After Looming Defeat, Russia Unlikely to Be Able to Recover and Change as Germany Did in 1945, Shelin Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, Dec. 11 – Like Germany in the first half of the 20^th century, Russia suffered a defeat, passed through a Weimar Republic-like period, and then sought to build a totalitarian state, Sergey Shelin says. But the future of Russia after its looming defeat in Ukraine is likely to be different and much worse than Germany’s was in 1945.

            That is because, the longtime Moscow commentator says, “in contrast to Germany then, within Russia, there are no reserves of alternative institutions, practices and habits” on which to build and “therefore, when this regime comes to an end, there won’t be something to build a new Russia on” (novayagazeta.eu/articles/2022/12/11/bred-velichiia).

            Instead, there are twin dangers which may in fact come together: something like the current regime may survive, and under its rule, Russia may again seek revenge by launching new imperial wars abroad and turning again, with the support of much of its population who lack any sense of alternatives, to totalitarianism in aid of that project as soon as the West looks awhuray.

            In Germany, in contrast, there were alternative practices and structures, Shelin continues. There were real churches that had not tied themselves to the totalitarian regime, there were local governments, there were systems of tax collection, and there was public understanding and acceptance of law and taxation.

            “When the Nazi regime fell, the Germans had something to operate on. There were alternatives in reserve. But in Russia, they don’t exist.” And it is this, even more than the occupation of Germany which made the difference – and Russia isn’t going to be subject to any occupation at the end of this war.

            Shelin says this lack of alternatives among Russians is especially clear when it comes to imperialism. “In Russia, there is no other tradition besides the imperial one. The problem isn’t that Russians have some sort of ‘imperial gene,’ but simply that people do not have any other social values in their heads.”

            That in turn reflects the fact that there is no clear distinction between the imperial center and the empire. Churchill could be an imperialist abroad but he was a democrat at home because the empire and the metropolitan center were clearly distinct. “But in Russia, there is no metropolitan center” – or rather it is the powers that be and everyone else is colonized by them.

            As a result, Shelin continues, Russia can’t form a nation state like those the Baltic countries and now Ukrainians are doing. Its people remain tied to the empire because they can’t imagine an alternative, and the powers that be do everything they can to ensure that that situation will continue.

            According to the Russian commentator, “the current regime in Russia is very viable. It is capable of withstanding real defeats and survive by presenting defeats as victories.” At the same time, “the people views the regime the way it does the weather, as something that must simply be accepted.” The population “doesn’t think it has the right to form anything else.”