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
A clear visual proof of how armed Russian "tourists" occupied my Luhansk.
So when pro-Russian bots show up claiming "Donbas wanted to join Russia" - just show them this video and my threads (from Donbas resident).
As I already wrote in my previous thread - on March 1, 2014, the operation to occupy Donbas began. A flood of Russian "tourists" arrived, pretending to be locals and demanding to join Russia. This was recorded in many cities - including Luhansk.
Despite direct orders from their FSB curators not to reveal their presence in Ukraine, many of them were stupid enough to film themselves.
On March 4, 2014, Russian flags were hung all over Luhansk. Russian propaganda immediately called it "Luhansk residents want to join Russia".
But one group of these "activists" couldn’t resist and recorded an archival video for themselves.
Now the osinters have identified some of them 👇
2/4 One of them (the man clearly visible in the screenshot from the video) is Ivan Syrovatsky, a Russian citizen from Voronezh Oblast.
It is exactly him on the video saying he came to Luhansk with Belykov.
Interestingly, he served in the 137th Regiment (Ryazan) in 2013 and was discharged from the Russian army just shortly before these events.
Many of the Russians who took part in the Donbas events at that time had only recently been active-duty Russian servicemen. One theory is that the Russian army itself was recruiting people to travel to Ukraine disguised as "tourists".
3/4 Next (clearly visible in the attached screenshot and photo with Syrovatsky) is Sergey Belykov, a Russian citizen, also from Voronezh Oblast.
He is the one who filmed this exact video. And it is him that Syrovatsky was referring to when he said they came to Luhansk together.
Interestingly, as of August 2014 Sergey Belykov was an active serviceman in the 331st Regiment (Kostroma, Russia). This is the very same regiment that fought against Ukraine in Donbas in August 2014. At that time, near Ilovaisk, Ukrainian forces captured 10 soldiers from this unit.
1/4 Exactly 12 years ago, Russia began the active phase of the conflict and occupation in Donbas, including in my Luhansk.
In this thread I’ll describe the situation in Luhansk at the time and share my own observations from those days.
On March 1, 2014, the Federation Council of the Russian Federation unanimously approved Putin’s request for permission to use armed forces on Ukrainian territory. Though honestly, it was just a formality - Russian troops were already actively involved in the annexation of Crimea by then.
That same day, a series of carefully organized rallies took place in many cities.
In Luhansk, for the first time in my memory, there were Russian flags everywhere. It was obvious that locals weren’t keeping them at home - at least I didn’t know a single person who did. This, along with many other small details, created an overwhelming feeling of artificiality and fakery.
Not everyone there was actually from Luhansk. People were bused in an organized way from towns and villages all over the Luhansk region.
And Russian “tourists” were also involved. We started noticing far more buses and cars with Russian license plates. All of this was meant to create the illusion of a massive popular uprising.
The photo shows one of the attacks by Russian "tourists" and local collaborators on Ukrainians in Luhansk.
2/4 Interestingly, before March 1 there were no large-scale pro-Russian rallies at all. For example, on February 9, 2014, locals heavily advertised the "Russian March", which ended up gathering only about 70 people (photo attached - that very "Russian March"). Even the organizers themselves complained during the event that, despite all the promotion, fewer than 100 people across the entire Luhansk supported them.
Of course, there were a few massive rallies in support of the then-government. But first, those weren’t pro-Russian rallies - they were purely Ukrainian ones with internal political demands. And second, they were organized by the local authorities, who widely used administrative resources — people were brought straight from factories and plants instead of working their shifts.
That’s why, right up until March 1, 2014 (when Russia started bringing in its "tourists", agent networks, and military), the city remained relatively calm. There were no mass calls to "join Russia". Only a handful of marginal activists, whom nobody took seriously.
The first two photos show the "Russian March". People are holding posters "We are Russians - God is with us" and "Luhansk people don't want to feed Euro-Sodom". The third photo shows a rally in support of the Revolution of Dignity, which was taking place across the street at the same time. The rallies are small (traditionally in Luhansk), but more people gathered in support of Dignity
3/4 There’s one more important nuance that Russian propaganda constantly manipulates. Russians love to point to Yanukovych’s election results and imply that everyone who voted for him automatically supported Russia. That’s an absolute lie.
Even among Ukrainian soldiers who went to defend Ukraine in the very first days of 2014 and 2022, there are people who once voted for or supported Yanukovych. Two key factors explain this:
1. In his election program, Yanukovych never said Ukraine or Donbas should join Russia. He talked about good relations with both the EU and Russia, and he promised to sign the Association Agreement with the European Union.
2. By annexing Crimea and starting the war in Donbas, Russia completely destroyed the positive attitude many Ukrainians had toward it. Before 2014, there really were quite a few people who felt warmly toward Russia and believed we shouldn’t join NATO. It was Russia’s aggression and the occupation of Ukrainian land that changed everything. Many of those same people are now effectively destroying Russian occupiers.
The Kremlin constantly manipulates old ratings and polls from before the war and annexation. But the truth is that the real turning point began exactly then. After seeing Russia’s aggression, Ukrainians radically changed their views - both on NATO and on Yanukovych, who first killed a lot of people and then fled to the aggressor country.
🧵Thread: Debunking Russian propaganda claiming that "Maidan" forced Russia to annex Crimea. In reality, preparations for this aggression had been underway long before the Revolution of Dignity.
1/8 Today marks 12 years since Russia began its military aggression against Ukraine and launched the active phase of the annexation of Crimea. This date is recognized not only by Ukraine - but by Russia itself.
The Russian Ministry of Defence medal "For the Return of Crimea" is officially dated 20 February 2014 - 18 March 2014.
On that very day Viktor Yanukovych was still President. He gave the order to crush the protests "by any means necessary". February 20 became the bloodiest day of the Revolution of Dignity.
Obviously, an operation to seize part of a sovereign country cannot be prepared in a day or even a week. The active phase began in the summer of 2013, while the strategic planning had been in motion for many years.
Let’s walk through the facts that prove this 👇
2/8
Let’s start with 2008 - the year Russia waged war against Georgia.
Although the signs of Moscow’s desire to annex Crimea had been visible long before: the Tuzla Island conflict, funding of pro-Russian organizations (including the so-called "Crimean Cossacks"), aggressive promotion of Russian citizenship, and the fast-track issuance of Russian passports.
It appears that the weak and toothless reaction of world leaders to Russia’s aggression against Georgia and the occupation of Georgian territories gave Putin the green light for something far more ambitious - a future war against Ukraine.
Immediately after the Georgian war in 2008, Russia began reorganizing the 810th Separate Naval Infantry Regiment into a full brigade, dramatically increasing its manpower. This exact unit would play the central role in the 2014 annexation of Crimea.
From 2008 onward, this brigade conducted regular exercises that specifically practiced the creation and arming of illegal armed formations - "Cossack organizations", "people’s self-defense squads", and so on.
Russian servicemen were put in civilian clothes, issued weapons, and trained to act as supposed "local self-defense forces". In a stunning "coincidence", they were rehearsing exactly what would happen in 2014.
From that same period, close cooperation intensified between the 810th Brigade, the Black Sea Fleet as a whole, and the Crimean Cossacks - groups directly controlled by Russian intelligence and financed by the Kremlin.
All of this was already documented in November 2008(!) in the report "Crimea after the Georgian Crisis" by the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI), as well as in reports from Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR).
3/8
Here’s a very telling detail:
In 2014, the so-called "People’s Self-Defense of Sevastopol" was headed by a Russian citizen, Oleg Roslyakov - the man who had earlier commanded the very same 810th Separate Naval Infantry Regiment we mentioned in the previous post.
These "People’s Self-Defense" units were, in reality, illegal armed formations. They blocked Ukrainian military units, seized military bases, and attacked pro-Ukrainian activists and Crimean Tatars. Yet Moscow presented them as "spontaneous unions of local Crimeans".
Exactly the same "people’s self-defense" groups were created in Donbas - and were also directly run by the Kremlin.
The mask was off.
1/6
Today - exactly 12 years ago - the bloody сulmination of the Revolution of Dignity began.
And right in those days, February 18-20, 2014, Russia started its war against Ukraine. The final preparations had been secretly underway for months.
Back then, just like today, skeptics told us Ukrainians could never win. Yanukovych’s repressive machine looked unbeatable.
But in just a few days it collapsed. Yanukovych, his inner circle, and many of his security forces and enforcers fled in panic. Those who stayed behind were later traded for Ukrainian POWs.
2/6 By that point it was already crystal clear: this could not end peacefully.
Protesters had already been killed in January. Hundreds more had been brutally injured in November and December - and no one was ever held accountable.
On top of that, Yanukovych’s coalition rammed! through draconian "dictatorship laws" that crushed the right to protest and freedom of speech.
Just before that, Yanukovych - using his fully corrupt Supreme Court - had already rewritten the Constitution to massively expand presidential power.
It was obvious he had zero intention of stepping down or calling early elections.
On the other side, Ukrainians refused to accept a President with blood on his hands any longer. People weren’t asking for elections in a year or even six months - they demanded them immediately. And a fair trial for those involved in the murder and torture of people
There was no doubt left: the people would not back down.
And a dictator who had already spilled blood… would spill it again.
3/6 On February 18, 2014, opposition MPs demanded the immediate repeal of the illegal constitutional changes that had massively expanded presidential power.
Yanukovych’s team blocked the vote.
So the protesters made a decision: they would march from Independence Square straight to the parliament building and hold a picket there.
The police responded with raw aggression — blocking the streets with buses and armored vehicles, beating people with batons, firing stun grenades and pump-action shotguns.
But the people were no longer afraid.
Thousands of Ukrainians fought back against the special forces. A real street battle exploded in the very heart of Kyiv.
The special forces opened live fire — including Kalashnikov assault rifles.
The number of dead began to climb.
The images of unarmed protesters advancing under fire with nothing but ordinary plastic shields… those pictures still speak louder than any words.
They are the ultimate symbol of unbreakable spirit and total sacrifice for the future of their country.
The defenders dug in to hold Independence Square. They set tires on fire around the barricades to create thick smoke screens that would blind snipers and hide them from aimed shots.
It was the hardest day yet. Casualties kept rising, while Yanukovych’s special forces continued their brutal assault.
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.