Ukrainian refugees will be offered to resettle in Siberia and the Far East. The Russian Ministry of Eastern Development supported the initiative of a group of State Duma deputies from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, led by Sergei Obukhov, who asked to develop a federal target program for the voluntary resettlement of people who were forced to leave Ukraine to the territory of Siberia and the Far East. As the department notes, by 2020, more than 50 thousand jobs will be created in the Far Eastern Federal District (FEFD), which could be filled by Ukrainians (Izvestia has the answer from the Ministry of Eastern Development at its disposal). The agency notified the Federal Migration Service (FMS) of Russia of its position for further consideration of the issue.
Deputy Minister of the Russian Federation for the Development of the Far East Sergei Kachaev in his response expresses support for the initiative of State Duma deputies and says that “the corresponding position has been sent to the Federal Migration Service.” The Ministry of Eastern Development notes that by 2020, more than 50 thousand jobs will be created in areas of socio-economic development and in investment projects.
“The list of territories of priority settlement includes the Republic of Buryatia, Trans-Baikal Territory, Kamchatka Territory, Primorsky Territory, Khabarovsk Territory, Amur Region, Irkutsk Region, Magadan Region, Sakhalin Region and Jewish Autonomous Region,” says the Ministry of Eastern Development.
At the end of 2015, Sergei Obukhov sent an appeal to the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev, the Federal Migration Service and the Ministry of Eastern Development with a request to develop a federal target program “Voluntary resettlement of persons who were forced to leave Ukraine to the territory of Siberia and the Far East.”
Deputies remind that on October 31, 2015, the preferential regime for the stay of Ukrainians in Russia (except for refugees from the Lugansk and Donetsk republics) ended. From November 1 to November 30, 2015, Ukrainian migrants had to obtain legal status on a general basis, otherwise they would face administrative deportation. According to parliamentarians, Ukrainians who have not received documents can be asked to voluntarily move to Siberia and the Far East in order to speed up the development of these territories.
Thus, in the Far Eastern Federal District, according to Rosstat, in 2011 there were 6,284,900 people, and as of January 1, 2015 - 6,211,021 people. At the same time, according to the state program “Socio-economic development of the Far East and the Baikal region”, by 2025 the population in the region is expected to grow to 10.75 million people. This task “is difficult to consider as fully realistic while maintaining the indicated trends.”
Despite the fact that Russia has a state program to assist the voluntary resettlement of compatriots living abroad in the Russian Federation, according to Sergei Obukhov, the pace of its implementation does not meet expectations and the assigned tasks are not being solved.
At the same time, the FMS believes that at present there is no need to develop a program for the resettlement of Ukrainians to Siberia and the Far East, since this task is being implemented with the help of the existing state program to assist the voluntary resettlement of compatriots living abroad to the Russian Federation. At the same time, for Ukrainians who have received temporary asylum, the list of documents and the period for their consideration for participation in the program have been reduced.
Today, 59 subjects accept compatriots within the framework of regional resettlement programs Russian Federation, including 9 subjects included in the Siberian Federal District (the republics of Buryatia and Khakassia, Altai, Transbaikal and Krasnoyarsk territories, Irkutsk, Kemerovo, Novosibirsk, Omsk regions), and 7 subjects included in the Far Eastern Federal District (Kamchatka, Primorsky and Khabarovsk territories, Amur, Magadan, Sakhalin regions, Jewish Autonomous Region). The Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) and the Tomsk region are preparing to begin receiving migrants, the FMS press service explains.
As of January 1, 2016 (since 2007 - the beginning of the practical implementation of the state program), about 440 thousand compatriots moved to Russia, of which more than 106.8 thousand people arrived in the regions of the Siberian Federal District and the Far Eastern Federal District.
As they say in the Federal Migration Service, in the last 2 years the number of Ukrainians participating in the program has increased.
In 2014, more than 106 thousand people moved to Russia, of which 41.7 thousand were compatriots from Ukraine. 29.6 thousand people arrived in the regions of Siberia and the Far East, including 10.8 thousand from Ukraine. In 2015, the number of program participants and members of their families amounted to more than 183 thousand people, of which about 111 thousand were immigrants from Ukraine. 38.8 thousand people arrived in the regions of the Siberian Federal District and Far Eastern Federal District, including about 18.5 thousand Ukrainian compatriots, the press service noted.
The FMS emphasized that the subjects that are part of the Far Eastern Federal District are among the territories of priority settlement, therefore, those who want to move to the Far East are provided with state support - compensation for travel, paperwork, settlement allowance (240 thousand rubles), etc. .
Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Regional Policy and Problems of the North and Far East Pyotr Romanov believes that the population needs to be financially motivated to move to Siberia and the Far East.
You can have a great idea, but the government will say that there is no money for its implementation, especially at this time,” he says. - The very idea of settling Siberia and the Far East is very relevant. We have lands, but they are not developed, they are used in exceptional cases, for example, coal is mined in the Kemerovo region, oil in the Tyumen region, Khanty-Mansiysk district, gas in the Yamalo-Nenets region. Without prospects, you won’t be able to attract people to these regions. It’s another matter if they say that you will get an apartment and a decent salary.
Petr Romanov also believes that it is necessary to actively promote the idea of resettlement to the Far East.
In the Soviet Union there were such slogans. The authorities gave the people ideas that people grabbed onto: the slogans “Five-Year Plan ahead of schedule!”, “Catch up and overtake the Americans,” “The enemy will be defeated, victory will be ours,” etc., he recalled.
Chairman of the Trade Union of Migrant Workers Renat Karimov believes that Ukrainians will not want to explore Siberia and the Far East.
If there were many jobs in these regions, then Russians would not seek to leave there. These are probably low-paid jobs, and Ukrainians won’t want to work there either. “We have all the money and work concentrated in the Central Federal District, so both Russians and migrants flock there,” he says. - The idea sounds nice, but in reality it’s unlikely to be implemented correctly. If the government wanted and knew how to develop the Far East, then they could have done it without the Ukrainians.
According to Renat Karimov, now Ukrainians have no problems with paperwork.
In general, the new requirements are being met, especially since it is not so difficult - you need to return to Ukraine, and then go to Russia and go apply for a patent. At least there were no calls to us with any problems, and there was no information about expulsions,” he noted.
According to the Federal Migration Service, there are currently about 2.6 million Ukrainian citizens in Russia, of which about 1.1 million come from the southeast of Ukraine.
The Ukrainians played important role in the development and industrialization of Russia. The largest flows of migrants from Little Russia were sent primarily to the eastern regions. Thus, Primorye at the beginning of the 19th century was called the second Ukraine.
First wave. Exiled nationalists
Although Ukrainians served in fortresses there from the very annexation of Siberia to Russia, the first large flow of settlers from Ukraine began in the second half of the 17th century, after its annexation to Russia.
Various figures who opposed Moscow, people suspected or convicted of treason, were exiled to Siberia. For example, in the 1650s these were, among others, supporters of Hetman Vygovsky, in the 1660s - opponents of Hetman Bryukhovetsky, etc. After the Battle of Poltava, of course, all like-minded people of Mazepa, after the liquidation of the Zaporozhye Sich - Cossack elders, as well as participants in the Haidamak movement.
Second wave. Agrarian development
It was a 100% agrarian period of colonization of the region, very successful. Fertile Siberian soils made it possible to harvest a good harvest, despite the harsh continental climate. At the end of the 17th century, there were no more than 20 thousand peasants in the region, at the end of the 18th century - already half a million, by the middle of the 19th century - 1.5 million.
By the beginning of the 18th century, Siberia was completely self-sufficient in bread and began trading with Asia and Europe. During this period, not only government officials settled in Siberia, but also significantly more fugitive serfs who were eventually given the right to settle. According to one of the leading researchers in the development of Siberia, Dr. historical sciences Tamara Mamsik, in percentage terms, Ukrainian provinces provided almost 40% of the immigrants.
During the Stolypin reform, thousands of Ukrainian families moved to lands in Siberia and the Far East. Compact settlements were formed, many place names are reminiscent of Ukraine: Novokievka, Kharkovka, Poltavka. To this day, in a number of districts of the Tyumen region there are villages in which the descendants of those settlers live. In the neighboring Omsk region there are areas, for example, Kyiv, Poltava, which were inhabited in the late 19th - early 20th centuries by immigrants from Ukraine.
Third wave. Stolypin reform
The Amur Governor-General Unterberger wrote that settlers for the Far Eastern regions were chosen from Little Russia, “they were supposed to create a stable cadre of Russian farmers on the spot, as a bulwark against the spread of the yellow race.” From 1868 to 1914, 22,122 peasant families arrived in Primorye, of which 69.95% were immigrants from Ukraine.
Some people tend to divide this period into several: dispossession, escape from hunger, convicted nationalists, military evacuation, but in general the flow was constant and stable, so there is no particular point in splitting this stage. 
More than half a million Ukrainians were sent to Siberia through the Gulag, and a million were evacuated. It was Ukrainian nationalists who formed the majority in Norilsk Gorlag, where they rebelled in 1953. A significant part of this category of immigrants returned to their homeland, but many remained.
Fifth wave. Orgnabor
To provide Siberian industrial facilities with workers, the USSR operated a system of organized recruitment of workers. In the 1960s, people were sent from any union republic with excess labor resources to a specific location. 
Thus, employees from Ukraine were sent to Siberia and the Far East to work in the forestry and fishing industries, and to construction sites. The interrepublican exchange plan was approved annually by the Council of Ministers.
During the entire existence of the organizational set from the 1930s to the 1970s, at least 5 million Ukrainians were resettled to Siberia. According to the 1989 census, more than 600,000 ethnic Ukrainians lived in the Tyumen region alone—about a third of the region’s population at that time. There is even a Consulate General of Ukraine opened in Tyumen, and the National Cultural Autonomy of Ukrainians operates.
Sixth wave. Reverse
In the post-Soviet period, the number of Ukrainians in the population of Siberia has been declining in all regions, and significantly. First of all, in the northern regions. More than 3 times - in the Chita region, almost twice - in the Irkutsk region, Buryatia, Yakutia, Krasnoyarsk Territory, Kemerovo region.
In southwestern Siberia the reduction was less significant, by about a third. In the Far East, compared to 1989, the number of Ukrainians has halved. It must be emphasized that this wave is not only centrifugal, but also, so to speak, internal: Ukrainians in new generations simply do not consider themselves Ukrainians, many have lost knowledge of the language and Ukrainian identity.
Based on the materials of the scientific-practical conference "Multinational Primorye: history and modernity."
Although the population census conducted in 1989 recorded 185,000 Ukrainians in Primorye, which is only 8.2% of the population, nevertheless, they are the second largest ethnic group in the region. However, in the public consciousness of Primorye there is a different idea of the share of Ukrainians in the population of the region and especially in rural areas. Many believe that they are no less than half of the population here. And this opinion is not accidental. It is probably difficult to find a native Primorye who did not have Ukrainian ancestors along at least one line. This is determined by the peculiarities of the development and historical development of the region.
It is difficult to reliably judge when the first Ukrainians appeared in Primorye, but it is possible that they could also be among the members of the detachment O. Stepanova, penetrated the river. Ussuri back in 1655, and as part of the crew of the Manjur transport, and as part of the ensign's team Komarova who founded the post of Vladivostok in 1860, and among the settlers who founded the first settlements on the territory of the region back in the 1850s-60s.
The mass resettlement of Ukrainians to the territory of the former South Ussuri Territory begins in 1883, when a regular mass resettlement of peasants by sea from Odessa to Vladivostok was established on Dobroflot steamships. It is known that on April 13, 1883, the first steamship arrived in Vladivostok, carrying 724 settlers from the Chernihiv province (1).
As you know, the Ukrainian peasantry was one of the leading colonization elements that settled and developed the territory of the present Primorsky Territory, which the Ukrainian settlers called the Green Wedge. In total, during the period from 1883 to 1917, 179,757 settlers from Ukraine arrived in the then Primorsky region, who became the core of the rural population of Primorye (2). According to statistics from the beginning of the 20th century, Ukrainians accounted for 81.26% of all settlers in the South Ussuri region (3).
In the conditions of a tough assimilation, Russification policy pursued by the tsarist government in relation to national minorities, when even Ukrainian language and the very existence of the Ukrainian people was not recognized, the Ukrainians, finding themselves in a new region, thousands of miles from their native land, having no national schools, churches, the printed word, were doomed to assimilation and loss of ethnic identity. As a result, despite the high natural increase, according to the 1923 census, only 219,462 thousand Ukrainians (and 223,018 Russians) lived in the Primorsky province (4).
Under these conditions, for the Ukrainians of the Russian Empire, for a number of decades, the theater remained the only legal form of national social activity. Therefore, the impetus for the awakening of Ukrainians to national social activities in the Green Klin was the arrival and activity here at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries. the first Ukrainian theater troupes. The result of these tours was the emergence of amateur theater circles, which united mainly representatives of the Ukrainian intelligentsia, military personnel, and office workers. The activities of these circles contributed to the development of national self-awareness and the preservation of the native language. In particular, such circles actively worked among the sailors of Vladivostok (5).
The liberalization of the regime in Tsarist Russia as a result of the revolution of 1905 led to the emergence in Primorye of the first legal Ukrainian organization - the Vladivostok Student Ukrainian Community, which united Ukrainian students of the Eastern Institute, which was created in October 1907. However, it did not last long and already in 1909 was banned in accordance with the order of the Minister of Public Education. However, it was precisely with its creation that the beginning of organized Ukrainian activity was associated not only in the territory of Primorye, but also in the entire Far East (6).
After the dissolution of the student community in Vladivostok under People's House A semi-legal Ukrainian circle was formed, the main task of which was to promote the national education of the Ukrainian masses through organizing Ukrainian performances and distributing Ukrainian literature in the region. Since 1909, the Ukrainian community of Vladivostok annually organized “Shevchenko Saints”, dedicated to the memory of the great Ukrainian poet, other literary and musical events, concerts, performances in which the best artistic forces of the city participated.
In February 1910, an attempt was made to register the charter of the Ukrainian cultural and educational society that arose in Nikolsk-Ussuriysk "Prosvita", but due to the reactionary tendencies that prevailed in the internal politics of tsarism during this period, its registration was refused (7). In the subsequent period, due to the outbreak of the First World War and the further tightening of domestic politics, Ukrainian social activity declined and manifested itself mainly only in theatrical activities. In the Far East, in particular, during these years the Ukrainian troupe actively toured K. Karmelyuk-Kamensky, who also performed in Japan and China.
The February Revolution, which overthrew tsarism, eliminated the numerous restrictions on the national rights of various peoples and ethnic groups that existed in Russia, marking the beginning of the rapid development of Ukrainian social life in the Far East, which manifested itself in the creation of a whole network of Ukrainian national organizations here. Their main form was Ukrainian communities, uniting the broadest strata of the Ukrainian population, regardless of social status, occupation or political views. They were called upon to defend the national interests of the Ukrainian population, seeking the realization of their rights as an ethnic community. In Vladivostok, Gromada was created on March 26, 1917, and by the summer of that year it united about three thousand members (8). Soon Ukrainian Communities were created in Nikolsk-Ussuriysky, Iman, Spassk, Posyet, Knevichi, Novokievsk, at the station of Muravyov-Amursky, the villages of Osinovka, Monastyrische, Mikhailovka, Grigoryevka, Olginskoye, Feodosyevka, Novopokrovka, Zenkovka, Avdeevka, Goncharovka, Ussuriyskoye, Drozdovskoye, Vinogradovka, etc. (9).
However, in addition to the Communities, national organizations that are narrower in their composition and tasks also emerge - professional (unions of Ukrainian teachers, artists, railway workers, postal and telegraph employees), political (in the summer of 1917, organizations of Ukrainian parties of Social Democrats and Socialist Revolutionaries were created in Vladivostok , uniting about 200 and 150 members, respectively (10).
Active cultural and educational activities were carried out by the Prosvita societies, which existed in Vladivostok (with branches in Kiparisovo, Osinovka, Vladimir-Aleksandrovsky, Grodekovo, Khorol, Spassk and on Russky Island) and Nikolsk-Ussuriysky (11). It should be noted that in the period 1917-1922. 6 Ukrainian newspapers were published in Primorye (4 in Vladivostok and 2 in Nikolsk-Ussuriysky), there were two Ukrainian publishing houses. The Ukrainian cooperative movement, headed by the regional Ukrainian cooperative "Chumak", was widely developed.
On the initiative of the Far Eastern Ukrainian Teachers' Union, in June 1917, the 1st Far Eastern Ukrainian Congress was convened in Nikolsk-Ussuriysk, at which over 20 Ukrainian organizations of the Far East were represented. The congress outlined an action plan for the development of a network of Ukrainian national organizations, the creation of a national school, libraries, etc., with the goal of national education of the Ukrainian people. The congress proposed to develop a draft charter for the Far Eastern Ukrainian Rada as the central administrative, political and social center of the Ukrainians of the Green Wedge. To manage current activities until the convening of the next congress, a Temporary Executive Committee was elected consisting of A. Stupak, P. Vasilenko, N. Prokoptsa, I. Ignatenko and A. Popovich (12).
In accordance with the decisions of the III Ukrainian Far Eastern Congress, held in April 1918 in Khabarovsk, the Vladivostok, Nikolsk-Ussuriysk and Iman Ukrainian District Councils were created on the territory of Primorye, uniting local Ukrainian organizations that existed respectively in the territory of Olginsky, Nikolsk-Ussuriysky and Iman districts. Representatives of the District Councils formed the Regional Rada, at the sessions of which decisions were made on the most important issues relating to the life of the Ukrainian population of the Far East. The executive body of the Regional Rada was the Secretariat elected at its sessions (13).
After the IV (Extraordinary) Ukrainian Far Eastern Congress, held at the end of October 1918 in Vladivostok, the Ukrainian Far Eastern Secretariat was elected at it, which was headed by the former chairman of the Vladivostok "Prosvita" and the Vladivostok District Rada Yu. Glushko-Mova, is located in Vladivostok, which from now on becomes the true center of Ukrainian public life in the Far East.
At the aforementioned IV Congress, a draft Constitution was developed for the national-cultural autonomy of Ukrainians of the Far East, which was adopted at the second session of the Ukrainian Far Eastern Regional Rada in May 1919. (14) The final approval of the Constitution was to occur at the V Ukrainian Far Eastern Congress, the convocation of which was appointed twice, but it never took place due to the unfavorable political situation that developed at that time. With the adoption of the Constitution, the Ukrainians of the Far East tried, in fact, to de facto implement the principle of national-cultural autonomy - the most democratic principle of resolving the national question, guaranteeing respect for the national rights of various ethnic groups, especially those settled dispersedly.
National-cultural autonomy was supposed to provide the most favorable conditions for the development of the original national culture of the Ukrainian people in the Far East. This was the goal that Ukrainian organizations in the Far East strived for in their activities during that period, whose activities were aimed, first of all, at protecting the interests of the Ukrainian population of the Far East. In this regard, they sought not to associate themselves with certain political forces opposing in civil war, which flared up in Russia. In various documents of the Far Eastern Ukrainian national movement It has been repeatedly emphasized that Ukrainians will recognize and support only that local government that recognizes by its special act the national rights of the Ukrainian population and allocates places in its composition for its representatives (15). However, in these aspirations, the Ukrainians did not find mutual understanding and support from the often successive local authorities of various political colors and were subjected to repression both from the whites (Alekseevsky’s government in the Amur region, Rozanov’s in the Primorskaya region) and from the Reds. And only in the Far Eastern Republic did the Ukrainians find mutual understanding, primarily on the part of the Mensheviks, who headed the Ministry of National Affairs.
The legislation of the Far Eastern Republic, which regulated interethnic relations, was one of the most democratic for its time. The Constitution of the Far Eastern Republic and the “Law on National-Cultural Autonomy” developed in the Republic guaranteed broad rights for the national minorities that inhabited it. It is in the Far East that a network of Ukrainian schools is being created for the first time in the Far East (16).
But 1922 came, the Far Eastern Republic was liquidated, with the establishment in Primorye Soviet power all Ukrainian organizations were liquidated, their leaders and activists were arrested, and the property created through painstaking labor was confiscated. Thus, organized Ukrainian public life in the Far East was stopped. The repressions against the Ukrainian social movement showed the Ukrainian population that Ukrainian new government It is not welcomed that this is simply dangerous, especially considering that not only public figures were arrested, but even teachers of Ukrainian schools that arose in the Far Eastern Republic.
Therefore, in the subsequent period, in the 1920s, local functionaries answered requests from Moscow about work among national minorities with a clear conscience that Ukrainians had almost completely Russified and did not want anything. However, local authorities were forced to reckon with the party line in the field of nationality policy, and in 1931, a policy of “Ukrainization” began to be implemented in the Far East, during which the Chernigov, Khanka, Spassky, Kalinin districts, with the highest share of the Ukrainian population, were transformed into Ukrainian national districts, in which all office work and the system of cultural and educational institutions, including the education system, were translated into Ukrainian. In four more districts - Ivanovsky, Shmakovsky, Yakovlevsky and Mikhailovsky, conditions should have been created to serve the Ukrainian population in their native language (17). A Ukrainian pedagogical technical school was created in Spassk, which was supposed to be transformed into a Ukrainian pedagogical institute. Spassk was also supposed to become a permanent base for the Ukrainian Regional Mobile Theater created in those years.
But the period of “Ukrainization” turned out to be short-lived. Already in December 1932, by a special order of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, all Ukrainian cultural and educational institutions on the territory of the RSFSR were liquidated. Since this period, Ukrainian schools and newspapers have completely disappeared in Primorye; the problem has become to find Ukrainian books in Green Klin, which was developed and populated by Ukrainian peasants. The consequence of this was a steady decline in both the share of Ukrainians in the population of Primorsky Krai and their absolute numbers. And this, despite the constant influx of Ukrainians to Primorye, which continued throughout the 1920s-80s.
They arrived here both as military personnel, and as young specialists assigned after graduating from universities, and as migrants (to rural areas), and as part of organizational recruitment to work, primarily in the fishing industry, and simply in search of romance or high earnings. But new generations of Ukrainians constantly arriving here were steadily Russified, and their children born here mostly became “Russian.” In addition, during the Soviet period, there were cases of purposeful replacement by the relevant authorities of nationality (Ukrainian to Russian), usually carried out when replacing passports, without the consent of the citizens themselves.
But during the existence of the USSR, losses from assimilation were compensated by the influx of ever new migrants from the Ukrainian SSR. With the cessation of this influx after the liquidation of the USSR and the creation of an independent Ukrainian state, with continuing assimilation tendencies, we have to recognize the threat of the rapid and complete disappearance of the Ukrainian diaspora in Primorye. Thus, the future of Ukrainian culture and the very existence of the Ukrainian ethnic group in the region are called into question.
This is facilitated by reasons of both an objective (proximity of cultures, language, religion of Russians and Ukrainians) and subjective nature. The latter includes both the lack of appropriate institutions of ethnicization (national schools, the press, professional cultural institutions), and the long-term policy of combating so-called nationalism, when any manifestations of national identity were fraught with the most dire consequences for citizens.
IN modern conditions, when the fundamental problems of a significant part of the population are problems of physical survival, when mercantile and narrowly utilitarian tendencies become leading in society, the problem of preserving national cultures becomes even more urgent. The erosion of national cultures is also facilitated by the widespread so-called Mass culture with its unified and primitive values and standards. This is, in particular, evidenced by the fact that if back in the 1970s. it was difficult to find a family or company in Primorye where Ukrainian songs were not sung, but now this is already a thing of the past, even in rural areas it is difficult to meet, for example, at a feast, a person who could perform more than one or two verses of some popular Ukrainian songs. This especially applies to the middle and younger generations.
A particular problem is the existing vacuum of objective information about Ukraine. In Primorye, many citizens, due to the indicated historical reasons, have close family, cultural, historical and other ties with Ukraine and are interested in receiving truthful and reliable information about the processes taking place there.
The Russian diaspora in Ukraine has the opportunity to receive daily information about life in Russia on Ukrainian television and radio, watch and listen to individual programs and entire Russian channels. In addition, there are local, Ukrainian Russian-language television and radio channels. In Ukraine there are a lot of Russian-language periodicals; a huge amount of literature in Russian is published (and imported from Russia). Ukrainians in Russia are deprived of all this. Today in Russia it is almost impossible to subscribe to Ukrainian periodicals, not to mention purchasing Ukrainian literature. Waves of anti-Ukrainian propaganda, periodically poured out by the Russian media and at times turning into hysteria (associated, first of all, with the problems of Crimea, the Black Sea Fleet, etc.), do little to create an atmosphere in Russian society conducive to the preservation of Ukrainian identity.
For many years, the tenuous ties that still exist between Primorye and Ukraine have been maintained only between close relatives and are based mainly on people of the older generation who were born and raised in Ukraine. Most of them have already left the sphere of business activity and do not play a noticeable role in the life of society. And with their death, these contacts are cut off. The younger generation, the majority born and raised in Primorye, does not speak the language, is not familiar with the national culture and does not have sufficient motivation to maintain contacts with their historical homeland.
These conditions do not contribute to the preservation of the Ukrainian diaspora in Primorye. In the coming years, the number of Ukrainians (and these are mainly people of the middle and older generation) will decrease tenfold. This will determine the catastrophic decline in the Ukrainian population.
What can be countered to these destructive trends? Our financial capabilities today do not allow us to have our own printed publications, to have commercial airtime on radio and television in order to disseminate information about the activities of our organization and promote the best achievements of national culture. Therefore, it is necessary to develop and create, with the support of the state, a mechanism for the preservation and development of national cultures in Primorye, including Ukrainian culture. The preservation of national culture will also contribute to the preservation of the diaspora. At the same time, it is necessary to make wider use of the opportunities provided by federal law on national-cultural autonomy, according to which the state assumes certain obligations to assist in the preservation and development of the national cultures of the peoples of Russia. And in order for this law to work, it is necessary, first of all, to register national-cultural autonomies, in connection with which certain difficulties arise and the allocation of appropriate funds.
It is necessary to establish operational communication with the relevant institutions in Ukraine and within the Ukrainian diaspora, expand the network of centers of national culture, and actively inform the widest possible range of the Ukrainian population about their activities. At the same time, it is necessary to more actively use the new information opportunities provided by the Internet.
Preserving culture involves, first of all, studying it. Currently, the widest circles of the population of Primorye are characterized by appalling illiteracy in matters of Ukrainian history and culture, which contributes to the spread of negative stereotypes in society regarding Ukraine and Ukrainians. Often, even among representatives of the local intelligentsia, Ukrainianness is associated only with “lard and vodka”, at best - with “dumplings and trousers”. While the histories, cultures and languages of the most diverse peoples of Asia and Europe are studied in local educational institutions, the history, culture and language of the people who took an active part in the settlement and development of the region and whose descendants make up a very significant proportion of its modern population, are practically forgotten; there are almost no specialists in this field. The activity that is being carried out in this direction by the Institute of History, Archeology and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far East of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and by enthusiasts of our society is clearly insufficient. In this regard, it seems the necessary creation, first of all, scientific structures designed to concentrate research in the field of Ukrainian studies, as well as the organization of teaching Ukrainian studies in local universities.
Another problem is school. School is the fate of the diaspora, its future. If in Ukraine thousands of Russian schools are supported by state funds, then the last Ukrainian schools in Primorye, in particular, were liquidated at the end of 1932. The main problem is the very principle that such schools should exist in Russia. Next we could talk about forms of organization educational process in them. But the fact is that there are no such schools at all and their appearance is very problematic in the conditions of the crisis that has hit the budgetary sector of Russia. Today, the main problem of the domestic education system is to at least pay off teacher salary debts. The whole problem has been solved for a hundred years in advance...
But in order for a problem to begin to be solved, it must first be raised, it must become known, it must become the subject of public discussion. Back in 1991, when the Society of Ukrainian Culture of the Primorsky Territory was created, we advocated for the state and local authorities to turn their faces to the problems of national cultural development, we raised questions about the need to develop in Russia and the Primorsky Territory our own concept of national politicians. Now we have fairly developed legislation, including a very democratic law on national-cultural autonomy, we have a structure government agencies both at the federal and regional levels, designed to implement this national policy. For our part, we stand for close, constructive cooperation with these bodies, since the revival of the original national cultures of the peoples inhabiting Russia and Primorye in particular is in our common interests, as it will contribute to the spiritual enrichment and moral improvement of our entire society. People must remember their origin, for thereby the beginnings of common culture, culture. The revival of Russia, which everyone is talking so much about now, can only begin with the spiritual revival of society, and this, in turn, is unthinkable without people turning to their roots, to the priceless spiritual treasures of national culture. For many Primorye residents, such a culture is Ukrainian culture.
It should also be noted that, in addition to ethical motives, the preservation of diasporas is also supported by the fact that Russia, as a country that has declared its goal to build a democratic society, must adhere to international norms in the field of ensuring the rights of national minorities. In addition, the presence of diasporas plays a stabilizing role in interstate relations. The disappearance of diasporas, that is, people with blood ties to another country (in this case, Ukraine) may contribute to strengthening tendencies of confrontation in relations between the two countries.
As you know, the Russian Parliament ratified the so-called “grand treaty” between Russia and Ukraine, which, among other things, provides for a guarantee of broad rights for the national and cultural development of Ukrainians in Russia, similar to the rights that Russians have in Ukraine. The treaty is designed to ensure normal, friendly relations between the two states, to contribute to the establishment of cooperative relations, bridges of friendship and mutual understanding.
The problems listed above are problems that need to be solved immediately, or, in an amicable way, yesterday. If we postpone the solution to these problems until better times, then in the near future they will disappear, based on the notorious principle “no people and no problems.” If the above trends do not change, tomorrow we, as a diaspora, will no longer exist and the need for the above bridges will no longer exist, since there will be no one to move across them. Who will benefit from this and whether anyone will benefit from this is the question that needs to be answered...
Vyacheslav CHERNOMAZ
Vladivostok
NOTES.
1. Busse F.F. Relocation of peasants by sea to the South Ussuri region. St. Petersburg, 1896. P.46.
2. Calculated according to: Kabuzan V.M. Resettlement of Ukrainians near the Far Land // Ukrainian Historical Journal. 1971. No. 2.
3. Argudyaeva Yu.V. Ukrainian peasant family in Primorye (80s of the XIX - early XX centuries). M., 1993. P.32.
4. Economic life of Primorye. 1924 No. 6-7. P.48.
5. Sweet I.V. Ukrainian Far East. Harbin, 1934. P.16-17.
6. Ibid.
7. RGIA DV. F.1. Op.2. D.2053. L.8.
8. Ukrainian on Green Klin. Vladivostok. 1917. 27 sickles.
9. Sweet I.V. Ukrainian Far East. Harbin. 1934. P.19.
11. L-ko M. Ukraine on the Far Gathering // Calendar for 1921. Vladivostok. 1921.
12. TsDAVO of Ukraine. F.3696. Op.2. D.381. L.213-214.
13. Ibid. L.214ob.
14. Ibid. L.219.
16. Lvova E.L., Nam I.V., Naumova N.I. National-personal autonomy: idea and implementation.//Polis. 1993. N 2.
17. Regions of the Far Eastern Territory (Materials of the Encyclopedia of the Far Eastern Territory). Khabarovsk, 1931. S.XCV.
Ukrainians constitute the second largest ethnic group in the population of the Far East. This is explained by the fact that the first settlers to Primorye in 1895, when the construction of the Chinese Eastern railway, became landless and land-poor peasants of Little Russia, mainly from the Chernigov province. The conditions for the resettlement movement were laid thanks to the activities of Count N.P. Ignatiev, who contributed to the signing of the Beijing Treaty in 1860. This treaty defined the eastern border of the Russian Empire and contributed to the development of the richest lands of Primorye and the Amur region.
For the first time the question of displaced persons N.P. Ignatiev raised it in 1862, but Alexander II postponed his decision. When the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway and the Chinese Eastern Railway began, the same issue was raised by the Minister of Railways S.Yu. Witte. Labor was required to lay rails and build stations and villages. It was impossible to recruit migrants from the Trans-Urals and Western Siberia, since these areas were sparsely populated. Then it was decided to involve the population of Little Russia in this.
Two areas were allocated for settlement - in the Amur region north of Blagoveshchensk and in the Primorsky region on the border with Korea and Manchuria. Later, the settlers themselves gave this corner of the Russian Empire the name Green Wedge. New settlers were allocated at least 20 acres of land, forest for buildings, one horse and one cow per family, seeds, agricultural tools and basic necessities.
Chairman of the Committee of Ministers I.N. Durnovo instructed the Volunteer Fleet to organize the delivery of immigrants from Odessa to Vladivostok at public expense. During the period from 1895 to 1899, over 1,500 families of migrants were transported - from 15 to 23 thousand people (according to various sources). Beginning in 1897, settlers arrived in the Far East not only from the Chernihiv region, but also from the Poltava, Kiev, and Slobozhanshchina.
In 1899, the population of the South Ussuri region exceeded 46 thousand people living in 118 settlements in the Khanki lowland: in Chernigovka, Chuguevka, Novochuguevka, Priluki, Khorol, Kievka, Novoselishche, Barabash-Levada, Gayvoron, Mikhailovka, Vasilkovka, Andreevka, Yablonovka , Monastyrische, Sinelnikov, Galenki and others. Over time, Khorol, Chuguevka and Chernigovka became regional centers of Primorye.
To protect the border with Manchuria, the male population from among the settlers joined the Amur Cossack Army and settled in the villages with their families. In 1899, the Special Ussuri Cossack Army was separated from the Amur Cossacks in the South Ussuri region and in the Primorsky region.
In March 1900, a peasant uprising broke out in Beijing against the colonialists - the British, French and Germans, which was initiated by the secret religious society "Yihequan" ("Fist for Justice and Harmony"). Rebel troops sought to destroy everything and everyone who disturbed the peace of good spirits Chinese land. Workers and employees of the CER began to be forced out of Chinese territory. Russia began to prepare for war, and therefore a decision was made to carry out the second stage of resettlement.
The third, most massive wave of the resettlement movement occurred from November 1908 to August 1909. Over 6 thousand families, or about 18 thousand men, women and children, arrived on the territory of modern Amur and Sakhalin regions, Khabarovsk and Primorsky territories. In 1906, the villages of Andreevka and Slavyanka appeared in the Posyet Bay area (near the border with China), and the settlements of Tavrichanka, Livadiya and Kiparisovo were founded in Peter the Great Bay. Among the settlers of the third stage were not only landless peasants, but also workers, artisans, minor officials and employees. According to 1916 data, more than 245 thousand people lived in the Amur and Primorsky regions (modern Amur region, Khabarovsk and Primorsky territories), of which 55% were immigrants.
