Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 5 – Like many
Russian nationalists, Vladimir Putin has long insisted that Russians,
Ukrainians and Belarusians are not separate nations but a single “triune”
people who thus should be part of a single state; but this week, his actions in
Ukraine and about Belarus have effectively killed off this chimerical notion for
all but the most diehard of imperialists.
On the one hand, and even more than over
the last several years, Russian forces in Ukraine have behaved as they did on
foreign territory and in the North Caucasus, using the kind of brutal scorched
earth attacks that make any claim that Russia views the Ukrainians as a
fraternal people deserving respect and even a kind of deference on that basis..
And on the other hand, Moscow moved
to create a genuine border regime between the Russian Federation and Belarus,
thus casting doubt on the possibility of any union state between the two Slavic
countries and demonstrating that any such state, should it arise, would be a
Russian empire in which non-Russians would be treated as second class citizens
or worse.
In a commentary on the Kasparov.ru
portal, Yevgeny Ikhlov says that events of the last few days make it possible
to “fix with precision the date of the death of the conception of ‘the triune
unity of the Russian nation” of Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians (kasparov.ru/material.php?id=58961BE4D3E09).
“A quarter of a century ago,” he
begins, “sociologists and historians wrote that rarely in any country has the end of the Middle Ages been
fixed as precisely as in Russia on August 22, 1991. The fall of Soviet power
and the union (that is, imperial-messianic) idea makred the complete end of the
ideocratic (i.e., logocentric) period of Russian history.”
Now, Ikhlov says, “we can set with
no less precision the death of ‘the triune unity of the Russian nation.” It occurred over the last few weeks because “the
sense of the unity of the nation means not simply a collection of historical
myths (in the good sense) but also a feeling of solidarity, commonality and
inclusion in some Big Family.”
Two events mark the passing of this
idea: the construction of a genuine border regime between the Russian
Federation and Belarus and Moscow’s threatening language when Alyaksandr
Lukashenka responded as the head of an independent country, and the nature of
the latest round of Russian aggression in Ukraine.
Moscow’s actions toward Belarus “clearly
show” the Kremlin doesn’t view the Belarusians as “part of the Russian people”
but as “a nation of a different and even hostile state.” And its attacks on Avdeyevka in Ukraine,
whose population Moscow should, on the basis of its past definition of eastern
Ukraine, be treated as a Donbass sub-ethnos and thus worthy of protection, show
that Moscow is quite prepared to treat them as a separate and enemy nation.
Instead, Moscow and its proxy forces
have treated the people of Avdiyevka not as “liberated” territory but as enemy
territory that they are free to treat with as much brutality as they like, must
as Soviet forces did in East Prussia at the end of World War II and Russian
forces did in Chechnya. Neither of those places was ever viewed as part of the “triune”
nation.
The death of “the triune nation”
idea has not only geopolitical consequences – it presages even greater efforts
among non-Russian countries to separate themselves from Russia and to find
support in the West against Moscow – it has psychological ones as well because
it challenges some of the most deeply held views among Russians.
Recent polls show that a majority of
Russians don’t view the former Soviet republics and especially Belarus and
Ukraine as truly foreign countries. (On this unfortunate reality, see .dsnews.ua/world/nezagranitsa-mozhno-li-vylechit-rossiyan-ot-geograficheskogo-03022017220000
and apostrophe.ua/article/politics/2017-02-05/byitovoy-imperializm-komu-sleduyuschemu-jdat-vtorjeniya-rossii/10017.)
Many will now be forced to view them
in exactly that way given that their own government is doing so and that means
that any Moscow moves to seize them must be viewed by people of good will in
Russia and the West for what they are: a naked imperial land grab designed to
benefit Moscow and the Russians allied with it against non-Russians they take
in.
As long as “the triune nation”
concept existed, many Russians and some in the West could deceive themselves
that what Putin is doing is somehow about “recovering” unjustified losses from
1991 even if they have been unwilling to see that that was exactly what Adolf
Hitler was doing with the Sudetenland and elsewhere.
Now, no one has that feeble excuse
any longer. By his actions against Belarus and Ukraine and by killing off the “triune”
mythology, Putin stands convicted of what he typically charges others of being:
a revanchist imperialist who must be opposed before he does any more damage to the
international order.
No comments:
Post a Comment