The third seminar, via Zoom led by Edit András is going to juxtapose the problem of the revolutionary status of 1989 already being the subject of the discussion in Bucharest, which is reflected with key works of Ukrainian and Belarusian artist (Lada Nakonechna, Marina Naprushkina, Aliaxey Talstou, Volodymyr Kuznetsov, Alexander Komarov, etc.) with the reality of war and military invasion. The seminar will thus focus on the art from the former Soviet Republics – especially Ukraine and Belarus, due to their contemporary, urging situation. It aims at exploring both the history of the Russian military aggression and its impact on Ukrainian art, bringing into focus the most recent artworks and texts, including these created after the present Russian invasion on Ukraine by Ukrainian artists and art historians (with whom Radomska has been in touch). The seminar will also address the notion of revolution, adapting it to characterize the protests that has been taking palce both in Ukraine (Orange Revolution, Dignity Revolution, etc.) and Belarus (2020-2022, but also previous events such as protests in 2006, 2010) by revising artistic responses to those events (artworks by Lime Blossom, Aliaxey Talstou, Ulyana Nevzorova, Masha Svyatogor, Sergey Shabohin, Ales Pushkin, R.E.P., Sergey Bratkov, Natsprom, etc). However, it also intends to juxtapose revolutionary events in both countries with artistic responses to the so-called „Singing Revolution” in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and its outcomes in contemporary art. Moreover, the seminar will discuss contemporary works by artists from the Baltic countries to the Russian military invasion on Ukraine. The seminar will initiate a discussion on possible forms of artivism comprehended as revolutionary act, asking about the possibility of their adaptation in the context of war – i.e. – how war and revolution may overlap and interact. An important aspect of the seminar will be an analysis of the artists’ commentary on the gas crisis and energy dependence of the former soviet republics from Russia, perceived as a processnot only resulting with energy blackmail and financial dependence of those countries from Russia, but also with what might be interpreted as an unfinished transition. Those aspects are of a crucial importance as far as the status of the year 1989 is concerned. The transition still appears as unfinished, therefore the narrative on 1989 in art requires revisioning.