Page source: http://intersectionproject.eu//article/russia-europe/russia-europe
●
Author: Vladislav Inozemtsev
Russia is Europe
As the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine escalates, and Russia begins to resemble a monarchy run by
Ivan the Terrible which allows Simeons Bekbulatoviches to occasionally jump in the driver’s seat, the word is
spreading among those who are not indifferent to this country that Russia is not Europe but some kind of Asia,
or Tartary, or the Horde, etc. For obvious reasons, these epithets can most frequently be heard in the Baltic
States, Ukraine and the former Soviet satellite states that have not completely forgotten the charm of being
under external control.
Unlike many of my compatriots, for me, such epithets do not cause offense: I can fully understand this cautious
and dismissive attitude towards Russia adopted by its neighbors. The Russian authorities can, quite rightly, be
accused of war crimes. They do not really deserve respect from those who abide by the rules of international
law. However, it seems to me that stories of Russia’s “Asian nature” are absolutely unfounded and, more
importantly, they divert attention from key issues. As a result, the understanding of the essence of
contemporary Russia (and the way it should be counterbalanced) turns out to be a false one which leads to
pointless delusions.
The assertion that Russia is an Asian country in terms of mentality, mindset, lifestyle or even the structure of
its governance is absolutely groundless. It is not even a Eurasian country (as Vladimir Putin would like to see
it). It is a European society in its own right from the point of view of the individualist mentality of the
population, their culture, their perception of reality, their values and interests. Russians are not drawn to Asia
by any means; they don’t send their children to study in Shanghai or Singapore nor do they purchase real
estate in Beijing or Ulan Bator. The Europeanness of Russians is far more visible in Khabarovsk and Irkutsk
than in Ryazan or even Kaliningrad since residents of borderland areas recognize the contrast with Asia more
readily. Few Muscovites are ecstatic about the prospect of fraternization with Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan –
Russia’s partners in the Eurasian Union. Even the notorious obedience Russians show to the authorities can be
perceived not as a “difficult legacy” passed on down the centuries, but as the embodiment of the optimal
strategy of self- preservation in the authoritarian state. I do not know of a single person, barring those who
came from a former Soviet state, who has arrived in Russia and described the civilization using the word
“Asian”.
When portraying Russia as an Asian country, the proponents of such a perspective employ the only logical
instrument they know in order to more closely associate themselves – real, potential or imaginary victims of
Russian aggression - with Europe and to appeal to Europe (and to the West, in a broader sense) for help.
However, so far, Europe has shown no intention of becoming embroiled in a serious confrontation with “Asia”,
with good reason.
The most important reason is that Russia is, in fact, “true Europe” when it comes to the spheres of foreign and
military policy. One only needs to change his perspective to observe proof of such, hence, let us switch from a
spatial to a temporary angle. Wars and violence have not been the prerogative of “Asians” only – Europeans
have been far more successful in this regard. Was it the Mongols or Islamic extremists who shot tens of
thousands of innocent people in Babi Yar or who sent millions to the gas chambers in Auschwitz less than a
hundred years ago? Was it Asians who partitioned Italy and Ukraine, divided up Poland and Germany among
themselves and who relentlessly vied for bigger slices? Correct me if I’m wrong, but people in most parts of
Asia were completely oblivious to the very notion of such religious wars, capable of wiping out entire cities
overnight, in the distant past. The fires of the Inquisition were also unheard of there, I’m afraid. Was it not
Europeans who created coalitions to suppress insurrections and revolutions? Was it not Europeans who
organized congresses to divide spheres of influence in Europe itself as well as in Africa, India and other
regions? This list of questions could go on forever.
For centuries, Europe has been the birthplace of bloody wars and misanthropic ideologies. The fate of the
peoples was decided for generations to come behind their backs. In this sense, Russia is truly a European
state. Its political and, regrettably, much of its intellectual class, waxes lyrical about reliving the European
past: the Holy Alliance targeted at “color revolutions”; the “new Yalta” cementing the next global divide; the
inviolable Westphalian sovereignty which allows a ruler to dictate which religion his subjects should follow,
hold court and apply any kind of justice he sees fit. You could say that we are witnessing the regurgitation of
communism in Russia, nowadays, if you like. One could even label it a fascist country. One should,
nevertheless, remember that neither the doctrines of communism nor fascism took root in Asia.
Vladimir Putin’s intention is not to turn Europeans into Asians. He “only” encourages them to relive their own
past, refocus on Realpolitik, discard “values” and appreciate the benefits, feel free to decide the fate of other
countries and peoples who happen to be weaker than he, the leader. And his propaganda appeals to the minds
of many Europeans (not Asians, mind you, no interest in Putinism has been observed there) precisely because
this rhetoric is understandable and has a familiar-sounding ring to it. It belongs to the very same history
books.
It is a mistake to juxtapose Russia and Europe as this constitutes mere self-deception: people try to convince
themselves that Russia is weak, it is about to fall apart and that should military confrontation with “real
Europe” ensue, the result will resemble that of the Battle of Omdurman. Instead, we have so far witnessed
evidence quite to the contrary. Hence, I call on my colleagues from the Baltic States, Ukraine, and Central
Europe to admit that this is not about the new confrontation between the East and the West but between the
past and the present. And the “frontline” does not run across eastern Ukraine where the Ukrainian people
strive to save Europe from Asia, as President Petro Poroshenko would have it, but in the minds of the
Europeans and Americans who are increasingly hesitant about the question of whether axiological and
universal values should be pursued further or if Realpolitik should finally be in deed and not in name alone.
The confrontation between old and new Europeanness is at the heart of the “New Cold War” today. This is due
to the fact that axiological approaches, welcomed with enthusiasm in the 1990s and 2000s, are now past their
sell-by dates. Political realism à la Putin and Trump stands a good chance of becoming the new keynote in
international relations. If this is to be, the countries affected by new geopolitical divides on the European map
should take steps to fit in with these paradigms of Realpolitik rather than bleat on about human rights. To
achieve this, these countries need to think about how they can be of use to great superpowers rather than
mulling over what kind of help they can obtain from them. They should define their own resistance strategies
for confrontation with the aggressor and decide how to temporarily retreat in the face of defeat. Finally, they
should come up with a way to bump the heads of the newly- emerged authoritarian leaders who dream of a
new world order. All the above mentioned aspects are currently coming to the fore and the elites of the states
which occupy the territory of the post-Soviet space, or are located in its vicinity, should think of the future as if
they lived in the 19th century and not 21st century, at least from time to time.
If we continue to pretend that Europe is strong and united, that it is just about to rally against the aggression
from “Asia”, we might eventually see that the politicians in Moscow and Washington (prospectively joined by
their colleagues in Berlin and Paris) will be deciding the future of these countries with no direct involvement of
their peoples. This decision might turn out to be extremely unpleasant for many parties involved. However,
should this scenario transpire, it will still be a very old-fashioned but truly European one.
Tags
Europe
values
Ukraine
Category
Russia / Europe