Putin’s Imperial Déjà vu: The Past Haunting Russia’s Future
It has been a month to the day since the tumultuous day long munity of Wagner militants who were prepared to March on the Kremlin in a “March for Justice” after a thirty-minute video criticizing the war in Ukraine was posted by Wagner boss Yevgeny Prigozhin on Telegram. In that time since, the exact details as to how the munity was put down have not become any clearer. Reports that Prigozhin had fled to Belarus under a plea deal were the first of many contradicting reports we have heard from the governments of Belarus and Russia. It has now emerged that Prigozhin himself met with Putin only five days after the incident. While the ordeal in hindsight might have seemed to be a flash in the pan, lessons harkening from Russia’s Imperial past prove a compelling case for Putin’s apparent paranoia.
At first, Prigozhin’s short lived munity might look something more like the failed military coup d’état of August 1991. It began when a group of hardline communist party members tried to seize power from Mikhail Gorbachev as the final act of the Soviet Union played itself out. In my opinion, however, the events are more reminiscent of January 9th, 1905, widely known in Russian history as Bloody Sunday.
Regarded as the precursor to the violence of the wider Russian revolution Bloody Sunday occurred due to Russia’s weak economic circumstances and a failing war in Japan all under the czar, Nicholas.
This weak-willed czar fell, in some part, under the influence of a group of aristocratic and military leaders who convinced him to undo many of the democratization efforts Russia had undergone during his father’s rule by dismantling a proposed chamber of parliament called the Duma. He was also rumored to be seeking advice from the now near mythical Rasputin. The paranoia and fear the czar had that he would lose his rule resulted in one of the most autocratic and oppressive periods in modern Russian history. Political prisoners such as Lenin were exiled and many expelled due to their beliefs.
The Bloody Sunday march was led by a radical priest named Georgy Apollonovich Gapon. He marched to the czar’s Winter Palace in St. Petersburg along with workers and most notably reserve Russian soldiers who had mutinied to make their demands. Imperial forces opened fire on the demonstrators, killing and wounding hundreds to the outrage of many across the country. The revolt was over pretty much overnight. Not enough soldiers had mutinied to effectively combat the imperial forces and the radical elements of the population were pleased with his liberal reintroduction of the Duma. Despite the revolt’s ultimate failure, the steppingstones for the Russian Revolution which saw the Bolsheviks seize power had been laid in clear daylight.
It is at this moment that I now draw parallels to Russia’s current situation. While no one was brutally massacred outside of the Kremlin or lead in a march to Moscow by a radical priest there are common threads that I would like to address.
1. Economic Downturns
2. The Exile of Political Opponents
3. A Failed War
Thanks for reading In Brief! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Subscribed
Economic Downturns
A brief bounce back from the great recession of 2008 saw Russia fall into period of economic stagnation and downturn between 2014 and 2016. Investors sold off their Russian assets, which led to a decline in the value of the Russian ruble and sparked fears of a financial crisis. Productivity slumped and market confidence was at an all-time low. Not to mention that the ‘Russian Spring’ as it was called was in full swing with over 26 000 protestors marching on the streets of Moscow to protest Russia’s “irresponsible” and “aggressive” position towards their neighbors Ukraine. The economic crisis was in part due to two main components. Firstly, the fact that the value of crude oil had fallen by around 50% and secondly Russia had sanctions imposed on them due to their unlawful annexation of Crimea.
The graph below illustrated just how much of an impact this downturn had on the country in this period:
Similarly, the Russian Empire between 1899 and 1902 was plagued with two major financial crises that saw an abrupt halt to the rapid industrialization undergone in the late 19th century. This rapid industrialization was sponsored by foreign capital inflows into national debt, and once foreign capital inflow into government bonds and the securities of industrial enterprises tanked the banking sector was naturally hit hard. GDP slumped further thus impoverishing the already unstable peasant majority. In response railway workers staged the Rostov General Strike of November 1902, which brought Rostov-on-Don, a sizable provincial center, to a complete economic standstill.
Professor Henry Reichman described the events of November 1902 as follows:
“Beginning in and emanating out of the city’s large railroad workshops, the Rostov strike was a phenomenal occurrence at the time. The Rostov strike was perhaps the first instance in which that long-cherished goal of the Russian Social Democratic intelligentsia — the merger of a spontaneous labor movement with the strivings of the educated classes for political change — approached practical reality.”
In both cases Russia was too reliant on Western and outside sponsorship to prop up their economy and in both cases, Russia was forced to become self-reliant and grassroots movements came to influence political decision-making at the highest levels, causing, what would in ordinary times, be great levels of social and political instability.
The Exile Of Political Opponents
Navalny Arrives Back in Russia Lenin Arrives Back in Russia
Lenin and Navalny Arrive Back in Russia
Unsurprisingly enough, Putin has made himself some powerful opponents. Namely, Alexei Navalny, a video journalist and anti-corruption activist who made headlines in August of 2020 when he was poisoned with Novichok by Russian spies in Omsk on his way to Moscow. He was left in such a critical state that he was transported to Charité hospital in Berlin, Germany, two days later while in a coma. He was released thirty-two days later.
Vox made a great video as to why the forty-seven-year-old is so problematic for Putin’s regime which I will leave in the closing notes under this edition. Essentially through his heighted public image after his attempted assassination he was able to swell up a movement in Russia that has not been seen in recent decades. His skillful use of the internet to reach audiences in Russia made him the face of the anti-Putin sentiment many within the public can associate with. His most viewed video to date is an expose titled: “Putin’s Palace. History of the world’s largest bribe. While he might not be running for president anytime soon it is hard to imagine why else Putin would have thrown him in jail on trumped up charges of fraud and contempt of court thus exiling him from political life.
While I am not suggesting that Lenin and Navalny are similar in any kind of way possible I am suggesting that the way in which they were perceived by ruling powers of their time and how they influenced movements is eerily similar. Lenin spent many years exiled by Tzarist officials. Living in various European cities the government preferred him to be out of the spotlight and away from a movement he had such a pull over. His ability to challenge the status quo with new innovative ways of public teachings and rallies to expose the brutalities his days government is not too dissimilar to what Navalny has done with his use of the internet. Lenin did everything to inflate his movement. He went under various pen names in underground communist magazines and newspapers while arranging workers councils or Soviets all in the hopes of spreading his message far and wide.
So, what can we take from this. I feel as though it is not so much as to what these two men believed but the fact that they provided something other than what was already being provided through government. It was the fact that they had something else but the governments narrative to preach even though they well knew there were grave consequences attached to any action. It is almost as though when people know a system is broken out from the most diverse crevasse of society do we produce revolutionary leaders with something fresh and new to say.
Subscribed
A Failed War
Taking On Putin with Peashooters Putin’s hubris in Ukraine recalls Russia’s disastrous war with Japan
Putin’s hubris in Ukraine recalls Russia’s disastrous war with Japan
Consumed in an ever increasingly unpopular war, Putin must seriously reflect on what was supposed to be an easy victory against Ukraine. It has always baffled me how smaller less significant nations can always put up a good fight against any neighboring military superpower when it matters most. There could not be a more perfect example than what we see between Russia and Ukraine today.
While I am sure that all we have heard since February last year is about war, war, war, and more war and how the Americans are providing this much aid and the British are supplying this many tanks I don’t think we often consider how good Ukraine has been in retaking and contesting territory within their borders. Their innovative use of common modern technology has left me in awe and is something I will be exploring soon. However, I digress. All in all, it is fair to say that Ukraine has embarrassed Russia over the last year or so often leaving sacked Russian military leaders speechless as to what more they could have done.
The Russo-Japanese War almost mirrors this very conflict. Desperate for a boost in approval from the public Tzar Nicholas spearheaded a war against Japan. A relatively weak country and an easy task for Imperial Russia. Much to everyone’s surprise at the time the Japanese humiliated the Russians in a victory that was a first of its kind by an Asian country against any western power. This ushered in a new age of skepticism towards the validity of the Tzarist rule, leading to his eventual overthrowal not many years later.
The adage “It’s not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog” that matters perfectly sums up how we can account for these two conflicts. It almost seems as though there is no buy in from soldiers and army officials in these situations. Whether that being dodgy claims to Japanese land or eyebrow raising assertions that Nazis have invaded the Ukrainian parliament.
Where to From Here?
To sum up, do I think that Putin’s time is nearing the end. Yes and no. While I am a big believer that history tends to repeat itself, I would never be too sure to make any definitive statements based on loose historical convergences. Do I think the situation Putin finds himself in is similar to that of Tzar Nicholas? Yes, most definitely, and what happened to him. Well, that is apparent from the established literature on the subject. My general feeling is that many people expected Prigozhin’s affair to end in the complete overthrowal of the Russian government as chaos ensues overnight in Russia’s most populous city. That may be a simplistic framing of the argument, but I sense that people expected more. To that point I remind them that Rome was not built in a day. The revolt of Bloody Sunday too did not end in anything substantial, however, it did give leeway to something more. Year by year, day by day the tables are turning and the faith in Vladimir Putin’s House of Cards is certainly waning.
