All of this history is irrelevant. In 1000, our Slavic ancestors were still in tribal phase.
No. By that time (1000) the Slavs had plenty of grads
developed into cities, polities centered on them (the Norse called Kievan Rus' "the Realm of Cities" Gardariki), and states. The Slavs had already slavicized the First Bulgarian Empire and its Czars. Kievan Rus' already had developed appanage principaliities with a center at Kiev. Mieszko I and Boleslaw I had formed the Polish State, following the establishment of the Kingdom of Bohemia, itself following the uniting of Slavic tribes into Greater Moravia in the 9th century, itself following the tribal confederation of the Frank Samo (623-658). A sign of this is the adoption of the Germanic term for king, *kuningaz, which became kǔningǔ amongst the Slavs.
I like how Ialmisry colors history. (sarcasm) In 1600, there was no such thing as ukrainian/polish nationalism.
By 1600 Polish nationalism was developed, along with Polonization, epitomized by the Union of Lubin (1569), secular precursor (at least for the Ruthenians) of the infamous "Union" of Brest (1595-6). 1697, when Polish replaced Ruthenian as the official language of Lithuania, marks a cut off. But that was just another nail in the coffin of a Ukrainian-Ruthenian-Polish common nationalism, a coffin brought out by St. Peter Movila's failure (though through no lack of trying) to form an Orthodox identity in the Polish Crown Lands-which contributed to the success of a seperate Ukrainian indentity-and the failure of the Treay of Hadiach to unite the szlachta and Cossaks-which led to both the seperate Ukrainian identity and the union with Russia.
No in 1600, 1800 AD no one in Belarus and Ukraine felt threathened by the existence of nonbelievers in their neighborhood.
The Treaties of Hadiach and Pereyaslav show otherwise: Hadiach voided the "Union" of Brest, Pereyaslav united the Cossaks to the Orthodox Czar against the Vatican's agent, the King of Poland.
In 1850, in the western gubernias of the Russian Empire, which is now called Belarus
It is called Belarus because it is Belarus.
and central Ukraine,
That is because it is in the center of Ukraine.
there were 10.300.000 million inhabitants of which 61,7% Orthodox, 28% Roman Catholic, Jews 6% and Protestants 4%.
In 1897 the Czar ruled 11,467,994 adherents to the Vatican and 7,931,307 speakers of Polish (the number, it is claimed, is underrepresented) and 1,210,510 speakers of Lithuanian. I'm not sure Orthodox Poles existed at the time (someone correct me if I am wrong, but with specific facts please), and the Lithanian ones had been mostly obliterated by the Poles during the Commonwealth. Since they were mostly in what of present day Poland in Lithania was under the Czar, and the number of Belorussians (mostly in Belorussia) was 5,885,547, that doesn't leave enough for over 3 million in subjegation to the Vatican in Belorus and Central Ukraine. Were are you getting your "figures"?
But then came Bolshevism and Banderism and destroyed our quaint paradise.
The Czar destroyed that Polonizers paradise: when, for instance, the Latin Poles pushed the "beatification" of Josaphat, the Ruthenians refused to pay for it, maintained a silence over the event in Rome, and increasingly turned to the Czar. The Romanians and Serbs did their part in Bukowina and Karlovcsi giving what cover it could to the return to Orthodoxy of the East Slavs, as the Poles were building their Union of Lublin Mound to dominate Lviv.
The problem in Ukraine today is not about the dregowicze, krywiczanie, and etc but Banderism, UPA-OUN.
The face of the problems in Ukraine, Stepana Bandera.
No, there is another rogue gallery:
The last belongs here mostly for making the first two possible. A disloyal son of Lithuania, he epitomizes why the Lithuanians are no fonder of the memory of the Commonwealth than the Ukrainians.
Some would like to add
but he solved Ukraine's Polish problems for Kiev. And left a monument to Polish arrogance
in place of a monument of Polish Orthodoxy
Dziekuja Dmowki, Grabski and Pilsudski.