Thread by @OstapYarysh

Many in the West praise Russian opposition leader #Navalny and the Oscar-nominated documentary about him. But there’s something else to remember: Being anti-Putin doesn’t negate Navalny’s imperialist and chauvinist views. Let’s take a look at specific examples in this thread 🧵

When Russia attacked Georgia in 2008, Navalny supported the invasion and wrote in his blog that he’d “really like to hit Georgian General Staff with a cruise missile.” He called Georgian people by slur "rodents" and called to deport them from Russia.
navalny.livejournal.com/274456.html

In his next posts, Navalny compared the then-president of Georgia Saakashvili to Hitler (Where else have I seen this rhetoric?) and said that despite this, Georgians were not that bad compared to others because “they’re Christians, after all.” navalny.livejournal.com/277835.html

Later Navalny got mad about the UN security council meeting on Georgia. He didn’t like the Costa Rica ambassador's remarks. “When we’re done bombing Georgia - Navalny wrote - we should deal with Costa Rica," suggesting bombing the country too. navalny.livejournal.com/276028.html

You might say that it was a long time ago. But in an interview with Xenia Sobchak in 2017, Navalny stood by his words about attacking Georgia and hitting it with cruise missiles. In 2021, on Navalny’s website, RUS-controlled Georgian territories were marked as separate states.

Let’s talk about Ukraine now. In the same screenshot from Navalny's web page 👆, Crimea is marked as Russia. Ukrainians directly asked to change it, but Navalny’s team refused. On the other Navalny team maps, Crimea is also marked Russian. (Most recent one is Dec 2022).

What’s Navalny’s personal position regarding Crimea? In 2014, he stated that “Crimea will remain a part of Russia and never in the foreseeable future will be a part of Ukraine.”

In the same interview, Navalny added that Crimea was annexed with violations, but when asked whether he’d return it, responded: “Is it a sandwich to give it back and forth?” Later he admitted the phrasing wasn’t good but never agreed with the idea of returning Crimea to Ukraine.

Over time, Navalny has repeatedly made statements that don’t differ much from Kremlin talking points about Ukraine. For example, he said that Ukrainians and Russians were the same nation, but naturally, Russia should dominate.
censor.net/ru/news/197005…

When in 2018 the Ukrainian Orthodox church was finally granted autonomy by Constantinople (a historic step towards religious independence from Moscow), Navalny complained that it would be a disaster for “Russkiy Mir”, a colonial concept of Russian culture’s superiority.

Seems that Navalny doesn’t see “Russkiy Mir” as anything bad. On the contrary,he criticized Putin for ruining it.He didn't blame Putin for trying to subjugate other nations and erase their cultural identity.But for undermining Russia’s authority and influence.Feel the difference?

Using ethnic or racial slurs does not appear to be a problem for Navalny either. He called Ukrainians by the ethnic slur “khokhols” (that tweet is still available btw) and used derogatory names towards non-Slavic ethnicities in Russia as well.

In Central Asia, for instance, Navalny is known for his solid anti-immigrant views. Time and again, he said that migrants from this region posed a threat to Russia. He called them criminals and drug dealers. Sound familiar?
globalvoices.org/2021/02/09/ale…

During his presidential campaign in 2017, Navalny promised to impose a visa regime for "beautiful citizens" of Central Asian countries while saying that Germany should establish a visa-free entrance for Russians.

In this thread, I focused mainly on Navalny’s views about Georgia, Ukraine, and Central Asia, but you can find similar examples about Baltic states, Moldova, Belarus, and other places that Russia considers its “sphere of influence.”

Some of these facts probably don’t fit in "the story of one man and his struggle with an authoritarian regime," as the movie describes. For many in the West who see Navalny as a new Russian hero and a democratic alternative to Putin, that might be uncomfortable to accept.

Is Navalny anti-Putin? Yes. Was he wrongfully imprisoned by Kremlin for this? Absolutely. Is he anti-war? He says so. But does he reject the colonial approach and the idea of Russian superiority/dominance over other nations? Definitely not. And this is something to keep in mind.