Updated Feb. 14, 2024 at 7:40 p.m.
–Analysis–
KYIV — The dream that the Russian Federation breaks apart into several independent nations is one shared by millions of Ukrainians. In 2022–2023, predictions of the Russian state’s disintegration were as common as discussions about enjoying a cup of coffee in Crimea after its liberation. Even in January 2024, this aspiration resurfaced briefly during protests in Bashkir.
[shortcode-Subscribe-to-Ukraine-daily-box]
The impressive defiance of Kremlin authority exhibited by the people of Chechnya, Dagestan, Buryatia, Yakutia, and Bashkortostan appears to offer a promising blueprint for overcoming Russian authoritarian dominance.
But it’s time to approach the situation with pragmatism and assess the likelihood of such a scenario unfolding.
Many of us are convinced of the swift disintegration of the Russian Federation, drawing inspiration from the remarkable achievements of national liberation movements and the demonstrated capacity of peoples to secure independence. Our confidence is further buoyed by the substantial successes of decolonization through the 20th century.
Freedom from Western colonialism
Between 1950 and 1980, the number of UN member states surged from 60 to 154, underscoring the momentum of independence movements. It’s important to note that many of these movements primarily challenged European colonial powers. By the mid-20th century, Europe had shifted significantly towards liberalism and democratic principles, facilitating the triumph of anti-colonial struggles in Asia and Africa.
Most British colonies, including India, attained liberation through non-violent means. Had figures like Gandhi faced a less liberal and rigid adversary, achieving peaceful victory would have been unimaginable.
The French attempted to quell armed struggles for independence through force, but their harsh suppression lacked sufficient backing in the metropolis. The use of torture by the French army in Algeria sparked significant outrage, despite the atrocities committed by merciless terrorists who spared neither women nor children.
Looking beyond Europe, we find a notable absence of successful national liberation movements.
Portugal’s colonial empire endured the longest among European powers, largely due to the presence of a dictatorial regime in Lisbon well until the 1970s. This regime was willing to engage in prolonged conflicts with rebels in Angola and Mozambique. The democratic “carnation revolution” in Portugal ultimately brought an end to this era.
One of the many Ukrainian videos showing the unrest in the Russian federation.
Failed liberation in China and Turkey
But if we are looking beyond the former European metropolises to the east, we find a notable absence of the once formidable force of national liberation movements.
In the 2020s, Turkish Kurdistan remains as distant from independence as it did a century ago, when the Atatürk regime deemed the Kurds “mountain Turks” who had allegedly forgotten their roots for inexplicable reasons.
Despite repeated rebellions against Ankara’s formulation, the Kurds faced brutal suppression by Turkish authorities. Even the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, which resorted to terrorist tactics and engaged in warfare with Turkey during the 1980s, failed to achieve success.
Similarly, Chinese Tibet and Xinjiang remain distant from attaining independence. Despite the existence of the Tibetan government in exile in India and the World Uyghur Congress operating in Germany, practical successes have been elusive.
Meanwhile, Beijing’s treatment of the Uyghurs displays alarming signs of genocide, including the extrajudicial imprisonment of hundreds of thousands in “re-education camps,” forced abortions, sterilizations, and the mass separation of children from their parents.
Does this suggest that the national self-awareness of the Kurds or Uyghurs is less developed than that of peoples inhabiting the Asian and African territories once controlled by the British Empire or the French Republic in the 20th century? Certainly not. Rather, it underscores the vast disparity between the autocratic regimes of Turkey and China and the European colonial powers, whose departure from their colonies was often prompted by public opinion pressure within their respective countries.
Russia’s brief liberation movements
Let’s now shift our focus back to Russia. Historically, Russia’s affinity lies not with Great Britain or France, but with countries like Turkey and China. The success of national liberation movements in Russia has typically occurred during brief periods when Russian despotism waned, and internal Russian life bore some distant resemblance to Western norms.
Prior to 1917, the Russian Empire hadn’t witnessed triumphant national movements. While oppressed peoples periodically rebelled against Russian rule, they did so without success. Even in 1916, just months before its collapse, the Tsarist regime managed to suppress an uprising against labor mobilization in Central Asian territories under its control.
No national movement within the USSR succeeded in overcoming the totalitarianism of Stalin’s regime.
But the events unfolding in Petrograd and the democratic February Revolution changed the landscape dramatically. The downfall of Russian autocracy created a window of opportunity for national liberation movements across the empire, from Finland to Ukraine. Some seized this opportunity effectively, while others did not. Unfortunately, with the final victory of the Bolsheviks and the establishment of a brutal dictatorship, this window closed once again.
Whether we prefer to acknowledge it or not, no national movement within the USSR succeeded in overcoming the totalitarianism epitomized by Stalin’s regime.
Wishful thinking
In the 1950s, the Soviet regime undertook a similar task in western Ukraine to what the French attempted in northern Vietnam during the same period. But this doesn’t imply that the communist Viet Minh fought for independence with more determination and bravery than the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA). It simply highlights the vast differences between the Fourth Republic of France and the Soviet Union.
The French left-wing organized numerous demonstrations with the rallying cry “Not a man, not a soul for the dirty war in Vietnam!”, carried out acts of sabotage at various facilities including enterprises, ports, and railways, disrupted the supply of military supplies to Indochina, and hindered effective countermeasures against the Hoshino partisans. Contrastingly, during that era in Moscow or Kyiv, it was unimaginable to envision even a single protest against punitive operations in western Ukraine.
A new opportunity for national liberation emerged only towards the end of the 1980s, coinciding with the relaxation and liberalization of the Soviet regime. It’s important to note that the national fronts in Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, much like the Ukrainian People’s Movement, initially positioned themselves as supporters of Soviet perestroika. But they eventually played a crucial role in dismantling the empire.
Considering all the aforementioned points, a clear conclusion arises.
Imagining a successful uprising of Chechens, Dagestanis, Buryats, Yakuts, or Bashkortostans against the Kremlin dictatorship is merely wishful thinking without any substantial basis. But the potential disappearance of the national republics in the event of another liberalization of the Russian regime is a plausible scenario.
Disintegration of the Russian Federation is unlikely to occur without prior liberalization.
Yet, Ukraine finds itself ensnared by its own emotions and the resulting dogmatism.
On one hand, it’s natural and justified to desire the disintegration of the Russian Federation. This sentiment aligns perfectly with the prevailing trends in Ukrainian society since the Russian invasion on Feb. 24, 2022.
On the other hand, hoping for the liberalization of the Russian Federation seems nonsensical. This implies that national aspirations should somehow coincide with the views of “good Russians”, who are largely antagonistic towards the majority of Ukrainians.
Logic dictates that the disintegration of the Russian Federation is unlikely to occur without prior liberalization. Therefore, witnessing the collapse of Russia will require waiting for the day that Moscow begins advocating for freedom and democracy once again.
