Therefore, it is necessary to develop a system of political measures to prevent possible antagonisms.

But, as world experience shows, the polyethnic nature of society, in spite of everything, creates new difficult problems. This, of course, also applies to Ukraine.

Basically, the composition of the population of our country, as a result of a long historical process, was formed at the turn of the XIX – XX centuries. It should be noted that its dynamics were determined, in particular, by such important points as the natural movement of the population, migration, ethnic processes (assimilation, consolidation).

In all oblasts, Ukrainians (except for the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, where their share is 24%) make up the majority of the population. Most Ukrainians (from 85 to 97%) live in Vinnytsia, Volyn, Zhytomyr, Ivano-Frankivsk, Rivne, Kyiv, Kirovohrad, Lviv, Sumy, Ternopil, Khmelnytsky, Cherkasy and Chernihiv regions. The least – in Donetsk (57%), Lugansk (58%), Odessa (62%) [6].

The politicization of the processes of national revival of the titular ethnos has had some negative consequences, especially against the background of an acute economic and political crisis. First, the complex internal structure of the Ukrainian ethnic group itself, the regional difference between the population of those parts of Ukraine that were formerly part of the Russian Empire and those that were under the rule of Austria-Hungary and later Poland, was clearly affected … Regional ethnopsychological and ethnocultural features of Ukrainians were actively used in the struggle of various groups of the political elite.

Which led to a certain demarcation of the western and southern and eastern regions. Secondly, these circumstances pushed the representatives of some Ukrainian sub-ethnic groups to the path of self-identification on ethnic grounds and attempts at national-territorial separation. Third, the struggle (within the framework of Ukrainian socio-political thought) among the main political currents over the role of the Ukrainian ethnic group, the nature of its relations with minorities has intensified.

Russians also live in all regions of Ukraine, but most of them in the Crimea, as well as in Luhansk, Donetsk, Kharkiv, Zaporizhia and Dnipropetrovsk regions (respectively 39, 38, 26, 25, 18%) [6]. Some of them painfully perceived the introduction of the study of the Ukrainian language in universities and schools, the Ukrainianization of cultural and business spheres. This is rather due to psychological factors. It is difficult for many Ukrainian Russians to accept the role of a national minority. And some actions of the Ukrainian national romantics not only contribute to such an understanding of the situation, but also turn part of the Russian population against the Ukrainian statehood.

Opinion polls show that there are twice as many Russians as Ukrainians, people who do not see the future of Ukraine as an independent state, and twice as many supporters of the Soviet revival. Thus, back in December 1994, the Congress of Russian Communities tried to push pro-Russian forces in Ukraine to initiate a referendum on the restoration of the USSR. The conductors of this action took into account, firstly, that the pro-Russian forces in the eastern and south-eastern regions are quite powerful.

Second, these regions are more economically attached to Russia and have suffered the most from the severance of economic ties with it. Third, Ukraine is still under the influence of Russia’s information space. And a lot in the Ukrainian political body depends on the “social well-being” of Russians and their position. Although independent Ukraine has not discriminated on the basis of ethnicity, many Russians still feel some discomfort with the breakdown of normal ties between the former Soviet republics, a sharp decline in living standards, deteriorating the socio-economic situation in Ukraine and the instability of Ukrainian- Russian relations.

Therefore, probable conflict situations with the participation of the Russian ethnic group can pose a serious threat to the stability of the Ukrainian state. The experience of the first years of independence shows that the actions of the authorities, which affect the interests of the Russians, immediately increase social tensions. But based on the cultural and linguistic closeness and close historical ties between the two peoples, ethnic conflict between Russians and Ukrainians is, in our view, unlikely. At the same time, the influence of foreign policy factors (northern neighbor) may stimulate the aggravation of relations between the Ukrainian and Russian communities of Ukraine.

As a result, it should be noted that polyethnicity in Ukraine has two manifestations.

There are territories with compact groups of ethnic minorities, which either dominate them (Russians in Crimea, Romanians and Hungarians in some areas of Bukovina and Transcarpathia), or do not dominate (Crimean Tatars and Germans in Crimea). Almost all regions of Ukraine are polyethnic. The most mosaic – South and East (Crimea, Odessa, Nikolaev, Kherson, Lugansk, Donetsk regions).

In some regions, the trend towards territorial disintegration is growing. Its signs:

significant activation of political forces prone to separatism in some territories (Crimea, Zakarpattia, Chernivtsi region); aggravation of confrontation between religious denominations; strengthening of destructive influence on interregional relations of artificially aggravated language issue; uneven political development of territories, which creates interregional contradictions on the basis of differentiated attitude of citizens to the events in Ukraine and its official policy.

According to ethnocultural features, the population of Ukraine is quite clearly divided into central, western and south-eastern regions. If the absolute majority of Ukrainians in the western region are Ukrainian-speaking, then the majority of the Ukrainian population in the south-eastern region is Russian-speaking. However, language behavior is only the most visible “superficial” factor of ethnic demarcation.

A deeper distinction is manifested in different assessments of the phenomena of the past, in different views on the future of Ukraine, in different political orientations. Further development of these trends is dangerous due to the growth of ethnocultural differences between regions in their territorial and political demarcation.

Foreign experience shows that under extreme conditions (deterioration of the economic situation, hostilities, rising unemployment, etc.) in relations between members of different ethnic groups plays a significant role “ethnic compare and contrast essay buy competition” which often escalates into “ethnic antagonism”. This can lead to deepening tensions in relations between ethnic groups, cause confrontation.

As the economic, social and political situation in Ukraine is far from stable, the possibility of future “ethnic antagonism” in social processes should not be ignored. We emphasize: it is not about inevitability, but only about possibility. However, it is necessary to take it into account. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a system of political measures to prevent possible antagonisms. This case is not very simple. Which, incidentally, is evidenced by research by scientists from other countries, such as Canada and the United States. The difficulty is that the ethno-national situation in polyethnic countries is constantly changing under the influence of both internal and external factors.

What seems relevant in this context? Although there has been no open conflict in Ukraine, sources of tension in different regions are emerging, and the reasons for this phenomenon are different. For example, the problem of resettlement and adaptation of Crimean Tatars, concerns in the regions with the so-called Russian-speaking population about the consequences of the possible “Ukrainization of Ukraine”, the problem of Transcarpathian Ruthenians, and so on.

In order to get a clear picture of complex and contradictory national relations and to determine the features and patterns of formation of the culture of relations between representatives of different ethnic groups, it is not enough to operate with some partial information. Extensive analysis requires the use of specific tools to help assess overall national tolerance.

One such tool is the “social distance” scale developed by Bogardus (1959). It allows to measure a person’s social attitudes towards his attitude to members of other ethnic groups and to determine a certain psychological readiness to approach or, conversely, distance from members of other nationalities, regardless of their personal qualities and values. Analysis of the distribution of nationalities on the scale of social distance on the basis of tolerance allows us to conclude that there is a tendency of a certain East Slavic isolation: Ukrainians, Belarusians, Russians, Poles have a rating of “4” on this scale … This indicates, if not high tolerance, then at least its positive assessment.

Several ratings (Crimean Tatars, Georgians, Arabs, Gypsies) in the assessment of the population of Ukraine exceed “5”. This means that the representatives of these ethnic groups in the mass consciousness are not recognized as permanent residents of Ukraine. In our opinion, it can be assumed that the main reason for this is that in the minds of the population of Ukraine they are associated with the threat of ethnic conflicts.

Thus, the fear of ethnic conflicts, in our view, is neither the result of any events that have arisen in the real situation, nor the result of maturing to certain ethnic groups. In our opinion, it is caused by general vigilance as one of the main psychological characteristics of the population of Ukraine. Such vigilance and prejudice make it possible to maintain a peaceful situation. However, the formation and strengthening of national isolationism is a hopeless phenomenon in terms of the development of an economically strong civilized state.

Ukraine as a whole is characterized by interethnic tolerance. Meanwhile, a number of socio-economic and political factors indirectly generate ethnic mistrust and intolerance. Serious problems of ethnosocial development are observed in almost all ethnic categories. Therefore, the situation requires a revision of approaches in state ethno-national policy, which do not justify themselves in conditions when ethnic communities are no longer satisfied with declarative rights, but require the provision of conditions for the realization of their specific interests.

In this regard, the ethnopolitics of the Ukrainian state towards ethnic minorities, in our opinion, should take into account several important points.

Representatives of ethnic groups other than the Ukrainian are about 14 million people. And this is a significant economic potential. Today, all ethnic groups, like Ukrainians, are experiencing an ethnic renaissance, albeit with their own characteristics.