STRATEGIC DISSONANCE OF UKRAINE’S CULTURAL POLICY : BETWEEN SECURITY ESSENTIALISM AND EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTIVISM

Abstract

This study analyses the key concepts underpinning Ukraine’s contemporary state cultural policy, focusing on the interplay between national identity and cultural diversity. Its aim is to outline methodological foundations for shaping an identity strategy aligned with European diversity principles. The empirical basis comprises the Culture Development Strategy of Ukraine until 2030 and the Strategy for the Affirmation of Ukrainian National and Civic Identity until 2030.
Methodology. The study applies critical discourse analysis and conceptual analysis, combining classical theories of nationhood with a postcolonial perspective. This approach enables the identification of conceptual frameworks through which the strategies interpret culture, identity, and diversity, as well as the detection of structural contradictions that limit the coherence of state cultural policy under wartime conditions.
Results. The analysis demonstrates that the two strategies operate within divergent discursive logics. The cultural development strategy relies on security-oriented essentialism, framing culture mainly as a tool for heritage preservation and national resilience. In contrast, the identity strategy is rooted in political constructivism, treating identity as a dynamic product of deliberate institutional modelling. These differing perspectives create a conceptual gap regarding diversity, community agency, and the representation of the «Other». Consequently, Ukraine’s cultural policy displays strategic ambivalence: an excessive emphasis on security risks reducing diversity to a merely declarative value, yet neglecting the protective role of culture in wartime remains impossible.
Novelty. The study argues for transitioning from a static to a processual understanding of identity and demonstrates the
analytical value of a postcolonial lens for interpreting Ukrainian nation-building during war and decolonisation.
Practical significance. The findings may contribute to the harmonisation of cultural policy documents, the development
of inclusive mechanisms for supporting diversity, and the design of coherent state programmes in culture and identity policy.