Nina Khrushcheva: Putin in History

[music]

Brian Lehrer: It's the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning again, everyone. With me now is Nina Khrushcheva, international affairs professor at The New School and she happens to be the great granddaughter of the Soviet Premier Nikita Krushchev who was in office in the 1950s and '60s, remembered for denouncing the crimes of Joseph Stalin and introducing some liberal reforms, but also for the Cuban missile crisis. We'll talk about Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine in the context of Russian history, and a little bit about Putin in the context of Donald Trump history. Even with Putin committing war crimes in progress, Trump was back at it this week soliciting Putin's help regarding rumors of the Biden family and this and that. Professor Khrushcheva, thank you for coming on at this intense time. Welcome back to WNYC.

Nina Khrushcheva: Thank you for inviting me.

Brian Lehrer: Can I ask about Putin in the long sweep of history that includes your great-grandfather? Nikita Khrushchev was known for his campaign of decolonization of Russia as I don't have to tell you, of course. People are saying Putin is doing re-Stalinization. Can you historically with Stalin then remind people of the things he did that your great-grandfather denounced?

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, thank you. Putin, I think goes much further in history than just Stalin or 20th Century because he looks at himself as Putin the Great, and that goes back centuries and centuries and centuries. Stalin is just one of his predecessors that he admires. He himself never said that he admired Stalin, but the whole system is set up that Putin is the successor of Stalin in presenting the strong hand, punishing the opponents, bringing up the FSB, the federal security forces and during Stalin, and it was the MKVD forces then replaced by KGB, into the forefront of the public life, of political life, of social life.

That's exactly what happened. We are not at the Stalin level of repressions yet, but the fact that essentially anybody who says anything against the war in Ukraine particularly, is being harassed, prosecuted, detained, really brings us back to the memory of the great purges 1937, 1938, when thousands and thousands of people went to prison, went into detention camps, were denounced as enemies of the people. The fear was just spreading like wildfire, and very similar effects of Putin's repression right now we experience in Russia.

Brian Lehrer: For the sake of history, and we have whole generations of listeners who have grown up now with no actual living memory of the Soviet Union, why did Nikita Khrushchev, your great-grandfather, do those denunciations and "de-Stalinization" at that time in the 1950s, rather than just keep quiet about Stalin's crimes and atrocities and take care of current business?

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, he could have, and it's a very big question and we don't have an exact answer yet. What could be an exact answer? Khrushchev was a leader in the despotic system, but he himself was not a despot. I think that differed him from other Stalin's apparatchiks. Krushchev, make no mistake about it, was a very, very determined and very admiring Stalin lieutenant. He in fact was the one in 1939 Stalin sent to Ukraine. He was the first secretary of the communist party of Ukraine. By sword and by fire, he was uniting the West Ukraine and East Ukraine in '39.

He was not collecting stamps and being a lovely butterfly gatherer, obviously, but I think he also-- [unintelligible 00:04:35] When Stalin died, and Stalin died in 1953, Krushchev was the first one amongst Stalin's lieutenants to start saying, "We really need to denounce the purges and we have to explain to the party that we had to do it. It was fear, but it was Stalin's decision." Indeed others were planning to keep quiet or wanted to keep quiet because Stalin was a great man of history and Krushchev was pushing for de-Stalinization because as he himself later on in life said, "My arms are covered with blood up to the elbows, and so we thought that we had to really denounce ourselves in front of the party in front of the people," and that's how he was pushing.

He was not an evolutionary reformer in a sense. He wasn't somebody who would be consistent in his reforms in any way, because let's remember that after he denounced Stalin at the Twenties Party Congress, February 1956, then in the fall of 1956 Soviet tanks rolled into Hungary to suppress the anti-communist uprisal. Once again, not collecting stamps there, but I think he had humanity and something that completely is missing today certainly from Putin as a leader. That's why I think you mentioned the Cuban missile crisis. It was resolved in 13 days because it became too scary that humanity's existence became at risk in 1962 when Krushchev was haggling with John F. Kennedy. I don't think Putin feels this responsibility. I think it's my way or the highway.

Brian Lehrer: I think we have whole generations listening who've never used a stamp either, but that's another show. I want to ask a question and stay on the deep history before we circle it back to Putin. At least one question informed by your book that came out in 2019 In Putin's Footsteps: Searching for the Soul of an Empire Across Russia's Eleven Time Zones. That's 11 time zones now in the post Soviet era. Why did the Soviet Union form? Why did Ukraine and the Baltic republics and other areas there become part of a Soviet mega state?

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, how long is your program? There was a Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 and before the Bolshevik Revolution and the creation of the Soviet Empire, there was a Russian Empire which held, essentially, most pieces, most parts then that became republics. After the Bolshevik Revolution they were parts of the Russian Empire and they transmitted into the Soviet Empire. A lot of them were being fought over. Some pieces went to some republics, some pieces went to other republics. As always land divisions are complicated.

Essentially the Soviet Union, although people like to break the past from the 20th Century present or from the 20th Century past now, it really was a continuation of an empire, just a different form of the despotic regime because Russia was before an absolute monarchy. Then it became dictatorship of proletariat and the minute you have a word dictatorship in anything that is a dictatorship. Dictatorship is dictatorship, no matter what. That's why we are dealing with history today and the history of the Russian Empire from time immemorial to today and the Soviet Union or the Soviet system was just part of those imperial regimes succeeding each other.

For that reason although, of course, in 1991 when the Soviet Union collapsed, a lot of republics, actually most republics, separated themselves from Russia. The 11 time zones remain because even today, just imagine that Russia goes on the west side of Russia, it goes from Germany, the city of Kaliningrad, which used to be East Prussia, all the way to China and all the way to Japan to the Pacific Ocean. It continues to be a very, very big country. Since you want to stay deep in history or in history, when Dmitry Medvedev replaced Putin in 2008 as president a warming chair, flunky president, he still tried to modernize Russia to some degree.

He reduced the time zones to nine. Let's not be so dictatorial and so big. Putin came back in 2012 and the 11 time zones that went back into effect again.

Brian Lehrer: Remind us what happened in Ukraine when the Soviet Union did fall apart 31 years ago in 1991. It wasn't the result of violent insurgencies in Ukraine and elsewhere. Again, for people who didn't live through this history, maybe the one line that people say is, "The Soviet Union collapsed, then the Berlin Wall fell." The Berlin Wall fell in 1989 but how did that happen in the case of Ukraine?

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, and, by the way, we talk about Budapest in '56 and there are other instances like Prague in '68 when the Soviet tanks went there as well, in '89 we have Gorbachev the last Soviet president, Soviet Chair of the Communist Party, did not send tanks. That was a very dramatic moment in history. It seemed like Russia is finally shedding away it's violent oppression of other countries, other republics that do not want to be part of it.

In '91, the Soviet Union collapsed peacefully. In fact, the agreement was signed by Boris Yeltsin, who was the Republic of Russia president at the time, by the Ukrainian president, and the Belarusian president. They signed an agreement of this dissociation, and Yeltsin was known at the time to say that to all of the 15 republics and others say, "You can have as much freedom if you can now swallow."

Ukraine was one of those 15 independent countries that came out as a result of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. I think Putin's obsession with Ukraine is similar to previous leaders, which Yeltsin was not one of, but with Joseph Stalin, for example, with the Russian czars, keeping Ukraine as a Russian appendage, rather than an independent nation.

Brian Lehrer: Can I ask how different you see eastern Ukraine in the context of all that history, considered the more Russian parts, versus the rest of the country in terms of Russian identification, or what they want to be nationally? This is in the news even this week as a potential outline for a potential peace agreement, where there would be autonomy in the east and Russia's annexation of Crimea in the east would be recognized. How consistent would that be, according to your understanding, with the identification of the people there and how much would that be a complete imposition of outside rule on a people who want none of it?

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, even in the east we would say, "Look at the battles of Mariupol." The Russians have been trying to take it for 36 days now and I think they finally did. It's a very eastern city. It used to be very Russian city. They don't want to be Russians anymore. Odesa was a Russian city, doesn't want to be Russian. Kharkiv was a Russian city, doesn't want to be Russian. Even with the identification of Russians, it's the violence of it and the matter of factness of it that Ukraine belongs to Russia is just appalling for Ukrainians, both Eastern and Western.

West Ukraine also there's all parts of Poland. For example, my great grandmother, Nina Khrushcheva, Nikita Khrushchev's wife, she was from West Ukraine. She was from the parts that are now Poland and she had three native languages. She spoke Polish, her native language, she spoke Ukrainian, her native language, and she spoke Russian. This is not the mentality or even linguistic abilities that people in the east have. They have Russian and Ukrainian.

As I mentioned, Khrushchev was sent by Stalin to unite East and West Ukraine in '39. Even in '39, and even after the war in '46, when he had to oversee the destruction of the Ukrainian Nationalist Party, these people were the ones who were saying, "We would never be Russian. We would never be Soviet. We are fighting against the Soviets." [unintelligible 00:14:51] was one of those cities that never wanted to be Soviet, never wanted to be Russian.

I imagine with increasing Russian rhetoric of domination, the increasing division of the West Ukraine, basically, they're saying, "We don't even have historical precedent, essentially, to become part of Russia, so leave us alone completely." I would imagine that even in the east, the desire to be a Russian under Putin is really no longer as appealing as it was, say, even 10 years ago.

Brian Lehrer: We have a few minutes left with Nina Khrushcheva, international affairs professor at The New School, author of the book from 2019 In Putin's Footsteps: Searching for the Soul of an Empire Across Russia's Eleven Time Zones and as she just referred to, she happens to be the great-granddaughter of the Soviet Premier from the 1950s and 1960s, Nikita Khrushchev. Let me take one or two phone calls for you before we run out of time. Here's John in Queens Village. John, you're on WNYC. Hello.

John: Thank you. I am born in Poland, in [unintelligible 00:16:08] actually. My father was there and I am Polish, I consider myself Slavic. Also, the point I want to make is this and I'm old, okay, so I went through the war also. I'm an old guy. I'm very old. Here's my point. Russia, as it is now, the Bolshevik Soviet Union as it was, Russia as it was during the Czars, has no history. The people really there have no history, no cultural memory of what it is to be free. I want to point out that that is the same case with China. China has always had emperors and once had dictators. I think because of that, it is highly unlikely that there'll be a serious revolution there, but one hopes.

I think a lot of the younger people have left if they can in Russia. Of course, we have the disinformation situation but I'd like to make that comment and see what Miss Khrushcheva has to add to that. I've read her book, by the way. Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: John, thank you very much. Well, that's quite a pronouncement that the people there have never been free, always lived under autocrats and therefore will not revolt against Putin.

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, I agree that people there have rarely been free. There were five minutes in the '90s and then early Putin, although he was already displaying then a strong hand, they were still relative freedoms. I think what we should absolutely remember that, essentially, Russia never had free elections. I think Yeltsin, when he first became President, that was a free moment but even in 1996 when he was running for his second term, it was already somewhat rigged by a variety of forces for a variety of reasons. Then in 2000, when Putin first became President, he was a successor of Yeltsin. In this sense, I agree. Russia has never been essentially free.

Revolutions can happen but I'm not a fan, like Putin, by the way, just because very rarely, but I think Ukraine is a very rare example, when people revolutions actually bring some positive results and I think in 2004, the Orange Revolution, that was a positive result. Russia is doomed for some time to come because KGB or whatever, FSB now is running the show and even if the war is over, they're not going to give up the power and that really saddens me because for years, my country is finished.

Brian Lehrer: Then one more related question. I think it's related from Mike in Manhattan. You're on WNYC. Hi, Mike.

Mike: Is that me?

Brian Lehrer: Yes it is.

Mike: Okay, [foreign language] My family is from Makariv, which is right outside of Kyiv. My question is really very simple. Khrushchev was a boss one day and then the generals deposed him. In contrast, Putin has had a decade to solidify his position. Now, while he is close to bankrupting the country, he's bringing in at least 5,000 mercenaries from Syria and supposedly he is going to conscript at least 100,000 new Russians. Can you predict or foresee any way in which the military establishment could similarly depose Putin? I'll take the the answer off the air. [foreign language]

Nina Khrushcheva: Okay, well, thank you. Actually, Khrushchev was not denounced by the military. It was his political people that took him out. Maybe, I don't know, because Russia actually does not have a history of military coup. They could be KGB coup, FSB coup, the security forces coup. For them, to give up Putin right now would be difficult because that would mean responding to Joe Biden's passionate plea to take him out, which Joe Biden just did in Warsaw a few days ago. I would not see that. I could be very, very wrong. Please, if I am wrong, don't hold it against me.

Brian Lehrer: [chuckles] Since you brought up Biden, one closing question, and just as an addendum to this whole conversation. Even with Putin committing the war crimes that he's committing, Donald Trump was back soliciting Putin's help this week regarding rumors of Hunter Biden's finances. Trump said this.

Donald Trump: So now I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it.

Brian Lehrer: Donald Trump on a program called Just The News. Even Lindsey Graham denounced Trump this week for inviting Putin to help the Republicans politically at this moment in time. What do you make of it with your knowledge of both countries?

Nina Khrushcheva: Well, I cannot take Trump seriously ever. I don't understand why we keep discussing him. Yes, has was a former president. He was the--

[crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: Yes, but the only reason that I bring him up anymore is that he wants to be president again, presumably.

Nina Khrushcheva: Right, right, right. My very quick question is that Trump loves attention and so he's saying things-- It's like Survivors' Island. He's going to eat cockroaches because everybody else is going to discuss, "Oh, my god, Donald Trump is eating cockroaches."

Brian Lehrer: [laughs]

Nina Khrushcheva: We're all talking about Putin, so Trump is jumping on the bandwagon so we can talk about Trump talking about Putin.

Brian Lehrer: Nina Khrushcheva, international affairs professor at The New School, author of the book In Putin's Footsteps: Searching for the Soul of an Empire Across Russia's Eleven Time Zones. Thank you very much for all the context and-

Nina Khrushcheva: Thank you very much.

Brian Lehrer: -history and analysis you've given us today.

Nina Khrushcheva: Thank you.

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. More to come.

 

Copyright © 2022 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.