Between Soviet Heritage and the European Vector: the Role of Political Rhetoric in Shaping National Identity in Ukraine (1991-2004)

This article explores the formative role of political rhetoric in constructing and contesting national identity in Ukraine during the post-Soviet period of 1991-2004. In a transitional context marked by institutional fragility, historical ambivalence, and regional polarization, political elites deployed rhetoric not only to reflect societal change but to actively shape collective imaginaries. Situated between the ideological legacy of the Soviet Union and the aspirational pull of European integration, Ukrainian political actors used discourse to navigate competing visions of sovereignty, identity, and geopolitical orientation. The study draws upon a broad empirical base, including presidential speeches, opposition discourse, party manifestos, electoral rhetoric, and symbolic statements. Using a combined methodology of political discourse analysis, content analysis, and sociological interpretation, the article traces identity narratives across four dimensions: memory politics (e.g., Holodomor, WWII), foreign policy alignment (Europe vs. Russia), language and cultural policy, and regional fragmentation. Special attention is given to the contrasting rhetorical strategies of Presidents Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma, alongside opposition figures such as Vyacheslav Chornovil, Viktor Yushchenko, Yulia Tymoshenko, and Petro Symonenko. The findings show that rhetoric served as a key mechanism of political legitimation and socialization, reinforcing generational and regional cleavages while laying the semantic groundwork for Ukraine’s emerging European orientation. Kravchuk’s discourse affirmed independence while maintaining symbolic continuity, relying on notions of unity, legality, and cultural inclusiveness to stabilise the early post-Soviet state. In contrast, Kuchma institutionalised a rhetoric of strategic ambiguity: balancing Soviet nostalgia and economic reliance on Russia with growing appeals to European integration and democratic modernity. Oppositional rhetoric challenged this ambivalence by articulating alternative identity projects. Figures such as Vyacheslav Chornovil, Viktor Yushchenko, and Yulia Tymoshenko offered competing narratives grounded in civic nationalism, European orientation, and historical justice. Their discourses mobilised younger generations and regional communities in Western and Central Ukraine, particularly through the reframing of the Holodomor, advocacy for Ukrainian as the sole state language, and emphasis on democratic reform. These rhetorical strategies laid the semantic groundwork for subsequent pro-European mobilisations, including the Orange Revolution. Meanwhile, leftist and pro-Soviet actors, especially the Communist Party of Ukraine, preserved a counter-narrative centred on Soviet achievements, Russian cultural affinity, and economic stability.