Current political manifestations of regionalism in the context of the power crisis in Ukraine

This article analyzes the manifestations of regionalism in the context of a deep socio-political crisis in Ukraine. With the development of the political crisis that followed the coup d'etat in February 2014 in Ukraine, there was a noticeable actualization of issues and problems related to regionalism, society as a whole demonstrated a request for the redistribution of powers between the power center and the regions. This is reflected in numerous initiatives of regional authorities and public organizations aimed at expanding the financial base, functions and rights of local authorities and self-government, as well as in policy documents of political forces. At the same time, in some cases, the idea of establishing a contractual relationship between the Central government and the regions was put forward, which is typical for the Federal model of government. In response to this request, the Executive branch made another attempt to implement local government reform under the slogan of decentralizing the country's state structure. Since 2014, Ukraine has developed two multidirectional trends – centrifugal and centripetal, the ratio of which will determine the dynamics and severity of political manifestations of regionalism. Despite numerous autonomist statements, Ukrainian regionalism remains within the "rigid" model formed in the post-Soviet period. The conflict in the South-East of the country and the deep involvement of the leading powers – Russia, the United States and the European Union-are the determining factor that predetermined the "freezing" of regionalization processes in Ukraine after 2014. After the signing of the Minsk agreements, the implementation of which means for Ukraine to introduce elements of Federal relations into the system of state structure, the reform of the state structure and territorial administration has become inextricably linked with Kiev's strategy towards the self-proclaimed republics of Donbass. Manifestations of regionalism were perceived by Kiev to a large extent in the context of threats to the territorial integrity of the country, which significantly limited the possibility of implementing the policy of decentralization. In addition, Russia and the United States have demonstrated in practice different approaches to the interpretation and implementation of the Minsk agreements, which has had a negative impact on the regionalization processes in Ukraine. The nature of the processes of regionalization in Ukraine allows to draw Parallels with the situation in Transnistria and around him, and to talk about common Moldovan and Ukrainian models hard regionalism, the hallmark of which is the transformation of the regionalization processes in a tool to achieve political goals of Russia and the West in conflict with the nature of their interaction on post-Soviet space.

1. (2004). Mir politicheskoj nauki. Kn. 1. Kategorii [World of political science. Vol. 1. Categories]. M.: Prosveshhenie. 796 p.

2. (2016). Mizhnarodnij dosvid borot'bi iz separatizmom: visnovki dlja Ukraïni. Mіzhnarodnij dosvіd borot'bi іz separatizmom: visnovki dlja Ukraїni. [International experience in the fight against separatism: conclusions for Ukraine. International experience in the fight against separatism: conclusions for Ukraine]. NISS. 52 p.Available at: https://niss.gov.ua/sites/default/files/2017-01/Separatism_druk-8a53a.pdf. (accessed: 20.12.2019).

3. (2019). Ukraina posle Evromajdana. Pjat' let krizisa i nadezhd: rabochaja tetrad'. [Ukraine after Euromaidan. Five years of crisis and hope: a workbook]. RIAC. # 54/2019. 60 p.

4. Barzilov S., Novikov A., Chernyshev A. (1997). Osobennosti razvitiya politiko-ideologicheskih protsessov v rossijskoj provincii [Features of the development of political and ideological processes in the Russian province]. Saratov. 95 p.

5. Degterenko A.M. (2016). Etnopolіtichnі zagrozi ta riziki nacіonal'noї konsolіdacії: regіonal'nij vimіr. [Ethnopolitical threats and risks of national consolidation: regional dimension]. NISS. P.18. Available at: https://niss.gov.ua/sites/default/files/2016-12/nats_konsol-eee72.pdf. (accessed: 22.12.2019).

6. Dergachev V., Vardomskij L. (2004). Regionovedenie. [Regional studies] Moscow: JuNITI-DANA. 519 p.

7. Esin R. (2009). Sovremennyj regionalizm: novye napravleniya v teorii [Modern regionalism: new directions in theory]. Problemy upravleniya. No. 3 (32). P. 170–181.

8. Fawn R. (2009). Regions and Their Study: Wherefrom, What for and Whereto? Review of International Studies. Vol. 35. Supplement S1. 35 p.

9. Hurrel A. (1995). Expanding in Resurgence of Regionalism in World Politics. Review of International Studies. Vol. 21. P. 331–358.

10. Isseman A. (1993). Lost in Space? On the History, Status and Future of Regional Science. The Review of Regional Science. Vol. 23. P. 5–6.

11. Jaroshenko I., Semigulina I. (2015). Problemni pitannja realizaciï reformi decentralizaciï vladi v Ukraïni [Problematic issues of implementing the decentralization of power reform in Ukraine]. Problemi ekonomiki. No. 4. P. 177–187.

12. KHaritonova N. (2015). Podhody k uregulirovaniju pridnestrovskogo konflikta [Approaches to the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict]. Obozrevatel' – Observer. No. 7. P. 56–74.

13. Kiting M. (2003). Novyj regionalizm v Zapadnoj Evrope [New regionalism in Western Europe]. Logos. No. 6 (40). P. 67–116.

14. Krylov M., Gritsenko A. (2015). Identichnosti na Ukraine: vyzovy sovremennosti – jeho proshlogo? [Identities in Ukraine: challenges of modernity-echoes of the past?]. World of change. Vol. 2. P. 142–156.

15. Miller A. (2003). Tsentr i okraina: Metamorfozy problemy v 18-19 vv. Otnoshenija vlasti i obshhestvennogo mnenija v Rossii k Ukraine i Belorussii [Center and outskirts: Metamorphoses of the problem in the 18th and 19th centuries. Relations of the government and public opinion in Russia to Ukraine and Belarus]. In Gel’man V., Hopf T. (eds) Tsentr i regional'nye identichnosti v Rossii. Spb.; M.: Izdatel'stvo Evropejskogo universiteta v S-Peterburge: Letnij sad. 254 p.

16. Oreshina M. (2003). Region kak ob#ekt social'no-gumanitarnyh issledovanij. [The region as an object of social and humanitarian research]. Politicheskaja nauka. No. 3. P. 142–152.

17. Paasi A. (2003). Region and Place: Regional identity in question. Progress in Human geography. 2003. Vol. 27. No. 4. P. 475–485.

18. Spindler M. (2005). Die Region als soziale Konstruktion. In Spindler M. Regionalismus im Wandel. Die neue Logik der Region in einer globalen ekonomie. Wiebaden: VS Verlag. 183 s.

19. Troitskij E. (2016). Politika Evropejskogo Sojuza v otnoshenii Pridnestrovskogo konflikta (1992–2015 gg.) [Policy of the European Union towards the Transnistrian conflict (1992–2015 years)]. Sibirskie istoricheskie issledovaniya. No. 3. P. 28–42.

20. Umland A., Romanova V. (2019). Reforma detsentralizacii v Ukraine v 2014–2019 gg.: pervye dostizhenija i budushhie vyzovy [Decentralization reform in Ukraine in 2014–2019: first achievements and future challenges]. Ideologiya i politika. No. 3(14). P.148–169.

21. Voskresenskij A. (2012). Kontseptsii regionalizatsii, regional’nykh podsistem, regional’nykh kompleksov i regional'nyh transformatsij v sovremennykh mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniyakh [Concepts of regionalization, regional subsystems, regional complexes, and regional transformations in modern international relations]. Sravnitel’naja politika. No. 12. P. 30–58.

22. Zamyatin D. (2004). Metageografiya: prostranstvo obrazov i obrazy prostranstva [Metageography: image space and images of space]. Moscow: Agraf. 506 p.

23. Zotkin A. (2010). Avtonomizm na Ukraine kak mehanizm realizacii politicheskih interesov [Autonomism in Ukraine as a mechanism for the realization of political interests]. Sotsiologiya: teoriya, metody, marketing. No. 3. P. 84–110.