Timothy Snyder: If Ukrainians Hadn’t Fought, the World Would Have Been Much Darker Place

Timothy Snyder: If Ukrainians Hadn’t Fought, the World Would Have Been Much Darker Place

Publication date: 10th of March, 2022

?

One of the most famous Western researchers in Central and Eastern Europe, Professor Timothy Snyder, tells what Putin’s ultimate goal is, how the Russian president differs from Stalin and why the struggle of Ukrainians is so important for the whole world.

Slawomir Serakovsky: What is Putin’s ultimate goal in this war?

Timothy Snyder: It’s not a secret at all. We are talking about the destruction of Ukraine as a state and the destruction of the Ukrainian people. I would like it to be clear - it’s about genocide. If the realization of such an intention requires — and it will require — the physical destruction of the entire intelligentsia or its expulsion to Siberia, so be it.

SS: So Putin is not some soft version of Stalin, not an equally dangerous leader?

TS: He’s different. Stalin did not doubt the existence of the Ukrainian nation and was a little afraid of it, hence the famine and terror of the 1930s. Putin, who believes that the Ukrainian nation does not exist, has a more radical position compared to Stalin, which resembles Hitler’s idea of human masses, which can be quickly broken by resorting to violence.

So, we have already left the field of conventional politics and found ourselves in the territory of classical tyranny. Before us is an elderly leader who thinks in categories not of modernity but of eternity. From Putin’s point of view, facts don’t really matter much. The practical barriers we notice, he either does not see, or considers them Western propaganda or illusion. In fact, Putin believes that the world is as he sees it.

SS: Which one?

TS: I’ve been reading Putin for many years; I listen carefully to what he says directly. He considers himself the second Vladimir the Great, and his task sees the completion of his case, which started more than a thousand years ago. He believes that Russia should increase, unite with Ukraine. Not only physically, territorially, or politically, but above all dialectically: as long as there is no unification, there is no Russia, it will appear only when it connects with Ukraine.

SS: Will it then exist as a real great power or as an idea?

TC: Rather spiritually, metaphysically.

SS: In the “Black Land” Ukrainian book “Black Earth. The Holocaust as a Story and a Warning” appeared in 2017 in the translation of Pavel Bilak, Oles Kamyshnikov, and Tatyana Rodionova. You have drawn very important conclusions about the history of war and the Holocaust by analyzing “Mein Kampf” and other works of Hitler. You treated him as the founder of a certain political philosophy. Not the first to have tragic results. Is Putin such a philosopher too? He is so inspired by the Russian soul that he thinks in metaphysical categories. That is, it turns out, because of it, the Russian spirit is embodied?

TS: I don’t really believe in the Russian spirit. But if you follow Putin’s statements or read randomly published articles that hint at his plans, you can see: he has been repeating for at least a decade that the existence of Ukraine as a nation and state has neither grounds nor justification. And that God wants Russia to unite with Ukraine. He said this in the Duma immediately after the 2012 election. In 2013, Putin went to Kyiv and said that one or another unification must take place because the will of God and politicians cannot resist it. There are a number of such statements, and I take them seriously.

SS: It is the circle of Putin’s advisers that is trying to guess his intentions. Fyodor Lukyanov, Vladislav Surkov, and others write about the spheres of influence of Russia and the West. It seems that no one predicted such a terrible plan that you are talking about. So what is the genealogy of Putin’s worldview?

TS: First of all, all these ideologues, but in fact, only commentators, did not want to believe in this war. Secondly, their comments are contained in the sphere of some kind of semi-rationality, which Putin has already abandoned. And thirdly, I believe that there is an ideological Putin, and there is a tactical Putin. Of course, I do not deny that tactical Putin is still acting, but it seems that he is getting weaker and ideological Putin is getting stronger. These are absurd geopolitical ideas.

If Putin were a true geopolitical strategist, he would understand the need to maintain a balance between the West and China. And he doesn’t do that at all. He artificially and unnecessarily creates a catastrophic geopolitical situation for Russia, pushing both the country and its inhabitants into such a great dependence on China that there will be no return or salvation from there.

SS: How will this alliance end for Russia?

TC: From China’s point of view, it’s not a union at all. The Chinese treat Russia as a country that no longer needs to be attacked because they will still get everything they want from it.

SS: Including the land? China remembers who took the most territory from it.

TS: Thinking about eternal, Putin acts quickly and a little rashly. He lives by illusions and believes — in fact, fascist — that he will go down in history through violence. With China, the opposite is true. They know how to think long-term and understand that it is only necessary to act so cruelly and quickly occasionally. They understand that the Russians do not need to be touched once again; the current Russian authorities themselves will give all the most important things for the Chinese. The Russians want to believe that this is some kind of alliance or partnership. And the Chinese, when they like it, speak the language of partnership. But this is and will be a very unequal relationship.

With Russia, relations with China will be the same as with Russian projects in Ukraine: they will have their own borders and their own little tyrant, but all this will not matter, since the entire Russian economy will depend entirely on the Chinese. In addition, there is a political dependence to which they are already approaching. So we found ourselves in a completely new situation. The United States, which, of course, does not want a Russian-Ukrainian war, cannot stop it, at least not immediately. But if the Chinese wanted to, they could stop it quickly, overnight.

SS: Doesn’t the move towards China contradict the Russian identity that was still created in Europe?

TC: From afar, this seems like a pretty deep problem for a leader like Putin. He does not care about the preferences of Russian citizens. Let’s read the Russian nationalists. They convince their compatriots that the Chinese will be fine. When I read this, I think, no, it’s unconvincing.

SS: What place will others take in this new order — for example, the Islamic world, including Iran, which is also anathema to the West? Does Russia have room for maneuvering in a world beyond China?

TS: For a while, yes. She is pleased with the success of relations in the Middle East and African countries. Psychologically, such progress is very important for Russians. But all these efforts will not be enough to create an independent pole of Russia at the world level. Today, apart from Syria, there are few places where Russian influence would be greater than Chinese influence. Perhaps now in Kazakhstan, where they had to intervene in January after large social protests.

SS: China still has more influence there. Otherwise, how to explain the fact that President Kassim-Jamart Tokayev refused to participate in the war together with Russia and Belarus and recognize the independence of the republics in the Donbas?

TC: He should not have done this; besides, he understands the consequences of the invasion: Kazakhstan would now fight sanctions itself. Any post-Soviet leader with common sense sees that this invasion is a crime and a folly.

SS: Let’s say Putin manages to get Ukraine under control. How will this affect relations between Russia and the European Union?

TC: Sanctions will not disappear while the Russian military is in Ukraine. It’s war and occupation; I don’t think normality will come back quickly. On the other hand, it seems that in this situation, the issue of morality, the most important values, has become a priority, Europeans have mobilized, and it is not only about a tough economy or geopolitics.

SS: Are you surprised by Joe Biden’s behavior, determination, and effectiveness?

TS: What impresses me in it is sobriety of mind and modesty. It also proved tactically effective. The Americans predicted everything, almost until the day. They clearly predicted the course of events in advance. Although they failed to convince Ukrainians and Europeans to the end, they at least created an appropriate atmosphere. The most important thing is that over the past 30 years, before Biden, every American president (whether Republican or Democrat), recalling foreign policy, spoke and thought magically, proved that we are capable of anything. And Biden noted that some things we are able to do, while others are not. He also said that we need the help of the Europeans because we ourselves will not cope. It worked very well. As an American, this is very important. When we don’t speak and think magically, there’s a chance that our foreign policy will be effective.

SS: Contrary to claims about the end of American domination, it turned out that the United States is the leader of the free world. America is strong and remains the greatest superpower; it has disciplined Europe and even led to a geopolitical turnaround.

TS: I look at it from a slightly different perspective. The main role here was played not by Americans and not by Europeans but by Ukrainians. Without them, we could not talk at all about possible U.S. leadership or any turning point in Germany or the European Union. Because if Ukrainians hadn’t fought, the world would have been a much darker place; they would just be winning time for us. For reflection, for action, for cooperation, for discussion, for everything. Everything we, Americans and Europeans, do, we owe to the Ukrainians. Only Europeans have far more to sanctions than Americans. For us, sanctions are a small thing, but for Europeans, it is no longer small. Perhaps we are the main partner, but I would give the role of a moral leader to Ukrainians.

SS: How did it happen that such a turnaround occurred in Europe? Traditionally pro-Russian states such as Italy quickly joined the sanctions, and Germany underwent fundamental changes and a shift away from principled pacifism. And it is Germany that suddenly sends Ukraine its deadliest weapon. Sweden and Finland reject neutrality.

TS: My answer consists of three parts. Still, individuals play a role in history. Without Green, it would be different. Germany and the EU made these bold decisions after his moving speeches to the European Parliament and the European Council. Secondly, the EU is traditionally vague and not very accurate but still consistently refers to the Second World War. Finally, such a war in Europe continues, completely unjustified, terrible, cruel. It turns out that these references to the Second World War made sense and again became relevant. The similarities are obvious. Thirdly, it is very important that Putin’s ideology and propaganda have dried up.

Eight years ago, they also talked about Nazis and Fascists, Russian-speaking residents, etc. Then they managed to win the propaganda war. This time, however, Europeans learned something, and Russian propaganda was much less targeted — or not at all. Ukrainians communicate much better, know languages, speak English fluently and intelligently, already have the best diplomats and better-known intellectuals. Well, in the case of the Germans, we see an absolute mental turnaround.

SS: We don’t want to think about it yet, but what does Germany’s militarization mean for Poland in the long run? Berlin will not always have sensible politicians in power.

TC: Germany is the most important democratic country in Europe. I’m glad it’s going to normalize in that sense. The lack of a normal army and a normal attitude to the army artificially weakened the Germans. I don’t expect the tradition of German militarism to suddenly resurface; we are very far from it. There have been a number of huge and positive changes. Every Pole knows that Germany will transfer weapons to fight Russia, that German remilitarization takes place in opposition to Russia, not to Poland. Polish politicians are constantly looking for a German enemy but have not found it yet.

SS: And Putin? Can he survive this war?

TC: It is known that no tyrant has managed to achieve immortality. A specific combination of events that will lead to its fall is difficult to predict. It seems to me that this is his last act, and was chosen by himself. He believes that there is some harmony between his life and Russian history and that such a dramatic gesture was necessary. He is now coming to an end and is determined, if only because Zelensky is still alive. Not yet under Putin, but sooner or later, Russia will want, if not to return, then start returning to the West. And this would not have been possible without military censorship imposed on society. The desire to know the truth will grow, the problem will escalate, until it explodes, as in the late 1980s.

SS: What will be Navalny’s role here?

TC: Putin has problems with rivals, with democracy, with young people and people who are not afraid. Putin himself is afraid - of disease, of the future. But when dealing with guys who aren’t afraid of him, he has a big problem. Therefore, he will use the full force of the Russian state to fight such people. There is a parallel between Zelensky and Navalny. Putin personally hates them. Therefore, it is important that there is such Navalny that there is a Russian who tells the truth, who is not afraid, whose motto is without fear. This has a huge symbolic meaning and, hopefully, not only symbolic.

SS: Ukraine is fighting courageously and acting wisely. If successful, should Ukraine be urgently admitted to the EU?

TS: Yes.

SS: Will we sooner or later face another collapse of Russia, as, for example, in 1989-1991?

TS: I hope not. I hope that there will be a Russia that will focus on its interests, but at the same time will be able to talk to us. It will be able to strike a balance between China and us - it will be better for everyone.

SS: You know Russian political culture well. Do you see a place for, if not a democratic Russia, then one that abandons imperial ambitions?

TS: Yes, but not now. Maybe in a year. This could be the agony of Russian imperialism. There is also the Polish, very wise tradition of Giedroyc, according to which the absolute key to Poland’s future is the end of imperialism.

SS: The condition for this is the acceptance of its borders. In the case of Poland, it is necessary to accept that Vilnius and Lviv are outside their borders.

TC: Until the former empire reconciles with its borders, it will not be able to create a normal state and society. And Poland, thanks to Giedroyc, Kuron, Gyeremek, and Skubiszewski, has resigned itself to its borders. Putin’s Russian agony in Ukraine may be the last stage of Russian imperialism. That’s what I want the Russians to do: that it will end as soon as possible. Russian imperialism is terrible for Ukrainians, it literally kills them, but it is also fatal to Russian statehood, leads to civilizational defeat, makes Russia dependent on China. He’s irrational. And he also allows Putin-style leaders to rule without rule, to arrange a spectacle, a show of force without real politics.

I’m not sure if Russian democracy will ever exist, but I’m convinced that a semi-Western, normal Russia is possible.

SS: Who thinks the same in the Kremlin? Who tells Putin the truth about the world?

TS: Unfortunately, no one.

Translation of article:

https://novapolshcha.pl/article/timoti-snaider-yakbi-ukrayinci-ne-voyuvali-svit-buv-bi-nabagato-temnishii