Igor Lossovsky: Ukraine needs to work with the oppressed peoples of Russia

Last November, Ukraine hosted a forum of ideas and solutions for the development of the Zakarpattia region as a multi-ethnic frontier, Ukraine's bridge to the EU and NATO, Re:Open Zakarpattia.

One of the forum participants was Ihor Lossovsky, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Policy and Freedom of Conscience.

Here is an interview with Ihor Lossovsky on ethnic policy in Ukraine.

Mr. Lossovsky, can you express the position of a national body, or will it be more of a personal opinion? First of all, a question: has the full-scale invasion changed the ethno-political balance in Ukraine, particularly in the South? After all, the South should be considered separately - Odesa, Kherson, and especially Crimea have their own peculiarities.

I am expressing my own expert opinion, not the official position of a national body.

Of course, the full-scale war has had a significant impact on ethno-political processes in Ukraine. But it is important to understand that we are dealing with very limited and outdated statistics. The last population census in Ukraine was conducted almost a quarter of a century ago, in 2000-2001. During this time, a whole generation has changed.

People change their identity, migrate, leave and return, and social and political circumstances change. Therefore, today we cannot say for sure how many and which ethnic or national communities live in Ukraine.

Indeed, we see some changes. But it is important to remember that in Ukraine, citizens are not obliged to declare their nationality - it is done voluntarily. Therefore, we do not have accurate data on the ethnic composition of the population.

According to the 2001 census, about 20% of Ukraine's population belonged to national minorities, and more than 130 ethnic groups were recorded. The new law of 2022 is very inclusive: anyone who declares themselves as a national minority is officially recognized as such. This distinguishes Ukraine from many European countries. For example, France does not recognize any minorities at all, and Germany recognizes only four.

In our country, even those groups that are considered migrants in other countries, such as Arabs, Kurds, and Turks, can be officially classified as national minorities. This is evidence of Ukraine's special approach, where ethnic diversity is recognized and protected at the legislative level.

Can the current classification of national minorities in Ukraine be called a legacy of the Soviet system?

In the Soviet Union, the situation was different: the concept of the "Soviet person" as a single social and economic space was being formed there. Ukraine does not pursue a policy of assimilation; on the contrary, we support national minorities. If a group declares itself a minority, the state recognizes it.

During the war, all citizens of Ukraine suffer equally, regardless of their ethnicity. But for some minorities, the war poses an existential threat. This applies, in particular, to the indigenous peoples of Crimea - Crimean Tatars, Karaites, Krymchaks, and the Greeks of the Azov Sea. When peoples are forced to live in a dispersed state, it is difficult for them to preserve their culture and language.

Nevertheless, members of minorities fight in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and give their lives for the state on an equal footing with everyone else. At the same time, they face an additional risk - the threat of extinction as separate ethnic communities.

The war, despite all the tragedies, has one conditionally positive consequence: it has united Ukrainian society. We realized that we have a single country, a single state, a single homeland, and a single enemy. And everyone - ethnic Ukrainians and national minorities alike - is fighting for freedom and independence.

Regarding discussions about indigenous peoples, Ukraine now officially recognizes the Crimean Tatars, Karaites, and Krymchaks. The Gagauzes, who live compactly in the Odesa region, do not yet have this status, although discussions are ongoing. The argument against their inclusion is that they have autonomy in Moldova...

As for other groups, such as Rusyns, Boikos, Lemkos, scholarly opinion is inclined to believe that these are sub-ethnic groups of Ukrainians. The Rusyn language is considered a dialect of Ukrainian, although it has its own peculiarities. Therefore, there are no active discussions at the state level about expanding the list of indigenous peoples, but if new scientific data emerges, the issue may be revisited.

Ukraine participates in international Rusyn events. How does the state treat this community?

We recognize Rusyns as part of the Ukrainian people. Our diplomats regularly participate in their congresses abroad. When I was working as a consul in Toronto, I saw how Rusyns and Lemkos stuck together, in fact, as one community. They considered themselves Ukrainians, although they retained their own identity. Ukraine supports their cultural initiatives, such as the Lemko Vatra festival.

What is the current status of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people and their national symbols?

The most important is the law on indigenous peoples of Ukraine. To implement it, we have developed three normative acts: two are already in force, and one is still in the process. We cooperate with the Mejlis and the Crimean Tatar Information Center, which propose additional legislative initiatives. The state is ready to discuss and further work on these issues.

What will be the fate of national minorities identifying themselves as Russians or Belarusians after the war? Will we be able to ensure their rights in equal status?

Yes, their rights will be protected. Ukraine is a member of international conventions and is obliged to guarantee equality for all national minorities. Joining the European Union will only strengthen these guarantees.

It is not about a person's ethnicity, but about his or her position. At the front, I saw that many soldiers spoke Russian back then, although the situation has changed now - more and more people are switching to Ukrainian. The Russian language has become a marker associated with the enemy, but this does not mean that it belongs only to Russia. Many people have changed their identity because of the aggression of the Russian Federation, so as not to be associated with imperial politics.

As for Belarusians, the situation is similar. The regime in Minsk is helping Russia to carry out its aggression, but there are many Belarusians who are fighting in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, both citizens of Ukraine and Belarus. There is even an association that organized an exhibition with portraits and biographies of Belarusians who died for the freedom of Ukraine. This exhibition has already visited many cities in Ukraine and abroad.

It all depends on whether a person supports the"Russian world" and the empire, or whether they are against the war and for freedom. There are even Russian citizens who are fighting on the side of Ukraine, including not only ethnic Russians but also representatives of small peoples, such as the Yakuts. This shows that the fight against the empire unites people of different backgrounds.

You mentioned the Yakuts and other small peoples who live in Russia in the status of de facto occupants. Can we expect that the next census in Ukraine will show the same number of national minorities as before? After all, many of them

The situation is such that if national minorities do not live compactly, but are scattered among the majority, they gradually lose their identity over time. This is a natural trend that happens all over the world. People mix, and children and grandchildren often no longer identify themselves in the same way as their ancestors. That's why the number of minorities in censuses may be decreasing.

In Russia, we see an intense policy of assimilation. Even large peoples, like the Tatars in Tatarstan, are facing the fact that their language is no longer required to be taught in schools or kindergartens. This leads to a rapid loss of cultural identity. The Russian authorities are imposing the concept of "Russian people," denying the right to their own culture.

Those who oppose this policy are often forced to live abroad. There are numerous associations of Chechens, Tatars, Bashkirs, Yakuts and other peoples in Europe. For example, there are congresses of Ugro-Finnish peoples in Finland and Estonia. This shows that the potential for preserving cultural identity exists, but it is being realized outside of Russia.

Russia remains the last empire. All other empires have collapsed: The British Empire, which was once the largest, has now been transformed into a Commonwealth of nations that is thriving and even accepting new countries that were never colonies. In contrast, the Commonwealth of Independent States, created by Russia, is actually in decline. This shows the difference between Russia's imperial approach and the democratic models of other countries.

How does the modern British Commonwealth differ from the Russian colonial system?

In Britain, colonialism was external - overseas territories that eventually gained independence. Today, even powerful countries such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand formally recognize the British monarch as the head of state, but this is symbolic and does not limit their independence. Canada, for example, has a governor general appointed by the monarch, but the country is actually independent.

Russia, on the other hand, acts quite differently: it tries to maintain control over its former colonies and regions by force. This is internal colonialism, when peoples within the country are deprived of the right to their own culture and self-determination.

What can Ukraine do to support the peoples oppressed in Russia?

The Ukrainian parliament has already adopted a number of resolutions, including one on the centenary of the Caucasian Federation and the recognition of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria. These are important steps. Ukraine also provides a conference venue for the Chechen government in exile.

In Kyiv and other cities, academic conferences on the collapse of the Russian Empire are held. They invite well-known professors from Britain and the United States who study these processes. This creates an international discussion and support for oppressed peoples.

Why is it important to support these peoples, even if it may look like interference in Russia's internal affairs?

These peoples are effectively deprived of the opportunity to defend their language and culture inside Russia - any activity there is punishable by death, imprisonment or exile. Therefore, they are forced to act abroad. Ukraine has a moral right to support them, as it has been an oppressed people for centuries.

Of course, such activities can be interpreted as support for separatism or interference in internal affairs, but it is important to find a "golden mean" - to help oppressed peoples without violating international norms.

Unfortunately, this is not part of our organization's mandate, but I think we need to work more actively with internationally recognized organizations that represent the oppressed peoples of Russia. And these are the oppressed peoples. And we have to help them, because we were also an oppressed people. For 300-250 years. And now they are also<span><span><span><span>losing their language. </span></span></span></span>

Валерій Болган