What events shaped Ukraine's relationship with Russia?

What events shaped Ukraine's relationship with Russia?

Early on probably the Crimean Tatars periodically raiding the Ukrainian steppe, I think the Russian response from Moscow was usually irregular because it didn't really affect them

Tatars came from the east you do know that right?

He meant Crimean Tatars who lived in, you guessed it, CRIMEA and were vassals of the Ottoman empire. They often raided the areas we now know as Ukraine for slaves and loot.

What about their modern relationship? I know many Ukrainians are ethnic Russians, but many hate Russia. Does it have anything to do with the Soviets?

Wanna know the truth? Ukraine was under USA for about 20-30 years. During that time usa hired inside of Ukraine and injected from the outside alot of agency. USA was pacticing in country hijacking since first world war so it was not a big deal. They giving alot of money to their agents and then blackmail them. So Ukraine now is just another tool against Russia. Whole democracy world is supporting the bandits who did coup d'etat in Ukraine. And they was shocked on how Russia took crimea, they blaming Russia anytime and by anything. This is a dirty game indeed. It is not our business but i wish you to see things clearly. Зa poдинy!

The most important Event was the Cossack rebellion against the PLC in the 1600's

Polish and later Austrian rule in western part.
Western part is the only real ''Ukraine'', and their identity is product of Polonization and later Austrian campaign.

Maybe it has to do with being invaded by them right fucking now.

>being invaded
Are you aware Ukraine is a deeply divided country?
Sending troops and paramilitaries to ''reeducate'' people in East is an invasion of sorts too.

They were pretty much always quite distinct. Even the Kievan Rus wasn't homogeneous and there were vast dialectal, cultural and economic differences between different parts.

The whole notion that (what's now) Ukraine is just a part of Russia (or at least Russia's little retard brother) is a product of 19th century Russian chauvinism, when Ukrainians were denied the right to even exist as a distinct nationality.

>Wanna know the truth?

"truth"

>Even the Kievan Rus wasn't homogeneous and there were vast dialectal, cultural and economic differences
Okay, provide sources for your claim.
Pro-tip: not Ukrainian or Polish ''unbiased'' scholars.

>Are you aware Ukraine is a deeply divided country?

I mean sure, in the sense that large sections of it are currently occupied by the Russian army.

You intentionally ignoring that fact just shows you're some Pole or deluded American or something like that.
Guess what, plenty of Ukrainians in East aren't really supportive of Kiev policies.
From their perspective, troops sent by Poroshenko are occupiers.

>Okay, provide sources for your claim.

Again, Russians living in their world of denial.

For example Novgorodian birch planks giveaway language completely distinct from what today passes as Russian, with actually strong Western Slavic elements (like completely-WS morph of TorT groups or consonant clusters). There are scattered among chronicles hints that people from different part of Rus had serious problems to understand each other. In anything, modern East Slavic are more uniform now than they have ever been.

There were distinct cultural and economic differences, with Novgorod having cultural patterns akin to Scandinavia, Galicia, Volyn and Kiev becoming alike Western Europe, and Vladimir (the bedrock of Moscow) heavily influenced by eastern neighbors.

>unironically repeating Russian state propaganda memes

Well for one Old Novgorodian language had some West Slavic characteristics

The Soviets pretty much created the Ukrainian rebirth before Stalin came and started suppressing Ukrainian identity.

>with actually strong Western Slavic elements (like completely-WS morph of TorT groups or consonant clusters)
Those consonant clusters are only superficially West Slavic, Old Novgorodian entirely failed to undergo the second palatalization at the start of words. None of the three branches of Slavic had this development. That Wikipedia article you’re looking at fails to note that #6 is just a special case of #1.

You're that scumbag Russian linguist who used to post on Kaysee am I right?

Nope, no idea who you're talking about. This is my first post on the subject, and I don't know where you get something pro-Russian out of it.

Regardless, it only proves that Old Novgorodian was a distinct language on its own right.

Yes, definitely so. If anything, it proves it even more, because it split off from the other Slavic languages at an even earlier date.

Ukrainian rebirth started before October revolution with Ukrainian People's Republic, though Soviets did use it in order to achieve their own means for a while. For example, Ukrainian Academy of Sciences was established in 1918 by Skoropadsky's government yet Bolsheviks not only accepted its existence but also essentially claimed it as their own initiative.

...

Have you been to east ukraine friend? Have you talked personally to any of the men fighting under the Donetsk People's Republic? These meen are not active units of the russian army. If they were they would have been on the gates of oddessa by now. Many of these men are local ethnic Russians who no longer think the post coup government represents them so they seceeded. There are however Russian nationals that left russia to fight alongside the donetsk militias that make up a sizable portion of the Novorussian army.

>These meen are not active units of the russian army.

Some of them aren't. Many are, and all are being actively supported by the Russian military. No doubt the full might of Russia could crush Ukraine, but they are still trying to maintain the ridiculous claim that it's just a "popular uprising."

Nice trips my friend

>Have you been to east ukraine friend?
no, but I have met people and refugees from there. I have also spoken to many on /int/

>Have you talked personally to any of the men fighting under the Donetsk People's Republic?
obviously not

>These meen are not active units of the russian army.
most of them are not, sure

>Many of these men are local ethnic Russians who no longer think the post coup government represents them so they seceeded.
Bost-goub :DDD

Most people in Donetsk and Luhansk support Ukraine, it's not like Crimea. The people there never asked for this shit. The countryside is full of Ukrainians, but Russians in the industrial cities took over, and all of a sudden the place was flooded with russian guns, heavy weapons and russian citizens.

Yeah sure. Even on Crimea, the one party that wanted Crimea to become a part of Russia had less than 3% of votes in the last pre-invasion elections.

Western part used to be under polish control hence they're more radical and have a more european mentality. Eastern part used to be under mostly russian sphere of influence hence they're more batshit and barbaric. Central Ukraine (Kiev etc.) is somewhere in the middle.

There's also the whole holodomor deal which killed-off a good bunch of the Ukrainian population which commies later replaced with ethnic Russians (much so in eastern Ukraine, many modern ukrainian nationalists don't want to have anything in common with the people from those lands and are pretty much fine with them being killed-off as long as it brings the lands back under their control).

I can understand Putin's rationale desu famalams.

In all fairness to ethnic Russians, they probably wouldn't have a good time under Western-friendly, anti-Russian governments. Putin is taking the necessary steps to ensure the safety of ethnic Russians and for that I have some respect. Sucks to be Ukraine, though.

anti-russian-government not anti-russian-peoples

And Ukrainian as a distinct national identity was a creation of 19th century romantic nationalists and the intelligence services of the Austro-Hungarian empire.

Muh Cossack uprisings