Russia’s intervention in Ukraine was one of two important issues discussed by leaders from 28 countries gathered for a Nato meeting in Wales earlier this month, after which Nato issued a statement saying that the leaders and the alliance “stand united in our support of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders”. On his way to the meeting, Barack Obama visited Estonia where he asserted that “borders cannot be redrawn at the barrel of a gun”.
Yet, many feel that this is just verbal bluster. As The Economist put it in a recent issue: “The sad reality is that Vladimir Putin is winning in Ukraine. The West must steel itself for a lengthy struggle.”
Russia is not an easy country to understand: a huge colossus – partly in Europe but mostly in Asia – it includes many non-Russian nationalities. Monopolising centuries of its history, the Mongol occupation has left an inedible impact on Russia and on its leaders, including the Tsars, the Bolsheviks and those who followed. Unlike Eastern European countries that tasted freedom and democracy between the two world wars, Russia’s Glasnost and Perestroika did not evolve into democracy.
After the initial chaos in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union, a former KGB operative, Vladimir Putin, took over. The Russians made a decisive choice: they opted for the strong man who does not tolerate any opposition, rather than a democrat subject to the whims of the ballot box.
Looking back might give some indications of the future: the Russian empire grew out of the enlargement of Moscovy, some 500 years ago. Within 200 years, it had reached the pacific coast, and by 1914, the Russian empire had unashamedly used force to reach its zenith, dominating a large part of Asia and of Europe.
Subsequently, the impact of World War I and social strife caused the collapse of that Russian empire.
Finland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia grabbed the opportunity of freedom and became independent states. So did White Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, in 1919, the Red Army invaded all these newly-independent states and by 1921 they were all back within the Russian fold. The Baltic States were spared for another 20 years until Hitler and Stalin made a deal to occupy them… and then threw in Poland for good measure. The empire had struck back.
The epic tale from Lenin to Stalin is a sad story of forced industrialisation, collectivisation and mass deportations. Millions paid the ultimate price, particularly in Ukraine, the traditional breadbasket of Russia, where some seven million Ukrainians starved as the Russian bear collected its quota of wheat, leaving those who grew it to die of hunger. No wonder many Ukrainians greeted the German Nazis as liberators.
When Hitler dumped the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the Germans easily invaded Russia, almost as far as Moscow and many non-Russians in the USSR sided with the Germans.
Many divisions of the Red Army made up of ‘foreigners’, such as Georgians, Ukrainians and Tartars, deserted the USSR and fought for the Germans. When Russia once again took control, the ‘runaways’ all paid a high price: thousands of Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Tartars, Volga Germans, Chechnians, Kurds and Aziris were ‘relocated’ thousands of miles away from their home.
This is not just a land grab. It is an ideological confrontation
The second time that the Russian empire (the then USSR) collapsed was in 1989. This time it did so under its own weight. Once again, the countries on the Baltic, in central Europe and in Asia, which were all subservient to – or part of – the USSR immediately grabbed the chance and declared independence. This political freedom achieved by millions is considered by Putin as the worse catastrophe of the last century. Within Russia itself, Chechnya declared independence and was promptly re-occupied via a bloodbath.
What is new in the current scenario? What should one expect to happen in Ukraine that has not happened before? Putin has every intention to roll back the situation as far as he can. He has already disregarded Georgia’s sovereignty by taking full control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia and annexed Crimea. Now, it is the turn of east Ukraine. The Baltic States with their Russian minorities would be next on the list, but these are now Nato members.
Where is Putin’s red line? He knows that he has local military superiority in Eastern Europe and he has no fear to use it, more so when the free world is preoccupied with the Isis phenomenon.
His people hanker after Mother Russia’s imperial destiny and Putin enjoys an 84 per cent popularity rating while controlling the Russian media. For Putin, ineffective sanctions – in force or threatened by the US and the EU – are water on a duck’s back. His only worry is the far-fetched prospect that the people in Moscow demand a western-type government that would consider democratic accountability a priority over empire rebuilding.
This is not just a land grab. It is an ideological confrontation: the reinvention of Russia as a great empire smothering a number of populations under its far-reaching tentacles versus the freedom that comes from real effective democracy.
micfal@maltanet.net