Over the past few days, the work of Russian troops in eastern Ukraine has intensified, with threats of a major upcoming attack. Vladimir Putin has made it clear that he believes Ukraine has no historical claim to independent statehood; on Monday, even declared modern Ukraine to be “completely Russian-born.” Putin's speeches are full of frustration for American and European leaders over what he sees as bringing Ukraine to the West route after the end of the Cold War. But at the heart of his outrage was the rejection of a political project contained in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. For years Putin has questioned the legitimacy of former Soviet republics, claiming that Lenin planted a "time bomb" by allowing them to decide for themselves in the early years of the USSR In his speeches, he seems to be trying to reverse the clock. not in the wake of the rise of Soviet Communism but in the time of the Russian empire.
I recently spoke by telephone with Serhii Plokhy, professor of history of Ukraine and Eastern Europe at Harvard and author of "The Gates of Europe," an account of the emergence of Ukrainian ownership. (His next book is entitled "Atoms and Ashes: A Global History of Nuclear Disasters." may respond to Russia's further invasion, and what Putin's speech tells us about the complex relations between the two nations.
How far do you follow the kind of Ukrainian ownership we can see today?
It depends on which part of the identity you are talking about. When you speak in a language, that can be a very early thing. As far as religious affiliation is concerned, that could be over a thousand years old. But Ukraine's first modern political project began in the mid-nineteenth century, as did many other parties. The problem Ukraine had was that it was divided between two empires: the Russian Empire and the Austria-Hungary. And, very early on, the Russian Empire recognized the threat posed by the unique Ukrainian language and specially written on the unity of the empire. So, from the beginning there was a period of more than forty years of ban on Ukrainian publishing, essentially banning the development of the written language. That, along with the position between the two powers, contributed to the fact that, during the First World War and the revolution, other nations tried and in some cases gained independence, the Ukrainian people tried to do so but ended up defeated. .
Why is Russia so threatened with Ukrainian ownership and, in particular, language? Was it the general mistrust and dislike of small groups or languages?
The Russians looked at what was happening in Europe at the time — especially in France, where the idea of creating a single language with vernacular or multilingualism, which was considered to be directly related to the unity of the empire. So that's around the world. What is clear and exciting today is the idea that there is one great Russian or Slavic nation, consisting of perhaps different nations, but, basically, they are the same nation. That is the model, from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, now Vladimir Putin has signed up when he says that Ukraine has no legitimacy as a nation. There is a direct link to what is happening today.
He recently wrote, "The Soviet Union was formed in 1922-1923 as a fake organization instead of a united country to settle Ukraine and Georgia, two of the most independent republics." Can you talk more about this?
The Bolsheviks controlled much of the Russian Empire by recognizing, at least pro forma, the independence of the various Republicans. Also, until 1922, Ukraine was a temporary state or state. When the Bolsheviks signed a treaty with Germany in 1922, the Rapallo Treaty, questions arose in Ukraine about why representatives of the Russian Federation have the right to sign such agreements. They decided that something had to be done, so they discussed building a united empire. Stalin's idea was to unite with the various republics that were joining. Lenin also watered the Ukrainians.
Lenin also denounced the Ukrainian and Georgian protesters, saying they should form a “unity government,” because his view was one of rebellion.
Can you describe the "union region" in a little more detail?
Officially, the Soviet Union was about the republican equality, from the great Russia to the small Estonia. The reason for playing even these games about independence was that these Republicans had declared or fought for their independence, but the Bolsheviks took over by fulfilling certain national and cultural aspirations, including granting language rights.
You must be logged in to post a comment.