Thursday, December 23, 2021

Once More on Russia and Ukraine

 

Once More on Russia and Ukraine

December 23, 2021

 

Many years ago I, your humble author, earned a PhD in Russian history. I lived in Moscow for the 1975-76 academic year with my late wife and our son, who turned two while we were there. I have written and spoken publicly about the relationship between Russia and Ukraine before, but it seems that tensions between Russia and Ukraine are increasing in recent times. It is clear to me that very few Americans know anything at all about Russian history and how Ukraine fits into that history. Our leaders either don’t know that history either or, more likely, have had it explained to them but chosen to ignore it or just don’t understand its significance. My purpose here is not to defend Vladimir Putin. He is an authoritarian ruler who fits perfectly into Russian history. He doesn’t need me to defend him, and my purpose here is to explain not to judge. I write here because the history of the relationship between Russia and Ukraine really does matter if we are to understand Russia and Putin well enough to avoid going to war over Ukraine. I’ll start with more recent events in the Russia-Ukraine relationship before looking briefly at the more distant nature of that relationship.

Because it had been part of the Russian Empire since the late eighteenth century, Ukraine became one of the republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics when that entity was created in 1922.[1] Communist bureaucrats in Moscow set the boundaries of that soviet republic. Doing so could not have been easy. Especially in the eastern part of what became the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic there are no clear demographic lines between Ukrainians and Russians. Those two cultural identities overlap. There are significant parts of Ukraine where many of the people are Russians not Ukrainians. Yet those soviet bureaucrats did establish a boundary between the Ukrainian republic and the Russian one. When they did they assigned the Crimean peninsula to the Russian republic not the Ukrainian one though Crimea is geographically contiguous with Ukraine not with Russia. For reasons no one really understands, in 1954 Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred the Crimea from the Russian republic to the Ukrainian one.

The Soviet Union ceased to exist on December 25, 1991, and had been falling apart for several years before that. Each of the fifteen constituent republics of the USSR became independent, sovereign states, something many of them, including Ukraine, had never been before. The world community quickly recognized these new nations. So did the new sovereign state of Russia. The Crimea became part of the sovereign nation of Ukraine, though the Crimean city of Sevastopol remained the home port of the Russian Black Sea fleet, something it had been for a long time before 1991.

In 2014 Russian forces invaded Crimea. Shortly thereafter the Russians conducted a popular referendum on whether Crimea should be part of Russia or part of Ukraine. That vote surely was for appearance only, but then Russian elections, including Soviet elections, usually have been only for show, Russia lacking anything like a democratic tradition. Many of the people of Crimea are Russians not Ukrainians, and, according to the Russians, the people voted to become part of Russia. Russia then annexed Crimea to the Russian state. Most of the world’s nations, including the United States, railed against the Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea and have refused to recognize it. They railed against it because they had recognized Ukraine as a sovereign nation, a fact which did make the Russian invasion a violation of international law. They seem to have done so with little or no consideration of the historical context in which that invasion and annexation had taken place.

That historical context is long and complex. A state that could be recognized as Russian appeared first in Kiev, now the capital of Ukraine. Russia became Orthodox Christian in 988 when the Grand Prince of Kiev converted to that faith. This first Russian state is known as Kievan Rus’, Rus’ being of course the source of the word Russia (Rossiya in Russian). In the thirteenth century the Mongols from much farther east in Asia invaded and destroyed Kievan Rus’. The political center of the Russian lands then moved north, where Moscow eventually became the dominate power and creator of a new Russian state. From a small amount of land around Moscow, the Russians gradually expanded their power in all directions, though at first much to the south because that’s where the Mongols were. Moscow acted at first as the Mongol’s collection agent for tribute, but by the sixteenth century Moscow had defeated the Mongols militarily. After Byzantium fell to the Turks in the mid-fifteenth century the Grand Dukes of Moscow began to call themselves “tsar’,” a Slavic rendering of the Latin word Caesar.[2]

Russian expansion continued, but Ukraine eventually came under the control of the Ottoman Turks ruling from Istanbul. By 1793, however, Russia, under Catherine the Great (who was a German not a Russian, but never mind), had annexed much of the land we now call Ukraine. The geographic relationship of Ukraine to the Russian Empire explains the name Ukraine. It comes from the Russian and means “on the border,” which Ukraine was to the Russians at the time. To this point the Ukrainians had never had an independent state of their own, though of course Kievan Rus’ had existed in territory that eventually became Ukraine. The lands we now call Ukraine became part of the Russian Empire with no distinction being made between Russians and Ukrainians. In the nineteenth century Ukrainian nationalism arose, but the imperial government of Russia never recognized the Ukrainians as a political entity of any sort. Neither did it consider Ukrainian to be a distinct language in its own right. The Russians mostly thought of Ukrainian as only a dialect of Russian.[3] The Russians never allowed schools to use Ukrainian as their language of instruction. Ukraine went from being just a part of the Russian Empire to being a Soviet Socialist Republic, to being an independent nation when the Soviet Union collapsed.

Most of us consider the collapse of the Soviet Union with its Communist government to be a very good thing. Soviet Communism was oppressive, totalitarian actually. By the 1970s it wasn’t nearly as brutal as it had been under Stalin (died 1953). Yet it wasn’t anything we or some Soviet people themselves considered to be good. In 1976 a journalism student at Moscow State University told me that journalists were allowed to write only about what was good but everything they saw was bad. Yet many Russians do not consider the disintegration of the USSR to have been a good thing. Vladimir Putin has called the end of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [twentieth] century.” One wonders if he had forgotten about World War II, in which the Soviets lost something like twenty million people, but never mind. It was as the dominant part of the USSR that Russia became a world power that other nations had to take seriously. As part of the USSR Russia ruled over most of what had been the Russian Empire.[4] It was the USSR not the western allies who were most responsible for the defeat of Nazi Germany. The USSR launched the first earth satellite and put the first person in space, accomplishments of which the Russians were and are appropriately proud. The Russian state that has existed since the end of the Soviet Union is very significantly smaller than Russia had been for the last two hundred years or so before 1991. Putin and many Russians regret Russia’s loss of size and stature since the end of the USSR.

Once they were free from Soviet Communism either as independent nations or as members of the Warsaw Pact, the eastern, Soviet version of NATO, many nations Russia had previously dominated, together with NATO did something profoundly unsettling to many Russians. Several of those nations applied for and were granted membership in NATO. Today the former Soviet republics of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania are members of NATO as are the former Warsaw Pact members Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Romania, and the two countries that used to be one, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. The former Warsaw Pace member the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) no longer exists and is part of NATO member the Federal Republic of Germany. Ukraine is not a member of NATO, but many of its people want it to become one or at least to see their country more aligned with NATO and the European Union than with Russia.

Consider for a moment if you will what the NATO membership of countries the Russians used to dominate looks like to the Russians. NATO was the Soviet Union’s great adversary during the Cold War. NATO was created specifically as a way to stop Soviet expansion into western Europe. The Soviet Union had had a string of buffer states, all members of the Russian dominated Warsaw Pact, between itself and NATO. Today the NATO members Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania are on Russia’s border or on the border of Belarus, a former Soviet republic that is now independent but very much in Russia’s sphere of influence. The former buffer states of the Warsaw Pact are now members of NATO. Vladimir Putin considers NATO’s incorporation of those nations to be an act of aggression toward Russia and a vey real threat to Russia’s national security. I find it easy to understand why he does. Just think. How would the United States have reacted if during the Cold War Canada and Mexico had joined the Warsaw Pact? That is what has happened to post-Soviet Russia. Putin fears that NATO may some day admit Ukraine, something he could only interpret as another anti-Russia measure and a most threatening one at that.

So we need to understand Russia’s reaction to a couple of historical realities. Ukraine, which had been part of the Russian Empire and then the Soviet Union since the late eighteenth century, is now an independent nation leaning toward the west. The Russians used to call much of what is now Ukraine “Little Russia.” For most of Russia’s history Russians have not considered Ukrainians to be Ukrainians but to be a slightly odd sort of Russians. Add the fact that Russia’s Cold War adversary NATO is at Russia’s doorstep, and you have a volatile situation at best.

I do not mean to suggest that Russia would be justified in launching a military invasion of Ukraine larger than the ones they have already launched, something Russia is quite capable of doing. I do mean to suggest that we absolutely must consider the current tension between Russia and Ukraine in its historical context. Putin is no saint to be sure, but he isn’t doing what he is doing with regard to Ukraine because he is evil. He is doing it because he is Russian. Putin is in many ways a relic of the Cold War. To him the west in general and NATO in particular have been the enemy or at least a primary adversary for a very long time. The United States and NATO have done nothing to assuage his historically understandable paranoia about the west. I find it reassuring that President Biden has said that though we would support Ukraine if Russia invaded we would not become involved militarily in defense of Ukraine. I do hope that more Americans and more of our leaders become more aware of the history of relations between Russia and Ukraine. We can’t possibly understand what’s happing between those two nations without knowing that history.



[1] I used the term “republics” here cautiously. The constituent republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were not republics in any meaningful way. They were parts of a totalitarian regime completely dominated by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Russia. I call the former republics of the USSR republics only because that’s what the Soviets called them, Republic being part of their official names.

[2] When transliterated from the Cyrillic alphabet in which Russian is written to the Latin alphabet the words Rus’ and tsar’ end in an apostrophe because in the Cyrillic they end with a character called a “soft sign,” which has no Latin equivalent.

[3] Today linguists and of course the Ukrainians themselves consider Ukrainian to be a distinct language different from Russian. The two languages are closely related, both of them being eastern Slavic languages.

[4] The only parts of the Russian Empire that were never again ruled by Russians were Finland and part of Poland.

No comments:

Post a Comment