PUTIN AND THE RETURN OF HISTORY

An eloquent report probes the complicated, competing narratives of Ukraine–Russia history.

Martin Sixsmith is a former BBC Moscow correspondent and author of An Unquiet Heart, and his son, Daniel, is a historian and author of The War of Nerves. Despite the optimism in the West for the emergence of liberal democracy in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the rise of Putin over the last two decades has assured the resurgence of the militarized autocratic model first installed during the time of the Mongols in the 14th century. As a correspondent in Moscow in 1991, Martin joined the triumphal voices at Russia’s disintegration and reported—wrongly, he admits—that “Russia would re-enter the community of nations after seven decades of self-imposed exile and become a responsible member of the international order.” Instead, Putin has only grown more resentful about what the former Soviet Union has lost. Most recently, Putin has reembraced the “Great Russian nationalism” favored by Catherine the Great, and he stresses the concept of Russian vulnerability to Western aggression and the need to protect the allegedly persecuted Russian minorities in places such as the Donbas—hence the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. As the authors note, Hitler used a similar casus belli to invade the Sudetenland in 1938. “Like Stalin before him,” the authors write, “Putin has appointed himself the supreme arbiter of the meaning of history. He declares his strict adherence to historical facts, but they are the ‘facts’ according to the ever-growing number…of Government Organized Non-Governmental Organizations that he himself has created.” As the authors capably demonstrate in this stimulating text, Putin’s massive folly in invading Ukraine—and expecting a warm welcome—has opened a perilous new chapter in the Russian historical narrative.

A tremendous study of how Putin has tragically manipulated national myths for personal gain and revanchist patriotism.