Paper short abstract:

What does it mean to feel at home in a post-conflict reality of changing meanings of identity and belonging? The case of the Donbas region will serve as an example to show how people cope with changes in their imagined homeland and desirable landscapes of local space of possibility.

Paper long abstract:

Due to the long-established stereotype of land of 'soviet people' strengthened by ongoing military conflict, the Donbas region is widely seen as a breeding ground for separatism rather than a land of hope. Yet for many the core of ongoing dramatic events is to be sought elsewhere - in social discontent fueled by nonfading affect for the homeland. A complicated history made Donbas home for many people of mixed origins, backgrounds and professions, creating a bond that for many comes before any other identification. Now striking differences in attitudes toward the very concepts of belonging, identity and citizenship could be seen in Ukrainian government-controlled parts of the region alone. How do people (re)create their feeling-at-home sentiment after experiencing war? Is there a place for a narrative other than national (e.g. local, regional) in post-conflict Donbas? How do people cope with uncertainty and a feeling of losing their imagined homeland without even moving away? How do they see its future? Especially after the events of Euromaidan (and Antimaidan) the materiality of the place brings many ambivalent meanings to the landscapes of national and local imaginary, including the question of what it means to be Ukrainian and/or Donbas inhabitant in this turbulent place of specific social memory. I am especially interested in discussing how everyday materialisations of statehood make people (not) feel at home and how different social actors try to influence and challenge what can be called 'desirable landscapes' of local space of possibility.