Historical Relationship between Western Democracies, Authoritarian Russia and Ukraine; Or – Why we Should Support an Independent Ukraine

Historical Relationship between Western Democracies, Authoritarian Russia and Ukraine;
Or – Why we Should Support an Independent Ukraine

Bart Binning, Ed. D.

As a warning, this article is much too long, but for the topic I chose, I do not know what to cut out.   This article is about a fundamental divergence of world views between Western Democracies and Russian/Slavic authoritarian cultures.  It is my supposition that for there to be peace in this area of the world, there needs to be an understanding of these divergent world views.

To most Americans, both our cultural history, as well as our thought of the superiority of democratic philosophies, begins with Thomas Paine’s bestselling pamphlet titled Common Sense.  Paine’s book was written in 1776.  Paine was born in Norfolk, England in 1737, and he immigrated to the Colonies in 1774 with the help of Benjamin Franklin. In 1776 Paine published his 47-page revolutionary pamphlet, selling an estimated 2 million copies in the 13 colonies in three months.  In the pamphlet, Paine suggested that the source of governmental legitimacy was neither the “right of conquest” nor the “divine right of kings”, but instead the “people” – who have a natural right to govern themselves.  Paine was calling for American independence from British rule, by arguing for self-determination, the illegitimacy of monarchial control, and the moral imperative to resist tyranny.

These same arguments of Payne can be seen as philosophically relevant to the current Russia-Ukraine conflict, especially in Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty and national identity.

1. Self-Determination: Paine argued that people have a natural right to govern themselves and break free from an oppressive power that does not represent their interests. In the context of the Russia-Ukraine war, Ukraine’s fight for independence from Russian influence mirrors this sentiment.  After the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and the subsequent occupation in the Donbas (coal and natural gas) and Luhansk regions, many Ukrainians see their struggle as one for self-determination against a foreign power trying to assert control[1].
2. Call for Unity and Action: Paine’s call for the colonies to unite against British rule can be likened to Ukraine’s appeal for international solidarity. Just as Paine believed that a united effort was necessary to break free from British control, Ukraine has sought international support to resist Russian aggression. This includes military aid from Western countries, economic sanctions against Russia, and diplomatic pressure.
3. The Legitimacy of Governance: Paine’s argument that governments derive their legitimacy from the consent of the governed is a core principle at stake in Ukraine. Ukrainians have repeatedly chosen democratic, pro-Western governments, which contrasts sharply with Russia’s desire to pull Ukraine into its sphere of influence. Russia’s actions, especially its military invasion in 2022, can be viewed as an attempt to undermine the will of the Ukrainian people, similar to the British crown’s attempts to maintain control over the American colonies against their will.

A DIFFERENT WORLD VIEW

In contrast to Payne’s Western Democratic Philosophies, it can be said that a different world view is espoused by Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin (b 1952), who joined the KGB (Soviet Secret Service) in 1975, serving in East Germany during the fall of the Berlin Wall, then in St. Petersburg, and later as the KGB head.  Putin, in one form or another, has been the head of the Russian government since 1999. Putin has been the longest serving Soviet or Russian leader since the revolution at the turn of the 20^th century.  Ivan the Terrible was the longest ruling Tsar, in office for almost 40 years.

Putin has consistently positioned himself as an opponent of Western liberalism, seeing it as decadent and corrosive to traditional values. He views Ukraine’s pro-Western trajectory as part of a larger struggle between Russia’s authoritarian model of governance and the West’s liberal democracy.  In Putin’s view (and according to many internal poles many of the Russian people), authoritarianism is good, democracy is bad.

TRANSITION FROM ROMAN TO SCANDINAVIAN TO RUSSIAN

After the fall of Rome, the Norse or Scandinavian peoples started migrations south looking for warmer places to settle as well as less war-like places to steal goods and slaves.  When these Scandinavians (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, etc.) when raping, pillaging and plundering it was said that they were “going Viking”.  Vikings were the main disruptive forces in Europe and the Eurasian Steppes.  When Vikings found a place they wanted to live, they typically did not conquer countries, but rather assimilated into the local cultures.  Examples include Normandy in France and what became the Kevian-Rus’ state north of the Black Sea.

1. Kievan Rus’ (9th–13th Century)

Kievan Rus’[2] was a powerful and expansive state that covered large parts of modern-day Ukraine, Russia (east of the Ural Mountains), and Belarus. Kyiv was its capital and one of the most important cities of the time, serving as the center of political, economic, and cultural life in Eastern Europe. This period is often regarded as the “birthplace” of East Slavic culture, as the state adopted Christianity, written language, and many other aspects of civilization.

• Kyiv as the Political and Cultural Center: Kyiv was the heart of the early Slavic world, where the Varangian (Viking)-led rulers developed a cohesive Slavic culture. It was also the seat of power for the ruling Rurikid dynasty, which later gave rise to the rulers of Russia. The city attracted craftsmen, merchants, and scholars, facilitating cultural exchanges with Byzantium and other European centers.
• Adoption of Christianity (988 CE): One of the most significant moments in the history of Kievan Rus’ was the adoption of Eastern Orthodox Christianity in 988 CE, under the Grand Prince Vladimir the Great, who was based in Kyiv. This event tied the region culturally and religiously to Byzantium and is a foundational moment in the spiritual and cultural development of Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. The Orthodox Church would later become a defining institution in Russian culture.
• Slavic Identity: Kievan Rus’ fostered the early development of a unified East Slavic identity, including the early foundations of what would later evolve into the Russian language, culture, and religious tradition.

2. Cultural Legacy in Modern Russia

Although Kievan Rus’ State collapsed after the Mongol invasions in the 13th century, its legacy lived on. Moscow eventually rose as the successor state, and Russian leaders would later claim that their rule was the legitimate continuation of the Kievan Rus’ political and cultural tradition. The Moscow Principality, and later the Russian Empire, viewed itself as the heir to Kyiv’s religious, political, and cultural significance.

• Kyiv as “Mother of Russian Cities”: Russian historians often refer to Kyiv as the “mother of Russian cities,” a phrase that underlines the symbolic importance of the city in Russian historical consciousness. Even as political power shifted to Moscow, Kyiv has remained a potent cultural and religious symbol.

3. Shared Cultural and Religious Heritage

The cultural ties between Ukraine and Russia are deeply intertwined due to their shared religious and linguistic heritage. Both countries trace the foundation of their Orthodox Christian faith to Saint Vladimir’s baptism of the Kievan Rus’ in the Dnieper River, whose headwaters is west of Moscow, flows through Belarus then Ukraine (Kyiv and Chernobyl) then empties into the Black Sea near Crimea.  Russian culture absorbed many elements from Kyiv’s religious and cultural traditions, which helped shape Russia’s own national identity.  Early East Slavic chronicles, like the Primary Chronicle, were written in Kyiv and reflect the early cultural history shared by both Ukraine and Russia. This literary tradition played a crucial role in shaping the histories of both nations.

4. Divergence After Kievan Rus’

While Kievan Rus’ laid the foundation for a shared cultural heritage, the trajectories of Ukraine and Russia began to diverge following the collapse of the medieval state. Ukraine was more influenced by its interactions with Poland and Lithuania in the west, while Russia expanded to the northeast and developed its own distinct empire. Over time, the historical narratives of both nations evolved separately, but the memory of Kievan Rus’ remained a source of both unity and conflict.

5. Contemporary Relevance

The question of Ukraine as the birthplace of Russian culture has become a point of contention in the current geopolitical conflict between the two countries. Russian President Vladimir Putin has frequently invoked the historical unity of Russia and Ukraine, particularly their shared roots in Kievan Rus’, to justify Russia’s claims over Ukraine[3]. Putin has argued that Ukraine is historically inseparable from Russia, an assertion that many Ukrainians reject as a denial of their distinct national identity.

SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC (SSR)

A Soviet Socialist Republic[4] was separate political entity from the Russian Empire, having the Soviet Communist Party as a unifying force.  In addition to Russia, there were 14 other SSR states: Ukraine. Belarus, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldavia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.  From the Ukrainian perspective, it has had a degree of independence within the Soviet Union, as evidenced by it (along with Byelorussian SSR) being founding members of the United Nations, signing the UN Charter in 1945.  Each had a clause embedded in their constitution that allowed them the right to withdraw from the USSR; Ukraine exercised that right in 1991.

THE OPRICHNINA AND THE AUTHORITANIAN STATE

The Oprichnina[5], established by Tsar Ivan IV (Ivan the Terrible) in the 16th century, are considered to be a foundational model for authoritarian rule and secret police operations in Czarist Russia as well as the Communist USSR state.

1. The Oprichnina: Historical Context

Origins: The Oprichnina was founded in 1565 as part of Ivan IV’s broad policy centralizing power in the hands of the Tsar and weaken the influence of the Russian boyars (nobility). Loyal only to the Tsar, they were tasked with enforcing his will, conducted purges of perceived traitors and enemies, established a highly centralized and autocratic state in which the Tsar held absolute power over all aspects of Russian life. This model of leadership has been a recurring feature in Russian political history, and has been evident after the Russian Revolution of 1917, especially in the Communist leadership styles of Joseph Stalin and Putin.

Secret Police

The Oprichnina are often seen as the prototype for future Russian secret police organizations, including the Okhrana (Tsarist secret police), the Cheka (Bolshevik secret police), the KGB (Soviet secret police and intelligence agency), and its modern successor, the FSB (Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation).  The historical roots of these organizations can be traced back to the Oprichniki, who pioneered the use of state-sponsored violence and terror to maintain autocratic control and suppress internal enemies.

2. The Ukrainian War and the Fear of Western Influence

Just as Ivan IV sought to eliminate internal threats and consolidate power, Putin’s government frames the war in Ukraine as a fight against the spread of Western influence. The Kremlin views Ukraine’s orientation toward the European Union and NATO as a direct threat to Russian sovereignty and security. This narrative of existential threat, used to justify internal crackdowns and external aggression, has parallels to Ivan’s use of fear to maintain, control, Oprichniki and justify the Oprichnina’s reign of terror.

3   Economic Influences

It is arguable that Russia invaded Ukraine to prop up is own economy.  For example, is the days of the USSR, Ukraine made up about 18% of the USSR population, 17% of the industrial output, and 21% of the agricultural output[6].  .  Before the war, Russia provided about 25% of the natural gas consumed in the European Union; with about 80% of those exports travel through pipelines through Ukrainian[7].  At this Russia occupies about 20% of Ukraine, including a significant portion of the agricultural prime area.  It is estimated that Russia earns about $1 billion a year from selling Ukrainian agricultural products and uses a significant portion of this money to finance the war.[8]

Conclusion

In many ways when comparing the differences between the Philosophies of Western Democracies and of Totalitarian forms of Government, we find them in existential conflict.  It is suggested that this conflict is part of the reason for the current war between Russia and its former vassal state Ukraine.

• Russia says that historically we were formed where you exist, but gradually the locus of control moved from Kyiv (The Mother of Russian Cities) to Moscow.  Therefore, under the model of the Oprichniki, we should control (own) your land, resources, and people for our benefit.
• Ukraine says that under the principals of Thomas Paine, the source of governmental power is the “people”, and (especially now, 2 years into the war) the citizens of Ukraine do not want to be controlled by Russia and the Oprichniki for Russia’s benefit.

Under Thomas Paine’s principle that we have a moral imperative to resist tyranny, it could be argued that we have a Moral Imperative to help Ukraine

p.s. Much of this paper was written with the aid of CHAT GPT

[1] Reference – Wikipedia: Donbas – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donbas

[2] Reference: Wikipedia. Kievan Rus’  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus%27

[3] Putin, Vladimir. “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians” July 12, 2012.  Reference: Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Russians_and_Ukrainians

[4] Reference: Wikipedia – Republics of the Soviet Union. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republics_of_the_Soviet_Union

[5] Reference: Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oprichnina

[6] “Economy of Ukraine” Encyclopedia Britannica, Ukraine – Agriculture, Industry, Trade | Britannica https://www.britannica.com/place/Ukraine/Economy

[7] “Russia–Ukraine gas disputes” Russia–Ukraine gas disputes – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_disputes#:~:text=Russia%20provides%20approximately%20a%20quarter%20of%20the%20natural,Ukrainian%20soil%20prior%20to%20arriving%20in%20the%20EU.

[8] Russia Sells Grain Stolen from Ukraine.  Wall Street Journal, 17 September 2024 pA006.

https://wallstreetjournal-ny.newsmemory.com/?publink=0495c639a_134d439