Serhii Plokhy: History of Ukraine, Russia, Soviet Union, KGB, Nazis & War | Lex Fridman Podcast

Added: Mar 5, 2024

Collapse of the Soviet Union

Plokhy explains that the collapse of the Soviet Union was not solely due to pressure or manipulation from the United States. In fact, the US initially did not want the Soviet Union to collapse as it was seen as a partner. However, various factors such as economic issues, nationalism, and the mobilization from below contributed to the Soviet collapse. The collapse of the Soviet Union marked the end of one of the last major European empires.

Role of Ukraine in the Soviet Collapse

Ukraine played a crucial role in the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Ukrainian referendum in December 1991, where Ukrainians voted for independence, led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union a week later. The decision of Ukraine to go independent signaled the end of the Soviet Union, as Russia did not see it in its interest to continue the Soviet project without Ukraine. The loss of Ukraine, the second-largest Soviet republic, was a significant blow to the Soviet Union.

Vladimir Putin's Perspective

Vladimir Putin has referred to the collapse of the Soviet Union as one of the greatest tragedies of history. Plokhy interprets Putin's statement as reflecting the loss of the great power status and unity of the Russian people rather than the loss of life. Putin's focus on the geopolitical catastrophe stems from his concern about the division of the Russian nation and the loss of the Soviet state.

Origins of Slavic Nations

The Slavic nations originated in the marshes of Northwestern Ukraine, southwestern Belarus, and eastern Poland. The Slavs spread across Europe, forming various nations such as Croats, Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, and Poles. Plokhy's book "The Origins of the Slavic Nations" delves into the historical development and nation-building projects of these Slavic peoples.

Kievan Rus

Kievan Rus was a medieval state that emerged as a major European empire, stretching from the Baltics to Central Ukraine. Kiev served as the capital of Kievan Rus, playing a central role in the historical mythology and nation-building of various Slavic groups. The legacy of Kievan Rus influenced the cultural, linguistic, and religious development of Eastern Slavic nations.

Moscow's Rise to Prominence

Moscow rose to prominence as the center of the Russian Empire following the Mongol rule over former Rus lands. Moscow became the capital, replacing Vladimir, and played a crucial role in uniting the Russian lands. The gathering of the Russian lands under Moscow's control extended the empire's reach to the Pacific, solidifying Moscow's position as a significant political and cultural center.

The Kievan Myth

The anonymous manuscript known as the "History of the Rus" emerged in the 1820s, claiming that the Cossacks of Ukraine were the original Rus people with a central place in the Russian Empire. The text, filled with drama, heroes, and villains, captivated the Russian intellectual elite in St. Petersburg. Figures like Krav, who participated in the 1825 Uprising, were influenced by the narrative of the Kievan myth.

The Kazak Manifesto

Plokhy discusses the importance of a text that played a significant role in Ukrainian nationalism in the 19th and 20th centuries. The text, known as the "Kazak Manifesto," advocated for the rights of the Kazak elite to be on par with the Russian nobility. This marked a shift towards nationalism and the idea of the Kazaks as a separate nation within the Russian Empire. Plokhy explains that the Russian Empire historically integrated elites from various backgrounds, but the introduction of nationalism challenged this model and led to movements for independence in Ukraine.

The Kazak Manifesto laid the foundation for Ukrainian national identity, which evolved through romantic poetry, folklore collection, and political mobilization. Plokhy notes that Ukraine experienced five attempts at independence in the 20th century, with only one successful in 1991. He highlights the dual manifestations of Ukrainian nationalism as national communism and radical nationalism, which emerged in response to Soviet and foreign control.

Stepan Bandera

Plokhy delves into the controversial figure of Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian revolutionary who led the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. Bandera's collaboration with Nazi Germany during World War II has led to conflicting views of him as either a hero fighting for Ukrainian independence or a fascist collaborator. Plokhy emphasizes the myth surrounding Bandera and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, noting their marginalization in Ukrainian politics despite their historical significance.

The Neo-Nazi Problem in Ukraine

The discussion shifts to the presence of far-right groups in Ukraine and the perception of a neo-Nazi problem. Plokhy acknowledges the existence of such groups but emphasizes their marginality compared to other European countries. He questions why Ukraine, amidst war and conflict, has managed to maintain a lower level of far-right influence in its political landscape.

Denazification as a Justification for War

Plokhy addresses Russian President Vladimir Putin's narrative of "denazification" as a justification for the war in Ukraine. He explains how the historical context of World War II and the Soviet narrative of fighting fascism resonate with the Russian population, influencing their perception of the conflict in Ukraine. Plokhy highlights the challenge of countering propaganda and misinformation in shaping public opinion.

Yurav Hanka Incident

The conversation touches on the Yurav Hanka incident, where a Ukrainian veteran of the SS received applause in the Canadian Parliament, sparking controversy. Plokhy contextualizes the involvement of Ukrainians in the SS division Galicia during World War II and the complexities of wartime collaboration. He criticizes the shallow approach of political gestures like applause without considering the nuanced history behind such individuals.

The Orange Revolution

The collapse of the Soviet Union marked a significant turning point in history, leading to the emergence of independent states, including Ukraine. The Orange Revolution in 2004 was a response to falsified presidential elections and a rejection of a candidate supported by Russia. This event resulted in the election of a pro-Western Ukrainian president, Victor Yushchenko, who advocated for Ukraine's membership in NATO.

The Revolution of Dignity

In 2013, the Revolution of Dignity erupted in response to the Ukrainian government's reversal on signing an Association Agreement with the European Union. This decision sparked massive protests, culminating in a violent crackdown by government forces. The brutal treatment of students by the police in Kyiv triggered widespread outrage and led to a wave of demonstrations across Ukraine.

Plokhy emphasizes the significance of these events in shaping Ukraine's trajectory towards Western integration and democracy, contrasting with Russia's shift towards autocracy under Vladimir Putin. The diverging paths of the two countries set the stage for conflict and tension in the region.

The Invasion of Crimea

The invasion of Crimea by Russia in 2014 marked the beginning of the Russo-Ukrainian War. The annexation of Crimea through military force, known as the "Green Men," was a blatant violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. This aggressive move by Russia was a response to Ukraine's pro-Western stance and its plans to sign an Association Agreement with the EU.

The Conflict in the Donbas Region

The conflict in the Donbas region, characterized by hybrid warfare, was another key development in the ongoing war. Donbas, a predominantly Russian-speaking area with a significant Russian population, became a focal point for Russian intervention. Economic decline and social unrest in the region provided fertile ground for destabilization efforts by Russia.

Plokhy highlights the role of Russian operatives, such as Igor Girkin, in instigating and escalating the conflict in Donbas. These individuals, with ties to Moscow, played key leadership roles in the separatist movements in eastern Ukraine. The pretext of defending ethnically Russian people in Donbas served as a justification for Russia's intervention, despite the lack of genuine grassroots mobilization in the region.

The war in Ukraine is not simply a defensive action by Russia but a calculated strategy to exert influence and control over its neighbor. The manipulation of ethnic and cultural factors, combined with economic grievances, has been instrumental in Russia's efforts to destabilize Ukraine and undermine its sovereignty.

Language and Identity in Ukraine

Plokhy notes that Ukraine has historically been a bilingual country, with both Russian and Ukrainian being widely spoken. However, there has been a shift towards Ukrainian as a marker of identity, especially among the younger generation. The war and loss of Crimea and parts of Donbas have accelerated this trend, leading to a resurgence of Ukrainian language and culture.

Putin's Essay on Russian and Ukrainian Unity

Plokhy analyzes Putin's essay on the historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians, noting that it draws on imperial narratives from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Putin's argument revolves around the idea of a unified Russian nation, which does not allow for the independence of Ukrainian identity. This historical perspective shapes Putin's justification for the invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

NATO's Role in the Conflict

Plokhy discusses the role of NATO in the conflict, highlighting how Russia used the fear of NATO expansion as a justification for its actions. However, he argues that NATO's involvement was not the primary cause of the war. Instead, the invasion was driven by Russia's desire to maintain influence over Ukraine and prevent its drift towards the West.

Volodymyr Zelensky's Leadership

Plokhy praises Zelensky's leadership during the early days of the invasion, noting his decision to stay in Kyiv despite the overwhelming odds against Ukraine. Zelensky's refusal to leave and his ability to rally the Ukrainian people reflect his belief in his role as president and his commitment to defending his country.

Failure of Peace Talks

Plokhy explains why the peace talks failed, citing Russia's unacceptable conditions, including the loss of territory and Ukraine's alignment with the West. The atrocities committed by Russian forces, such as massacres of civilians, further complicated the negotiations and made it difficult for Ukraine to agree to any terms that compromised its sovereignty.

Western Involvement in Peace Talks

Plokhy addresses claims that Western leaders, such as Boris Johnson, compromised the peace talks. He dismisses these claims, stating that Zelensky would not take orders from anyone and would prioritize Ukraine's interests above external influence. While acknowledging the importance of Western support in the conflict, Plokhy emphasizes Zelensky's agency in decision-making.

Possible Trajectories of the War

Plokhy outlines three possible scenarios for the end of the war: victory for one side, victory for the other side, or a stalemate and compromise. He notes that the war has been ongoing for two years and that all three scenarios are still possible. He mentions the historical perspective of wars leading to the disintegration of empires and the emergence of new states.

Challenges Faced by Zelensky

Plokhy discusses the recent firing of Ukraine's head of the army, General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, by President Zelensky. He highlights the significance of this decision and the potential implications for the war effort. Plokhy raises questions about Zelensky's leadership and the possibility of political changes in Ukraine, including the potential for a shift towards authoritarianism or far-right influence. He discusses the challenges of maintaining democratic principles during times of prolonged conflict and the risks of power corrupting leaders.

Chernobyl Disaster

Plokhy discusses the Chernobyl disaster as a significant event that not only highlighted the failures of a nuclear power plant but also shed light on the broader institutional and governmental issues in the Soviet Union. He emphasizes the culture of secrecy, lack of decision-making autonomy, and the impact of authoritarian regimes on safety protocols. The Chernobyl disaster serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of centralized planning and the devaluation of human life in the pursuit of a better world.

Nuclear Safety

While technically nuclear energy is considered safe in terms of the number of deaths per energy generated compared to coal and oil, Plokhy argues that the political, economic, social, and cultural factors that led to past nuclear accidents are still prevalent today. He highlights the vulnerability of the nuclear industry to repeating old mistakes due to underlying structural issues within governments overseeing nuclear facilities. He warns that new accidents are likely to create anti-nuclear mobilization and make nuclear energy an unreliable long-term solution.

Parallels with the Cold War

Plokhy sees parallels between the current situation and the Cold War era, with Russia attempting to reestablish control over the post-Soviet space. He notes the resurgence of the transatlantic alliance and the emergence of a new bipolar world order centered around the United States and China. He emphasizes the need to learn from the Cold War era and understand how leaders managed to keep the world on the brink of war without escalating into a global conflict.

Hopeful Trajectory for the Future

Despite the challenges and uncertainties in the current geopolitical landscape, Plokhy remains hopeful for the future. He stresses the importance of learning from history, particularly the Cuban Missile Crisis, where leaders' fear of nuclear weapons played a crucial role in preventing a catastrophic outcome. He emphasizes the need for wise leadership and a deep understanding of the power and consequences of nuclear weapons to navigate the complexities of the 21st century.