A brief history of Ukraine, and the uncertain future ahead
Ukraine’s present struggle is rooted in five centuries of shifting borders and fallen empires. As negotiations loom, leaders must decide how much of Ukrainian land they are willing to bargain away
The Ukraine we see today was never guaranteed.
It is the product of five centuries of shifting borders, collapsing empires, uprisings, famines, and revolutions.
To understand Ukraine's fragile present and its uncertain future, one must first understand how fluid this land has always been, and how often its fate has been decided by forces beyond its borders.
Land between powers
Around 500 years ago, the land now known as Ukraine was not even a unified country, but a vast patchwork divided between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Kingdom of Poland. These northern powers lay the southern steppes, home to nomadic groups and the Crimean Khanate, whose shifting alliances and raids shaped life across the region.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
The turning point came in 1569 when the Union of Lublin merged Poland and Lithuania into the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Suddenly, most Ukrainian territories were under Polish control.
Polish culture, governance and Catholic influence expanded. But in the late 1500s, a new force rose on the frontier: the Cossacks.
The Zaporizhian Host, a part military, part political order, emerged as a symbol of Ukrainian defiance. Their autonomy, communal way of life, and their readiness to resist foreign domination have been shown through centuries of Ukrainian history.
By 1648, tensions between the Cossacks and the Commonwealth came down to the Khmelnytsky Uprising, leading to the formation of the Cossack Hetmanate.
But this autonomy did not survive long in this region. In 1654, the Treaty of Pereyaslav aligned the Hetmanate with the Tsardom of Russia; whether by alliance or submission remains contested. What followed was known as "The Ruin", a period of civil war, foreign intervention and internal fragmentation.
By 1795, with the final partition of Poland, the Russian Empire absorbed most Ukrainian lands, while Austria took control of the west. The old Hetmanate was abolished.
Empire and awakening
The 19th century saw Ukraine split between two empires, each pulling it in different directions. Under Russian rule, the Ukrainian language faced repeated bans, most notoriously the Ems Ukaz of 1876, yet the Ukrainian national revival grew anyway.
Poetry, literature, and political thought are said to have flourished underground and in the Austrian-controlled west.
The First World War tore through the region and weakened both empires that ruled the Ukrainian lands. Between 1917 and 1921, during the chaos of revolution, Ukraine saw multiple competing states rise and fall, from the Ukrainian People's Republic to short-lived socialist republics. Independence slipped away as the Bolsheviks consolidated control.
For centuries, Ukraine has been the frontline of someone else's empire. This time, we are determined that it will be the frontline of our own future.
By 1922, most of Ukraine was absorbed into the Soviet Union as the Ukrainian SSR. The West was divided between Poland, Romania and Czechoslovakia. Stalin's rule soon brought catastrophe: the Holodomor of 1932–33, a man-made famine that killed millions. Soviet policies not only starved communities but also attempted to erase a growing sense of nationalism.
During the Second World War, Nazi occupation devastated Ukraine, leaving mass graves, shattered cities, and a population traumatised by occupation on both sides. After the war, Western Ukrainian lands were incorporated into the Ukrainian SSR for the first time, creating the territorial shape that would later become independent Ukraine.
Through industrialisation, repression, the cultural thaw of the 1960s, and the shadow of Chernobyl in 1986, Ukraine remained a reluctant part of the Soviet project until the centre finally buckled.
A new nation
In 1991, Ukraine declared independence. A December nationwide vote overwhelmingly supported the break from Moscow. Leonid Kravchuk became the first president of a country that was hopeful, yet deeply fragile.
Three years later, under the Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine surrendered its massive nuclear arsenal in exchange for security assurances from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia. At the time, it seemed a step towards peace.
The Orange Revolution in 2004 showed the world that Ukrainians were ready to challenge power when democracy was at risk. A decade later, the Euromaidan protests erupted after President Viktor Yanukovych abandoned plans for closer ties with the European Union. The uprising forced him to flee the country.
Moscow responded with force. In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea and backed separatists in Donbas. The conflict simmered until it exploded again on 24 February 2022, when Russia launched a full-scale invasion, the largest conflict Europe has seen since the Second World War.
Ambassador of Ukraine to the United States Olga Stefanishyna, speaking in a recent interview with The New York Times, described the invasion as part of a longer pattern, "For centuries, Ukraine has been the frontline of someone else's empire. This time, we are determined that it will be the frontline of our own future."
Future of Ukraine
Now, Ukraine is still fighting, but the battlefield map has shifted again. Russia has occupied Mariupol, Luhansk, and Donetsk, creating the most politically sensitive dilemma since the war began.
The future, Stefanishyna warns, is "painfully uncertain". The war has become a test not only of military strength, but of political will, both within Ukraine and among its allies.
The US has floated a proposal that Ukraine should negotiate by ceding those three occupied regions in exchange for an end to the war. This, officials suggest privately, is "the most likely scenario" if a ceasefire is to be reached in the coming months. The proposal has divided policymakers and horrified many Ukrainians, who see it as a reward for aggression.
Stefanishyna's response captures the emotional and political weight of the moment: "How do you tell a mother that her son died for a city we are now told to give away? How do you explain to a soldier that victory was never the goal?"
Ukraine's leaders understand that negotiation may eventually be unavoidable, but they also know the precedent it sets. For a nation whose borders have been repeatedly drawn by outsiders, accepting new territorial losses feels like a return to the tragic cycles of its past.
History also offers another lesson: Ukraine has endured every empire that tried to contain it. The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Russian Empire, the Soviets, and the Nazis, none succeeded in erasing Ukrainian identity. Even the Holodomor, designed to break the nation's spirit, failed.
As Stefanishyna put it, "Ukraine is still here. That alone is a miracle of history."
The proposed American plan would freeze the conflict, allowing Ukraine to focus on rebuilding its economy and stabilising its government. But it would also cement Russian gains, creating a wound that could define Ukrainian politics for generations.
The future may be uncertain, but it is not predetermined. Ukraine has rewritten its fate before, and may do so again.
