The first steps of the Directory in december 1918 – january 1919 under the statesman of the ukrainian revolution

Abstract

The purpose of the article: State-building processes in the years of Ukrainian 1917 – 1921 took place in difficult conditions. The active participants of the events of that time left a considerable number of memories in which they reflected their personal attitude to the events, to the politicians and the work of state bodies. The authors, based on memoirs, diaries, synthetic works of historical and memoir nature, set out to characterize the work of the Directory in the first months of its creation. The methodology of the study is based on a combination of structural-functional analysis, comparative-historical and comparative-legal method. The authors adhered to the study of the principles of historicism, systematicity, scientificity and verification. The scientific novelty of the work is that, using comparative historical and comparative legal methods, the authors analyzes the memoirs of the Heads of the Directory, Prime Ministers and ordinary servants of the Ukrainian Revolution of 1917 – 1921, and analyzes their relationship to the first months of the Directory's work. The authors also shows the main shortcomings in the work of the state body. Conclusions. According to the authors, the work of the Directory was influenced by the constant disputes of its members. They were especially noticeable between V. Vynnychenko and S. Petliura, who fought for influence on the state body. There were fundamental differences between these leaders in the direction of building a state of socialist or European model? State-building processes have also been affected by feuds between the military and civilian administrations, leading to ongoing conflicts. The military did not always follow the directives of the Directory. In addition, due to the lack of skilled workers in the civil and military administrations, unscrupulous executives were often appointed. However, the state policy-making process did not cause the greatest harm to the state policy. Laws were delayed and citizens were not always informed about the work of the Directory. In a short time, it lost its popularity and support of citizens.