The article analyzes the state and legal status of Ukraine’s cultural heritage sites in Crimea under UNESCO protection from the beginning of the Russian occupation until 2021, prior to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The study focuses on Ancient City of Tauric Chersonese and its Chora, inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 2013, as well as the Bakhchysaray Palace of the Crimean Khans and the Sudak (Genoese) Fortress, the most significant Crimean monuments on the UNESCO Tentative List. The paper highlights the process of including these unique monuments of Crimean culture into the prestigious World Heritage List through Ukraine’s persistent efforts. A particular emphasis is placed on Russia’s disregard for the 1954 Hague Convention and its Second Protocol (1999) regarding the enhanced protection of sites located in the annexed territory. The author argues that the occupation authorities use Tauric Chersonese to promote the concept of a «sacred center of Russia», serving as an element of ideological instrumentalization and the falsification of history. The article explores the irreversible consequences for these sites resulting from the lack of direct control by Ukraine and international organizations under the conditions of Russian annexation. It outlines the problems of theft, displacement of artifacts, and their appropriation by Russia, as well as illegal archaeological excavations and «restoration» or «landscaping» projects that lead to the loss of the sites’ authenticity. The criminal nature of Russia’s actions regarding the preservation of world-class monuments in Crimea is substantiated, citing rushed restoration design decisions prioritized for military infrastructure, negligence, the inability to provide qualified restoration teams, and the concealment of malpractice by «improving» the monuments authenticity. Special attention is paid to Ukraine’s activities within international organizations, primarily UNESCO, as a key tool for protecting cultural heritage from destruction and political appropriation. The study reveals the Organization’s potential for monument protection through direct monitoring procedures, evidenced by the UNESCO Executive Board’s regular decisions on Crimea. It is concluded that despite limited physical access, Ukraine’s proactive stance in UNESCO keeps the issue of Crimean heritage on the international agenda and creates a legal framework for the future accountability of the aggressor. Ukraine presents itself not as a «victim», but as an active subject initiating new remote monitoring methods (satellite imagery, NGO reports, etc.).
This article analyzes the historical preconditions for the emergence of the Ukrainian Sich movement in Galicia and Bukovyna, which is viewed as a natural outcome of the national revival of the 19th and early 20th centuries along the border between the Russian and Austrian (Austro-Hungarian) empires. Particular attention is paid to Pokuttia — a historical and ethnographic region that, starting in the 1840s, gradually became one of the centres of the Ukrainian national movement, and in 1900, the birthplace of the first branches of the «Sich» fire and gymnastic society in Galicia, where it achieved its greatest development. The ideologist and organizer of «Sich», K. Trylovskyi, viewed the society as a means of strengthening the electorate of the newly formed Ukrainian Radical Party (URP) amid increasingly competitive election campaigns. The founding of the first «Sich» groups, whose existence evoked the glorious historical traditions of the Cossacks and the Zaporozhian Sich, became an integral part of the politicization of the Ukrainian national movement in the 1890s and early 20th century. It is noted that in the 19th century, Galicia served as a kind of «bridge» through which the national and cultural influence from Russian-ruled Ukraine spread to neighbouring Bukovyna. The organizational model of Galicia Sich movement began to be implemented in Bukovyna in 1902 and had certain distinctive features due to the local conditions of the Ukrainian national revival (greater ideological diversity, a more moderate political stance, willingness for interethnic dialogue, closer integration with the existing network of societies, etc.). The multifaceted activities of the «Sich» society up to 1914 contributed to the establishment of Ukrainian national consciousness among the peasant masses of Galicia and Bukovyna, and its branches, which interacted with one another, laid the foundation for the formation of the Ukrainian Sich Riflemen during World War I.
Ukrainian-Polish relations, which date back a thousand years, have been marked by both the bitterness of tragic and conflict-ridden chapters in interethnic relations and the positive aspects of good neighbourliness. This article analyzes the historical myths and stereotypes prevalent in Ukrainian and Polish societies that shape attitudes toward the neighbouring nation. The more than thousand-year history of these two neighbouring nations is steeped in numerous examples of disputes and conflicts that have arisen between them. Despite the equally numerous unifying factors in Ukrainian-Polish history, it is precisely this complex historical past, mutual grievances, confrontations and disagreements that have led to the formation, in the historical memory of both nations, of stereotypes and historical myths which are, to a considerable extent, persistent and difficult to overcome over time. It has been demonstrated that in today’s globalised world, where the boundaries of national identities and cultures are blurring, historical myths and stereotypes continue to be a significant factor in shaping public opinion and, consequently, influencing inter-ethnic relations. The importance of researching the origins of stereotypes and historical myths, and the possibilities for influencing their transformation, stems from the relevance of this issue in contemporary Ukrainian-Polish relations. After all, it is no secret that historical memory is now often used as a tool in hybrid information attacks, and successfully countering these depends directly on the progress of both societies in overcoming their negative historical legacy. The study also emphasizes the need for a balanced and responsible historical policy aimed at overcoming entrenched stereotypes and fostering mutual understanding between the two nations. It concludes that only through critical reflection on the past and constructive dialogue Ukrainian-Polish relations can move toward sustainable reconciliation and partnership.
The aim of the study is to highlight the processes of organizing the system of Russian occupation administration in Bukovyna in 1914–1917, to determine the structure of local bodies of Russian government, and its personnel policy. In particular, three periods of Russian occupation are reflected, which were embodied in the activities of the Provisional Military Governorate-General of Galicia (late August 1914 — spring 1916), the Governorate-General of the regions of Austria-Hungary occupied by the right of war (summer 1916 — March 1917), and the Regional Commissariat of Galicia and Bukovyna created by the Provisional Government of Russia in the spring of 1917. As a result of the analysis of the modern historiography of the problem, as well as unpublished documents, the conclusion was formulated that during the governorship of S.D. Evreinov (August 1914 — June 1915), the activities of his administration were aimed at creating conditions for the rapid incorporation of Bukovyna into the Russian Empire. Instead, his successor as Chernivtsi governor, V.V. Ligin, in 1916, tried to pursue a balanced policy aimed at meeting the needs of the Russian army and the front, taking into account the local characteristics of the socio-economic and political development of the occupied provinces of Austria-Hungary. However, the Russian occupation administration failed to overcome the personnel shortage and restore the judicial system of power. Not all candidates for positions in the newly created bodies of Chernivtsi province were appointed governors for various reasons. At the same time, the processes of unification of the administration of Bukovyna were ineffective, did not have much support from local residents, former Austrian officials. Against the background of mutual distrust, the authority of the Russian occupation administration was discredited by frequent repressions, restrictions and espionage. In addition, the proximity of the front determined the temporary nature of all decrees and decisions of the occupation authorities turned the interests of the Russian army into priorities in the policy of the civil administration. The third period of the Russian occupation (March — August 1917) turned out to be somewhat different in its nature. After all, the Regional Commissar of Galicia and Bukovyna, D.I. Doroshenko, appointed after the February Revolution in Russia, tried to democratize the administrative bodies, to rely on Ukrainian personnel in the activities of the occupation administration. However, the chaotic retreat of the Russian army in the summer of 1917, the complications of the geopolitical situation in the region led to the curtailment of the activities of the D.I. Doroshenko administration in Bukovyna. The Russian occupation authorities, which for three years tried to institutionally establish themselves in the territory of Bukovyna, finally ceased to exist at the end of 1917.
The article analyzes the course of the 6th Congress of Ukrainian Museum Workers of Galicia in the city of Kolomyia in 1938, which became an important factor in the preservation of national heritage. The first quarter of the 20th century was marked by the opening of new museums in Galicia, which prompted the founders to gather and discuss the concept of their activities. With the assistance of the Committee of Ukrainian Regional Museums, six congresses of Ukrainian museum workers were held in the 1930s, at which its participants reported on the work done, shared experience, and determined directions for further work. The 6th Congress of Ukrainian Museum Workers, which took place on June 5–6, 1938 in the city of Kolomyia, was rich in its course and results. The event was organized by the Museum «Hutsulshchyna» under the leadership of Volodymyr Kobrynskyi. The Polish authorities prevented its opening. The organizers had to change the format of the meeting: instead of a scientific conference, a regular meeting was held. Ukrainian newspapers and magazines covered the course of this congress in details, which took place in the People’s House. Several hundred participants arrived at the museum forum, which was preceded by a festive liturgy in the local parish church. On the first day of the congress, representatives of regional museums, as at previous museum forums, traditionally read reports on their activities. In total, the conference of museum workers took place over two days and seven reports were heard: I. Svientissky («The current state of Ukrainian museum work in Poland and the foundations of its development»), M. Gavdiak («The boundaries of regional museums and some problems associated with the delimitation of the scope of activity»), V. Kobrynskyi («Organization of regional museums and private collections of individuals»), R. Harasymchuk («Cartographic method in the ethnographic department of the regional museum»), I. Krypiakevych («General outline of the Pokuttia region»), V. Zalozetskyi («Byzantine and Western sources of Eastern Galician architecture with a focus on Pokuttia»), R. Lukań («Basilian monasteries in Pokuttia»). The first day of the scientific forum was accompanied by a tour to the Museum «Hutsulshchyna», which was located on the first floor of the People’s House. Both days of the museum workers’ gathering ended with fruitful discussions, which became the basis for summing up the final resolution of the congress. Twelve resolutions were adopted, including the following: to protest against the destruction of religious and cultural monuments and museums in Soviet Ukraine; to instruct regional museums to organize exhibitions of paintings that were privately owned; to reorganize the Committee of Ukrainian Regional Museums into the statutory Union of Ukrainian Regional Museums, and to choose the city of Stryi as the venue for the next congress. Thus, the 6th Congress of Ukrainian Museum Workers of Galicia, which took place in the city of Kolomyia on June 5–6, 1938, served well to the cause of exchanging experience in the organization and activities of museum centres, stimulated the continuation of search and collection work in the museum sphere, and became an important factor in preserving the national heritage of Ukrainians in the region. However, due to the growth of international tension on the eve of World War II, congresses, meetings, and meetings ceased their activities, and the short-lived rise of Ukrainian museum workers in Galicia became impossible.
