The Mirage of Russian Nationalism: A Deep Dive into the Kremlin’s Historical Narrative
In recent years, Russia has been increasingly leaning on its historical narrative to justify its geopolitical ambitions, especially in its relations with Ukraine and the West. This is not a new phenomenon; nations often resort to history to legitimize their actions. However, Russia’s historical narrative is based on a mythologized identity that glorifies its imperial past and ignores its relative backwardness and repeated defeats. By invoking history, Russia also rejects the global trend towards respecting the sovereignty and self-determination of other nations, which creates tensions and conflicts with its neighbors and the international community.
The Great Patriotic War as a Cornerstone
The Kremlin has strategically used the Great Patriotic War as the cornerstone of Russia’s national story. This selective focus conveniently starts the narrative in 1941, avoiding the awkwardness of discussing the non-aggression treaty between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that included a secret plan to divide Central and Eastern Europe into their spheres of influence. The idea is simple: because the Soviet Union, often reduced to Russia in this narrative, won World War II, it has a right to the lands it controlled after that time. This logic was evident in Putin’s 2021 ultimatum, where he asked for a return to the geopolitical reality that existed before NATO’s expansion post-1997.
The Vacuum of Identity
What makes Russia’s reliance on history particularly interesting is the absence of other unifying factors. Unlike other nations that have a strong sense of civic identity, religion, or ethnicity, Russia is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious country with a regime that lacks a coherent ideology. The Kremlin can’t use religion as a unifying factor because Russia has four official religions: Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism. It can’t use ethnicity because Russia is incredibly diverse, with over 190 ethnic groups and 35 official languages. And it can’t use civic identity because of the nature of its regime, which is authoritarian and corrupt. This leaves a vacuum that history conveniently fills, providing a sense of continuity and coherence to a nation that has struggled with its identity, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. History also serves as a tool for legitimizing the current leadership and projecting power abroad, as Putin often invokes the ideas of thinkers emphasizing the organic unity of the Russian Empire and its people. However, history is not a static or objective reality, but rather a contested and constructed narrative that reflects the interests and values of different groups. Therefore, Russia’s historical identity is not only influenced by its past, but also by its present and future aspirations.
The Dangers of a Historical Crutch
While leaning on history might offer a temporary solution to the identity crisis, it comes with its own set of problems. For one, it justifies aggression and expansionism under the guise of reclaiming what is ‘rightfully’ Russia’s. This not only strains relations with neighboring countries but also sets a dangerous precedent in international politics, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 demonstrated. Secondly, it prevents Russia from coming to terms with its own history, including the darker aspects that are conveniently left out of the narrative, such as the atrocities committed by Stalin and his successors and the repression of ethnic minorities and dissidents. By ignoring or distorting these facts, Russia risks losing its credibility and legitimacy as a modern and responsible nation.
The Future Implications
As Russia continues to use history as its crutch, it risks becoming a prisoner of its own narrative. The nation’s inability to differentiate itself from its imperial past — be it the Soviet Union or the Russian Empire — limits its potential for growth and positive change. Moreover, it creates an environment where any form of dissent or alternative viewpoints are suppressed, further entrenching the existing narrative. This narrative often relies on historical revisionism, disinformation, and victimization to justify Russia’s aggressive actions and policies. For example, Russia denies or distorts the facts about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the annexation of Crimea, and the ongoing war in eastern Ukraine. By manipulating history, Russia seeks to undermine the legitimacy and sovereignty of its neighbors, especially Ukraine, and to challenge the international order that emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Conclusion
The Kremlin’s reliance on history to shape Russia’s national identity is a double-edged sword. While it may provide a sense of unity and purpose in the short term, it risks isolating Russia in the long run, both from the international community and from the diverse voices within its own borders. It’s high time for Russia to look beyond its past and focus on building a future that is inclusive, progressive, and in tune with the realities of a rapidly changing world.
