Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Full Chapter Putin S Wars The Rise of Russia S New Imperialism 3Rd Edition Marcel H Van Herpen PDF
Full Chapter Putin S Wars The Rise of Russia S New Imperialism 3Rd Edition Marcel H Van Herpen PDF
https://textbookfull.com/product/from-russia-with-blood-the-
kremlin-s-ruthless-assassination-program-and-vladimir-putin-s-
secret-war-on-the-west-heidi-blake/
https://textbookfull.com/product/from-cold-war-to-hot-peace-an-
american-ambassador-in-putin-s-russia-michael-mcfaul/
https://textbookfull.com/product/law-and-the-russian-state-
russia-s-legal-evolution-from-peter-the-great-to-vladimir-putin-
william-pomeranz/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-war-against-putin-what-the-
government-media-complex-isn-t-telling-you-about-russia-first-
simon-schuster-hardcover-edition-m-s-king/
The Juridical Act A Study of the Theoretical Concept of
an Act that aims to create new Legal Facts H. D. S. Van
Der Kaaij
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-juridical-act-a-study-of-
the-theoretical-concept-of-an-act-that-aims-to-create-new-legal-
facts-h-d-s-van-der-kaaij/
https://textbookfull.com/product/putin-v-the-people-the-perilous-
politics-of-a-divided-russia-samuel-a-greene/
https://textbookfull.com/product/new-world-technologies-2020-and-
beyond-first-edition-errol-s-van-engelen/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-new-public-health-3rd-
edition-theodore-h-tulchinsky/
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-rise-and-fall-of-russia-s-
far-eastern-republic-1905-1922-nationalisms-imperialisms-and-
regionalisms-in-and-after-the-russian-empire-ivan-sablin/
Putin’s Wars
Putin’s Wars
The Rise of
Russia’s New Imperialism
Third Edition
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by
any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who
may quote passages in a review.
vii
viii Contents
In writing this book I owe a lot to the discussions with the members of the
Russia Seminar of the Cicero Foundation. I want to thank Emma Gilligan,
Hall Gardner, Christiane Haroche, Rona Heald, Albert van Driel, Peter
Verwey, and Ernst Wolff, who read chapters of the book and gave useful feed-
back. I want to thank also Susan McEachern, Carolyn Broadwell-Tkach, and
Jehanne Schweitzer, who, with great professionalism, shepherded the book
through the editorial production process. Finally, I want also to thank my
wife, Valérie, who gave me her patient support during the years of research
and writing. I dedicate this book to her and to my two sons, Michiel and
Cyrille, who share their father’s interest in Russian history.
xiii
Glossary and Abbreviations
xv
xvi Glossary and Abbreviations
In December 1991 the Soviet Union ceased to exist. The end of the last
European empire came suddenly and unexpectedly, not least for the Russians
themselves. However, with hindsight it seemed to be the logical conclusion
of a chapter in European history. Other European countries had gone down
the same road. Spain had already lost its colonies in the nineteenth century.
France, Britain, Belgium, and the Netherlands had decolonized after World
War II. Even Portugal, a colonialist “laggard” that clung to its possessions in
Africa and Asia until the bitter end, had to give up its empire after the “car-
nation revolution” of 1974. Decolonization—until now—has seemed to be
an irreversible process: once a former colony had obtained its independence,
it was unlikely that the former colonial power could make a comeback. The
history of European decolonization has been, so far, a linear and not a cyclical
process. The chapter of European colonialism seems to be closed definitively,
once and for all. But is it? Does this analysis also apply to Russia? This is
the big question because not only were the conditions under which Russia
built its empire quite different than for the other European countries, but also
because the process of decolonization was different. Let us consider these
differences. There are, at least, five:
• First, Russia did not build its empire overseas, as did the other European
powers. Its empire was contiguous and continental: the new lands it ac-
quired were incorporated in one continuous landmass.
• Second, with shorter communication lines and no need to cross oceans,
rebellions and independence movements in the colonized territories could
be more easily repressed.
1
2 Introduction
• Third, Russian empire building was also different because it did not come
after the process of state-building, as was the case in Western Europe. In
Russia it was an integral part of the process of state-building itself.
• Fourth, Russian empire building was neither casual, nor primarily driven
by commercial interests, as was the case in Western Europe, but from the
start, it had a clear geopolitical function, namely, to safeguard Russia’s
borders against foreign invaders.
• Fifth, in Russian history periods of decolonization were never linear, nor
irreversible. Decolonization was never definitive. When, for instance, after
the Bolshevik Revolution, the colonized lands of the Russian empire were
set free, they were soon afterward reconquered by the Red Army.
RUSSIA: A POST-IMPERIUM?
According to some authors, the end of the Soviet Union sounded the death
knell of Russian colonialism and imperialism. One of these authors is Dmitri
Trenin, a Russian analyst and the head of the Moscow bureau of the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace. In his book, with the telling title Post-
Imperium, he tries to reassure the reader that “Russia has abandoned the age-
old pattern of territorial growth. A merger with Belarus was not pursued as
a priority. Abkhazia and South Ossetia were turned into military buffers, but
only in extremis.”1 In his book Trenin repeats this reassuring mantra again
and again. He writes: “The days of the Russian empire are gone; Russia has
entered a post-imperial world”2; or: “Russia will never again be an empire”3;
and again: “The Russian empire is over, never to return. The enterprise that
had lasted for hundreds of years simply lost the drive. The élan is gone. In
the two decades since the collapse, imperial restoration was never considered
seriously by the leaders, nor demanded by a wider public.”4 Trenin gives
several arguments for his thesis. The first of these is the presence in Russia
of an empire fatigue. Russians, he argues, are no longer willing to pay for
Introduction 3
an empire: “At the top, there was neither money nor strong will for irreden-
tism.”5 Instead of an empire, he continues, Russia has only the desire to be-
come a “great power.” The difference between the two is, in his opinion, that
great powers are selfish. They don’t want to spend money on behalf of other
nations. “Empires,” writes the author, “for all the coercion they necessarily
entail, do produce some public goods, in the name of a special mission. Great
powers can be at least equally brutish and oppressive, but they are essentially
selfish creatures.”
However, the sudden eclipse of Russia’s eternal imperial drive cannot be
explained exclusively by “selfishness.” Trenin gives a second reason, which
is the growing xenophobia in the Russian population. Although xenophobia
may be an ugly, anti-humanist attitude, in Russia’s case, it would have some
positive effects. “What the rise in xenophobia, the upsurge of chauvinism,
and the spread of anti-government violence also tell,” writes the author, “is
that there is no appetite whatsoever for a new edition of empire, only residual
nostalgia for the old days.”6 Like Bernard Mandeville, who in his Fable of the
Bees explained how public benefits could emerge from private vices, Dmitri
Trenin explains how in contemporary Russia private vices, such as xenopho-
bia and egoism, result in a public benefit: the lack of appetite in the Russian
population for the restoration of the lost empire.
However, the problem with Trenin’s analysis is not only that it is too
simple, but also that it contradicts the facts. One of these facts is that dur-
ing Putin’s reign the phase of “empire fatigue” has definitively come to an
end. Under the guise of the “Eurasian Customs Union,” “Eurasian Economic
Union,” and—most recently—“Eurasian Union,” new efforts of empire
building have begun. As concerns xenophobia, presented by Trenin as an
effective antidote against empire building, history shows that xenophobia,
far from eliminating an imperialist drive, often accompanies it. One does not
have to go back to the 1930s to find extremely xenophobic regimes that at the
same time were expansionist and imperialist. A good example of this combi-
nation in contemporary Russia is the leader of the Liberal-Democratic Party
in the Duma, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, who, in his book Poslednyy brosok na
yug (Last Push to the South), likens immigrants to Russia from the Caucasus
or Central Asia to “cockroaches” (tarakany) who should be expelled from the
European center of Russia.7 This does not prevent Zhirinovsky from pleading
for a reconquest of both the Soviet and tsarist empires (the latter included
parts of contemporary Poland and Finland). Zhirinovsky even claims Turkey,
Iran, and Afghanistan as exclusive spheres of influence, not excluding that
“Russia gets a frontier with India.”8 Trenin’s argument that the widespread
xenophobia in Russia will prevent Russia from becoming imperialist is
therefore not valid. In fact the contrary is true: ultranationalism and imperial
chauvinism are often most developed in xenophobic and racist countries.
4 Introduction
Ironically, Trenin mentions in his book a number of facts that undermine his
own theory of Russia as a post-imperium. These facts are rather disconcert-
ing. When Trenin mentions how Putin called the demise of the Soviet Union
“the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century,” he writes that
“Putin’s words were interpreted as evidence of an active Kremlin nostalgia
for the recently lost empire, and even as a sign of his intention to bring back
the USSR. This was a misinterpretation.”9 Trenin is certainly right that Putin
did not want to bring back the USSR—because, as he rightly stresses, Putin
“blamed the non-performing communist system for losing the Soviet Union.”
But a Russian empire does not have to be a communist empire, as the tsar-
ist experience proves. Trenin also mentions Putin’s remark at the Bucharest
NATO summit in April 2008 that Ukraine “was not even a state” and “would
break apart.” This was, according to Trenin, neither an expression of Russian
imperial arrogance and contempt, nor a barely disguised threat. Putin, he
wrote, “was probably highlighting the brittleness of Ukraine’s unity, which
would not survive a serious test.”10
But if Putin was completely free of any annexationist fervor, why, in 2003,
did he propose that Belarus return to Russia and join the Russian Federation as
six oblasts (provinces), a proposition that was refused by Belarus? As long ago
as 1993, the Supreme Soviet laid claim to the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol.11
However, if Putin’s objectives are so radically different, why would his gov-
ernment distribute Russian passports in the Crimea and in Eastern Ukraine,
knowing that the Ukrainian Constitution strictly forbade dual nationality?
And why was this distribution of Russian passports accompanied in August
2008 by Medvedev’s introduction of “five foreign policy principles,” which
included the right for the Kremlin to protect Russians “wherever they are” and
intervene on their behalf? These principles were applied in the case of Georgia,
which was invaded in August 2008. And why, after the Orange Revolution,
did Russian politicians speak out in favor of the “federalization” of Ukraine?12
As Trenin himself writes, this proposal was interpreted by Ukrainian politi-
cians as “paving the way to its breakup and the absorption of its eastern and
southern regions by Russia.” And why, in 2003, did Putin equally propose the
federalization of Moldova?13 Was it not because it would make a breakup of
that state easier and bring the breakaway province of Transnistria definitively
back within Moscow’s sphere of influence? Trenin also mentions that after
the Ukrainian bid for a route into NATO, “some not entirely academic quar-
ters in Moscow played with the idea of a major geopolitical redesign of the
northern Black Sea area, under which southern Ukraine, from the Crimea to
Odessa, would secede from Kiev and form a Moscow-friendly buffer state,
‘Novorossiya’—New Russia. As part of that grand scheme, tiny Transnistria
would either be affiliated with that state or absorbed by it. The rest of Moldova
could then be annexed by Romania.”14 These sentences need to be read very
Introduction 5
carefully: for “some not entirely academic quarters in Moscow,” one could
read: the Kremlin or Kremlin-related politicians. For “played with the idea of
a major geopolitical redesign,” one could read: military intervention in order
to break up Ukraine, an internationally recognized sovereign state (also recog-
nized by Russia). Moreover, the creation of a Russia-friendly “buffer state” has
traditionally, in Russian politics, led to that state becoming part of Russia. One
could be tempted to see some historical parallels. But, of course, you need not.
Because Trenin is reassuring us: Putin’s Russia has no plans to reconquer its
lost empire. Russia is a post-empire and intends to remain so.
The thesis of this book is that the Russian Federation is both a post-
imperial state and a pre-imperial state. The aim of this book is to analyze
Putin’s wars in Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine and to put them in a broader
context in order to better understand the inner dynamic of Putin’s system.
The key idea of the book is that in Russian history there has always existed
a negative relationship between empire building and territorial expansion on
the one hand and internal democratization on the other. Reform periods in
Russia (after 1855, 1905, and 1989) are often the result of lost wars and/or
the weakening of the empire. Periods of imperial expansion, on the contrary,
tended to have a negative impact on internal reform and democratization.
Gorbachev’s perestroika—a product of the lost Cold War—is an example of
the former; Putin’s policy of a reimperialization of the former Soviet space is
an example of the latter.
NOTES
DESPOTISM AND
THE QUEST FOR EMPIRE
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.F.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.