September 10, 2024

Are We The Baddies??

The problem with Russian ethnonatinalism is how deeply ingrained it is in Russia and how poorly it is understood in the West.

When asked “Why do you always wear black?," Anton Chekhov said, "I am mourning for my life.”

When I published my first essay here I wrote that “I never felt or thought of myself as either Jewish or Russian, and as soon as I was old enough to understand I never wanted to feel “Soviet.” My twenties were in retrospect a desperate search for a national identity, for a homeland.” I am still on that journey to understand my national, ethnic, and cultural identity. However, this one is not about me. Well, not really.

There are two words in Russian language that are typically translated as “Russian:” русский (russky) and россиянин (rossiyanin). The former is generally thought to be an ethnic term referring to members of a particular Eastern Slavic people. Whereas, the latter is nowadays a strictly political term referring to all the citizens of the Russian Federation, regardless of their ethnic or cultural identification.

Although the etymology of rossiyanin goes back 1524 or so, there are many different perspectives and viewpoints on the meaning and development of the word through the centuries. The distinction between the two terms became popular thanks to Boris Yeltsin, President of the Russian Federation, who invariably began his speeches by addressing “россияне” rather than “русские.” So, a rossiyanin is a person who is ethnically non-Russian, such as Tatar, Yakut, Bashkir, Jew, or Dagestani (there are more than 190 ethnicities who reside in Russian Federation). One could make a parallel to the not so nuanced difference between being British and English.

Why is the distinction prevalent in the Russian language and why was the non-ethnic term pushed so hard by Yeltsin? “The idea of rossiysky is not to replace the historical names of Russia’s nationalities – no one wants that. But this word can become, and already is becoming, an appropriate term for a civic nation,” political scientist Viktor Pirozhenko told Izvestiya. It's important to understand the context of each word so that you use them correctly in conversation. In my turbulent twenties, lacking any national or ethnic identity while being being viewed by everyone around me as “Russian,” I duped into the idea and for a few years not only identified myself as a rossiyanin, but almost proudly eschewed what I know understand to be Russian ethnonationalism.

I wrote a few months ago that:

While most of Europe experienced the birth of nationalism and national identity during the 18th and 19th centuries, culminating with Bismarck’s iron willed unification of Germany, Russia remained the same provincial agrarian and completely lacking national identity country. If you would’ve asked a random citizen of the Romanovs’ empire or even a random Bolshevik during the 1920s, rarely would they tell you that they were “Russian,” rather they would tell you that they are “Тульскикй” (from Tula) or “Тверской” (from Tver’) or “Псковской” (from Pskov).” Among many accomplishments of Stalin’s career, one stands nearly overlooked - he created Russian national identity and Russian nationalism along with it.

It is not by accident that both Khrushchev’s Thaw and Gorbachev’s Perestroika were clearly an informal if not always official symbolic break with the cult of state power, but not necessarily the cult of the Dear Leader, that was integral to the Russian imperial tradition. By contrast, Stalin’s symbolic revival of the elements of the tradition of state power through the experience of World War II that culminated in the rise of Soviet Union as a world power required a “usable past” that can serve as a real foundation for the “invention of tradition” and historical precedent. All of this is to say that Stalin, whether intentionally or not, forged the Russian national identity.

Before Stalin’s rise to power, Lenin firmly believed that nationalism of the dominant nations was suspicious on account of its chauvinist nature, whereas the nationalism of the oppressed nations was deserving of support as long as it did not infringe upon the still higher interests of the international proletariat. He viewed Russian chauvinism and intrinsic racism as an extension of the global imperialism. Nonetheless, by the late 1920s, this policy of “indigenization” resulted in a more ethnically diverse communist party leadership and the creation of national republican elites with an interest in advancing the cause of local constituencies, even if within the ideological boundaries set by the party.

I am bringing this up because the recent scandal over the documentary Russians at War yet again highlighted to me the real depth and danger of Russian ethnonationalism that has evolved into Russian ethnofascism under President Putin.

Anastasia Trofimova's documentary Russians at War at the Venice Film Festival (the film also has a planned premiere in Toronto) is an insult to the victims of Russia’s war against Ukraine. It is nothing more than platforming the genocidal Russian regime’s propaganda. The film grotesquely misrepresents the realities of Russian aggression and serves as a tool for Kremlin propaganda.

The director, Anastasia Trofimova, spent seven months embedded with a Russian army battalion in eastern Ukraine which is occupied by Moscow’s forces, to make the film, which she says was done without the Russian government’s knowledge. There is absolutely no possible way that Russian government and Russian military would allow an unauthorized access of such length and depth. The main problem with the Russians at War movie is not even the content itself. It’s the fact that the whole movie was a planned Kremlin propaganda operation all along, and most western orgs were ready to swallow it. The West’s exposed info vulnerability is the main story here. Articles that objectively call out the film as a clumsy attempt to humanize the Kremlin's army, legitimizing Vladimir Putin's imperialist propaganda are very few and far in between.

Russian soldiers commit atrocities and war crimes, attempt a genocide and yet Russian propaganda still pervades mainstream Western culture, including prestigious film festivals.

Anastasia Trofimova, a Russian-Canadian filmmaker, says she did not witness any war crimes during the seven months she spent embedded with a Russian army battalion in eastern Ukraine. Ukrainians have not been so lucky. Adding insult to the murders, rapes, castrations, beatings, and other atrocities, Trofimova’s film, a sentimental look at Russian soldiers’ daily lives, just premiered at the Venice Film Festival. 

It gets worse. The supposedly independent film was subsidized by $250,000 of Canadian taxpayers’ money. Next up is Toronto, where it is billed as “a spellbinding tale of sacrifice and disillusionment in which soldiers resemble pawns in a nefarious game.” 

Bashing modern (or even historical) Russian films, books, and pictures for concealed or blatant imperialist content is only part of the answer.

Trofimova goes on to say that “we have to humanize everyone..” No, we don't have to do anything. Recent video footage appears to show Russians killing Ukrainian soldiers who were surrendering.

Between this and the head of a Ukrainian soldier on a spike by the neo-nazi Rusich unit, which now is deployed on the border of Finland, I find it difficult to humanize Russians, especially after they leave Ukrainian cities like looking like this:

An established Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, helps platforming the abhorrent propaganda by allowing the Canadian-Russian director responds to TIFF documentary backlash. Trofimova says journalists ‘follow the story where it goes.’ “I’ve spent half my life in Canada, half in Russia. I understand both views of the world, and I respect both.” Allow me to clarify that she ‘respects’ Russia’s desire to ethnically cleanse Ukrainians from occupied territory.

Subscribe now

Moreover, I question how much of a journalist she is as she worked at Russia Today from 2014 to 2020. Not the RT news but RT DOCUMENTARIES. Do you know what kinds of documentaries were made by RTD since 2014? "MH17: A year without the truth" in which the state run propaganda channel attempts to discredit any and all efforts that the West and Ukraine are making to prove that the Russians shot down a civilian airliner, murdering nearly 300 innocent people. It's like saying "oh I wasn't directly managed by Goebbels, I was actually in another department where he had less oversight." She is not even pretending otherwise:

Here she is on June 12, 2017 at one of Navalny rallies. More than a thousand people were arrested. Not Anastasia Trofimova. She was literally front and center riding the wave. Anastasia Trofimova :

So when she states that “the film represents another side of the story of the war” I agree with Oleh Nikolenko, Ukrainian consul general in Toronto, when he says “Why not bring a film about Nazis and the Holocaust, and show that they were also ordinary people?”

Margarita Simonyan, Editor in Chief of RT, publicly admitted that her Russian propaganda’s mouthpiece organized clandestine networks in the U.S. to spread their narratives.

This comes at the time when US intelligence officials warn that the most active foreign threat is Russia's ongoing efforts to undermine American elections and astonishing DOJ indictment of two RT employees for covertly funding and directing U.S. company that published thousands of videos in furtherance of Russian interests and indictments against Russia's effort to put Trump in the White House. These recent indictments clearly demonstrate the degree to which the far-right media has become a loudspeaker for the Russian propaganda but likely we are only scraping the surface of the proverbial tip of the iceberg. Wired reports that “An FBI affidavit unsealed this week says the Russians are maintaining an active list of 2,800 influencers, 600 of whom are in the US. The FBI has not released the list.”

Kremlin is using “authentic U.S. voices” on major social media platforms to “launder” propaganda and divisive narratives aimed at swaying American audiences. Kremlin loves social media discourse and especially the superspreader accounts. This is a before we even mention Elon Musk or Pavel Durov “the chief signals officer of the Russian armed forces?1” Roman Sheremeta writes: “Two sanctioned Russian oligarchs helped Elon Musk to purchase Twitter. Musk's connection to Russia has been obvious for some time. But the latest reveal of direct Russian investments in X is very troubling.” Durov, for his part, famously bragged about graduating from special military propaganda program back in his college days…

But I digressed.

Julia Davis is absolutely correct when she writes that “using the fashionable military lexicon that’s almost de rigueur in wartime Russia, Simonyan described RT’s efforts as “partisan warfare.” We organized a number of guerilla projects. I won’t say whether these are the projects of which the United States is currently accusing us . . . I won’t report about it to anyone except for our Supreme Commander-in-Chief, and he didn’t ask these questions.” Also, note the repeated emphasis on Soviet Union throughout Simonyan’s monologue.

I find it incredibly abhorrent that Simonyan, who was born into a family of the descendants of Armenian refugees described herself as “Я армянка чистокровная, во мне нет ни капли другой крови. И я русская, понимаете?” Her father's family, settled in Crimea during the Armenian genocide. During World War II, they were deported by Stalin's NKVD along with thousands of other Hamshen Armenians. Her mother was born to an Armenian family that had fled the massacres of the Armenians in the late 19th century. Yes, she is very ‘Russian’, but the tragedy is that she either fails to understand or completely ignores that to ethnic русский she is and will always be a россиянкa.

Subscribe now

Recently, I wrote about a short and surprisingly heated exchange with a very close friend regarding the political and more importantly moral positions our friends largely take. The root of the “argument” was my father’s nonchalant use of a racist slur, one that I specifically called out in an essay just the day prior. It was inexcusable for my father to use such a term but what’s so much worse is that the vast majority of GenX who were born in the former USSR, regardless of where they are now, are just as xenophobic and racist as our parents - Mother Russia has a very powerful grip. Yeah, I guess I am not the only Frankenstein’s monster around.

Denis Zharkov sums this up better than I could, “I remember that moment very well when I first understood how my perception of reality was shaped by that "very funny empire". Slow Estonians, stupid Americans, barbaric Chechens, friendly yet alien Finns, little-brothers Ukrainians. It was all there, right in my head. What was not there, were the Winter War, 2 Chechen wars, famine in Qazaqstan, Latvia, and Georgia, and generations that lived a life and died while being milked and generalized and sovetized and destroyed by the country I am supposed to be proud of.”

One of the leaders of the so-called Russian opposition, Mikhail Khodorkovsky writes: “Russia won't disappear, no matter the outcome of the current conflict. The West must learn to coexist with its 120-140 million people.”

Such framing is one of many reasons why "Russia won't disappear." What infuriates me is the Russian-centric POV. Yes, the population of Russian Federation is about 140 million people (based on '21 census) but only 102 million or so are officially ethnic Russians. There's no room for even a hint of self determination for over 40 million of ethnic minorities. The so-called opposition, from Navalny to Khodorkovsky to pick your own name are no different that Putin; all are part of the same Russian ethnoemperial ambition that has turned into fascism.

A few months ago, I’ve written about Alexander Navalny, recently deceased leader of the so-called opposition and his ethnonationalist politics. I still remember many proclaiming that under the leadership of his widow, Yulia Navalnaya, it would be different, that she does not have the same “troubled” history of flirting with the far-right fascism. Well, just a few days ago, Yulia Navalnaya clearly displayed her agreement with Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s and her own late husband’s Russian ethnonationalism. Speaking at a conference, she said, “Наконец, мы найдём и тех, кто рассказывает про необходимость срочно "деколонизировать" Россию. Надо якобы разделить нашу слишком большую страну на пару десятков маленьких и безопасных государств. Правда, объяснить, почему люди с общим бэкграундом и культурным контекстом должны быть искусственно разделены, "деколонизаторы" не могут. И как это вообще должно произойти — не сообщают.”

Such proclamations from two of the leading figures of the Russian so-called liberal opposition testifies to the centuries old imperial syndrome, something that practically everyone born and raised under the Soviet and Putin regimes clearly suffers from. Essentially everyone in the West needs to understand that with a change in Kremlin, there simply would be the next Russian “tsar” and democracy in Russia will not come.

We have all read and heard about Ukraine being “Putin’s War.” Alas, it is a Russian war of the same imperial aggression that been taking place for centuries. Miriam Naiem writes: “Why are some in the West fixated on Russian views? The entire historical journey and the sacrifice of the Ukrainian people, marked by a repeated struggle for self-determination, sovereignty, and democracy, remains obscured in the shadow of the complex Russian anti-war heroism. Being anti-war is not a sufficient stance to earn a platform; actively anti-imperialist stance and actions are.”

Yet many continue to “resist such “bogyman” framing and the application of normative labels, such as “imperialist” and “ethnic nationalist.2” or proclaim that “one of the tragedies of the Russia-Ukraine war is the proliferation on social media of ethnonationalist stereotypes and simplistically determinist historical narratives, dressed up in the progressive jargon of decolonisation. By fixating on an essentialist 'Russian mindset,' by presenting a monolithic, undifferentiated Russian culture as the problem, this discourse mirrors Kremlin propaganda and exonerates the perpetrators of Putin's genocidal war.”

The shared cultural context and background that Yulia Navalnaya mentions does not exist and never existed. Dor Shabashewitz דור שבשביץ provides a great rebuttal collecting and translating responses to Navalnaya’s statement, here’s one but I strongly recommend reading the entire thread: “Genocide, ethnic cleansing, Russification, erasure of indigenous cultures and languages and acquisition of new territories by force for centuries – is this what you mean by common background and shared cultural context?” Dor also provides an in-depth reality of the Russification on the example of Astrakhan, Russia’s least Russian oblast and the growth of separatist movement3: “Significant part of people who identify as ethnic Russian descend from various indigenous and immigrant communities they had to “forget” via forced assimilation, xenophobia, institutionalized discrimination and repression.4“

People quickly stop identifying themselves as Russian when it is no longer required for their own safety and the safety of their children. Pekka Kallioniemi, author of the Vatnik Soup, writes that “Russia has a massive5 demographic problem6 and because of their mindless invasion of Ukraine, it will be even worse in the following decades. Which is why they steal Ukrainian children and brainwash them to become "Russian".

This is genocide7.

In the war against Ukraine, Russian soldiers make a conscious choice to participate, just as they and their fellow citizens chose to allow Putin to remain in power. To describe Russian soldiers as mere "tools in a larger political game," as Trofimova suggests, edges dangerously close to echoing the very talking points propagated by the Russian government — claims like Russia's supposed right to invade in order to halt NATO’s encroachment on its "sphere of influence."

Recently “resurrected” Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Lavrov stated that in Ukraine, the majority of people supposedly consider Russia their brother. How are Russians trying to prove to Ukrainians that they are “brotherly nations”? By launching ballistic missiles and drones that kill civilians, reducing cities to rubble, occupying cities, taking those living under occupation who resist for some "reeducation" in basements, raping women and children, executing Ukrainian soldiers taken prisoner, sending abducted Ukrainian children to the far reaches of Russia.

You can “look at the history of Russia's imperialism as the remorseless expansion of the Continental Empire, the overseas colony in Alaska, the interesting smaller episodes of dabbling in Africa - and [see] the differences with Soviet imperialism.”

The “interesting smaller episodes of dabbling in Africa,” are of course Russian fighters dragging young men out of their homes and forcing them to hide the evidence of a massacre of their friends & neighbors in Moura, Mali. The men were forced to bury corpses that were littered round the town in mass grave. Here, according to Philip Obaji Jr, is why Russian PMCs, who’ve committed numerous human rights atrocities including raping kids and massacring civilians across Africa, are in the continent in the first place.

“Our country has not stained itself with the bloody crimes of colonialism,” wrote Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in his programmatic article published in July 2022 in several newspapers across the African continent as a part of the Russian informational campaign around Lavrov’s visit to Africa8. Kremlin relies on well-known Africans to spread Russian misinformation and propaganda across the continent. Russia is using media and cultural initiatives to attract African journalists, influencers, and students while spreading misleading information.

As Sergej Sumlenny writes, “while looking at the history of the Russian expansion, one cannot ignore the existence of the very clear parallels with the colonialism of the Western nations, including the same timeline, ways of expansion, and mechanisms of control over the colonized regions.”

Mind you, it is predominantly the ethnic minorities that are dying in the name of Russian imperialism in Ukraine. Last fall, a sociologist from PSLab spent over a month conducting ethnographic research in Buryatia, this report reveals how this becomes normalized.

It really is true that there are no good Russians. Here’s example of the mundane, sweeping repression of any anti-war sentiment in Russia: A 79-year old who served 30 years in the Interior Ministry is facing 5 years in prison for leaving anti-war leaflets at the apartment block in Petrozavodsk. That fact, in and of itself would not be important, Russia is well known for censorship, like this newspaper publisher in Siberia jailed 8 years over war ‘fakes’. The “fakes” were the facts about the atrocities committed by Russian Army in Bucha. What is fascinating and critical in the story of the 79 year old is how much the repressions are aided and abetted by the general population in Russia: A random teenager apparently took a photo of the old lady writing "no war" at a bus shelter before the teenager and her mum went to the police to complain.

It is the same mentality that is not giving rise to" military-patriotic camps" across Russia. Many of these camps offer free attendance, funded by the government. With the rising cost of other leisure activities, these camps have become the only affordable option for many families. Camps like "Zashchitnik" (defender) in the Moscow oblast’ offer activities like meeting war veterans, sports, paintball, and “young soldier” courses. There's a limited set of war-related words with letter "Z" , that's why most camps are named "Zashchitnik" (Zащитник). Some camps have faced scandals.

A camp in Leningrad oblast’ faced investigations in 2022 due to reports of counselors abusing children, including firing airsoft guns at their legs. The camp was temporarily closed but has since reopened.

Government sponsored"Avangard" centers, blending leisure with pre-conscription training, began in 2020. Originally for tenth-grade boys, they expanded to include girls. Initially focused on physical activities, they've since added war propaganda. Since the Ukraine invasion, "Avangard" camps have shifted towards more aggressive propaganda, showing films depicting war positively and portraying Ukrainians as fascists. I would not be surprised if this propaganda included footage from Trofimova’s film. Children from occupied Ukrainian territories attend camps, where they are forced to listen to talks by Russian soldiers and are exposed to war propaganda, particularly in camps located in the Azov region. The children in these camps never witnessed any other power in Russia besides Putin's. The Kremlin is investing in raising a generation willing to fight in future imperial conquests.

Subscribe now

It’s not just in Russia. This is what happens when you give Russians visas and let them live in a civilized country: Russian London school teaches students how to assemble and handle AKs, throw grenades and despise the West (while living in London!!).

I believe that Jens Siegert is right writing that “Putin's ultimate aim is not so much territorial gains as the destruction of an independent Ukrainian state.” Yet, the Western policy toward Ukraine is really a policy of incrementalism which is appeasement-light, and it’s failing; as Russia kills children in Ukraine, West insists on protecting Putin's warplanes. Anders Aslund adds:

The US compelled Ukraine to a hopeless counteroffensive in 2023. The US demanded the offensive and told all what it was supposed to do, so the Russians built up their defenses. The US did not deliver any air support and only a minimum of ATACMS. It made Ukraine bound to fail. […] The Biden administration has hold back the Ukrainians from attacking the Russian bases from which the Russians attack the whole of Ukraine, notably civilians. This is contrary to the UN Charter Article 51 on the right of self-defense. This is unacceptable. As a consequence, the US has created a sanctuary for Russia, but none for Ukraine. It prohibits Ukraine to attack Russia with US arms, while it allows Russia to bomb9 the whole of Ukraine by not doing anything actively against it. This cannot be right. Kamala Harris must correct US Ukraine policy.

Russia is waging a reckless campaign of sabotage across Europe and orchestrates Trump’s fascist Project 2025 and yet when asked earlier today on whether he will lift the restrictions to allow Ukraine to strike military targets in Russia with long range missiles such as ATACMS and Storm Shadow, President Biden said "We're working that out right now."

If you are still wondering how Russian disinformation manifests so easily in the existing social media ecosystem, take a look at how a completely fake and insane story about Haitian refugees has managed to disseminate all the way up to sitting US senators in the span of 24 hours.

In part, this is a complete abandonment of any standards when it comes to repeating allegations in the right wing media and political ecosystems in the US. It what happens when you care more about power than truth, and has been years in the making with the internet sponsored by Kremlin sending it into overdrive. In the end, it is all the same centuries old Russian ethnoimperialism:

Two days ago Latvia reported that a Russian military drone invaded their sovereign airspace and crashed in the Eastern part of the Baltic republic. Latvian President Edgars Rinkēvičs notes that “the number of such incidents is increasing along the Eastern flank of NATO and we must address them collectively.” Putin now knows crystal clear that NATO won’t defend Ukraine. Now he is trying to find out if NATO will defend NATO.

Guess what happens next if it won’t?

Mariam Naiem writes, “I asked a question to a resident of a frontline city: What do you feel towards Russian soldiers? “I understand that on one hand they are human beings, but on the other hand they are killers.” Such depth and humanity, yet a clear grasp of facts: they're human, but chose to be killers. Strangely, this isn't obvious to some.”

There is a strong narrative that combines victimhood and imperial expansion. It has always been about the sacrifice for Mother Russia10. Even as prisoners, Russians were colonizers across distant places, which only strengthen the cultural identity of suffering and sacrifice. These experiences produced a cultural figure of the imperial colonizer who was also a captive, most strongly expressed by Pushkin’s Кавказский пленник and then retold by Tolstoy, Lermontov, Dostoevsky and later Soviet agitprop. Putin’s regime portrays itself as a victim of the West and uses this newly found victimhood to justify aggression.

The fall of the Soviet Union should have given many new opportunities to millions of people. Some nations gained independence and has a chance to pursue a course of dignity, democracy and freedom - something that was not given to millions of rossiyanin still under Russian imperial occupation. Trofimova’s Russians at War is the logical culmination of imperial aggression dressed up as victimhood.