The main Russian question about Ukraine

In the comments to my first post about Ukraine, a sore point about “in” and “on” was raised. Like, which is correct - in Ukraine or in Ukraine?

One commentator argued, of course, that it was correct - in Ukraine. This, he says, is the norm of the Russian language. Another commentator wrote that it is correct - in Ukraine. And also because, he says, this is the norm of the Russian language. It’s as if when you need to say something about a country, they use “in” - for example, in Poland, in Italy, in Spain, and so on; but when you need to say something about a territory that is part of a country, they say “on” - in the Urals, Altai, Yamal, and so on.

So, both commentators are wrong.

One of the main things to know about Ukraine is that Ukraine is an island. But, due to a divine misunderstanding, this is an island not in the sea or ocean, but on the continent. Perhaps this sense of self is rooted in those times when free communities on the territory of the present state of Ukraine were separated from the tyrannies by the steppe, the Dnieper with its rapids. Who knows? Perhaps there is some kind of invisible ocean, an invisible sea - an accumulation of passions, drives or impulses that ultimately determine that Ukrainians, unlike neighboring peoples, as the classic said, although they have given the world outstanding bureaucrats, are generally prone to anarchy . I must add: and to escape. Ukrainians always seem to assume that they can hide behind the ocean, beyond the sea. And if people here have a melancholy, some kind of fundamental regret, then this melancholy, this regret boils down to the fact that in the visible world there is still no such water barrier for any enemies, although in the invisible world it obviously exists.

If you think about Ukraine as an island, you can understand much of what Ukraine wants to do and, most importantly, does not want to do in its foreign policy. So, inviting Ukraine into the Customs Union is the same as inviting Cyprus to Turkey or New Zealand to Australia. Ukraine and Russia are like England and the continent. Well, yes, they say, it seems like one space, but actually we are on our own and God Save the English Channel.

And, in this context, the question may arise: why then do so many in Ukraine want to join the European Union? There are two answers to this question. First: there are many people here who, consciously or unconsciously, are carriers of Polish culture, and there are many people who, consciously or unconsciously, are carriers of global culture. They really need European integration. Even better is Euro-Atlantic integration. But most of those who create demand for this integration need it rather as a guarantee that Ukraine will remain an island and will never again become part of Russia, the continent. European structures, in this case, play the role of transferring facts of the invisible world into the visible world - they are needed here exactly as an ocean, a sea separating people from Russia.

Thus, the problem of choosing between “in” and “on” in relation to Ukraine, in my opinion, should be resolved in favor of “on”. Like in Cuba, Hokkaido, Jamaica and so on. But “in” has become the political norm here, it’s like one of the piles in the foundation of local civic identity, and that’s why I always write “in Ukraine.”