Fascism, Russia and Ukraine

February 23, 2014 at 6:11 pm (Andrew Coates, anti-semitism, fascism, posted by JD, Russia)

The following article will be published in the New York Review of Books on March 20th:

snyder_1-032014.jpg

Above: The opposition leader Vitali Klitschko at a rally in Maidan Square, December 2013

By Timothy Snyder

The students were the first to protest against the regime of President Viktor Yanukovych on the Maidan, the central square in Kiev, last November. These were the Ukrainians with the most to lose, the young people who unreflectively thought of themselves as Europeans and who wished for themselves a life, and a Ukrainian homeland, that were European. Many of them were politically on the left, some of them radically so. After years of negotiation and months of promises, their government, under President Yanukovych, had at the last moment failed to sign a major trade agreement with the European Union.

When the riot police came and beat the students in late November, a new group, the Afghan veterans, came to the Maidan. These men of middle age, former soldiers and officers of the Red Army, many of them bearing the scars of battlefield wounds, came to protect “their children,” as they put it. They didn’t mean their own sons and daughters: they meant the best of the youth, the pride and future of the country. After the Afghan veterans came many others, tens of thousands, then hundreds of thousands, now not so much in favor of Europe but in defense of decency.

What does it mean to come to the Maidan? The square is located close to some of the major buildings of government, and is now a traditional site of protest. Interestingly, the word maidan exists in Ukrainian but not in Russian, but even people speaking Russian use it because of its special implications. In origin it is just the Arabic word for “square,” a public place. But a maidan now means in Ukrainian what the Greek word agora means in English: not just a marketplace where people happen to meet, but a place where they deliberately meet, precisely in order to deliberate, to speak, and to create a political society. During the protests the word maidan has come to mean the act of public politics itself, so that for example people who use their cars to organize public actions and protect other protestors are called the automaidan.

The protesters represent every group of Ukrainian citizens: Russian speakers and Ukrainian speakers (although most Ukrainians are bilingual), people from the cities and the countryside, people from all regions of the country, members of all political parties, the young and the old, Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Every major Christian denomination is represented by believers and most of them by clergy. The Crimean Tatars march in impressive numbers, and Jewish leaders have made a point of supporting the movement. The diversity of the Maidan is impressive: the group that monitors hospitals so that the regime cannot kidnap the wounded is run by young feminists. An important hotline that protesters call when they need help is staffed by LGBT activists.

On January 16, the Ukrainian government, headed by President Yanukovych, tried to put an end to Ukrainian civil society. A series of laws passed hastily and without following normal procedure did away with freedom of speech and assembly, and removed the few remaining checks on executive authority. This was intended to turn Ukraine into a dictatorship and to make all participants in the Maidan, by then probably numbering in the low millions, into criminals. The result was that the protests, until then entirely peaceful, became violent. Yanukovych lost support, even in his political base in the southeast, near the Russian border.

After weeks of responding peacefully to arrests and beatings by the riot police, many Ukrainians had had enough. A fraction of the protesters, some but by no means all representatives of the political right and far right, decided to take the fight to the police. Among them were members of the far-right party Svoboda and a new conglomeration of nationalists who call themselves the Right Sector (Pravyi Sektor). Young men, some of them from right-wing groups and others not, tried to take by force the public spaces claimed by the riot police. Young Jewish men formed their own combat group, or sotnia, to take the fight to the authorities.

Although Yanukovych rescinded most of the dictatorship laws, lawless violence by the regime, which started in November, continued into February. Members of the opposition were shot and killed, or hosed down in freezing temperatures to die of hypothermia. Others were tortured and left in the woods to die.

During the first two weeks of February, the Yanukovych regime sought to restore some of the dictatorship laws through decrees, bureaucratic shortcuts, and new legislation. On February 18, an announced parliamentary debate on constitutional reform was abruptly canceled. Instead, the government sent thousands of riot police against the protesters of Kiev. Hundreds of people were wounded by rubber bullets, tear gas, and truncheons. Dozens were killed.

The future of this protest movement will be decided by Ukrainians. And yet it began with the hope that Ukraine could one day join the European Union, an aspiration that for many Ukrainians means something like the rule of law, the absence of fear, the end of corruption, the social welfare state, and free markets without intimidation from syndicates controlled by the president.

The course of the protest has very much been influenced by the presence of a rival project, based in Moscow, called the Eurasian Union. This is an international commercial and political union that does not yet exist but that is to come into being in January 2015. The Eurasian Union, unlike the European Union, is not based on the principles of the equality and democracy of member states, the rule of law, or human rights.

On the contrary, it is a hierarchical organization, which by its nature seems unlikely to admit any members that are democracies with the rule of law and human rights. Any democracy within the Eurasian Union would pose a threat to Putin’s rule in Russia. Putin wants Ukraine in his Eurasian Union, which means that Ukraine must be authoritarian, which means that the Maidan must be crushed.

The dictatorship laws of January 16 were obviously based on Russian models, and were proposed by Ukrainian legislators with close ties to Moscow. They seem to have been Russia’s condition for financial support of the Yanukovych regime. Before they were announced, Putin offered Ukraine a large loan and promised reductions in the price of Russian natural gas. But in January the result was not a capitulation to Russia. The people of the Maidan defended themselves, and the protests continue. Where this will lead is anyone’s guess; only the Kremlin expresses certainty about what it all means.

The protests in the Maidan, we are told again and again by Russian propaganda and by the Kremlin’s friends in Ukraine, mean the return of National Socialism to Europe. The Russian foreign minister, in Munich, lectured the Germans about their support of people who salute Hitler. The Russian media continually make the claim that the Ukrainians who protest are Nazis. Naturally, it is important to be attentive to the far right in Ukrainian politics and history. It is still a serious presence today, although less important than the far right in France, Austria, or the Netherlands. Yet it is the Ukrainian regime rather than its opponents that resorts to anti-Semitism, instructing its riot police that the opposition is led by Jews. In other words, the Ukrainian government is telling itself that its opponents are Jews and us that its opponents are Nazis.

The strange thing about the claim from Moscow is the political ideology of those who make it. The Eurasian Union is the enemy of the European Union, not just in strategy but in ideology. The European Union is based on a historical lesson: that the wars of the twentieth century were based on false and dangerous ideas, National Socialism and Stalinism, which must be rejected and indeed overcome in a system guaranteeing free markets, free movement of people, and the welfare state. Eurasianism, by contrast, is presented by its advocates as the opposite of liberal democracy.

The Eurasian ideology draws an entirely different lesson from the twentieth century. Founded around 2001 by the Russian political scientist Aleksandr Dugin, it proposes the realization of National Bolshevism. Rather than rejecting totalitarian ideologies, Eurasianism calls upon politicians of the twenty-first century to draw what is useful from both fascism and Stalinism. Dugin’s major work, The Foundations of Geopolitics, published in 1997, follows closely the ideas of Carl Schmitt, the leading Nazi political theorist. Eurasianism is not only the ideological source of the Eurasian Union, it is also the creed of a number of people in the Putin administration, and the moving force of a rather active far-right Russian youth movement. For years Dugin has openly supported the division and colonization of Ukraine.

The point man for Eurasian and Ukrainian policy in the Kremlin is Sergei Glazyev, an economist who like Dugin tends to combine radical nationalism with nostalgia for Bolshevism. He was a member of the Communist Party and a Communist deputy in the Russian parliament before cofounding a far-right party called Rodina, or Motherland. In 2005 some of its deputies signed a petition to the Russian prosecutor general asking that all Jewish organizations be banned from Russia.

Later that year Motherland was banned from taking part in further elections after complaints that its advertisements incited racial hatred. The most notorious showed dark-skinned people eating watermelon and throwing the rinds to the ground, then called for Russians to clean up their cities. Glazyev’s book Genocide: Russia and the New World Order claims that the sinister forces of the “new world order” conspired against Russia in the 1990s to bring about economic policies that amounted to “genocide.” This book was published in English by Lyndon LaRouche’s magazine Executive Intelligence Review with a preface by LaRouche. Today Executive Intelligence Review echoes Kremlin propaganda, spreading the word in English that Ukrainian protesters have carried out a Nazi coup and started a civil war.

The populist media campaign for the Eurasian Union is now in the hands of Dmitry Kiselyov, the host of the most important talk show in Russia, and since December also the director of the state-run Russian media conglomerate designed to form national public opinion. Best known for saying that gays who die in car accidents should have their hearts cut from their bodies and incinerated, Kiselyov has taken Putin’s campaign against gay rights and transformed it into a weapon against European integration. Thus when the then German foreign minister, who is gay, visited Kiev in December and met with Vitali Klitschko, the heavyweight champion and opposition politician, Kiselyov dismissed Klitschko as a gay icon. According to the Russian foreign minister, the exploitation of sexual politics is now to be an open weapon in the struggle against the “decadence” of the European Union.

Following the same strategy, Yanukovych’s government claimed, entirely falsely, that the price of closer relations with the European Union was the recognition of gay marriage in Ukraine. Kiselyov is quite open about the Russian media strategy toward the Maidan: to “apply the correct political technology,” then “bring it to the point of overheating” and bring to bear “the magnifying glass of TV and the Internet.”

Why exactly do people with such views think they can call other people fascists? And why does anyone on the Western left take them seriously? One line of reasoning seems to run like this: the Russians won World War II, and therefore can be trusted to spot Nazis. Much is wrong with this. World War II on the eastern front was fought chiefly in what was then Soviet Ukraine and Soviet Belarus, not in Soviet Russia. Five percent of Russia was occupied by the Germans; all of Ukraine was occupied by the Germans. Apart from the Jews, whose suffering was by far the worst, the main victims of Nazi policies were not Russians but Ukrainians and Belarusians. There was no Russian army fighting in World War II, but rather a Soviet Red Army. Its soldiers were disproportionately Ukrainian, since it took so many losses in Ukraine and recruited from the local population. The army group that liberated Auschwitz was called the First Ukrainian Front.

The other source of purported Eurasian moral legitimacy seems to be this: since the representatives of the Putin regime only very selectively distanced themselves from Stalinism, they are therefore reliable inheritors of Soviet history, and should be seen as the automatic opposite of Nazis, and therefore to be trusted to oppose the far right.

Again, much is wrong about this. World War II began with an alliance between Hitler and Stalin in 1939. It ended with the Soviet Union expelling surviving Jews across its own border into Poland. After the founding of the State of Israel, Stalin began associating Soviet Jews with a world capitalist conspiracy, and undertook a campaign of arrests, deportations, and murders of leading Jewish writers. When he died in 1953 he was preparing a larger campaign against Jews.

After Stalin’s death communism took on a more and more ethnic coloration, with people who wished to revive its glories claiming that its problem was that it had been spoiled by Jews. The ethnic purification of the communist legacy is precisely the logic of National Bolshevism, which is the foundational ideology of Eurasianism today. Putin himself is an admirer of the philosopher Ivan Ilin, who wanted Russia to be a nationalist dictatorship.

What does it mean when the wolf cries wolf? Most obviously, propagandists in Moscow and Kiev take us for fools—which by many indications is quite justified.

More subtly, what this campaign does is attempt to reduce the social tensions in a complex country to a battle of symbols about the past. Ukraine is not a theater for the historical propaganda of others or a puzzle from which pieces can be removed. It is a major European country whose citizens have important cultural and economic ties with both the European Union and Russia. To set its own course, Ukraine needs normal public debate, the restoration of parliamentary democracy, and workable relations with all of its neighbors. Ukraine is full of sophisticated and ambitious people. If people in the West become caught up in the question of whether they are largely Nazis or not, then they may miss the central issues in the present crisis.

In fact, Ukrainians are in a struggle against both the concentration of wealth and the concentration of armed force in the hands of Viktor Yanukovych and his close allies. The protesters might be seen as setting an example of courage for Americans of both the left and the right. Ukrainians make real sacrifices for the hope of joining the European Union. Might there be something to be learned from that among Euroskeptics in London or elsewhere? This is a dialogue that is not taking place.

The history of the Holocaust is part of our own public discourse, our agora, or maidan. The current Russian attempt to manipulate the memory of the Holocaust is so blatant and cynical that those who are so foolish to fall for it will one day have to ask themselves just how, and in the service of what, they have been taken in. If fascists take over the mantle of antifascism, the memory of the Holocaust will itself be altered. It will be more difficult in the future to refer to the Holocaust in the service of any good cause, be it the particular one of Jewish history or the general one of human rights.

—February 19, 2014

H/t: Comrade Coatesy, who writes: “This is important, though already dated, and downplays far too much the role of the hard-right in the Ukrainian events (apparently we poor naive leftists are seduced by the Russians) but is worth considering (if only for how Russia has its own nationalist hard right.”

14 Comments

  1. dagmar said,

    The idea that Klitchko could be described as a “gay icon” because he met the then-German (gay) foreign minster Westerwelle, from the now largely irrelevant (and no longer in parliament, for the first time ever) Neoliberal and generally hated party of-and-for-the-super-rich, the F.D.P., is ridiculous.

    It is interesting though that it was decided somehow to associate Klitchko with homosexuality, and not with somehow kow-towing to the interests of the German government, which would be far less ridiculous, given that he fluently speaks Russian, English, and German, and maybe other languages, but not (or only broken) Ukrainian (which is definately a problem for his political career), that his party is an invention of the German Christian Democrats, funded through German tax-payers’ money through state funding of their ‘educational’ Konrad Adenauer Foundation, and because he lives permanently in Germany, where he and his brother made their careers, and has done so for many years. He is also the “face” of coffee and non-coffee related tat-company “Tchibo”, who are trying to remove Vitaly’s face from their products and stop an advertising campaing for fitness products in the light of recent events ( http://www.tz.de/politik/tchibo-streicht-werbung-klitschko-kiew-zr-3380270.html ).

    Have the memories of the “Great Patriotic War” faded so much in Russia since the end of the Soviet Union that “gay icon” is now more effective an insult than “German”? If so, is this “progress”?

    • R F McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

      You have to remember that veterans of the Great Patriotic War are now all in their 80s or older in a country where life expectancy for males is now just 64 (and has only very recently recovered to the level of the last years of the USSR).

      To a 20-year old on the street whether in Moscow or Kiev WW2 presumably now has no more significance than it has to a contemporary in London (and I suspect considerably less than to one in Berlin).

      As for the older generation for 45 years they were carefully indoctrinated to distinguish precisely between Germans (and particularly the citizens of the DDR) and Nazis.

      • dagmar said,

        All anecdotal evidence (and I admit, it is only that) I’ve ever heard – even, and especially from Russophile Germans (including east Germans) – is that such ‘careful indoctrination’ to distinguish between ‘good Germans’ (i.e. the KPD) and Nazis didn’t work in any way whatsoever.

        I would doubt that WW2 ‘today’ has little significance in countries where probably every family lost, often in harrowing circumstances, a number of relatives in it.

        Also a lot of those 20 year olds’ parents would have served in the “Red Army” in the GDR, and they may vaguely know somehow of some of the events which led to this.

        It would also surprise me if there aren’t some so-called “history” channels on Russian (state-run or commercial, yet effectively state controlled) television that are almost entirely made up of war films/programmes on Hitler and/or Stalin. If it’s good enough for the UK and Germany, I’m sure Russia won’t be left out.

      • R F McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

        Yes and no – without a large sample survey neither of us can know.

        FWIW there certainly are recent Russian mass market films and TV dramas set in WW2 – I’ve actually watched Fortress Brest a couple of times as I find its old-fashioned picture of heroic Red Army soldiers and civilians hopeless last stand against unabashedly evil Nazis rather stirring.

        There was also late noughties TV series called Shtrafbat which is supposed to give an unflinching picture of life and death in a wartime NKVD penal battalion but which I’ve never been able to find a subtitled version of.

        I also watched a little while back a very odd documentary which brought together a large room full of the (mostly Baltic) actors who made a living playing Nazi officers in Soviet and post-Soviet Russian films and TV for an ironic Best Portrayal of Fascist Beast award ceremony – and while some of the clips used were familiar to me, a lot weren’t which suggests a fair number of WW2 dramas got made that never registered with Western critics.

        (Would give you the link but made the mistake of assuming that because I’d linked to it on twitter it would be easy to find again under my profile which twitter has now done something horrible to…)

  2. Fascism, Russia and Ukraine | OzHouse said,

    […] Feb 23 2014 by admin […]

  3. Jim Denham said,

    A Time to Mourn, a Time to Act: an Open Letter to the Ukrainian Left from http://www.criticatac.ro/lefteast/a-time-to-mourn-a-time-to-act-an-open-letter-to-the-ukrainian-left/

    Dear Comrades,

    We write to express our solidarity with you in these trying times. Your country is burying a hundred or so dead, demonstrators and policemen, and hundreds more wounded are still in its hospitals. The specter of a civil war has not yet left Ukraine. While not the defeated party, most of you cannot partake in the joys of the victors. Euromaidan was hardly the ideal terrain for your struggle. Its contradictions divided you and those who did participate, were outsized by the Right Sector. We don’t say this in reproach: with a few exceptions such as the former Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey, the East European left is everywhere small, and everywhere divided over those strange but powerful social movement that have swept our countries in recent years, expressing the just social anger in ways that have often puzzled us. We’ve been reading your painfully honest self-reflections on the Ukrainian left in the era of the Euromaidan. We admire your honesty and share your frustration.

    But now Ukraine is moving to the next, post-revolutionary stage in its history. Though more backroom deals still need to be signed, the Maidan evacuated, regions pacified, and elections held, a transition of power has already begun in your country. We write this in full confidence that better days lie ahead for you.

    For history repeats itself—even Ukrainian history with its inimitable dramatic flair. The military confrontation that just took place on the Independence Square and its vicinity repeats in infinitely more violent and bloody form the Orange Revolution, which first expelled Yanukovich from power almost a decade ago. And the lessons of that previous power handover—that Yushchenko/ Timoshchenko were hardly better than Kuchma/ Yanukovich, that “patriotic,” “real Ukrainian” oligarchs stole no less than do the current paymasters of the Party of Regions, that office-holders are much easier to replace than the structural underpinnings of peripheral capitalism—were not lost on most Ukrainians. It was no accident that Ukraine’s left flourished in the years after 2004.

    Today’s Second Orange Revolution—the popular mobilization that spectacularly replaces one set political elite with another without challenging the country’s fundamental dependencies—has just succeeded; now it’s time for it to disappoint and fail, to be betrayed, as its front soldiers and sincere supporters will undoubtedly feel. Looking at the kind of politicians it is recycling back to the main stage, it cannot do otherwise; they cannot but be corrupt, they cannot but practice the austerity policies their creditors recommend; they help surrounding themselves with their cronies or handing over ever larger pieces of Ukraine’s economy to local oligarchs, to Western or Russian capital. Just give them time and they’ll discredit themselves. They will of course blame their initial failures on the failures of their predecessors (and will be partly right), but how long can this last? How long can it be before the glaring similarities between the opposition and the authorities, who periodically trade chairs, become self-evident? How long can it be before Svoboda’s mock-socialism of the far right becomes exposed for what it is—a sham? These post-revolutionary conditions are now ripe for you to form a third pole, distinct from today’s Tweedledums and Tweedledees, whose basic similarity will grow more evident by the day.

    Your victory, of course, is anything but guaranteed. Today’s heroes from the Right Sector and Tiahnibok’s falcons may try to put into practice their favorite chants “Death to the enemies!” or “Communists on the gallows!”; they will soon be changing their paramilitary fatigues for police uniforms. Take care of yourselves! There will be terrific culture wars, too, as the new masters try to solidify their power: Lenin’s monuments are already falling and Bandera’s will soon rise; new laws await the Russian language. Yet you understand better than anyone else the workings of those mechanisms for getting people to vote against their social and economic interests. Whether you like to think of it this way or not, you are the true Ukrainian patriots now. You are the main force that can cut through the false choices of Europe or Russia, West or East, with which the power-hungry political class is ripping your country apart.

    From the pages of LeftEast, we’ve tried to follow your debates on whether the Ukrainian Left missed the opportunity to form a Left Sector of the Euromaidan or whether you were right to stay out of a movement compromised by a strong far-right presence and bound to be co-opted by discredited politicians. We still don’t know whether you missed your turn to act or not, but the last few days have rendered those debates moot.

    What we know for sure is that now is your time. You are the only ones who can give meaning to the deaths and wounds of the Euromaidan. Godspeed in this fight!

    In solidarity,

    LeftEast editorial collective

    February 22, 2014

  4. R F McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

    While Carl Schmitt’s influence on Dugin’s Eurasianism is fairly clear it is hardly accurate to call Schmitt the leading Nazi political theorist – he was a Nazi party member and a leading political theorist but a leading political theorist in Nazi Germany in the sense of his writings having any significant political influence on Nazi ideology or policy – indeed he was denounced as as a mere fellow traveller whose true loyalty was to Catholicism and forced to resign his position at the head of the Nazi Jurists Association in 1937.

    In fact his major work on geopolitics Der Nomos der Erde was not even published until 1950 (and not translated into English until 2003 or IIRC much discussed even by Schmitt-obsessed Anglophone academics until after the translation).

    And ‘Eurasianism’ is hardly Schmitt’s original invention in that one can find (admittedly generally less sophisticated) variants of it amongst pretty much every figure (Spengler, Strasser, Niekisch, Junger, Evola, Moeller van den Bruck etc) who modern ‘National Bolsheviks’ or Strasserites claim as an influence – and was of course developed at great length by Karl Haushofer who via his student Rudolf Hess did directly influence Nazi thinking.

    So by trying to trace a single genealogical line to Schmitt via Dugin Snyder may actually be understating the influence of far right ideas in Russia which clearly reflects the whole range of 20th century fascist and neo-fascist thinkers.

    How this is even possible in a country that suffered such devastation at the hands of the Nazi invaders is indeed a mystery,…

    • R F McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

      First para should have read ‘but NOT a leading political theorist in Nazi Germany….’ damn the lack of an edit function….

  5. Jim Denham said,

    Jews are understandably wary about the situation, but there is no evidence of attacks and identifiable Jews have mingled unmolested amongst the protesters, says the Jerusalem Post:

    http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-Features/Ukraines-Jews-ponder-their-future-342348

  6. Boleyn Ali said,

    Don’t worry about the Ukrainian Jews “Socialist Unity” are on it. http://socialistunity.com/ukrainian-rabbi-urges-jews-flee-kiev/

  7. Andrew Coates said,

    Like Roger I am very wary of the claims about Schmitt and Euroasianism.

    I also sceptical about its impact on Putin’s thinking.

    More updates of analysis (they come daily): http://tendancecoatesy.wordpress.com/2014/02/25/ukraine-everything-you-know-may-be-wrong/

  8. R F McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

    An FYI.

    For some archaic reason the official publication date of the NYRB is the end of the month during which the paper is sold rather than the beginning.

    So if you had a print subscription or were able to get to one of the tiny handful of highbrow bookshops that used to and may still sell it in the UK you’d already have the issue with this article whatever it says on the masthead.

    Probably best policy when citing it on a blog (as opposed to referencing it academically) is to just say ‘current’ or ‘new’ issue.

  9. R F McCarthy (@RF_McCarthy) said,

    Anyone know anything about Dmitry Kolesnik and Liva (Left) magazine?:

    http://liva.com.ua/newmunich.html

    They do appear to be based in Ukraine and to be taking the fascist coup line….

  10. blelrggg comeomenraryet said,

    I see the harry’s place scum are cheering on the fascist insurgency in Venezuela. Says it all really, the vile pricks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 473 other followers

%d bloggers like this: