”On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians“
in a tragic moment in time, July 12 in 2021 - Vladimir Putin published this Essay on kremlin.ru?- and nobody listened. I would go to the extend to compare this Essay with parts of Hitlers "Mein Kampf", using historical analogies and lies to form a future vision.
published on kremlin.ru July 12 2021 (link below the article)
”On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians“
Article by Vladimir Putin
July 12, 2021 17:00
During the?recent Direct Line, when I?was asked about Russian-Ukrainian relations, I?said that Russians and?Ukrainians were one people?– a?single whole. These words were not driven by?some short-term considerations or?prompted by?the?current political context. It is what I?have said on?numerous occasions and?what I?firmly believe. I?therefore feel it necessary to?explain my?position in?detail and?share my?assessments of?today's situation.
First of?all, I?would like to?emphasize that the?wall that has emerged in?recent years between Russia and?Ukraine, between the?parts of?what is essentially the?same historical and?spiritual space, to?my?mind is our great common misfortune and?tragedy. These are, first and?foremost, the?consequences of?our own mistakes made at?different periods of?time. But these are also the?result of?deliberate efforts by?those forces that have always sought to?undermine our unity. The?formula they apply has been known from time immemorial?– divide and?rule. There is nothing new here. Hence the?attempts to?play on?the?”national question“ and?sow discord among people, the?overarching goal being to?divide and?then to?pit the?parts of?a?single people against one another.
To?have a?better understanding of?the?present and?look into the?future, we need to?turn to?history. Certainly, it is impossible to?cover in?this article all the?developments that have taken place over more than a?thousand years. But I?will focus on?the?key, pivotal moments that are important for?us to?remember, both in?Russia and?Ukraine.
Russians, Ukrainians, and?Belarusians are all descendants of?Ancient Rus, which was the?largest state in?Europe. Slavic and?other tribes across the?vast territory?– from Ladoga, Novgorod, and?Pskov to?Kiev and?Chernigov?– were bound together by?one language (which we now refer to?as?Old Russian), economic ties, the?rule of?the?princes of?the?Rurik dynasty, and?– after the?baptism of?Rus?– the?Orthodox faith. The?spiritual choice made by?St. Vladimir, who was both Prince of?Novgorod and?Grand Prince of?Kiev, still largely determines our affinity today.
The?throne of?Kiev held a?dominant position in?Ancient Rus. This had been the?custom since the?late 9th century. The?Tale of?Bygone Years captured for?posterity the?words of?Oleg the?Prophet about Kiev, ”Let it be the?mother of?all Russian cities.“
Later, like other European states of?that time, Ancient Rus faced a?decline of?central rule and?fragmentation. At?the?same time, both the?nobility and?the?common people perceived Rus as?a?common territory, as?their homeland.
The?fragmentation intensified after Batu Khan's devastating invasion, which ravaged many cities, including Kiev. The?northeastern part of?Rus fell under the?control of?the?Golden Horde but retained limited sovereignty. The?southern and?western Russian lands largely became part of?the?Grand Duchy of?Lithuania, which?– most significantly?– was referred to?in?historical records as?the?Grand Duchy of?Lithuania and?Russia.
Members of?the?princely and?”boyar“ clans would change service from one prince to?another, feuding with each other but also making friendships and?alliances. Voivode Bobrok of?Volyn and?the?sons of?Grand Duke of?Lithuania Algirdas?– Andrey of?Polotsk and?Dmitry of?Bryansk?– fought next to?Grand Duke Dmitry Ivanovich of?Moscow on?the?Kulikovo field. At?the?same time, Grand Duke of?Lithuania Jogaila?– son of?the?Princess of?Tver?– led his troops to?join with Mamai. These are all pages of?our shared history, reflecting its complex and?multi-dimensional nature.
Most importantly, people both in?the?western and?eastern Russian lands spoke the?same language. Their faith was Orthodox. Up to?the?middle of?the?15th?century, the?unified church government remained in?place.
At?a?new stage of?historical development, both Lithuanian Rus and?Moscow Rus could have become the?points of?attraction and?consolidation of?the?territories of?Ancient Rus. It so happened that Moscow became the?center of?reunification, continuing the?tradition of?ancient Russian statehood. Moscow princes?– the?descendants of?Prince Alexander Nevsky?– cast off the?foreign yoke and?began gathering the?Russian lands.
In?the?Grand Duchy of?Lithuania, other processes were unfolding. In?the?14th?century, Lithuania's ruling elite converted to?Catholicism. In?the?16th?century, it signed the?Union of?Lublin with the?Kingdom of?Poland to?form the?Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. The?Polish Catholic nobility received considerable land holdings and?privileges in?the?territory of?Rus. In?accordance with the?1596 Union of?Brest, part of?the?western Russian Orthodox clergy submitted to?the?authority of?the?Pope. The?process of?Polonization and?Latinization began, ousting Orthodoxy.
As?a?consequence, in?the?16–17th centuries, the?liberation movement of?the?Orthodox population was gaining strength in?the?Dnieper region. The?events during the?times of?Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky became a?turning point. His supporters struggled for?autonomy from the?Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth.
In?its 1649 appeal to?the?king of?the?Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the?Zaporizhian Host demanded that the?rights of?the?Russian Orthodox population be respected, that the?voivode of?Kiev be Russian and?of?Greek faith, and?that the?persecution of?the?churches of?God be stopped. But the?Cossacks were not heard.
Bohdan Khmelnytsky then made appeals to?Moscow, which were considered by?the?Zemsky Sobor. On?1?October 1653, members of?the?supreme representative body of?the?Russian state decided to?support their brothers in?faith and?take them under patronage. In?January 1654, the?Pereyaslav Council confirmed that decision. Subsequently, the?ambassadors of?Bohdan Khmelnytsky and?Moscow visited dozens of?cities, including Kiev, whose populations swore allegiance to?the?Russian tsar. Incidentally, nothing of?the?kind happened at?the?conclusion of?the?Union of?Lublin.
In?a?letter to?Moscow in?1654, Bohdan Khmelnytsky thanked Tsar Aleksey Mikhaylovich for?taking ”the?whole Zaporizhian Host and?the?whole Russian Orthodox world under the?strong and?high hand of?the?Tsar“. It means that, in?their appeals to?both the?Polish king and?the?Russian tsar, the?Cossacks referred to?and?defined themselves as?Russian Orthodox people.
Over the?course of?the?protracted war between the?Russian state and?the?Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, some of?the?hetmans, successors of?Bohdan Khmelnytsky, would ”detach themselves“ from Moscow or?seek support from Sweden, Poland, or?Turkey. But, again, for?the?people, that was a?war of?liberation. It ended with the?Truce of?Andrusovo in?1667. The?final outcome was sealed by?the?Treaty of?Perpetual Peace in?1686. The?Russian state incorporated the?city of?Kiev and?the?lands on?the?left bank of?the?Dnieper River, including Poltava region, Chernigov region, and?Zaporozhye. Their inhabitants were reunited with the?main part of?the?Russian Orthodox people. These territories were referred to?as?”Malorossia“ (Little Russia).
The?name ”Ukraine“ was used more often in?the?meaning of?the?Old Russian word ”okraina“ (periphery), which is found in?written sources from the?12th?century, referring to?various border territories. And?the?word ”Ukrainian“, judging by?archival documents, originally referred to?frontier guards who protected the?external borders.
On?the?right bank, which remained under the?Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, the?old orders were restored, and?social and?religious oppression intensified. On?the?contrary, the?lands on?the?left bank, taken under the?protection of?the?unified state, saw rapid development. People from the?other bank of?the?Dnieper moved here en masse. They sought support from people who spoke the?same language and?had the?same faith.
During the?Great Northern War with Sweden, the?people in?Malorossia were not faced with a?choice of?whom to?side with. Only a?small portion of?the?Cossacks supported Mazepa's rebellion. People of?all orders and?degrees considered themselves Russian and?Orthodox.
Cossack senior officers belonging to?the?nobility would reach the?heights of?political, diplomatic, and?military careers in?Russia. Graduates of?Kiev-Mohyla Academy played a?leading role in?church life. This was also the?case during the?Hetmanate?– an?essentially autonomous state formation with a?special internal structure?– and?later in?the?Russian Empire. Malorussians in?many ways helped build a?big common country?– its statehood, culture, and?science. They participated in?the?exploration and?development of?the?Urals, Siberia, the?Caucasus, and?the?Far East. Incidentally, during the?Soviet period, natives of?Ukraine held major, including the?highest, posts in?the?leadership of?the?unified state. Suffice it to?say that Nikita Khrushchev and?Leonid Brezhnev, whose party biography was most closely associated with Ukraine, led the?Communist Party of?the?Soviet Union (CPSU) for?almost 30?years.
In?the?second half of?the?18th?century, following the?wars with the?Ottoman Empire, Russia incorporated Crimea and?the?lands of?the?Black Sea region, which became known as?Novorossiya. They were populated by?people from all of?the?Russian provinces. After the?partitions of?the?Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the?Russian Empire regained the?western Old Russian lands, with the?exception of?Galicia and?Transcarpathia, which became part of?the?Austrian?– and?later Austro-Hungarian?– Empire.
The?incorporation of?the?western Russian lands into the?single state was not merely the?result of?political and?diplomatic decisions. It was underlain by?the?common faith, shared cultural traditions, and?– I?would like to?emphasize it once again?– language similarity. Thus, as?early as?the?beginning of?the?17th?century, one of?the?hierarchs of?the?Uniate Church, Joseph Rutsky, communicated to?Rome that people in?Moscovia called Russians from the?Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth their brothers, that their written language was absolutely identical, and?differences in?the?vernacular were insignificant. He drew an?analogy with the?residents of?Rome and?Bergamo. These are, as?we know, the?center and?the?north of?modern Italy.
Many centuries of?fragmentation and?living within different states naturally brought about regional language peculiarities, resulting in?the?emergence of?dialects. The?vernacular enriched the?literary language. Ivan Kotlyarevsky, Grigory Skovoroda, and?Taras Shevchenko played a?huge role here. Their works are our common literary and?cultural heritage. Taras Shevchenko wrote poetry in?the?Ukrainian language, and?prose mainly in?Russian. The?books of?Nikolay Gogol, a?Russian patriot and?native of?Poltavshchyna, are written in?Russian, bristling with Malorussian folk sayings and?motifs. How can this heritage be divided between Russia and?Ukraine? And?why do it?
The?south-western lands of?the?Russian Empire, Malorussia and?Novorossiya, and?the?Crimea developed as?ethnically and?religiously diverse entities. Crimean Tatars, Armenians, Greeks, Jews, Karaites, Krymchaks, Bulgarians, Poles, Serbs, Germans, and?other peoples lived here. They all preserved their faith, traditions, and?customs.
I?am not going to?idealise anything. We do know there were the?Valuev Circular of?1863 an?then the?Ems Ukaz of?1876, which restricted the?publication and?importation of?religious and?socio-political literature in?the?Ukrainian language. But it is important to?be mindful of?the?historical context. These decisions were taken against the?backdrop of?dramatic events in?Poland and?the?desire of?the?leaders of?the?Polish national movement to?exploit the?”Ukrainian issue“ to?their own advantage. I?should add that works of?fiction, books of?Ukrainian poetry and?folk songs continued to?be published. There is objective evidence that the?Russian Empire was witnessing an?active process of?development of?the?Malorussian cultural identity within the?greater Russian nation, which united the?Velikorussians, the?Malorussians and?the?Belorussians.
At?the?same time, the?idea of?Ukrainian people as?a?nation separate from the?Russians started to?form and?gain ground among the?Polish elite and?a?part of?the?Malorussian intelligentsia. Since there was no historical basis?– and?could not have been any, conclusions were substantiated by?all sorts of?concoctions, which went as?far as?to?claim that the?Ukrainians are the?true Slavs and?the?Russians, the?Muscovites, are not. Such ”hypotheses“ became increasingly used for?political purposes as?a?tool of?rivalry between European states.
Since the?late 19th century, the?Austro-Hungarian authorities had latched onto this narrative, using it as?a?counterbalance to?the?Polish national movement and?pro-Muscovite sentiments in?Galicia. During World War I, Vienna played a?role in?the?formation of?the?so-called Legion of?Ukrainian Sich Riflemen. Galicians suspected of?sympathies with Orthodox Christianity and?Russia were subjected to?brutal repression and?thrown into the?concentration camps of?Thalerhof and?Terezin.
Further developments had to?do with the?collapse of?European empires, the?fierce civil war that broke out across the?vast territory of?the?former Russian Empire, and?foreign intervention.
After the?February Revolution, in?March 1917, the?Central Rada was established in?Kiev, intended to?become the?organ of?supreme power. In?November 1917, in?its Third Universal, it declared the?creation of?the?Ukrainian People's Republic (UPR) as?part of?Russia.
In?December 1917, UPR representatives arrived in?Brest-Litovsk, where Soviet Russia was negotiating with Germany and?its allies. At?a?meeting on?10 January 1918, the?head of?the?Ukrainian delegation read out a?note proclaiming the?independence of?Ukraine. Subsequently, the?Central Rada proclaimed Ukraine independent in?its Fourth Universal.
The?declared sovereignty did not last long. Just a?few weeks later, Rada delegates signed a?separate treaty with the?German bloc countries. Germany and?Austria-Hungary were at?the?time in?a?dire situation and?needed Ukrainian bread and?raw materials. In?order to?secure large-scale supplies, they obtained consent for?sending their troops and?technical staff to?the?UPR. In?fact, this was used as?a?pretext for?occupation.
For?those who have today given up the?full control of?Ukraine to?external forces, it would be instructive to?remember that, back in?1918, such a?decision proved fatal for?the?ruling regime in?Kiev. With the?direct involvement of?the?occupying forces, the?Central Rada was overthrown and?Hetman Pavlo Skoropadskyi was brought to?power, proclaiming instead of?the?UPR the?Ukrainian State, which was essentially under German protectorate.
In?November 1918?– following the?revolutionary events in?Germany and?Austria-Hungary?– Pavlo Skoropadskyi, who had lost the?support of?German bayonets, took a?different course, declaring that ”Ukraine is to?take the?lead in?the?formation of?an?All-Russian Federation“. However, the?regime was soon changed again. It was now the?time of?the?so-called Directorate.
In?autumn 1918, Ukrainian nationalists proclaimed the?West Ukrainian People's Republic (WUPR) and, in?January 1919, announced its unification with the?Ukrainian People's Republic. In?July 1919, Ukrainian forces were crushed by?Polish troops, and?the?territory of?the?former WUPR came under the?Polish rule.
In?April 1920, Symon Petliura (portrayed as?one of?the?”heroes“ in?today's Ukraine) concluded secret conventions on?behalf of?the?UPR Directorate, giving up?– in?exchange for?military support?– Galicia and?Western Volhynia lands to?Poland. In?May 1920, Petliurites entered Kiev in?a?convoy of?Polish military units. But not for?long. As?early as?November 1920, following a?truce between Poland and?Soviet Russia, the?remnants of?Petliura's forces surrendered to?those same Poles.
The?example of?the?UPR shows that different kinds of?quasi-state formations that emerged across the?former Russian Empire at?the?time of?the?Civil War and?turbulence were inherently unstable. Nationalists sought to?create their own independent states, while leaders of?the?White movement advocated indivisible Russia. Many of?the?republics established by?the?Bolsheviks' supporters did not see themselves outside Russia either. Nevertheless, Bolshevik Party leaders sometimes basically drove them out of?Soviet Russia for?various reasons.
Thus, in?early 1918, the?Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic was proclaimed and?asked Moscow to?incorporate it into Soviet Russia. This was met with a?refusal. During a?meeting with the?republic's leaders, Vladimir Lenin insisted that they act as?part of?Soviet Ukraine. On?15?March 1918, the?Central Committee of?the?Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) directly ordered that delegates be sent to?the?Ukrainian Congress of?Soviets, including from the?Donetsk Basin, and?that ”one government for?all of?Ukraine“ be created at?the?congress. The?territories of?the?Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic later formed most of?the?regions of?south-eastern Ukraine.
Under the?1921 Treaty of?Riga, concluded between the?Russian SFSR, the?Ukrainian SSR and?Poland, the?western lands of?the?former Russian Empire were ceded to?Poland. In?the?interwar period, the?Polish government pursued an?active resettlement policy, seeking to?change the?ethnic composition of?the?Eastern Borderlands?– the?Polish name for?what is now Western Ukraine, Western Belarus and?parts of?Lithuania. The?areas were subjected to?harsh Polonisation, local culture and?traditions suppressed. Later, during World War?II, radical groups of?Ukrainian nationalists used this as?a?pretext for?terror not only against Polish, but also against Jewish and?Russian populations.
In?1922, when the?USSR was created, with the?Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic becoming one of?its founders, a?rather fierce debate among the?Bolshevik leaders resulted in?the?implementation of?Lenin's plan to?form a?union state as?a?federation of?equal republics. The?right for?the?republics to?freely secede from the?Union was included in?the?text of?the?Declaration on?the?Creation of?the?Union of?Soviet Socialist Republics and, subsequently, in?the?1924 USSR Constitution. By?doing so, the?authors planted in?the?foundation of?our statehood the?most dangerous time bomb, which exploded the?moment the?safety mechanism provided by?the?leading role of?the?CPSU was gone, the?party itself collapsing from within. A?”parade of?sovereignties“ followed. On?8 December 1991, the?so-called Belovezh Agreement on?the?Creation of?the?Commonwealth of?Independent States was signed, stating that ”the?USSR as?a?subject of?international law and?a?geopolitical reality no longer existed.“ By?the?way, Ukraine never signed or?ratified the?CIS Charter adopted back in?1993.
In?the?1920's-1930's, the?Bolsheviks actively promoted the?”localization policy“, which took the?form of?Ukrainization in?the?Ukrainian SSR. Symbolically, as?part of?this policy and?with consent of?the?Soviet authorities, Mikhail Grushevskiy, former chairman of?Central Rada, one of?the?ideologists of?Ukrainian nationalism, who at?a?certain period of?time had been supported by?Austria-Hungary, was returned to?the?USSR and?was elected member of?the?Academy of?Sciences.
The?localization policy undoubtedly played a?major role in?the?development and?consolidation of?the?Ukrainian culture, language and?identity. At?the?same time, under the?guise of?combating the?so-called Russian great-power chauvinism, Ukrainization was often imposed on?those who did not see themselves as?Ukrainians. This Soviet national policy secured at?the?state level the?provision on?three separate Slavic peoples: Russian, Ukrainian and?Belorussian, instead of?the?large Russian nation, a?triune people comprising Velikorussians, Malorussians and?Belorussians.
In?1939, the?USSR regained the?lands earlier seized by?Poland. A?major portion of?these became part of?the?Soviet Ukraine. In?1940, the?Ukrainian SSR incorporated part of?Bessarabia, which had been occupied by?Romania since 1918, as?well as?Northern Bukovina. In?1948, Zmeyiniy Island (Snake Island) in?the?Black Sea became part of?Ukraine. In?1954, the?Crimean Region of?the?RSFSR was given to?the?Ukrainian SSR, in?gross violation of?legal norms that were in?force at?the?time.
I?would like to?dwell on?the?destiny of?Carpathian Ruthenia, which became part of?Czechoslovakia following the?breakup of?Austria-Hungary. Rusins made up a?considerable share of?local population. While this is hardly mentioned any longer, after the?liberation of?Transcarpathia by?Soviet troops the?congress of?the?Orthodox population of?the?region voted for?the?inclusion of?Carpathian Ruthenia in?the?RSFSR or, as?a?separate Carpathian republic, in?the?USSR proper. Yet the?choice of?people was ignored. In?summer 1945, the?historical act of?the?reunification of?Carpathian Ukraine ”with its ancient motherland, Ukraine“?– as?The?Pravda?newspaper put it?– was announced.
领英推荐
Therefore, modern Ukraine is entirely the?product of?the?Soviet era. We know and?remember well that it was shaped?– for?a?significant part?– on?the?lands of?historical Russia. To?make sure of?that, it is enough to?look at?the?boundaries of?the?lands reunited with the?Russian state in?the?17th century and?the?territory of?the?Ukrainian SSR when it left the?Soviet Union.
The?Bolsheviks treated the?Russian people as?inexhaustible material for?their social experiments. They dreamt of?a?world revolution that would wipe out national states. That is why they were so generous in?drawing borders and?bestowing territorial gifts. It is no longer important what exactly the?idea of?the?Bolshevik leaders who were chopping the?country into pieces was. We can disagree about minor details, background and?logics behind certain decisions. One fact is crystal clear: Russia was robbed, indeed.
When working on?this article, I?relied on?open-source documents that contain well-known facts rather than on?some secret records. The?leaders of?modern Ukraine and?their external ”patrons“ prefer to?overlook these facts. They do not miss a?chance, however, both inside the?country and?abroad, to?condemn ”the?crimes of?the?Soviet regime,“ listing among them events with which neither the?CPSU, nor the?USSR, let alone modern Russia, have anything to?do. At?the?same time, the?Bolsheviks' efforts to?detach from Russia its historical territories are not considered a?crime. And?we know why: if they brought about the?weakening of?Russia, our ill-wishes are happy with that.
Of?course, inside the?USSR, borders between republics were never seen as?state borders; they were nominal within a?single country, which, while featuring all the?attributes of?a?federation, was highly centralized?– this, again, was secured by?the?CPSU's leading role. But in?1991, all those territories, and, which is more important, people, found themselves abroad overnight, taken away, this time indeed, from their historical motherland.
What can be said to?this? Things change: countries and?communities are no exception. Of?course, some part of?a?people in?the?process of?its development, influenced by?a?number of?reasons and?historical circumstances, can become aware of?itself as?a?separate nation at?a?certain moment. How should we treat that? There is only one answer: with respect!
You want to?establish a?state of?your own: you are welcome! But what are the?terms? I?will recall the?assessment given by?one of?the?most prominent political figures of?new Russia, first mayor of?Saint Petersburg Anatoly Sobchak. As?a?legal expert who believed that every decision must be legitimate, in?1992, he shared the?following opinion: the?republics that were founders of?the?Union, having denounced the?1922 Union Treaty, must return to?the?boundaries they had had before joining the?Soviet Union. All other territorial acquisitions are subject to?discussion, negotiations, given that the?ground has been revoked.
In?other words, when you leave, take what you brought with you. This logic is hard to?refute. I?will just say that the?Bolsheviks had embarked on?reshaping boundaries even before the?Soviet Union, manipulating with territories to?their liking, in?disregard of?people's views.
The?Russian Federation recognized the?new geopolitical realities: and?not only recognized, but, indeed, did a?lot for?Ukraine to?establish itself as?an?independent country. Throughout the?difficult 1990's and?in?the?new millennium, we have provided considerable support to?Ukraine. Whatever ”political arithmetic“ of?its own Kiev may wish to?apply, in?1991–2013, Ukraine's budget savings amounted to?more than USD?82 billion, while today, it holds on?to?the?mere USD?1.5?billion of?Russian payments for?gas transit to?Europe. If economic ties between our countries had been retained, Ukraine would enjoy the?benefit of?tens of?billions of?dollars.
Ukraine and?Russia have developed as?a?single economic system over decades and?centuries. The?profound cooperation we had 30 years ago is an?example for?the?European Union to?look up to. We are natural complementary economic partners. Such a?close relationship can strengthen competitive advantages, increasing the?potential of?both countries.
Ukraine used to?possess great potential, which included powerful infrastructure, gas transportation system, advanced shipbuilding, aviation, rocket and?instrument engineering industries, as?well as?world-class scientific, design and?engineering schools. Taking over this legacy and?declaring independence, Ukrainian leaders promised that the?Ukrainian economy would be one of?the?leading ones and?the?standard of?living would be among the?best in?Europe.
Today, high-tech industrial giants that were once the?pride of?Ukraine and?the?entire Union, are sinking. Engineering output has dropped by?42 per cent over ten years. The?scale of?deindustrialization and?overall economic degradation is visible in?Ukraine's electricity production, which has seen a?nearly two-time decrease in?30 years. Finally, according to?IMF reports, in?2019, before the?coronavirus pandemic broke out, Ukraine's GDP per capita had been below USD?4?thousand. This is less than in?the?Republic of?Albania, the?Republic of?Moldova, or?unrecognized Kosovo. Nowadays, Ukraine is Europe's poorest country.
Who is to?blame for?this? Is it the?people of?Ukraine's fault? Certainly not. It was the?Ukrainian authorities who waisted and?frittered away the?achievements of?many generations. We know how hardworking and?talented the?people of?Ukraine are. They can achieve success and?outstanding results with perseverance and?determination. And?these qualities, as?well as?their openness, innate optimism and?hospitality have not gone. The?feelings of?millions of?people who treat Russia not just well but with great affection, just as?we feel about Ukraine, remain the?same.
Until 2014, hundreds of?agreements and?joint projects were aimed at?developing our economies, business and?cultural ties, strengthening security, and?solving common social and?environmental problems. They brought tangible benefits to?people?– both in?Russia and?Ukraine. This is what we believed to?be most important. And?that is why we had a?fruitful interaction with all, I?emphasize, with all the?leaders of?Ukraine.
Even after the?events in?Kiev of?2014, I?charged the?Russian government to?elaborate options for?preserving and?maintaining our economic ties within relevant ministries and?agencies. However, there was and?is still no mutual will to?do the?same. Nevertheless, Russia is still one of?Ukraine's top three trading partners, and?hundreds of?thousands of?Ukrainians are coming to?us to?work, and?they find a?welcome reception and?support. So that what the?”aggressor state“ is.
When the?USSR collapsed, many people in?Russia and?Ukraine sincerely believed and?assumed that our close cultural, spiritual and?economic ties would certainly last, as?would the?commonality of?our people, who had always had a?sense of?unity at?their core. However, events?– at?first gradually, and?then more rapidly?– started to?move in?a?different direction.
In?essence, Ukraine's ruling circles decided to?justify their country's independence through the?denial of?its past, however, except for?border issues. They began to?mythologize and?rewrite history, edit out everything that united us, and?refer to?the?period when Ukraine was part of?the?Russian Empire and?the?Soviet Union as?an?occupation. The?common tragedy of?collectivization and?famine of?the?early 1930s was portrayed as?the?genocide of?the?Ukrainian people.
Radicals and?neo-Nazis were open and?more and?more insolent about their ambitions. They were indulged by?both the?official authorities and?local oligarchs, who robbed the?people of?Ukraine and?kept their stolen money in?Western banks, ready to?sell their motherland for?the?sake of?preserving their capital. To?this should be added the?persistent weakness of?state institutions and?the?position of?a?willing hostage to?someone else's geopolitical will.
I?recall that long ago, well before 2014, the?U.S. and?EU countries systematically and?consistently pushed Ukraine to?curtail and?limit economic cooperation with Russia. We, as?the?largest trade and?economic partner of?Ukraine, suggested discussing the?emerging problems in?the?Ukraine-Russia-EU format. But every time we were told that Russia had nothing to?do with it and?that the?issue concerned only the?EU and?Ukraine. De facto Western countries rejected Russia's repeated calls for?dialogue.
Step by?step, Ukraine was dragged into a?dangerous geopolitical game aimed at?turning Ukraine into a?barrier between Europe and?Russia, a?springboard against Russia. Inevitably, there came a?time when the?concept of?”Ukraine is not Russia“ was no longer an?option. There was a?need for?the?”anti-Russia“ concept which we will never accept.
The?owners of?this project took as?a?basis the?old groundwork of?the?Polish-Austrian ideologists to?create an?”anti-Moscow Russia“. And?there is no need to?deceive anyone that this is being done in?the?interests of?the?people of?Ukraine. The?Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth never needed Ukrainian culture, much less Cossack autonomy. In?Austria-Hungary, historical Russian lands were mercilessly exploited and?remained the?poorest. The?Nazis, abetted by?collaborators from the?OUN-UPA, did not need Ukraine, but a?living space and?slaves for?Aryan overlords.
Nor were the?interests of?the?Ukrainian people thought of?in?February 2014. The?legitimate public discontent, caused by?acute socio-economic problems, mistakes, and?inconsistent actions of?the?authorities of?the?time, was simply cynically exploited. Western countries directly interfered in?Ukraine's internal affairs and?supported the?coup. Radical nationalist groups served as?its battering ram. Their slogans, ideology, and?blatant aggressive Russophobia have to?a?large extent become defining elements of?state policy in?Ukraine.
All the?things that united us and?bring us together so far came under attack. First and?foremost, the?Russian language. Let me remind you that the?new ”Maidan“ authorities first tried to?repeal the?law on?state language policy. Then there was the?law on?the?”purification of?power“, the?law on?education that virtually cut the?Russian language out of?the?educational process.
Lastly, as?early as?May of?this year, the?current president introduced a?bill on?”indigenous peoples“ to?the?Rada. Only those who constitute an?ethnic minority and?do not have their own state entity outside Ukraine are recognized as?indigenous. The?law has been passed. New seeds of?discord have been sown. And?this is happening in?a?country, as?I?have already noted, that is very complex in?terms of?its territorial, national and?linguistic composition, and?its history of?formation.
There may be an?argument: if you are talking about a?single large nation, a?triune nation, then what difference does it make who people consider themselves to?be?– Russians, Ukrainians, or?Belarusians. I?completely agree with this. Especially since the?determination of?nationality, particularly in?mixed families, is the?right of?every individual, free to?make his or?her own choice.
But the?fact is that the?situation in?Ukraine today is completely different because it involves a?forced change of?identity. And?the?most despicable thing is that the?Russians in?Ukraine are being forced not only to?deny their roots, generations of?their ancestors but also to?believe that Russia is their enemy. It would not be an?exaggeration to?say that the?path of?forced assimilation, the?formation of?an?ethnically pure Ukrainian state, aggressive towards Russia, is comparable in?its consequences to?the?use of?weapons of?mass destruction against us. As?a?result of?such a?harsh and?artificial division of?Russians and?Ukrainians, the?Russian people in?all may decrease by?hundreds of?thousands or?even millions.
Our spiritual unity has also been attacked. As?in?the?days of?the?Grand Duchy of?Lithuania, a?new ecclesiastical has been initiated. The?secular authorities, making no secret of?their political aims, have blatantly interfered in?church life and?brought things to?a?split, to?the?seizure of?churches, the?beating of?priests and?monks. Even extensive autonomy of?the?Ukrainian Orthodox Church while maintaining spiritual unity with the?Moscow Patriarchate strongly displeases them. They have to?destroy this prominent and?centuries-old symbol of?our kinship at?all costs.
I?think it is also natural that the?representatives of?Ukraine over and?over again vote against the?UN General Assembly resolution condemning the?glorification of?Nazism. Marches and?torchlit processions in?honor of?remaining war criminals from the?SS units take place under the?protection of?the?official authorities. Mazepa, who betrayed everyone, Petliura, who paid for?Polish patronage with Ukrainian lands, and?Bandera, who collaborated with the?Nazis, are ranked as?national heroes. Everything is being done to?erase from the?memory of?young generations the?names of?genuine patriots and?victors, who have always been the?pride of?Ukraine.
For?the?Ukrainians who fought in?the?Red Army, in?partisan units, the?Great Patriotic War was indeed a?patriotic war because they were defending their home, their great common Motherland. Over two thousand soldiers became Heroes of?the?Soviet Union. Among them are legendary pilot Ivan Kozhedub, fearless sniper, defender of?Odessa and?Sevastopol Lyudmila Pavlichenko, valiant guerrilla commander Sidor Kovpak. This indomitable generation fought, those people gave their lives for?our future, for?us. To?forget their feat is to?betray our grandfathers, mothers and?fathers.
The?anti-Russia project has been rejected by?millions of?Ukrainians. The?people of?Crimea and?residents of?Sevastopol made their historic choice. And?people in?the?southeast peacefully tried to?defend their stance. Yet, all of?them, including children, were labeled as?separatists and?terrorists. They were threatened with ethnic cleansing and?the?use of?military force. And?the?residents of?Donetsk and?Lugansk took up arms to?defend their home, their language and?their lives. Were they left any other choice after the?riots that swept through the?cities of?Ukraine, after the?horror and?tragedy of?2 May 2014 in?Odessa where Ukrainian neo-Nazis burned people alive making a?new Khatyn out of?it? The?same massacre was ready to?be carried out by?the?followers of?Bandera in?Crimea, Sevastopol, Donetsk and?Lugansk. Even now they do not abandon such plans. They are biding their time. But their time will not come.
The?coup d'état and?the?subsequent actions of?the?Kiev authorities inevitably provoked confrontation and?civil war. The?UN High Commissioner for?Human Rights estimates that the?total number of?victims in?the?conflict in?Donbas has exceeded 13,000. Among them are the?elderly and?children. These are terrible, irreparable losses.
Russia has done everything to?stop fratricide. The?Minsk agreements aimed at?a?peaceful settlement of?the?conflict in?Donbas have been concluded. I?am convinced that they still have no alternative. In?any case, no one has withdrawn their signatures from the?Minsk Package of?Measures or?from the?relevant statements by?the?leaders of?the?Normandy format countries. No one has initiated a?review of?the?United Nations Security Council resolution of?17?February 2015.
During official negotiations, especially after being reined in?by?Western partners, Ukraine's representatives regularly declare their ”full adherence“ to?the?Minsk agreements, but are in?fact guided by?a?position of?”unacceptability“. They do not intend to?seriously discuss either the?special status of?Donbas or?safeguards for?the?people living there. They prefer to?exploit the?image of?the?”victim of?external aggression“ and?peddle Russophobia. They arrange bloody provocations in?Donbas. In?short, they attract the?attention of?external patrons and?masters by?all means.
Apparently, and?I?am becoming more and?more convinced of?this: Kiev simply does not need Donbas. Why? Because, firstly, the?inhabitants of?these regions will never accept the?order that they have tried and?are trying to?impose by?force, blockade and?threats. And?secondly, the?outcome of?both Minsk?1 and?Minsk?2 which give a?real chance to?peacefully restore the?territorial integrity of?Ukraine by?coming to?an?agreement directly with the?DPR and?LPR with Russia, Germany and?France as?mediators, contradicts the?entire logic of?the?anti-Russia project. And?it can only be sustained by?the?constant cultivation of?the?image of?an?internal and?external enemy. And?I?would add?– under the?protection and?control of?the?Western powers.
This is what is actually happening. First of?all, we are facing the?creation of?a?climate of?fear in?Ukrainian society, aggressive rhetoric, indulging neo-Nazis and?militarising the?country. Along with that we are witnessing not just complete dependence but direct external control, including the?supervision of?the?Ukrainian authorities, security services and?armed forces by?foreign advisers, military ”development“ of?the?territory of?Ukraine and?deployment of?NATO infrastructure. It is no coincidence that the?aforementioned flagrant law on?”indigenous peoples“ was adopted under the?cover of?large-scale NATO exercises in?Ukraine.
This is also a?disguise for?the?takeover of?the?rest of?the?Ukrainian economy and?the?exploitation of?its natural resources. The?sale of?agricultural land is not far off, and?it is obvious who will buy it up. From time to?time, Ukraine is indeed given financial resources and?loans, but under their own conditions and?pursuing their own interests, with preferences and?benefits for?Western companies. By?the?way, who will pay these debts back? Apparently, it is assumed that this will have to?be done not only by?today's generation of?Ukrainians but also by?their children, grandchildren and?probably great-grandchildren.
The?Western authors of?the?anti-Russia project set up the?Ukrainian political system in?such a?way that presidents, members of?parliament and?ministers would change but the?attitude of?separation from and?enmity with Russia would remain. Reaching peace was the?main election slogan of?the?incumbent president. He came to?power with this. The?promises turned out to?be lies. Nothing has changed. And?in?some ways the?situation in?Ukraine and?around Donbas has even degenerated.
In?the?anti-Russia project, there is no place either for?a?sovereign Ukraine or?for?the?political forces that are trying to?defend its real independence. Those who talk about reconciliation in?Ukrainian society, about dialogue, about finding a?way out of?the?current impasse are labelled as?”pro-Russian“ agents.
Again, for?many people in?Ukraine, the?anti-Russia project is simply unacceptable. And?there are millions of?such people. But they are not allowed to?raise their heads. They have had their legal opportunity to?defend their point of?view in?fact taken away from them. They are intimidated, driven underground. Not only are they persecuted for?their convictions, for?the?spoken word, for?the?open expression of?their position, but they are also killed. Murderers, as?a?rule, go unpunished.
Today, the?”right“ patriot of?Ukraine is only the?one who hates Russia. Moreover, the?entire Ukrainian statehood, as?we understand it, is proposed to?be further built exclusively on?this idea. Hate and?anger, as?world history has repeatedly proved this, are a?very shaky foundation for?sovereignty, fraught with many serious risks and?dire consequences.
All the?subterfuges associated with the?anti-Russia project are clear to?us. And?we will never allow our historical territories and?people close to?us living there to?be used against Russia. And?to?those who will undertake such an?attempt, I?would like to?say that this way they will destroy their own country.
The?incumbent authorities in?Ukraine like to?refer to?Western experience, seeing it as?a?model to?follow. Just have a?look at?how Austria and?Germany, the?USA and?Canada live next to?each other. Close in?ethnic composition, culture, in?fact sharing one language, they remain sovereign states with their own interests, with their own foreign policy. But this does not prevent them from the?closest integration or?allied relations. They have very conditional, transparent borders. And?when crossing them the?citizens feel at?home. They create families, study, work, do business. Incidentally, so do millions of?those born in?Ukraine who now live in?Russia. We see them as?our own close people.
Russia is open to?dialogue with Ukraine and?ready to?discuss the?most complex issues. But it is important for?us to?understand that our partner is defending its national interests but not serving someone else's, and?is not a?tool in?someone else's hands to?fight against us.
We respect the?Ukrainian language and?traditions. We respect Ukrainians' desire to?see their country free, safe and?prosperous.
I?am confident that true sovereignty of?Ukraine is possible only in?partnership with Russia. Our spiritual, human and?civilizational ties formed for?centuries and?have their origins in?the?same sources, they have been hardened by?common trials, achievements and?victories. Our kinship has been transmitted from generation to?generation. It is in?the?hearts and?the?memory of?people living in?modern Russia and?Ukraine, in?the?blood ties that unite millions of?our families. Together we have always been and?will be many times stronger and?more successful. For?we are one people.
Today, these words may be perceived by?some people with hostility. They can be interpreted in?many possible ways. Yet, many people will hear me. And?I?will say one thing?– Russia has never been and?will never be ”anti-Ukraine“. And?what Ukraine will be?– it is up to?its citizens to?decide.