Everyone is talking about war – except Putin
In the early hours of 24 February 2022, the Russian army marched into neighboring Ukraine. The deployment of troops in the weeks before had been aimed at preparing an invasion after all. This time the CIA was right, but nobody really wanted to believe the unthinkable. Cynically, President Putin claimed a few days earlier that he was withdrawing troops again. A liar. He also justified the war by claiming that Ukraine was not actually an independent state and that the democratically elected government was made up of Nazis and drug addicts. A liar. Furthermore, Russia itself should not be talking about war and invasion, but about a special operation. Another lie.
The old days are back – 1938 and the Cold War send their regards
The whole situation reminds me fatally of 1938, when Hitler was allowed to get away with it in order to maintain peace in Europe, which Hitler never wanted. The price was a part of Czechoslovakia, which was not even allowed to have a say or negotiate. Great Britain and France generously granted Hitler parts of a country that did not even belong to them. And Czechoslovakia was so weak that it could not defend itself. We all know what came of it. It could have been foreseen, as Hitler had explained his actual ideas in a widely circulated book.
And Putin? He remains more opaque. No wonder, he is also a KGB man. But the annexation of Crimea and the formation of dubious self-proclaimed People’s Republics in the Donbass and his statement when he last took office in 2018 should have given us pause for thought. Like in 1938, when people thought that Hitler must finally be satisfied.
There are also clues in Putin’s career. The traumatized KGB officer who felt abandoned by the leadership in Moscow when the Berlin Wall fell in Germany. The “disgrace” of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the “defeat” in the Cold War.
Imperialism à la Russia
Russian governments have always thought imperially. First the construction of the Tsarist Empire, which incorporated its colonies into the empire because they were conveniently located on its doorstep. Even after the end of the tsar, the new communist rulers set about restoring the old borders in a bloody civil war, which they succeeded in doing, with the exception of a few areas in the west. Then came the Second World War, the expansion of the Soviet sphere of influence into the middle of Europe and the establishment of a nuclear power that could terrify the free world.
And in 1991? Disgrace and misery. Not only did Russia’s new democratic government fail to get to grips with the country’s problems, but a drunken president made a fool of himself and the new economic oligarchs divided up the pieces of the Russian economy among themselves. Russia sank down to being a supplier of raw materials that was no longer taken seriously, even though it still had a considerable arsenal of nuclear weapons.
And then came Putin
At first, Putin was the savior who brought order back to a chaotic country. But it was to be his order. Did he have a plan? Who knows. In any case, he managed to make the most of his opportunities. An economic upswing followed, and the so-called peace dividend also reached the Russian population. But the country was still not really taken seriously, especially as a new power began to establish itself as a world power – China.
Nevertheless, Russia’s influence remained in almost all of the former Soviet republics thanks to potentates loyal to Moscow. The Baltic states fled to NATO and the EU as quickly as they could. They knew what was going on. The former socialist states in Eastern Europe did the same. What remained was Ukraine. Not that Ukraine was an economically successful state. But unheard-of things happened there, such as free elections. There was even an Orange Revolution that toppled the pro-Russian government. The Ukrainians turned to the West, because you warm yourself by the fire, not by the coals. Good grief, what if the same thing happened in Russia?
It was no longer so easy to control the younger generation, which is why Putin resorted to tried and tested measures such as rigged elections (which he didn’t even need at the beginning), the imprisonment of unpopular opposition figures and contract killings. There were always reasons for this that would make a rational thinker’s toenails roll up. And here we are back in the Cold War. The Soviet power had already acted according to the motto “What cannot be, must not be”. So Putin was not out of practice.
German Angst in Russia?
In addition, there was something that runs through Russian history – the feeling of being threatened. One wonders why? Two attempts to conquer Russia, once by Napoleon and once by Hitler, failed miserably. The country is simply too big! And the population put up patriotic resistance. In his book “The Power of Geography” , Tim Marshall explains very aptly how geography fostered this sense of threat. But more recent history has other reasons: Hitler’s betrayal of Stalin, who invaded the Soviet Union despite the non-aggression pact, the threat posed by the USA and NATO, which had declared war on communism. The outstretched hand for peace after 1991 was grasped, but only shaken lukewarmly before turning to more important partners. Suddenly, the focus was no longer on ideology, but on the economy. After all, they wanted to collect the “peace dividend”. And the Russians were at a clear disadvantage.
Respect? Not really…
NATO played a major role in the negotiations on German reunification. They also wanted to buy the freedom of Eastern Europe by NATO holding back there. But these were not contractual agreements. As a result, the former socialist countries fled under NATO’s protective umbrella as quickly as possible – and NATO let them do so. As a result, the alliance moved ever closer to the Russian border. A threat? No, why should NATO also threaten Russia? From the Russian point of view, however, it was perceived differently. You don’t behave like that towards a valued partner. So why take it into consideration?
Ideology vs. rationality
My wife comes from Russia. She was born in Moscow, grew up in the Soviet Union and has lived in Germany since 1995. She has been a German citizen for 22 years, speaks almost perfect German and is very successful as an entrepreneur. One reason for this is that she acts rationally and bases her activities on economic and logical aspects. She learned this in Vienna and the USA, where she studied economics.
Until February 24, she didn’t believe that Putin would really invade Ukraine. And was naturally shocked. She thinks rationally. What can you gain from such a war? Nothing economically and it’s a disaster for the people affected. Putin, however, does not think rationally, but ideologically, whereby he has his own ideology of the place of the Russian Federation in the world. He acts accordingly, having secured the support of the true second world power – China. Another parallel: the non-aggression pact between Hitler and Stalin in 1939 was intended to keep Hitler’s back free so that he could strike in the West. Putin is prepared to sacrifice much of what Russia has achieved in recent decades. Last but not least, he also wants to improve his domestic political situation, as things have become increasingly difficult with the opposition.
And now?
We can ask ourselves when and if Putin will stop. Interestingly, everyone is talking about Putin, not the Russian people, and that’s a good thing. I doubt that there would have been a majority among the Russian people in favor of war. An escalation, at least in economic terms, also to the detriment of Germany, which has made itself far too dependent on Russia for its energy supply. Putin cannot be stopped by rational means. He behaves like a bully in the schoolyard who bullies his classmates until he gets punched in the nose.
It is estimated that Ukraine is lost. The Russian military apparatus appears to be too strong at the end. It would probably be too late to rearm Ukraine anyway. But the NATO borders are in the neighborhood. And that could become a crucial test. If Putin also attacks NATO, the alliance will either disintegrate if the French, British and Germans don’t want to be killed for Estonians, Lithuanians or Poles. Or it could go to extremes, because it is questionable whether NATO would actually be strong enough conventionally to stop the Russian army. This was already the case during the Cold War, but the nuclear umbrella has maintained the “balance of terror”. So how far will Putin go? The less he has to lose, the further.
No answer
But what can be the answer? Apart from economic measures, there is nothing available at the moment to “hit the bully on the nose”. And these would also affect the West. Nevertheless, if the West does not act as one, it is only playing into Putin’s hands. 1938 – Neville Chamberlain had only the best in mind, but he misjudged the situation. If Hitler had been met with more resistance back then – who knows what we would have been spared. Chamberlain acted rationally – Hitler ideologically.
As far as Germany is concerned – we need to reorganize our energy supply and make the Bundeswehr a force to be taken seriously again, because that’s what it used to be when I made my contribution to the defence of our country as a “citizen in uniform”. Germany must make its contribution to NATO more than ever. Both are things that cannot happen overnight. Hopefully this will not be forgotten once the situation has calmed down again. Whatever the world will look like then.
Intercultural training in Russia – a discontinued model
Until 2014, intercultural training in Russia was one of our “top sellers”. After the sanctions due to the annexation of Crimea came into force, this changed to almost zero. Logically, one cannot expect this situation to improve, because our clients were companies that were or wanted to become active in Russia. This tooth has now been pulled, because if anything is clear, it is that there will be bitter economic frost between Western Europe and Russia. Unless someone is interested in “getting to know the enemy”. Just like during the Cold War.
Two notes on culture
Attitudes and values are always part of culture. In this respect, I would like to draw attention to two things. When Putin was once asked by a journalist whether the Russians did not have reservations about the Germans because of the devastating war of 1941-1945, he replied: “We won.”
It’s nice that the Russians don’t demonize Germany after the Second World War. But it also shows Putin’s attitude to all the suffering and deaths caused by the German attack: it doesn’t matter as long as we win. And it shows something else: Putin has clearly formulated his war aims. If he fails to achieve them, he is showing weakness, because he has lost. That would probably not only cost him his office, it would also be a personal disgrace.
Traditionally, human lives have never been as important in Russia as they are in Western Europe. This was already the case under the tsar, when soldiers were sent into battle against German and Austrian troops with little or no weaponry. These were mainly peasants, people who, according to the attitude of the time, could be dispensed with as long as they served the tsar. No wonder the revolution fell on fertile ground in Russia.
The attitude of treating people as military tools then continued with the Red Army. Ideology was above all else, especially as communist ideology is a collective ideology (in contrast to the USA, where it is about the rights of the individual).
Only one thing is certain. The Russians are not bellicose. But Russia has often had governments that were.
Closing words
We never thought we would have to take a stand on a war in Europe. Sadly, this is the case. Our thoughts are with all those who have to pay the price for this senseless slaughter. And we can only hope that the fighting will soon be over. The price will be high for everyone involved. And hopefully there will still be a Ukraine.
