Attempts undertaken by researchers of Ukraine and Russia to eliminate the gap that emerged between historiography schools of Russia and Ukraine after disintegration of the Soviet statehood not just failed. On the contrary, the gap is getting to increase. The principal reason for that is hidden in the Ukrainian historiography basic ‘paradigm' aimed at ever increasing ideological and mythological components of the Ukrainian history as well as at forgery of the most contradictory facts. Emergence, political nature, and activities of the Central Rada as a political institution from the contemporary Ukrainian statehood takes its ideal origin is one of the most mythologized moments of the 20th century Ukraine history moments. Myths about the Central Rada invented by Ukrainian historians have not a historical but obviously political character and are targeted to forgery of the common historical past, unsubstantiated accusations of the Russian government, and victimization of the Ukrainian party. Such myth invention is easily disclosed by virtue of genuine scientific and objective approach to study of history. Unfortunately, however, until creation of myths, not scientific examination of historical facts will dominate in the Ukrainian historiography the dialogue between historians of Russia and Ukraine will be exceptionally hampered.

Ukraine occupies a peculiar position on the very frontier between Europe and Russia. Geopolitical position of Ukraine has determined its historical development and is the most important factor defining the current course of the Ukrainian foreign policy. Ukraine which was not an independent state until the end of the 20th century used to be the arena of geopolitical struggle among Russia and European powers: Poland, Austria and Germany. As the independence was declared in 1991 Ukraine confronted with a necessity to choose its path: whether it would run for Europe or for Russia? This dilemma is still unresolved completely even now. The author tries to demonstrate that the choice in favor of integration with Russia fits the national interests of Ukraine while the choice in favor of the EU, on the contrary, would be pernicious for the state sovereignty and the national identity of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian question was of great importance for the multi-ethnic Russian empire for, besides the threat of considerable deterioration of Russia' geopolitical situation in case of Ukraine’s secession, it undermined the ideological pillars of the «trialistic Russian nation», i.e., it was a factor which prompted the crisis of the Russian self-identification in the beginning of the 20th century. The authors note the inertness and amorphism that were specific characteristics of the Group of Ukrainian members of the 1st and the 2nd State Dumas. Members of the group normally were members of other factions, i.e., factions of Social Democrats, Labor, Constitutional Democrats and even the Union of October, 17. In the 3rd and the 4th State Dumas Ukrainophils did not establish a group of their own but tried to act through factions of the Labourists and the Constitutional Democrats. The Ukrainian question came to the fore and acquired the extreme acuteness in the 4th State Duma, especially during the World War I. Being unaware that their tactics potentially led to the fundamentals of the Russian statehood undermining the Constitutional Democrats and the Socialists used it as a minor card in their struggle against the government.