best to
create himself and is not inclined to refuse the
opportunity to make history. For this reason, we
believe that the history of Ukraine should be
based on the subjectivity of a modern country
and political nation (Morozov, 2019). However,
at the same time, it should be a story about people
and their interaction on the territory of Ukraine.
Modern history should not be a history of
204
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
statehood or one ethnic group, as they are only
manifestations of the social interaction of
humanity. At the same time, we should agree
with the researchers that Russian aggression
against Ukraine has actualized interest in history.
Primitive Russian manipulations (for example,
repeated statements about the "artificiality" of
Ukraine, its creation by Vladimir Ulyanov-
Lenin, coming from the highest Kremlin
authoritarian leadership) do not stand up to any
criticism from the point of view of objective
scientific history. At the same time, they were
directed to the Russian audience as an element of
the formation of the inferior Russian imperial
myth and modern imperialism. For the Ukrainian
audience, these appeals had the opposite effect.
They led to an interest in the past, including the
development of public history (for example, the
formation of YouTube channels covering events
in Ukrainian and world history), the emergence
of modern monographs and individual scientific
and journalistic studies, etc. Awareness of the
separateness of the Ukrainian people has become
a trend that will require further development.
Conclusions
Therefore, in the context of Russian aggression
and the active propaganda that accompanies this
aggression, the issue of Ukrainian historical
policy has become much more active. It has been
determined that in general, this field is quite new
in Ukrainian realities. The Ukrainian Institute of
National Remembrance was officially
established only in 2006. Moreover, this state
institution has focused on researching the
twentieth and twenty-first centuries, while other
periods of the Ukrainian past, which also require
decommunization and rethinking, have been left
out of the attention of scholars. Some of the
reforms that were introduced in the Ukrainian
context were only partially successful and were
not followed up with appropriate measures. In
particular, the Ukrainian centrality in historical
research was emphasized, Ukrainian historical
figures were highlighted, and names erased by
the Soviet regime were rehabilitated.
Decommunization (the policy of restoring
memory) was launched only in 2015 after the
occupation of Crimea and support for separatists
in eastern Ukraine. This process, even with its
partial implementation, was perceived by a part
of society as hostile due to the opposition of
Russian propaganda, Russian influence on
Ukrainian political life, and the inertia of a part
of Ukrainian society that did not realize the
realities of the undeclared war. However, the
history education policy was probably quite
successful. By 2022, it was mostly
decommunized and de-Russified. However, for a
long time, the politics of memory and
transnational memory politics were hardly
addressed at all, including due to the reluctance
of Russian scholarship to establish common lines
of understanding.
Further development of historical policy should
focus on de-communization and aspects of
historical policy. Although street renaming is
currently underway, the main focus should be on
revising Soviet institutions for socio-cultural
activities. This step will contribute to the
eradication of Soviet management principles in
many government institutions. In addition, an
important step will be the formalization of
decolonization processes, including the removal
of certain monuments, street names, and
institutions associated with the Ukrainian lands
being part of former empires. In this context, the
creation of new monuments in honor of new
heroes of Ukraine, in particular the heroes of the
Russian-Ukrainian war, will be important for the
consolidation of the national idea and will remind
ordinary Ukrainians of the honor and dignity of
Ukrainian defenders.
A further area of research can be considered the
formation of effective mechanisms for
establishing historical policy and expanding it
beyond the twentieth century, using the tools of
public history and oral history to record
contemporary events.
Bibliographic references
Bello Hutt, D. (2018). Republicanism,
Deliberative Democracy, and Equality of
Access and Deliberation. Theoria, 84(1),
83-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12138
Blau, A. (2020). How (not) to use the history of
political thought for contemporary
purposes. American Journal of Political
Science, 65(2), 359-372.
https://doi:10.1111/ajps.12545
Frazer, M. L. (2018). The ethics of interpretation
in political theory and intellectual
history. The Review of Politics, 81(1),
77-
99. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034670518000
967
Geuss, R. (2001). History and illusion in politics.
Cambridge University Press.
https://acortar.link/RHiSB0
Gorinov, P., & Mereniuk, K. (2022). Military law
in Ukraine: future prospects for development.
Futurity Economics & Law, 2(3), 18-
27. https://doi.org/10.57125/FEL.2022.09.25
.03
Volume 12 - Issue 66
/ June 2023
205
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Gromenko, S. (2022, July 16). Strategy of
historical politics. Why Ukraine needs it.
Glavkom. Retrieved from
https://acortar.link/EWXsFm
Jacques, L. G. (1992). History and memory.
Columbia University Press.
https://acortar.link/E4M5IK
Kasianov, H. (2014). Istorychna polityka 1990-
kh – poch. XXI st.: Ukraina ta postradianskyi
prostir (Historical policy of the 1990s –
beginning 21st century: Ukraine and the post-
soviet space). Ucrania moderna, 135-159.
Retrieved from: https://acortar.link/OECdUC
Kulyk, V. (2017). Identity in transformation:
Russian-speakers in Post-Soviet
Ukraine. Europe-Asia Studies, 71(1), 156-
178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2017.
1379054
Kuo, R., & Marwick, A. (2021). Critical
disinformation studies: History, power, and
politics. Harvard Kennedy School
Mis/information Review.
https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-76
Kuzio, T. (2022). Russian nationalism and
Ukraine. Russian Nationalism and the
Russian-Ukrainian War, 99-
128. https://doi.org/10.4324/978100319143
8-4
Morozov, Y. (2019). Pylyp orlyk’s constitution
1710: Adoption and historic meaning for
Ukraine. International Scientific Conference,
173-175. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-
571-89-3_60
Moseiko, A. H. (2022). Russian-ukrainian war
(2014–2022): legal aspects. In The russian-
ukrainian war (2014–2022): historical,
political, cultural-educational, religious,
economic, and legal aspects (p. 1227–1234).
Baltija Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-223-
4-153
Ostrovyy, V. (2022). Historical truth and
historical education: factors of national
security of Ukraine: The phenomenon of
security: social and humanitarian
dimensions), Khmelnytskyi: FON Melnyk
L.L., pp. 255-275.
http://46.63.9.20:88/jspui/handle/123456789
/698
Parshyn, I. (2018). Diplomacy of the Galician-
Volyn state: European narrative sources of
the XIII-XV centuries. Lviv: Oshchipok MM.
https://www.nas.gov.ua/UA/Book/Pages/def
ault.aspx?BookID=0000015164
Parshyn, I., & Mereniuk, K. (2022). The Muslims
in Medieval Lviv: linguistic, historical
contexts . Journal of Narrative and Language
Studies, 10(19), 138–149. Retrieved from
https://nalans.com/index.php/nalans/article/v
iew/498
Scott, M. A., Le Goff, J.-M., & Gauthier, J.-A.
(2023). History matters: the statistical
modelling of the life course. Quality &
Quantity. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-
023-01648-1
Skotheim, R. A., & Fischer, D. H. (1971).
Historians' fallacies: Toward a logic of
historical thought. The William and Mary
Quarterly, 28(2),
318. https://doi.org/10.2307/1917317
Still, J. (2020). Jacques derrida and the challenge
of history. By Sean Gaston. French
Studies, 74(3), 506-
507. https://doi.org/10.1093/fs/knaa079
Udod, O. (2018). Historical politics and
academic freedom historians: domestic
stereotypes and world experience.
Historiographic research in Ukraine, 29,
233-246. Retrieved from:
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/bitstream/handle/1
23456789/160408/13-Udod.pdf?sequence=1
Wood, E. A., Pomeranz, W. E., Merry, E. W., &
Trudolyubov, M. (2015). Roots of Russia's
war in Ukraine. Columbia University Press.
https://doi.org/10.7312/wood70453
Yakovenko, N. (2009). Narys istorii Ukrainy z
naidavnishykh chasiv do kintsia XVIII st.(An
outline of the history of Ukraine from the
earliest times to the end of the 18th century).
Kyiv. https://acortar.link/nrt3Vg
Zaretsky, E. (2013). What is political history?:
The question of the public and the private.
Reviews in American History, 41(3), 557-
562. https://doi.org/10.1353/rah.2013.0083