Follow us on social

Shutterstock_2127053996-scaled

Ukraine and the power of nationalism

Zelensky is bringing his country together in unified resistance to Russian aggression. Can it remain that way beyond the invasion?

Analysis | Europe

Ukrainians’ inspired defense of their country against Russian aggression is one of the most vivid displays in recent times of strong nationalism. That defense and the sentiments and loyalty that have sustained it have demolished Vladimir Putin’s assertion that Ukraine is not a real nation but only a Soviet-manufactured entity.

What the Ukrainians are demonstrating can be viewed in the context of a larger pattern of nationalism shaping internal as well as international politics across much of the globe. The roots of nationalism are very old and include the consolidation of the European nation-state in the 17th century and the concept of mass commitment to the nation-state that came out of the French Revolution. Nationalism emerged more recently and clearly as a dominant way of people thinking about their identities and loyalties once the obscuring effects of supranational empires (of which the Soviet Union was one of the last) and the supranational conflict known as the Cold War went away.

Nationalism in other nations has important implications for the United States, but it is important to distinguish two different types of ideologies that have borne labels that include the word nationalism.

One type is often called ethno-nationalism or some other name that incorporates an ethnic, racial, or religious identity that is the focus of the ideology. This type is not based on the nation-state or patriotic adherence to a nation-state. It instead typically asserts a superior position for a demographic group within a nation-state. In that respect it is exclusive rather than inclusive. Sometimes its adherents reach beyond international borders to make common cause with those having comparable ideas about exclusion, which is true of some nativists today.

Examples of this type include the “Hindu nationalism” of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party in India, the Israeli ideology that claims a superior position for a specific ethnic and religious group, various far-right political parties in today’s Europe, and ethnically-based extremism in the United States that sometimes claims the title “nationalist.”

Ethno-nationalism poses numerous problems, including to peace and security.

Internationally, it has underlain wars where ethnic and religious patterns of habitation do not correspond with state boundaries, as in the Balkans and Caucasus. Internally, it leads to such violence as between Hindus and Muslims in India, between Jews and Arabs in Palestine, and individual carnage at the hands of white supremacists in the United States.

Although ethno-nationalism is no stranger to Ukraine, the nationalism that Ukrainians are displaying today in resisting Russian aggression is a much different type. It is loyalty to the entire nation-state rather than any one demographic group within it. It is inclusive rather than exclusive. In Ukraine, it is proving more powerful than what could have been a more exclusive variety based on language or ethnicity. In disproving one of the mistaken assumptions Putin evidently made before launching the war, even most Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the eastern part of the country have rallied to the Ukrainian national cause.

The type of nationalism that Ukrainians are displaying need not be a problem for peace and security. Strong pride in, and attachment to, a nation-state is consistent with preservation of an international order based on the nation-state and respect for territorial integrity. Nationalist-minded Ukrainians may be stubborn enough about restoring their own territorial integrity to make a peace settlement more elusive than it might otherwise be, but their nationalism does not motivate them to invade another country. The alternative to nationalism based on the nation-state is empire, which is what Putin is trying to recreate.

In shaping its foreign policy, the United States needs to respect nationalism — genuine, Ukrainian-style nationalism based on the nation-state. When the United States in the past has failed to show that kind of respect and understanding, it has gotten in trouble, as in Vietnam and Iraq.

A restrained foreign policy that incorporates such respect can avoid such trouble. The performance in the current war of Ukrainian forces, highly motivated to defend their country, against a numerically superior Russian military ought to be taken as revalidation of this lesson.

It would be nice if the more inclusive variety of nationalism could everywhere displace destabilizing ethno-nationalism and its variants, but that is too much to hope for. Even in Ukraine, which has long been troubled by linguistic and other internal divisions that at times has given its external policies a split personality, it took a brutal foreign invasion to inspire the degree of national unity and patriotism it displays today. The curse of ethno-nationalism is not about to go away in most of the world. The United States should criticize it as appropriate and certainly not actively support it.


ODESSA, UKRAINE - 20 FEB 2022: Unity march in Odessa against Russian invasion. (Photo: Olga Evans via shutterstock.com)
Analysis | Europe
Trump Netanyahu in Washington
Top photo credit: Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu (Joshua Sukoff / Shutterstock.com)

Netanyahu returns to DC — in triumph or with more to ask?

Middle East

On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will arrive in Washington for his third visit of Trump’s second term. Today also marks 21 months of Israel’s war on Gaza. The purpose of the visit remains unclear, and speculation abounds: will Trump and Netanyahu announce a real ceasefire in Gaza? Will Syria join the Abraham Accords? Or might Trump greenlight even broader Israeli action against Iran?

Before Netanyahu’s visit, Trump posted an ultimatum on Truth Social, claiming Israel had agreed to a 60-day ceasefire. He urged Hamas to accept the terms, threatening that “it will only get worse” if it doesn’t. Although Trump intended to pressure Hamas, reiterating a longstanding narrative that portrays the group as the obstacle to peace, Hamas has long maintained that it will only accept a ceasefire if it is part of a process that leads to a permanent end to Israel’s war and its complete withdrawal from the enclave. Netanyahu, for his part, remains adamant that the war must continue until Hamas is eliminated, a goal that even the IDF has described as not militarily viable.

keep readingShow less
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Yes to 'Department of War' name change

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.

keep readingShow less
Bidenites make soft landing in heart of lucrative war industry
Top photo credit: Brett McGurk (Kuhlmann /MSC/Wikimedia Commons) and Lloyd Austin ((DoD Photo by U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Jack Sanders).

Bidenites make soft landing in heart of lucrative war industry

Military Industrial Complex

In 2021, Ret. Gen. Lloyd Austin declared he had “no intent to be a lobbyist.” On June 3, less than six months after leaving office, former President Joe Biden’s Secretary of Defense announced that he would be launching a new strategic advisory firm called “Clarion Strategies.” Some Senators allege this is simply lobbying by another name.

A pitch deck obtained by Politico noted that Clarion Strategies’ name is a “nod to its aim to equip clients with the clarity they need to navigate geopolitical upheaval driven by the war in Ukraine, advancements in defense technology like AI and unmanned systems, global trade shifts and emerging alliances among U.S. adversaries like Russia, China, North Korea and China.” In other words, the new firm is very much hoping to court clients from the defense industry.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.