From Nationalism to Universalism: Vladimir (Ze'ev) Jabotinsky and the Ukrainian Question byIsrael KleinerReview by: John D. KlierSlavic Review, Vol. 60, No. 4 (Winter, 2001), pp. 846-847Published by:Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2697516 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 18:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Slavic Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.139 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:48:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

846 Slavic Review

tions and additional pictures in the text, among them many cartoons. On the other hand he gives less attention to some important political and social factors of Ukrainian nation building, especially during the crucial period 1917-1939 (social and national mobiliza- tion, Ukrainization, korenizatsiia, urbanization). The second chapter on myths of Ukrain- ian antiquity is entertaining, but in allocating space to bizarre inventions that are not rep- resentative, it distorts the reality of the actual Ukrainian historiography. In the historical account, there are some inaccuracies and mistakes. For example, Ihor during his famous campaign was not prince of Chernihiv, but of Novhorod-Sivers'kyj; the legend from the Primary Chronicle about the four options Volodymyr examined before adopting the Or- thodox faith is confused; the statements about Moscow as the Third Rome are mistaken; the possible Russian-Ukrainian elite culture in tsarist Russia should not be labeled Rossi- iskaia (which would comprise also the non-Slavic peoples), but Vserusskaia or Russkaia; Hrushevs'kyi was not a native Galician historian; there were only four, not five, universals.

Wilson, relying on his first book and numerous articles, is on firmer ground in the very informative second part of the book (chapters 9-13) devoted to Ukrainian national- ism and national imagination; the political, religious, and economic development; and the geopolitical situation of Ukraine during the 1990s. In his conclusion he underlines the fac- tors contradicting the teleological interpretations of Ukrainian nation building, namely its ambiguity and diversity, its regional cleavages, its different options, and the important im- pact of empires, especially the crucial Russian question. Wilson may underestimate the co- herence and integrative capacities of the national project, but his critical approach has to be taken seriously. In the end he outlines several possibilities for future development and comes to the conclusion: "After nearly a decade of independence, key aspects of Ukraine's future are yet to be decided" (317).

This important book is elegantly written and rich in information from various sources, in inspiring insights and interpretations. This is also an ambitious book that does not fully succeed in combining its divergent threads into a coherent narrative. Neverthe- less, it is fascinating reading.

ANDREAS KAPPELER

University of Vienna

From Nationalism to Universalism: Vladimir (Ze'ev)Jabotinsky and the Ukrainian Question. By Israel Kleiner. Foreword, Wolf Moskovich. Edmonton: Canadian Institute of Ukrain- ian Studies Press, 2000. xvi, 199 pp. Appendix. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $34.95, hard bound. $19.95, paper.

The reputation of Vladimir (Ze'ev) Jabotinsky, the founder of Zionist Revisionism and principal inspiration of the political right in contemporary Israel, remains potent to the present day. For his opponents he was the enfant terrible who never grew up, a militarist with fascist tendencies. His followers consider him the most pragmatic and farseeing of all Zionist leaders, made more attractive still by his personal charisma and literary gifts. Israel Kleiner belongs to the latter camp and makes no secret of his admiration forJabotinsky. His book seeks to use Jabotinsky's attitudes and actions toward the Ukrainian national movement as a specific demonstration of his political genius. Despite its hagiographic aura, Kleiner's study is worth consideration, forJabotinsky had much to say about Ukrain- ian-Jewish relations. They offered a test case for his doctrine of "reciprocity of treatment," the need for the mutual recognition of national rights and interests, not least among peoples who were under a foreign yoke such as Poles, Ukrainians, andJews in the Russian empire.

Indeed, Ukrainian nationalism featured in one of the most controversial actions of Jabotinsky's career. In 1921 Jabotinsky co-signed with Maksym Slavinsky, the representa- tive of Symon Petliura's 6migr6 Ukrainian government, an agreement to create aJewish gendarmerie to serve as a defense against pogroms in areas to be liberated by a putative invasion of communist-held Ukraine. Since Petliura and his government were widely seen as pogrom-mongers in theJewish world, this agreement drew fearsome criticism. (Indeed,

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.139 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:48:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Book Reviews 847

it was a factor inJabotinsky's uncharacteristic reticence to take a public stand in the polit- ical furor surrounding the Paris trial of Petliura's assassin, Simon Schwartzbard, in 1927.) Kleiner argues that the much-reviled Slavinsky accord was a characteristic act of political courage on Jabotinsky's part. It reflected his theory of the "anti-Semitism of circum- stances," whereby specific and concrete phenomena-the consequence of Jewish life in the diaspora- rather than ideology, underlay hostility to theJews. Thus, anti-Semitism was best combated by recognizing its objective causes and approaching them in a realistic way. Thus, Jabotinsky was also happy to negotiate with the anti-Semitic prewar Polish govern- ment, if that meant the removal of a large part of Polish Jewry to Palestine, to the mutual satisfaction ofJews and Poles.

Perhaps the most interesting-because less-known-part of Kleiner's study is his ex- amination of the debate betweenJabotinsky and Russian liberals over the true significance of the centennial celebrations to mark the birth of Taras Shevchenko in 1911. As Kleiner demonstrates, Jabotinsky used the occasion for a press campaign against two enemies, the "Great Russian chauvinist" tendencies of Russian liberalism (exemplified by Petr Struve), andJewish assimilationists in Ukraine.

Jabotinsky castigated the Jewish assimilationists for their "infatuation with Russian culture," which led them to dismiss or ignore the emergent Ukrainian national movement. Jabotinsky presciently foresaw, argues Kleiner, that this neglect would complicate Jewish- Ukrainian relations in the future. Kleiner's summary of the debate, and his analysis of Jabotinsky's writings, is valuable, but it hardly tells the whole story. Jabotinsky was neither the first Ukrainian nor the firstJew to address this problem: Ukrainian intellectuals had been complaining about the Russifying tendencies of the Jews as early as the Osnova/Zion polemic of 1861-62. In the aftermath of the pogroms of 1881-82, Mykhailo Drahomanov explored this aspect of Ukrainian-Jewish relations at length in his journal Volnoe slovo and attractedJewish responses.

In general, Kleiner's efforts to place Jabotinsky's thought in context is marred by his neglect of contemporary research onJews in the Russian empire. For bothJabotinsky and Kleiner, "assimilationist" functions merely as a term of abuse and obscures the wider pic- ture. ForJews moving into the non-Jewish, secular culture, Russian was the sole language of education and upward-mobility. Moreover, "culture wars" were very much an elite prob- lem. The thoroughly RussifiedJabotinsky ignored the de facto acculturation that existed between Ukrainian Jews and peasants in the countryside. Unsatisfactory too is Kleiner's treatment of Russian anti-Semitism, which he describes as growing out of "the mystical and messianic psychology peculiar to Russians," perhaps to differentiate it from the Ukraini- ans' "anti-Semitism of circumstances" (21).

Ironically, the Jewish culture thatJabotinsky was intent on protecting was itself a new creation, the Hebrew-based culture of Zionism, yet Kleiner never mentions this. It is significant that the word Yiddish is virtually absent from a book devoted to the cultural problems of east European Jewry. Finally, as demonstrated by Henry Abramson's recent publications, the author's claim that "the absolute majority of Jewish political forces in Ukraine ... supported the Ukrainian national government during the revolution and civil war between 1917 and 1920" (44) in untenable.

Despite these many caveats, Kleiner's study is a useful introduction to the problemat- ical relationship of Ukrainians andJews in the last years of the Russian empire.

JOHN D. KLIER University College London

Elections and Democratization in Ukraine. By Sarah Birch. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2000. xii, 212 pp. Appendixes. Notes. Bibliogrpahy. Index. Figures. Tables. $65.00, hard bound.

This volume has five chapters devoted to electoral contests in Ukraine that span the last years of the USSR and seven years of independence. These contests are: the elections to the Congress of People's Deputies of 1989, the parliamentary elections of 1990, the refer-

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.139 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:48:18 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions