‘Historical Borders Often Continue to Resonate To This Day’

Your book explores the borders at the River Zbruč, which hardly anyone outside Ukraine knows about these days. Why is the story of this particular historical border so exciting and worth telling?

For one, it’s precisely because the former border at the Zbruč is largely unknown – but mainly because, like other historical borders in Eastern Europe, it occasionally re-emerges in response to current events: in voting behaviour, for example. This was one of the signs that led me to take a closer look. We are familiar with patterns like these in Germany too – the former intra-German border often seems to re-establish itself during elections. The research project which gave rise to the study investigated what we call 'phantom borders' in Eastern Europe. Historical borders often continue to resonate to this day. I focused on Ukraine because it wasn’t receiving much attention from researchers at the time, before the start of the war in Eastern Ukraine in 2014. There are two major rivers in Ukraine: the Dnipro, which is highly politicised, and the Zbruč, which is less contested, but is nonetheless present in the intellectual discourse and also in people’s daily consciousness. It was this low-key presence and lack of academic attention that made it such an exciting topic for me.

How have the people who lived along this border experienced political change – and how do these experiences shape their identity today?

I conducted research in two villages without explicitly mentioning the former border, to see whether and how it surfaced in daily life. In the first conversations that I held, it was mentioned repeatedly: 'There was a border here once'. People are aware of its historical existence, but they associate it with different things. Several borders were created here in the past – after the partitions of Poland between the Habsburg and the Russian Empire, for example, or between Poland and the Soviet Union after the First World War. Very few people these days ever experienced these older borders, but stories, references and historical associations still come up in discussions or conversations. Identity is treated flexibly, yet terms such as Galičani, Banderivci or Moskali still exist: they have diverse historical, political and cultural connotations and are used by locals on both sides of the border to describe each another. Although there is a similar population structure on both sides of the border, the opposite side is often associated with different political or cultural characteristics – for example, it is assumed that they are more, or less, democratic, collective or patriotic. Economic differences also feature in this narrative, although in reality, there is very little difference between the two sides.

You talk about 'phantom borders' – what does this mean, and how do historical borders such as these continue to influence our thinking about spaces and belonging?

The term 'phantom borders' is a metaphor to describe past political boundaries which, although no longer current, can re-emerge in various forms – in institutions, routines, practices or conceptions of space, for example. They are not permanently visible: they appear and disappear, depending on the context. That’s where the phantom-like element comes in: they are sometimes there and sometimes not. They are not permanent. This is not a static conception of space, but a reawakening through discourses and narratives, institutional continuities or historical associations: 'That was the Habsburg Empire' or 'That was Poland', for example. The crucial aspect is to understand when and why these borders and social systems become relevant again. These effects can still be observed today – between East and West in Germany, for example, where they are visible in voting behaviour, the availability of pre-school facilities, or attitudes to early-years care. The reconstruction of these borders – particularly the former intra-German border – then often becomes part of political agendas. Phantom borders – associations with past political and social systems – resurface in structures and attitudes; sometimes they are overwritten and forgotten, only to reappear later if the past is brought back into play.

Are there any other places in Europe where former borders have left such deep marks?

One case is Poland, where the partition between Prussia, the Russian Empire and the Habsburg Empire can be seen very clearly in regions of what was once Galicia, for example. People actively refer back to the Habsburg period, trace the former course of the borders and create small museums or places of remembrance. These forms of remembrance tend to have an elegiac quality: it is less about whether the historical border continues to shape people’s behaviour today and more about consciously making history visible. But there are still many unanswered questions, such as the re-emergence of partition borders in the context of voting behaviour in Poland or in its rail network or agricultural structure.

What lessons can we learn from knowing about forgotten borders like the one at the Zbruč?

My study of the Zbruč shows that we should not draw premature conclusions, nor should we assume that there are any continuities – for example, that people have pro-European voting tendencies because it was once part of the Habsburg Empire, or are less European because it was once part of the Soviet Union. These are often knee-jerk reactions. We have to look more closely. What motivates voters? How are the past and the future connected in election campaign promises or discourses, and how context-dependent is identity formation? People might be described as Galičani in one breath and as Moskali in the next – depending on context and the need to draw distinctions. Behaviour is strongly influenced by context. This is also where the phantom-like aspect of historical borders is visible: they resurface in specific situations – as a result of challenges or mobilisation, for example – and vanish again in others. It’s not a predictable chain of events along the lines of: 'Because it was like this in the past, this is how it is today' or 'The past continues into the present'. Connections to the past are always created for identifiable reasons, and it is for precisely this reason that nuanced, context-specific analyses are required. Past systems overlap, but not fully. Some elements are lost, while others are frequently reclaimed and continued, but in different terms or with different meanings.

The interviewer was Angelika Markowska, trainee at ZOiS.

PD Dr Sabine von Löwis is a social geographer at the Centre for East European and International Studies (ZOiS), where she heads the Conflict Dynamics and Border Regions research cluster.

Von Löwis, Sabine. Das Phantom der alten Grenze am Zbruč: Kontinuitäten und Brüche sozialräumlicher Strukturen in der Westukraine. Reihe: Phantomgrenzen im östlichen Europa; Bd. 7. Wallstein Verlag, 2025.