TALLINN, Estonia — 

Last month, during a conversation with Tucker Carlson, Vladimir Putin discussed his motives for the invasion of Ukraine in 2014 by providing a detailed explanation of Russian history. The 71-year-old leader of Russia spent over 20 minutes sharing a timeline of events and significant figures dating back to the ninth century, leaving Carlson confused.

Putin presented him with a folder that allegedly included copies of historical records supporting his claims. These records aimed to prove that Ukrainians and Russians have always been a unified people and that Ukraine’s independence is an invalid remnant of the Soviet era.

Carlson expressed his surprise at being the subject of a historical lesson. However, for those who are knowledgeable about Putin’s government, this turn of events was anything but unexpected. In Russia, history has often been utilized as a means of promoting the Kremlin’s political agenda. The past two years have only reinforced this approach.

Russian officials have attempted to garner support for their perspective by highlighting the nation’s past successes while downplaying its more unpleasant historical events. They have altered educational materials, financed extensive historical displays, and silenced dissenting opinions through forceful means.

Russian officials have also regularly bristled at Ukraine and other European countries for pulling down Soviet monuments, widely seen there as an unwanted legacy of past oppression, and even put scores of European officials on a wanted list over that in a move that made headlines this month.

According to Oleg Orlov, one of the founders of Memorial, the oldest and most renowned human rights organization in Russia, the authorities have turned history into a tool of oppression, similar to a hammer or even an axe.

The glorifying

From the early years of his quarter-century rule, Putin has repeatedly contended that studying their history should make Russians proud. Even controversial figures, such as Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, contributed to Russia’s greatness, Putin argues. (Russian media have counted over 100 monuments to Stalin in Russia, most of which were installed during Putin’s rule.)

The president of Russia has proposed the idea of having a single “fundamental state narrative” instead of conflicting textbooks. He also suggested the creation of a “universal” history textbook to communicate this narrative. However, this concept faced strong opposition from historians and did not gain much support until the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

In the previous year, the authorities introduced four new history textbooks for 10th and 11th grade students, claiming them to be “universal.” One of these books included a section discussing Moscow’s “special military operation” in Ukraine, attributing the Cold War to the West and labeling the dissolution of the Soviet Union as “the most significant geopolitical disaster of the 20th century.”

Historians criticized it as obvious propaganda. According to historian Nikita Sokolov, the textbook portrays the Soviet Union, and later Russia, as a constant target of attack, always surrounded by enemies. The hostile groups are portrayed as trying to weaken and exploit Russia for its resources.

The pro-Kremlin perspective on Russian history is currently prevalent in a series of expansive “history parks” that are funded by the government. These parks, located in 24 different cities throughout the country, showcase exhibitions focused on historical themes.

After a number of important displays in the early 2010s that attracted large crowds of Russians and earned recognition from Putin, these locations were inaugurated. Metropolitan Tikhon (Shevkunov), a bishop in the Russian Orthodox Church who is believed to be Putin’s personal spiritual advisor, was instrumental in their creation.

Packed with animations, touch-screen displays and other flashy elements, those widely popular expositions were criticized by historians for inaccurate claims and deliberate glorification of Russian rulers and their conquests.

Ivan the Terrible, a 16th-century Russian czar known for his brutal purges of Russian nobility, was described as a victim of an “information war” in one exhibition. Another exhibition falsely attributed a quote to Otto von Bismarck, chancellor of the German Empire in the 19th century, which sparked outcry and was promptly removed. The quote read: “It is impossible to defeat the Russians. We have seen this for ourselves over hundreds of years. But Russians can be influenced with false values, causing them to defeat themselves.”

At the core of this story about a powerful Russia is the triumph over Nazi Germany in World War II. Observed on May 9th, when Germany formally surrendered after midnight in Moscow on May 9th, 1945, the Soviet triumph has become a crucial part of Russian culture.

The Soviet Union lost an estimated 27 million people in the war, pushing German forces from Stalingrad, deep inside Russia, all the way to Berlin. The suffering and valor that went into the German defeat have been touchstones ever since, and under Putin Victory Day has become the country’s primary secular holiday.

According to Orlov, whose group received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2022, the authorities believe that Russia’s history is a continuous series of triumphs. They also emphasize the importance of being proud of our history and using it to cultivate patriotism. However, their definition of patriotism is centered on admiration for the leadership, whether it be the czarist, Soviet, or current leadership.

The silencing

As the years passed and celebrations of Victory Day became more extravagant, the Russian government became less accepting of any challenges or disapproval of the Soviet Union’s actions during the war, or in general.

In 2014, Dozhd, the only independent TV channel in Russia, was removed from Russian cable networks. This was in response to a history program it aired about the Siege of Leningrad (1941-44), in which viewers were asked to vote on whether Soviet authorities should have surrendered the city to save lives. The siege resulted in a famine that claimed the lives of over 500,000 people in what is now known as St. Petersburg. This question sparked controversy, with officials criticizing the channel for crossing moral and ethical boundaries.

In that particular year, the Russian authorities passed a legislation that criminalized acts of “rehabilitating Nazism” or “knowingly disseminating false information about the USSR’s actions during World War II”.

In 2016, the initial guilty verdict for those allegations was announced. A male individual received a penalty of 200,000 rubles (equivalent to approximately $3,000 at that time) for publishing a statement on social media claiming that “the Communists and Germany collaborated to invade Poland, resulting in the outbreak of World War II.” As time passed, there was a rise in the number of convictions for this offense.

In recent years, there has been a lot of pushback against the research and discussion surrounding Stalin’s mass repressions. Historians and activists point out the striking similarities between this historical event and the current crackdown on dissent, which has resulted in the imprisonment of hundreds of individuals.

In recent years, two historians who were studying Stalin’s mass executions in northwestern Russia were imprisoned on charges unrelated to their research. Many believe that these charges were connected to their work. Memorial, a well-known human rights organization in Russia that gained worldwide recognition for its research on political oppression in the Soviet Union, has been forced to close down. Although it still operates, its operations in Russia have been greatly limited.

The annual tradition of “Returning the Names” in Moscow, where people would gather to read aloud the names of victims of Soviet repressions in front of a monument, has been put on hold due to COVID-19. In previous years, this event would draw thousands of people, but in 2020, the city authorities decided to cancel it. As a result, the usual queue of people waiting to participate in this event during late October is no longer seen in central Moscow streets.

Natalya Baryshnikova, the producer of “Returning the Names” from last year, reports that preservation of historical memory has become a growing concern for authorities, particularly since the start of the Ukrainian war. The event, which took place in 2023 and was held in multiple cities worldwide as well as online, faced numerous challenges and obstacles.

Baryshnikova notes that since the onset of the Ukraine war, it has become evident that any expression of grassroots civil action or remembrance of Soviet atrocities is met with inconvenience.

The justifying

Tamara Eidelman, a well-known history teacher, believes that the Kremlin’s version of history includes three key elements: prioritizing the state over individual lives, glorifying self-sacrifice and willingness to die for a greater cause, and glorifying war.

“The latter is never explicitly stated,” says Eidelman. Instead, the story goes: “We have always aimed for peace … We have always been under attack and have only defended ourselves.”

According to her, this provided the ideal ideological foundation for the invasion of Ukraine. She also notes the transformation of the sentiment “Never again!” about World War II into “We can do it again” among some Russians in recent years, following the annexation of Crimea in 2014. This was accompanied by a rise in aggressive rhetoric from the Kremlin towards the West.

Prior to the Ukraine conflict, Putin frequently referenced history. When his presidential term limits were reset in 2020, a reference to history was included in the country’s constitution. The new clause states that Russia is united by a long history and is committed to protecting historical truth.

During the 2020-21 period, Putin released two extensive pieces on the topic of history – one denouncing the actions of the West prior to World War II and another asserting that Ukrainians and Russians have always been a united people. Prior to sending troops into Ukraine, he referenced history in a speech to his nation, stating that the Soviet leaders artificially created the state of Ukraine.

According to Ivan Kurilla, a historian from Wellesley College, history has been utilized to justify the regime from the early days of Putin’s leadership. With the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, it has now become a key component of the state ideology, along with discussions of sovereignty, the “decline of the West,” and the preservation of traditional values.

Source: voanews.com