ON THE ISSUE OF THE CHARASTERISTICS OF UKRAINE AS A STATE AND THE POSSIBILITIES OF ITS FEDERALIZATION (REGIONALIZATION): A HISTORICAL STATE ANALYSIS AND A THEORETICAL AND LEGAL RESEARCH 

Gulyakov Aleksandr Dmitrievich, Candidate of juridical sciences, associate professor, rector of Penza State University (40, Krasnaya street, Penza, Russia), E-mail: rector@pnzgu.ru 

342 

10.21685/2072-3016-2020-1-5 

Background. The question of Ukrainian statehood after the February events of 2014 in Ukraine rightfully attracted increased attention, triggering a number of historical myths and political science speculations that need to be answered adequately. In parallel with this, the current state of Ukrainian statehood encourages us to turn to the theory and practice of federalism, offering Ukraine the most optimal ways out of the domestic political and international crisis.
Materials and methods. The author uses an extensive historical and state material, as well as a comparative method, to isolate the characteristics of Ukrainian statehood and propose optimal ways to reform it.
Results. It is alleged that the historical construction of Kievan Rus, at the request of Academician B. D. Grekov, received an unreasonably wide interpretation, at the same time displacing the true history of the South Russian lands after the Tatar-Mongol invasion. Meanwhile, these lands were drawn into the orbit of influence of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and then the Polish Kingdom of the Commonwealth. The annexation of part of the South Russian (Cossack) lands to Russia in 1653 brought them, and then adjacent territories to the path of social progress, but did not lead to the accumulation of experience of independent statehood even in Soviet times. Moreover, after the declaration of independence in 1991, Ukraine has to deal with Ukrainian-Russian ethnic dualism, the expansion of aggressive nationalism with Galicia, the struggle of oligarchic clans, pressure on the power of illegal armed groups and illegal arms trafficking, artificial public polarization as a result of nationalist propaganda , local civil war in the Lugansk and Donetsk regions.
Conclusions. In Ukraine, objective conditions for federalization have long ripened. Belated federalization, or at least regionalization (as a first step) could reduce the chances of a local civil war developing into universal war. If you want to keep the Donetsk and Lugansk people's republics in their composition, the Ukrainian authorities should go for their actual confederalization. For the rest of Ukraine, a mandatory territorial reorganization is necessary either in the form of regionalization (without changing the borders of existing regions), taking into account the positive experience of Italy and the negative experience of Spain, or in the form of federalization with the allocation, for example, of 6 regions with clear cultural, historical and ethnic features, and creating for them an influential representative body. 

history of Ukraine, characteristics of Ukrainian statehood, South Russian lands as a part of the Russian Empire, South Russian lands as a part of the Polish Commonwealth, Soviet Ukraine, expediency of the federation of modern Ukraine

1. Medvedev A. Podlinnaya istoriya russkogo i ukrainskogo naroda [The true history of the Russian and Ukrainian people]. Moscow, 2015, p. 15. [In Russian]
2. Rybakov B. A. Kievskaya Rus' i russkie knyazhestva XII–XIII vv. Proiskhozhdenie Rusi i stanovlenie ee gosudarstvennosti [Kievan Rus and Russian principalities of the ХII–ХIII centuries. The origin of Russia and the formation of its statehood]. Moscow, 2014, p. 61. [In Russian]
3. Gulyako A. D., Salomatin A. Yu. Kak nashe gosudarstvo stalo federativnym? (analiz otechestvennogo istoriko-gosudarstvennogo opyta) [How did our state become federal? (analysis of Russian historical and state experience)]. Penza, 2019, pp. 19–22. [In Russian]
4. Lyubavskiy M. K. Ocherk istorii litovsko-russkogo gosudarstva do Lyublinskoy unii vklyuchitel'no [Studies of the history of the Lithuanian-Russian state up to and including the Union of Lublin]. Saint-Petersburg, 2004, p. 102. [In Russian]
5. Bryantsev P. Litovskoe gosudarstvo. Ot vozniknoveniya v XIII v. do soyuza s Pol'shey i obrazovaniya Rechi Pospolitoy i krakha pod naporom Rossii v XIX v. [Lithuanian state. From the formation in XIII century before the union with Poland and the formation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the collapse under the pressure of Russia in the XIX century.]. Moscow, 2018, pp. 284, 285. [In Russian]
6. Istoriya yuzhnykh i zapadnykh slavyan: uchebnik: v 2 t. [History of southern and western slavs: textbook: in 2 volumes]. Eds. G. F. Matveev, Z. S. Nenasheva. Moscow, 2008, vol. 1, pp. 185, 186. [In Russian]
7. Tolochko P. P., Simonenko R. G., Oleynikov A. A. Istoriya Ukrainy VI–XXI vv. [History of Ukraine in VI–XXI centuries]. Kiev; Moscow, 2018, pp. 140, 143. [In Russian]
8. Tyurin A. V. Kak sozdavalas' Rossiya. Russkiy frontir [The way Russia was created. Russian frontier]. Moscow, 2018, pp. 61, 62. [In Russian]
9. Vernadskiy G. Moskovskoe tsarstvo [Moscow kingdom]. Moscow, 2017, p. 17. [In Russian]
10. Allen U. Istoriya Ukrainy. Yuzhnorusskie zemli ot pervykh kievskikh knyazey do Iosifa Stalina [History of Ukraine. South Russian lands from the first Kiev princes to Joseph Stalin]. Moscow, 2017, p. 164. [In Russian]
11. Florya B. N. Rossiya-Ukraina: istoriya vzaimootnosheniy [Russia-Ukraine: the history of relations]. Moscow 1997, pp. 16–24. [In Russian]
12. Kochegarov K. A. Ukraina i Rossiya vo vtoroy polovine XVIII veka [Ukraine and Russia in the second half of the XVIII century]. Moscow, 2019, p. 211. [In Russian]
13. Chmyr' S. G. Istoriya natsional'nykh politicheskikh partiy v Rossii [History of national political parties in Russia]. Moscow, 1997, pp. 147, 148. [In Russian]
14. Grosul V. Rossiyskaya istoriya [Russian history]. 2015, no. 2, p. 71. [In Russian]
15. Miller A. I. «Ukrainskiy vopros» v politike vlastey i russkom obshchestvennom mnenii (vtoraya polovina XIX v.) [“The Ukrainian Issue” in the policy of the authorities and Russian public opinion (second half of the XIX century)]. Saint-Petersburg: Aleteyya, 2000, p. 231. [In Russian]
16. Karr E. Istoriya sovetskoy Rossii: v 14 kn. Kn. 1. T. 1–2. Bol'shevistskaya revolyutsiya 1917–1923 [History of Soviet Russia: in 14 books. Book 1, Volumes 1–2. Bolshevik revolution of 1917–1923]. Moscow: Progress, 1990, p. 237. [In Russian]
17. Marchukov A. V. Novorossiya. Formirovanie natsional'nykh identichnostey (XVIII–XX vv.) [Novorossiya. The formation of national identities (XVIII–XX centuries)]. Moscow, 2018, pp. 176, 177. [In Russian]
18. Argumenty nedeli [Argumenty nedeli newspaper]. 2019, no. 15, p. 3. [In Russian]
19. Federalizatsiya Ukrainy. Fakty i mify [Federalization of Ukraine. Facts and myths].
Available at: http://vlasti.net/news/140413 (accessed Jan. 14, 2020). [In Russian]
20. Mel'nik N. Federalizatsiya Ukrainy: ukreplenie ili unichtozhenie gosudarstva? [Federalization of Ukraine: strengthening or destruction of the state?]. Available at: https:// day.kyiv.ua/ru/article/podrobnosti/federalizaciya-ukrainy-ukreplenie-ili-unichtozheniegosudarstva (accessed Jan. 10, 2020). [In Russian]
21. Bakalinskiy M. Intelros. Geopolitika [Intelros. Geopolitics]. 2014, iss. XXIII, pp. 8–22. [In Russian]
22. Chirkin V. E. Verkhnyaya palata sovremennogo parlamenta: sravnitel'no-pravovoe issledovanie [Upper house of the modern parliament: a comparative legal study]. Moscow: Norma, 2009, pp. 10, 11, 18, 20. [In Russian]