Who does Donbas historically really belong to?
As a native of Donbas and someone who knows the history of my homeland well, I couldn't help but laugh at Putin's latest nonsense claiming that Donbas has always been Russian.
🧵1/6
In this thread, I'll share brief historical facts about the region along with my own observations as a local. It might be a lot of text for casual scrolling, but it'll be valuable for anyone who genuinely wants to understand the issue — instead of swallowing empty, manipulative propaganda.
(In the photo: Donetsk, 2014)
#Ukraine #Donbas #RussianPropaganda
2/6 I'll start with my own memories.
I was born and spent my childhood in a small mining town in Donbas. Indeed, there were many Russians among the population — or people who identified as Russian. Most had relatives in Russia, and the overwhelming majority spoke Russian.
But here's what's interesting: everyone who had relatives in Russia was a descendant of migrants from Russia, not the other way around. These were people who had moved to Donbas in the 20th century, rather than locals whose families had emigrated to Russia.
As for truly local people — those whose roots stretched back to the 19th century or earlier in this land — there were very few. My great-grandmother was one of them. She had a distinctly Ukrainian surname and spoke Ukrainian.
Even from these personal observations, it's clear that Donbas only became partially Russian in the 20th century. How exactly that happened will be explained through historical facts further in this thread.
3/6 The territory of modern Donbas remained largely uninhabited for a long time and was known as the 'Wild Fields' (Dyke Pole). Only wild nomadic tribes appeared here occasionally (except for Greek settlements on the Azov Sea coast). I won't go into long and tedious stories about those nomadic tribes — the Polovtsians, Khazars, and others.
Until the 16th century (after the collapse of the Golden Horde), this area was a buffer zone between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Crimean Khanate. On European maps of that time, it was depicted as empty steppe, or as 'Great Tartary,' or as part of the Crimean Khanate.
Nearby, Ukrainian Cossackdom was developing (part of Lithuania, and later the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but functioning like a 'state within a state' with its own elected leaders, laws, and courts). It was the Cossacks who started the real settlement of the 'Wild Fields' — the part we now call Donbas.
The first mention of Cossacks in these territories dates back to 1547 (one of the sources is the Nikon Chronicle). It is possible that Cossacks appeared there even earlier.
From the 17th century onward, this turned into regular, gradual settlement of the wild region by Ukrainians, continuing into the 18th century. This is confirmed in works by historians from various countries: Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, and French.
4/6 Active settlement of Donbas by Ukrainians continued until the end of the 18th century.
It's worth noting that in the mid-17th century, the Ukrainian Cossack state entered a military-political alliance with Muscovy (the historical name for Russia). This alliance led to the gradual subjugation of Ukrainians by Moscow. The territory where Ukrainian Cossacks lived began to be considered Muscovite (and later Russian). Eventually, in the 18th century, Muscovy renamed itself the Russian Empire, attempting to appropriate the history of ancient Rus' (but that's a separate, long story).
It was from the 18th century that the most severe oppression of Ukrainians by the Empire began.
For example, in 1775, Ukrainian Cossackdom was liquidated.
Around the same time, the Russian Empire started the first industrialization of Donbas, building factories there. Some major cities were founded during this period.
But here's where the typical Russian manipulation comes in. For instance, the founding of the city of Luhansk is officially dated to 1795. Russians pretend that nothing existed there before, as if they simply arrived, settled the land, and built the city from scratch.
In reality, taking Luhansk as an example, Cossack settlements — like Kamianyi Brid and Verhunka — already existed on that site. The Russian Empire simply merged these settlements and built a factory.
The same applies to other cities that supposedly 'appeared' in the late 18th–19th centuries. Often, Ukrainian settlements were already there. But the Empire would merge them, import Russians, and proclaim the creation of a new city.
Nevertheless, the dominant ethnic group at that time was Ukrainians. This is confirmed by the 1897 population census. Nationality wasn't directly recorded, but native language was.
According to the census conducted by the Russian Empire, 52.4% of people indicated Ukrainian as their native language. 28.7% of the population named Russian as their native language.
And here's another interesting nuance: even then, the Russian Empire was actively working to eradicate the Ukrainian language and impose Russian. Ukrainians who considered Russian their native language were already appearing. But they were Ukrainians and identified themselves as Ukrainians.
In other words, the real number of Ukrainians was higher than 52.4%
5/6 Next, Ukraine — and Donbas in particular — was hit by wars and revolutions. There were successful attempts to restore Ukrainian statehood, but Russian communists seized control of Ukraine.
This led to the creation of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic within the USSR. In turn, Donbas was included in Ukraine, which made perfect sense given its history.
Donbas continued to industrialize rapidly thanks to its vast coal reserves and other resources.
Villages began turning into cities, and large numbers of workers were brought in as labor — especially from Russia.
However, according to the 1926 population census, Ukrainians still remained the dominant ethnic group. The data showed 58.4% Ukrainians and 33.4% Russians.
But here's an interesting detail about the distribution: Russians mostly arrived in the cities, while Ukrainians often stayed in their homes in the villages. As a result, in urban areas, 48.9% of the population were Russians and 40.4% Ukrainians.
Another historical fact that deserves a separate thread is the genocide of Ukrainians by famine (the most massive in 1932-1933). Then the communists took away all the food from the villagers and thereby provoked millions of deaths from hunger. Given the dominance of Ukrainians in the villages, this was a blow precisely to Ukrainians. And the most cynical thing about it is that Russians were settled in the houses where Ukrainian families died.
This trend persisted until Ukraine's independence. The highest concentrations of Russians were in the industrial cities.
Additionally, an important aspect is the mixing of the two ethnic groups in later periods. In the second half of the 20th century, it became common for people to be half Ukrainian and half Russian due to Moscow's assimilation policies.
We also have to account for Russia's policy of Russification of Ukrainians. This is a huge topic that deserves its own thread, but in short: the Kremlin destroyed the Ukrainian language and culture while imposing Russian. That's why many people from mixed families — or those unsure of their identity — identified as Russian.
During what period of time was Donbas Russian?Considering all the facts I've presented above, it's clear that Russian propaganda is manipulating the narrative.
Donbas was settled by Ukrainians, cities emerged on the sites of Ukrainian Cossack settlements, and Ukrainians have been the dominant ethnic group for the last several centuries.
Yes, in the 20th century, the share of Russians grew — due to the Kremlin's deliberate resettlement of Russians to Donbas. By the way, the same happened to the residents of Crimea (where the main ethnic group was Crimean Tatars), as well as Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and other states subjugated by Russian communists.
Also, there were attempts to destroy the culture of Ukrainians and turn them into Russians.
During the industrialization of Donbas, Russians were resettled to industrial cities. Therefore, in large cities, the share of Russians is large.
And in 2014, when the Russians began their aggression against Ukraine in Donbas, they used, in addition to the imported Russians (mainly from the Belgorod and Rostov regions), the children and grandchildren of those Russians whom they settled here in the 20th century (a good lesson for those countries that have the same problem with ethnic Russians who migrated in the 20th century)
But despite all this, Donbas was and remains Ukrainian territory occupied by Russia. The people of Donbas who opposed the occupation faced persecution and were forced to flee their homes — all based on Putin's insane claims that this land has always been Russian.
And finally, the 2001 population census, where Ukrainians once again form the majority.
I tried to keep this thread as concise and informative as possible, so I skipped many other interesting — and sometimes bloody — moments in the history of Donbas Ukrainians
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My previous thread about languages in Ukraine attracted the attention of Kremlin bots and lovers of Russian propaganda. Usually, I rarely respond to such accounts because it makes no sense — there won't be any constructive dialogue. But here there's so many propaganda clichés that I decided to debunk them, because it really pisses off the "vatniks." After all, I've been dealing with this for over 10 years and know the situation from the inside perfectly.
So let's start with these bizarre maps that propagandists draw. Once again, I see maps of elections for Yanukovych and his party, which supposedly prove something. But that's nonsense. A ton of people who once voted for Yanukovych (just like those who speak Russian) are now fighting in the Ukrainian army and gladly eliminating Russians. As I already told in my older threads — Yanukovych in his pre-election program advocated cooperation with both the EU and Russia. Most Ukrainians (despite the bloody history) had a completely positive attitude toward all neighbors, including Russia, because they left history in the past. But it was precisely the annexation of Crimea and the start of the war in 2014 that made it clear that Russians haven't changed. The full-scale war of 2022 gave birth to hatred toward murderers, torturers, and rapists.
That's why these maps are long in the history books now. And the reality is to have nothing in common with the aggressor. If you want to look at maps — take a look at the 2019 presidential elections.
#Ukraine #RussianPropaganda
This map is the funniest one. It has appeared many times in replies from Russian bots and trolls. And it was exactly this one that motivated me to write my previous thread.
Let's start with the fact that the real source of this data is unclear. I searched the website of this university — I didn't find this information. I asked Grok and GPT, and in response, I got that nowhere is it confirmed that such research exists. The methodology of this survey or study is unclear. Therefore, it's likely just an empty fake that brainwashed Kremlin trolls carry around.
The second point about this map is the concept of "surzhyk." Essentially, surzhyk is a dialect of the language that varies depending on the region. This is typical for large countries. And also for countries that have been occupied by different states for a long time. Ukraine falls under both categories, so the Ukrainian language is diverse.
And the funniest thing is that many territories are marked as Russian-speaking, even though in those areas people often use not literary Russian, but a characteristic dialect — "surzhyk." Thanks to this, on the Donbas I could often distinguish visiting Russians from locals. And I almost always guessed right. Because the Russian language among locals in the Donbas differs with a Ukrainian tone and Ukrainian words in the Russian dialect.
Ukrainian-based "surzhyk" varies by territory and can include Russian, Polish, or Hungarian words depending on the region. Therefore, this map is complete nonsense — both due to the lack of a source and understanding of the research methodology, and because of introducing the concept of "surzhyk," since "surzhyk" can be considered anything.
But fans of Russian propaganda don't give a damn about sources and facts.
And this map, as I understand it, is only used to have more graphics, as if it proves something. What does it have to do with languages in Ukraine? Nothing. What kind of survey is this and what methodology? None.
It's just an attempt by pro-Russian trolls to prove to me (a person from Donbas) that we all supported Russia. Absolutely no argument.
Just more noise that carries no facts. Instead, I attached my old thread about the Revolution of Dignity and the start of Russia's war against Ukraine in 2014. There's a lot of text and facts there — something fans of Russian propaganda don't like. But those who are really interested in the topic can study this history from me, as an eyewitness to those events. x.com/i/status/16610…
🧵1/5 Russian propaganda often manipulates the fact that the Russian language is widespread in Ukraine, especially in the eastern and southern regions. It claims that Russian-speaking people are Russians, and therefore these regions are ethnically Russian.
In this thread, I'll break down why Russian-speaking Ukrainians appeared and how this situation is changing right now. I'll share my own observations from Donbas before 2014 and how the language landscape has shifted in Ukraine today. I'll also provide historical facts about how the Ukrainian language was suppressed over the past centuries—but still survived. And finally, it will become clear why Russia is, now as always, interested in destroying Ukrainian culture 👇
2/5 I grew up in Donbas in a society where Russian was the dominant language. I attended a Russian-language school — and most schools were like that (the reason why will become clear when I get to the historical facts). But despite the language of everyday communication, the majority were Ukrainians who preserved Ukrainian traditions and often mixed Ukrainian words into their speech.
As a child, I heard Ukrainian only from my great-grandmother, from rural villagers who traditionally kept their language and culture alive, and occasionally on television.
When I started university, I encountered Ukrainian much more often — from professors, artists, cultural figures, and conscious individuals. That's when I began occasionally switching to Ukrainian myself. After the Russian occupation of my city in 2014, I fully switched to the language I now consider my native one.
An interesting observation from my student years: I noticed that people who came to study from Ukrainian-speaking areas of Donbas would speak Russian in public. But when their parents called, they would shyly switch to Ukrainian on the phone.
This can be explained by the fact that since the times of the Russian Empire and later the Soviet Union, Kremlin propaganda tried to impose the idea that Ukrainian is an artificial dialect spoken only by uneducated people. This propaganda was so powerful that it lingered even after Ukraine's independence, embedding itself in people's minds and making them ashamed of their origins. The situation only began to change after Russia's aggression in 2014.
So, let's walk through the history of the suppression of the Ukrainian language and understand the Kremlin's motivation to turn Ukrainians into Russians👇
3/5 The first seizures of Ukrainian lands by Muscovy occurred in the 16th and 17th centuries.
Muscovy's doctrine from that time (and relevant to the present day) was to proclaim itself the successor to the ancient state of Rus (whose center was actually on Ukrainian lands). Therefore, in the 18th century, Muscovy renamed itself the Russian Empire.
For assimilation purposes, the Russians introduced the terms 'Great Russians' for themselves and 'Little Russians' for Ukrainians. They called the Ukrainian language the 'Little Russian dialect' of the Russian language.
And to assimilate Ukrainians, they began gradually destroying the Ukrainian language through various bans and propaganda in the following centuries.
To keep this thread from being boring and overloaded with dates, I'll provide just a few examples that illustrate the trend of suppressing the Ukrainian language.
The first decrees against the Ukrainian language appeared at the beginning of the 18th century (right around the time Muscovy became Russia). Peter I banned book printing in Ukrainian, and Ukrainian texts were removed from church books and replaced with Russian ones.
In 1863, the Valuev Circular was issued, which declared the Ukrainian language 'non-existent' and imposed strict bans on any Ukrainian publications. In fact, this was a response to the revival of Ukrainian literature, which had occurred despite anti-Ukrainian orders that had existed for a century and a half prior.
In 1876, the Ems Ukase banned the Ukrainian language in theater, science, and the import of Ukrainian-language publications (since printing Ukrainian books within the country was already prohibited). Public performances in Ukrainian were also banned.
Since Christianity played a leading role at the time, in 1881 church sermons in Ukrainian were prohibited.
This is far from a complete list of bans on the Ukrainian language.
A situation emerged where Ukrainian activists and writers were arrested for underground printing of Ukrainian books or their import from abroad, for writing Ukrainian works, or simply for public speeches in Ukrainian or criticism of anti-Ukrainian decrees.
In contrast, only by communicating in Russian could a Ukrainian build a career.
Even despite this, according to the 1897 population census, Ukrainian speakers in various regions of modern Ukraine ranged from 42 to 93 percent. Some Ukrainian regions were part of territories extending deep into Russia, but villages and towns on the territory of modern Ukraine had more Ukrainian speakers than Russian speakers.
But this laid the foundation for Russian being considered more 'prestigious,' with science and culture being Russified, and most of the population, despite their native language, coming to understand Russian. And that's when Russian-speaking Ukrainians appeared.
And this work was continued by the successor to the Russian Empire — the Soviet Union.
The time has come to debunk one of the myths of Russian propaganda.
I saw this tweet from a Russian asset and it made me laugh. But I realized that many foreigners have no knowledge of Ukrainian history. Therefore, I will try to write briefly about Stepan Bandera, his difference from Andrii Melnyk and the Ukrainian struggle for independence in the middle of the 20th century.
What did I mean when I said that I find it funny to read this piece of Russian propaganda? This is the fact that the Russian asset speaks positively about Melnyk, but most Ukrainians have a cool attitude towards Andriy Melnyk due to the fact that he at a certain period relied on cooperation with the Nazi government with the hope that the Germans would support the restoration of Ukraine's independence. And Stepan Bandera is a symbol of resistance to two bloody dictatorships - Nazism and Communism. This symbolism is clearly illustrated in his biography - Bandera was a prisoner of a German concentration camp, his brothers were killed by the Nazis, and Stepan was killed by communists from the KGB.
But we must start with the fact that after the First World War, Ukraine lost its independence after a short time and was occupied by several states, including the Soviet Union and Poland.
Ukrainians became the largest nation without its own state in Europe. This contributed to the fact that insurgents who fought for the independence of their state appeared on Ukrainian territory. These were different organizations, but in this context we will talk about the organization of Ukrainian nationalists.
Ukrainian nationalists differed from nationalists in some other European countries. If nationalism in imperialist countries is about domination over other nations, then Ukrainian nationalism is about restoring one's own state, culture and language of the Ukrainian nation. This is a consequence of the fact that Ukraine was an occupied colony for centuries.
The organization of Ukrainian nationalists existed mainly in the Ukrainian territories that were in Poland. However, the rebels declared the need to restore the Ukrainian state both on the territory of Poland and on the territory of the Soviet Union. Therefore, they represented a threat to both countries.
Stepan Bandera, together with other rebels, was arrested by the Polish authorities for rebel actions and sentenced to death. Then the Poles reduced the punishment and handed down a sentence - life imprisonment. It should be noted that even under the threat of the death penalty, Bandera did not betray his ideas and proclaimed that Ukraine should become independent.
At that time, the organization of Ukrainian nationalists was headed by Yevhen Konovalets. He actively worked on the diplomatic front and tried to raise the issue of Ukrainian sovereignty in the League of Nations. The Soviet Union did not like this. Therefore, a KGB agent killed Yevhen Konovalts in Rotterdam, where he had been living for the last time. Konovaltsy is buried at the Kroswijk cemetery in Rotterdam.
In 1939, Andriy Melnyk was elected the head of Ukrainian nationalists in Rome.
At the same time, World War 2 begins and Bandera, along with other rebels, find themselves at large. The difference between the Poles and the Communists should be noted. The Poles, before the threat of occupation, released prisoners, and the communists shot them.
Stepan Bandera and other rebels who were in Ukrainian territories were skeptical of Andrii Melnyk.
It is known that Bandera and his supporters were able to go to Rome to meet with Melnyk. According to historians, including the American John Armstrong, Bandera suggested to Melnyk to transfer the headquarters of the organization to a neutral country and start rewarding relations with Great Britain, France, the USA and Canada. It was also proposed to create a legion of Ukrainians to help Finland, which was then attacked by the Soviet Union.
Melnyk refused these proposals. He hoped for a war between Germany and the Soviet Union in order to use this moment to try to restore Ukrainian independence in alliance with the Germans.
Since then, the organization of Ukrainian nationalists has split into Bandera (OUN B) and Melnikiv (OUN M).
I would like to note that the difference between these organizations was small - both groups pursued the goal of creating a Ukrainian state. But they had different ways of achieving their goal.
Bandera's supporters did not trust the Nazis and hoped only for their own strength to gain independence.
Melnyk's supporters did not believe in the possibility of a successful struggle simultaneously against two great totalitarian empires - Nazi and Communist. They also did not believe in the idea of "making an alliance with Britain and France." Because these countries were allies of Poland, which owned part of Ukrainian territories.
Continuation of my memories of the beginning of the war in Donbas in 2014.
At the beginning of April, the Kremlin moved to a new stage of the conflict - taking control of administrative buildings, completely suppressing pro-Ukrainian activists and creating falsified referendums… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
There are many facts about the fact that the Russians intervened in the situation in Ukraine and are involved in the seizure of administrative buildings.
One example is the seizure of the building of the Kharkiv State Administration. Then a pro-Russian rally attacked a rally in… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Another famous Russian, who not only participated in the beginning of the war in Donbas, but was also one of the leaders, is the Russian Igor Strelkov, also known as Girkin. His Russian gang took over Slovyansk and nearby towns, where the first fighting between Russia and Ukraine… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Continuation of the story about the beginning of the war in Donbas in 2014. I remind you that these are my subjective memories of events as a resident of Donbass. Some moments I could forget. But the general picture remains true.
The same situation began to occur in Donetsk and some other regions. Pro-Russian rallies, which consisted of real people who support Russia, and sportsmens-"tituski", and provocateurs brought from Russia.
On March 13, the first Ukrainian to die in Donetsk was 22-year-old Dmytro… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
There were many murders of pro-Ukrainian residents of Donbas. But, first of all, I want to recall the following, which will not please those who spread Russian propaganda about "Ukraine killing the children of Donbas."
As a resident of Donbas, I was asked to tell about the beginning of war in Donbas in 2014.
But this is a long story. So I'll do it in a few threads over the next few days.
I realized that before I talk about the beginning of the war in Donbas, I need to talk a little about the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
If we turn to the situation in Donbas, then it was calm there. There were also rallies in support of the Revolution of Dignity. Personally, I periodically traveled to Kyiv, and when I returned, I went to local protests.
From the end of November to the middle of February, according to my personal observations, more supporters of the Revolution of Dignity went to rallies in Luhansk than in support of Yanukovych. Of course, this does not mean that our views dominated the region. Rather, most… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…