Relevance of the research topic. In the modern world, for each state, the issue of national identity is one of the most important. Without national unity, a sense of national community, common shared national interests and values, it is impossible to imagine a strong and stable state. The stronger the national unity, the higher civil liability and the greater the likelihood of joint action in the name of their nation.
The modern period of development of the post-Soviet states is the period of nation-building and the formation of national identity, which is not completed in most states of the region. In the early 1990s. a unique state disappeared from the political map of the world - the Soviet Union, and with it a unique supranational community and socio-ideological construct - the “Soviet people”. Obviously, as a result of the collapse of the USSR, close inter-republican ties were severed. The role of the once united cultural and historical Soviet space is gradually decreasing.
Obtaining independence by states did not entail the immediate consolidation of citizens into a single nation. Since the nation is formed not just in the process of a long historical development, but is the result of targeted efforts by the intellectual elite and the state (constructed), the national elites of the new independent states turned to the formation of strategies for building a nation and national identity.
The Commonwealth of Independent States occupies a key place in Russia's foreign policy. These countries belong to our closest geopolitical environment. Russian economic and security interests are concentrated here. Therefore, for Russia, the issues of national self-identification of new independent states are extremely important. First of all, this concerns Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova - the states of civilization and culture that are closest to us, whose political, economic, and socio-cultural development is of strategic importance for Russia.
The goal of the work: analyzing functioning of the post-soviet nations after independence.
The tasks of the work:
1. to learn historical and cultural overview of USSR;
2. to examine culture and change such as transformation of national identity in Ukraine , Moldova and Belarus;
3. to analyze the language question in the former Soviet Republics such as Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus.
The revolution of 1917 divided the artistic intelligentsia of Russia into two parts. One of them, though not everyone accepting to the Council of Deputies (as many then called the country of the Soviets), believed in the renewal of Russia and gave its strength to serve the revolutionary cause; the other was negatively contemptuous of the Bolshevik government and supported its opponents in various forms.
V. Mayakovsky in a kind of literary autobiography “I myself” in October 1917 characterized his position as follows: “To accept or not to accept? There was no such question for me (and for other futurist Muscovites). My revolution. During the civil war, the poet worked in the so-called “ROSTA Satire Windows” (GROWTH - Russian Telegraph Agency), where satirical posters, cartoons, and popular prints were created with short poetic texts. The enemies of the Soviet government — generals, landowners, capitalists, and foreign interventionists — were mocked at them. They spoke about the tasks of economic construction. Future Soviet writers served in the Red Army: for example, D. A. Furmanov was a division commissar commanded by Chapaev; I.E. Babel was a fighter of the famous 1st Cavalry Army; At sixteen, A. P. Gaidar commanded a youth detachment in Khakassia.
Future immigrant writers took part in the white movement: R. B. Gul fought as part of the Volunteer Army, which made the famous Ice Campaign from Don to Kuban, and GI Gazdanov joined the Wrangel Army as a volunteer after the 7th grade of the gymnasium. I. Bunin called his diaries the days of the civil war “Cursed Days”. MI Tsvetaeva wrote a cycle of poems under the significant name “Swan Camp” - a lament over white Russia filled with religious images. The themes of the civil war for human nature were permeated with the works of emigre writers M. A. Alda-nova (“Suicide”), M. A. Osorgin (“Witness to History”), I. S. Shmeleva (“The Sun of the Dead”).
Later, Russian culture developed in two streams: in a Soviet country and in conditions of emigration. Writers and poets of I. A. Bunin, who won the Nobel Prize in literature in 1933, D. S. Merezhkovsky and 3. N. Gippius, the leading authors of the anti-Soviet program book The Kingdom of Antichrist, worked in a foreign land. Some writers, such as V.V. Nabokov, entered literature already in emigration. It was precisely abroad that the artists V. Kandinsky, O. Tsadkin, M. Chagall won world fame.
If the works of emigre writers (M. Aldanov, I. Shmelev, and others) were permeated with the theme of the perniciousness of the revolution and the civil war, the works of Soviet writers breathed revolutionary pathos.
In the first post-revolutionary decade, the development of culture in Russia was characterized by experimentation, the search for new artistic forms and means — the revolutionary artistic spirit. The culture of this decade, on the one hand, was rooted in the “Silver Age”, and on the other hand, it took from the revolution a tendency to renounce classical aesthetic canons, to thematic and plot novelty. Many writers saw their duty in serving the ideals of the revolution. This was manifested in the politicization of Mayakovsky's poetic creativity, in the creation of the Theater October Revolution by Meyerhold, in the formation of the Association of Artists of Revolutionary Russia (AHRR), etc.
The poets S. Yesenin, A. A. Akhmatova, O. E. Mandelstam, B. L. Pasternak, who started their poetic path at the beginning of the century, continued to create. A new word in the literature was said by the generation that came into it already in the Soviet era - M. A. Bulgakov, M. A. Sholokhov, V. P. Kataev, A. A. Fadeev, M. M. Zoshchenko.
If in the 20s. Literature and art were distinguished by exceptional diversity, and in the 1930s, under the conditions of ideological dictate, so-called socialist realism was imposed on writers and artists. According to his canons, the reflection of reality in works of literature and art had to obey the tasks of socialist education. Gradually, instead of critical realism and a variety of avant-garde trends in art culture, pseudo-realism became firmly established, i.e. idealized image of the Soviet reality and the Soviet man.
Artistic culture was under the control of the Communist Party. In the early 30s. numerous associations of artists were eliminated. Instead, they created unified unions of Soviet writers, artists, filmmakers, artists, composers. Although formally they were independent public organizations, the creative intelligentsia had to be completely subordinate to the authorities. At the same time, the unions, possessing funds and houses of creativity, created certain conditions for the work of the artistic intelligentsia. The state maintained theaters, financed the filming of films, provided artists with studios, etc. From the creative figures, only one thing was required - to faithfully serve the Communist Party. Writers, artists and musicians, who retreated from the canons imposed by the authorities, were expected to be “worked out” and repressed (O. E. Mandelstam, V. E. Meyerhold, B. A. Pilnyak and many others died in Stalinist torture chambers).
Significant place in the Soviet artistic culture occupied historical and revolutionary themes. The tragedy of the revolution and civil war was reflected in the books of M. A. Sholokhov (“The Quiet Don”), A. N. Tolstoy (“Going Alone”), E. E. Babel (collection of short stories “Konarmiya”), pictures by M. B. Grekov ("Tachanka"), A. A. Deine-ki ("Defense of Petrograd"). In cinema, films devoted to revolution and civil war occupied an honorable place. The most famous among them were “Chapaev”, a film trilogy about Maxim, “We are from Kronstadt”. The theme of the heroism did not descend from the capital and
from provincial theater scenes. A characteristic symbol of Soviet fine art was the sculpture “Worker and Kolkhoz Woman” by V. I. Mukhina, which adorned the Soviet pavilion at the World Exhibition in Paris in 1937. Famous and little-known artists created pompous group portraits with Lenin and Stalin. At the same time, MV Nesterov, P. D. Korin, P. P. Konchalovsky, and other talented artists achieved outstanding success in portrait and landscape painting.
Prominent positions in the world of art 20-30-ies. took the Soviet cinema. It stood out such directors as SM. Eisenstein (The Battleship Potemkin, Alexander Nevsky, and others), the founder of the Soviet eccentric comedy G. V. Aleksandrov (Jolly Fellows, Volga-Volga, etc.), the founder of Ukrainian cinema A. P. Dovzhenko (Arsenal, Shchors, etc.). Stars of the Soviet sound film shine on the artistic sky: L. P. Orlova, V. V. Serova, N. K. Cherkasov, B. P. Chirkov, and others.
Great Patriotic War and artistic intelligentsia. Not even a week had passed since the Nazis attacked the USSR, the TASS Windows (TASS - Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union) appeared in the center of Moscow, continuing the traditions of the propaganda and political poster and caricature of ROSTA. During the war, 130 artists and 80 poets took part in the work of the TASS Windows, which published more than 1 million posters and caricatures. In the early days of the war, the famous posters “Motherland Calling!” Were created (I. M. Toidze), “Our cause is just, victory will be ours” (V. A. Serov), “Warrior of the Red Army, save!” ( V. B. Koretsky). In Leningrad, the “Battle Pencil” artists' association set up the production of small-format posters.
During the Great Patriotic War, many writers turned to the genre of journalism. The newspapers published military essays, articles, poems. The most famous publicist was IG Ehrenburg. Poem
A. T. Tvardovsky “Vasily Terkin”, front-line poems by K. M. Simonov (“Wait for me”) embodied the feelings of the whole people. The realistic reflection of the fate of people was reflected in the military prose of A. A. Beck (“Volokolamsk Highway”), V. S. Grossman (“The people is immortal”),
B. A. Nekrasova (“In the trenches of Stalingrad”), K. M. Simonova (“Days and Nights”). In the repertoire of theaters appeared statements about front-line life. It is significant that the plays of A. E. Korneychuk “Front” and K. M. Simonov “Russian People” were printed in newspapers along with Sovin-form bureau reports on the situation on the fronts.
The most important part of the artistic life of the war years were front concerts and meetings of artists with the wounded in hospitals. Russian folk songs performed by L. A. Ruslanova were very popular, pop songs were performed by K. I. Schulzhenko and L. O. Utesova. Lyrical songs of K. Ya. Listov (“In a dugout”), N. V. Bogoslovsky (“Dark night”), M. I. Blanter (“In the forest near the front”) were widely spread at the front and in the rear. , V.P. Solovyov-Sedoy ("The Nightingale").
In all cinemas a military chronicle was shown. Filming was carried out by operators in front-line conditions, with great danger to life. The first full-length documentary film was dedicated to the defeat of Hitler's troops near Moscow. Then the films “Leningrad on fire”, “Stalingrad”, “People’s Avengers” and a number of others were created. Some of these films were shown after the war in the Nuremberg trials as documentary evidence of Nazi crimes.
V. Vysotsky in the performance of the Theater of Drama and Comedy on Taganka "Hamlet" Art culture of the second half of the XX century. After the Great Patriotic War, new names appeared in Soviet art, and from the turn of the 1950s through the 1960s. began to form new thematic areas. In connection with the unmasking of the personality cult of Stalin, overcoming the frankly “lacquering” art, especially characteristic for the 30-40s, occurred.
Since the mid 50s. literature and art began to play the same educational role in Soviet society as they played in Russia in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The extreme ideological (and censorship) obtrusiveness of sociopolitical thought contributed to the fact that the discussion of many issues of concern to society was transferred to the sphere of literature and literary criticism. The most significant new phenomenon was the critical mapping of the realities of Stalin's time. A sensation was the publication in the early 60s. works of A.I. Solzhenitsyn (“One Day of Ivan Denisovich”, short stories) and A.T. Tvardovsky (“Terkin in the Other World”). Together with Solzhenitsyn, the camp theme entered literature, and the poem of Tvardovsky (along with the poems of the young E. A. Yevtushenko) marked the beginning of an artistic attack on the personality cult of Stalin. In the mid-60s. The novel by M. A. Bulgakov, The Master and Margarita, written with pre-war time, was published for the first time, with its religious and mystical symbolism, which is not characteristic of Soviet literature. However, the artistic intelligentsia still experienced ideological dictates from the party. So, B. Pasternak, who won the Nobel Prize for the declared anti-Soviet novel Doctor Zhivago, was forced to abandon it.
In the cultural life of Soviet society, poetry has always played a big role. In the 60s. poets of a new generation - B.A. Akhmadulina, A. A. Voznesensky, E. A. Yevtushenko, R. I. Rozhdestvensky - with their civic consciousness and journalistic orientation the lyric became the idols of the reading public. Poetic evenings in the Moscow Polytechnic Museum, sports palaces, and higher educational institutions enjoyed tremendous success.
The mid-twentieth-century Soviet culture is represented in Figure 1 and table 1.
Fig.1. Soviet culture in the middle of the 20th century (early 1950s - 1960s)
The main trends in the development of post-Soviet culture. One of the features of the development of Russian culture at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. is its deideologization and pluralism of creative search. In the elite fiction and visual arts of post-Soviet Russia, avant-garde art has come to the fore. These include, for example, the books of V. Pelevin, T. Tolstoy, L. Ulitskaya and other authors. Avant-gardism is the predominant direction in painting. In the modern domestic theater, the symbols of the irrational principle in a person are imbued with the productions of director R. G. Viktyuk.
Soviet culture in the middle of the 20th century (early 1950s - 1960s)
•General and special reform of education
• Formation of new scientific centers
• Increase the number of scientific frames
• Significant development progress computing technology atomic energy and rocket technology
• Commissioning of the world's first NPP
• Space launch of the first artificial earth satellite
• Difficulties and successes in overcoming ideologization social sciences
• Organization of new literary and art magazines
• Creation of new theater groups
• New trends in fiction and art
• The struggle of liberal and conservative trends in artistic creation
• The struggle to preserve the principle of partisanship in literature
• Meeting of the party leadership with the creative intelligentsia
Inconsistency "thaw" in the culture is represented in the figure 2.
Fig.2. Inconsistency "thaw" in the culture
From the period of “perestroika”, the overcoming of the isolation of Russian culture from the cultural life of foreign countries began. Residents of the USSR, and later on the Russian Federation, were able to read books, see films that were previously inaccessible to them for ideological reasons. Many writers, deprived of their citizenship by the Soviet authorities, returned to their homeland. A single space of Russian culture emerged, uniting writers, artists, musicians, directors and actors regardless of their place of residence. For example, sculptors E. I. Neizvestny (the tombstone of N. S. Khrushchev, a monument to the victims of the Stalinist repressions in Vorkuta) and M. M. Shemyakin (a monument to Peter I in St. Petersburg) live in the USA. And the sculptures of V.A. Sidur, who lived in Moscow (“The victims of violence”, etc.) were installed in the cities of the Federal Republic of Germany. Directed by N. S. Mikhalkov and A. S. Konchalovsky make films both at home and abroad.
The radical break-up of the political and economic system led not only to the liberation of culture from ideological fetters, but also caused the need to adapt to the reduction, and sometimes to the complete elimination of state funding. The commercialization of literature and art led to the proliferation of works that were not distinguished by high artistic merit. On the other hand, even in the new conditions, the best representatives of culture turn to the analysis of the most acute social problems, looking for ways of spiritual improvement of a person. Such works include, in particular, the works of film directors V. Yu. Abdrashitov (“Time of the Dancer”), N. S. Mikhalkov (“Tired of the Sun”, “The Siberian Barber”), V. P. Todorovsky (“Country of the Deaf”) , S.A. Solovyov ("Tender age").
Portrait of D. D. Shostakovich. Artist T. Salakhov. 1976 Music art. Representatives of Russia made a major contribution to the world musical culture of the 20th century. The greatest composers whose works were repeatedly performed in concert halls and opera houses in many countries of the world were S. S. Prokofiev (symphonic works, the opera War and Peace, the ballet Cinderella, Romeo and Juliet), D. D. Shostakovich (6th symphony, opera “Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk”), A.G. Schnittke (3rd symphony, Requiem). Opera and ballet productions of the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow were world famous. On his stage were both the works of the classical repertoire, and the works of composers of the Soviet period - T. N. Khrennikova, R. K. Shchedrin, A. Ya. Eshpaya.
A whole constellation of talented performing musicians and opera singers who received worldwide fame worked in the country (pianists E. G. Gilels, S. T. Richter, violinist DF Oistrakh, singers S. Ya. Lemeshev, E. Obraztsova) . Some of them could not put up with hard ideological pressure and were forced to leave their homeland (singer G. P. Vishnevskaya, cellist M. L. Rostropovich).
Musicians playing jazz music also experienced constant pressure - they were criticized as followers of the “bourgeois” culture. Nevertheless, in the Soviet Union, jazz orchestras led by singer L. O. Utesov, conductor O. L. Lundstrem, and brilliant improviser-trumpet player EI Rozner led the war.
The most common musical genre was pop song. The works of the most talented authors who managed to overcome the momentary opportunism in their work became, over time, an integral part of the culture of the people. These include, in particular, “Katyusha” by M. I. Blanter, “Flows the Volga” by M. G. Fradkin, “Hope” by A. N. Pakhmutova, and many other songs.
In the 60s. The author's song entered the cultural life of Soviet society, in which professional and amateur principles came together. Creativity of bards, who spoke, as a rule, in an informal setting, was not controlled by cultural institutions. In the songs performed by B. Sh. Okudzhava, A. A. Galich, Yu. I. Vizbor, performed under the guitar, new motives were heard - purely personal, not stencil-official attitudes towards public and private life. The powerful civil pathos and wide genre diversity was filled with the work of V. S. Vysotsky, who combined the talents of the poet, actor and singer.
Even more profound social content received in the 70-80s. Soviet rock music. Its representatives - A. V. Makarevich (group “Time Machine”), K. N. Nikolsky, A. D. Romanov (“Resurrection”), B. B. Grebenshchikov (“Aquarium”) - managed to pass from imitation to Western musicians to independent works, which showed themselves, along with the songs of bards, the folklore of the urban era.
For the Ukrainian society, which has become more oriented towards European integration, the historical socio-cultural unity of the Slavic peoples does not seem to be the main factor of national identity. At the same time, the majority of Ukrainian citizens are aware of the value of family and personal ties with Russia. Many unresolved issues remain: the unresolved situation of ethnic groups and national minorities, the status of the Russian language. For both countries, the process of formation of national identity based on a combination of ethnic and civil factors is characteristic.
Speaking about the formation of Ukrainian identity, it should be noted that along with trends similar to other post-socialist countries, the overcoming of the past, the restoration of ethnic justice was of particular importance. As a result, after declaring independence, great attention has been paid to ideology in countering itself to Russia. Active attempts to turn Russia into the "other". The existence within the framework of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire earlier allowed Ukraine to gain experience in national development and form a national identity 101, the institutions created allowed the implementation of a national project as soon as the opportunity arises, i.e. with the collapse of the USSR. The image of the other is key to the formation of identity, especially in the case of the ethnic affinity of two nations, and if one group refuses to recognize the independent existence of the other in any other way except as part of a larger group. The desire to prove the right to independent existence at the ideological or toponymic level was expressed in the demand to change the use of the preposition with the name Ukraine in order to avoid association with the outskirts of Russia. International politics plays an important role in the process of forming a national state. Forming an independent foreign policy for any post-Soviet state inevitably means a conflict with Russia, the former hegemon. Realizing the closeness of the historical, cultural, linguistic and ethnic with Russia, Ukraine is trying as much as possible to isolate itself on the foreign policy arena from Russia.
The states, in which the various territories of Moldova were part of one or another period of time, pursued a policy aimed at forming a territorial and national identity advantageous to them. As a single political community, Moldova within modern borders began to form within the framework of the Soviet Union. The Soviet leadership put forward the thesis that Moldovans and Romanians are different nations. In Moldova, a policy began to be pursued for the formation of Moldovan identity as opposed to the Romanian one. The construction of the Moldavian nation in the USSR was not so much the intention to break the already existing national identity, as it was an attempt to direct the formation of the nation, which in inter-war Romania were not completed, into a new Soviet channel. In the period of its independence, Moldova is in the zone of geopolitical uncertainty, balancing between the EU and the CIS. An important factor in this process is gradually becoming European integration, the influence of which is reinforced by the EU membership of Romania [16, p. 355]. In general, the peculiarities of the historical development of Moldova led to the presence of several external (Moscow, Bucharest and partially Kiev) and internal (Chisinau, Tiraspol and Comrat) political, cultural and economic competing centers and a number of ethno-political identities that influence the formation of a nation and state in Moldova. One of the features of the Moldovan identity is the contradiction between “Romanianism” and “Moldovanism”, which creates a split in society and confirms the struggle between the western and eastern vector in foreign policy [4, p. nineteen]. So, the post-Soviet countries are carriers of a special model of ethnopolitical transformation and national-state identification, including the common - Soviet and pre-Soviet history (territory, language, psychology), and especially - its own configuration of interethnic interests and foreign policy orientations in the new independent state/
In the last decade, the importance of the post-Soviet space has increased markedly in the world. The region has become the object of increased attention of the great powers and the arena of their rivalry. This is confirmed by the series of “color revolutions” in the post-Soviet space, projects for the expansion of NATO to the East, the implementation of the European Neighborhood Policy.
The events that are taking place actualize the problem of national identity, which is caused by the need to rethink ideas of national unity, taking into account new geographical, political, and social boundaries. What image of a nation will Ukraine and Belarus choose, what strategies and models for the formation of national identity? Therefore, whether it will be a strategy of self-identification and presentation of oneself as part of the Slavic Orthodox world, or part of European civilization, the development of the post-Soviet space in the 21st century will largely depend. The realities of the post-Soviet period of development have put Russia and other states of Eurasia in front of a difficult question: together or separately integrate into the new architecture of the globalizing world.
The Belarusian society is still characterized by a great cultural identification with Russia than with Europe, which is explained by the recognition by Belarusians of the historical, cultural, linguistic affinity of the two peoples. However, the importance of Soviet identity is gradually decreasing, giving way to new models of identity (civil, European).
In the first half of the nineties of the last century, the official attitude to the language problem in Belarus and in Ukraine was virtually the same. The young republics, finally receiving sovereignty, plunged headlong into the "national". This also included languages. I deliberately take the word “national” in quotes: an unbiased person understands that today Russian is no less national for the average Belarusian and Ukrainian than the languages Belarusian and Ukrainian, respectively. It is possible to welcome this fact, it is possible not to welcome him, but it is difficult to argue with him. How often, when you speak to a person on the move, you can hear the language in response - both in Minsk and in Kiev! Moreover, the participation of our two peoples in the creation of the Russian language, Russian literature is difficult to overestimate. It should be understood that both Russian literature and the Russian language were integral, including all the most significant of the cultural heritage of the three peoples. Refusal from Russian language and literature means voluntary cultural castration. Even a highly nationalist, if he is more or less sensible, should not abandon them in order not to drive himself to the cultural periphery. One Taras Shevchenko or Yanka Kupala will not be full. There is still Gogol, there is Dostoevsky, there is, by the way, Mitskevich and Oginsky - and so on, all of his own, not parochial, but local, and all the stars of the first magnitude. The greatest folly is to refuse them on the grounds that they developed the "culture of the neighboring state." As part of this state, it is bad or good, and there were Belarus and Ukraine, and therefore, it is unlawful to separate it from the Belarusian / Ukrainian culture. It is foolish to ignore the legacy of the enlighteners and first printers sent from our lands on a mission to the east, among a large people who have acquired global significance.
It would be wise, recognizing the common heritage, not to forget about the specifically national, necessary, as a seasoning for a good dish. Let the Russians have a weasel, the Belarusians have a kryzhachok, and the Ukrainians have a gopachok. But it is impossible to build a full-fledged culture solely on trousers and straw hats. Culture is global, true culture is a worldwide phenomenon.
Of course, there is the historical problem of the eternal provincialism of our peoples, who served as raw materials for Poland and now for Russia. But self-pity is the worst engine possible. The historically conditioned integration in the cultures of Russia and Poland today could be turned to their advantage. It is cultural openness, the creation of a wide cultural field “od morza do morza”, in which both Eastern and Western cultures would meet and flourish, as well as close cooperation with each other, could bring unprecedented flourishing for both Belarus and Ukraine. Knowledge is power, knowledge of language is tremendous power and great advantage, you need to strive to know as many languages as possible, and not uproot existing language skills.
Language plays a key role in the identity of Ukraine. As a potential symbol of culture and ways of delineating the boundaries of identity. According to the Constitution of Ukraine (Article 10), “the state language in Ukraine is Ukrainian. The state ensures the all-round development and functioning of the Ukrainian language in all spheres of public life throughout Ukraine. ”2 The Constitution guarantees the free development, use and protection of Russian and other minority languages of Ukraine. The state promotes the study of languages of international communication. But the lack of clear wording on the contrary created difficulties in regulating the problem and the field for interpretation. The Constitution did not give an answer about the possibility or impossibility of using the Russian language in official spheres. In the field of education, however, Art. 53 of the Constitution guaranteed “the right to study in the native language or to study the native language in state and municipal educational institutions or through national cultural societies”. As in the case of other post-socialist countries, there is obviously a lack of experience in democratic development. The complexity of relations between the Russian-speaking and Ukrainian-speaking population, the conflict between them and the inability to normalize it is largely due to the weakness of national identity, its incomplete formation, the formation of a parallel to the national identities of the two states. At the same time, there was no unity among the political elites in terms of creating the image of the “other”, as there was no unity in relation to the West, which contributes to the formation of a third way - a unique image of a bridge between two worlds, which is also characteristic of most post-socialist countries and countries in the process of late formation of national identity.
Speaking of Moldova, we note that as early as 1989, on the wave of restructuring announced by Mikhail Gorbachev at the request of the creative intelligentsia, the parliament proclaimed the Moldovan language as the state language and translated it into Latin script instead of the Cyrillic alphabet used earlier. Then the population of Transnistria and Gagauzia demanded to legitimize Russian as the second state language, which was spoken by almost 90% of the country's population and which was the main one for every third resident. The controversy surrounding the language issue resulted in a conflict in Gagauzia, the war in Transnistria and led to a split of the country.
Meanwhile, in Moldova, a number of researchers believe that Moldavian is not an independent language at all, but a dialect of modern Romanian literary language, indicating that the same dialect is spoken in the historical region of Moldova in eastern Romania.
Some scholars and politicians in Chisinau disagree with this opinion. They believe that the Moldovan language was formed in antiquity, when the Moldavian principality existed, Romania was created as a state in the 19th century, then modern Romanian appeared. At the same time, everyone acknowledges that there is virtually no difference between Moldovan and Romanian.
The present work is devoted to analyzing functioning of the post-soviet nations after independence.
When writing the work there was learnt historical and cultural overview of USSR, examined culture and change such as transformation of national identity in Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus, analyzed the language question in the former Soviet Republics such as Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus.
Summing up it should be added that In the last decade, the importance of the post-Soviet space has increased markedly in the world. The region has become the object of increased attention of the great powers and the arena of their rivalry. This is confirmed by the series of “color revolutions” in the post-Soviet space, projects for the expansion of NATO to the East, the implementation of the European Neighborhood Policy. The events that are taking place actualize the problem of national identity, which is caused by the need to rethink ideas of national unity, taking into account new geographical, political, and social boundaries.