In the speech where Putin called the collapse of USSR "a major geopolitical disaster," he also said that "the civilizing mission of the Russian nation" in Eurasia must continue." V. Vereshchagin captured the encounter of #Samarkand with Russia's mission civilisatrice this way: 1/
The painting was part of the series "The Barbarians," which represented the "backward" nature of the Orient that civilization, carried on the backs of the Russian troops, was meant to salvage. "Civilizing mission" was a key term of the 19-c. vocabulary of colonialism. 2/
It was widely used as a justification of colonial presence across the globe. Even though it implied that empire was here to uplift the "indigenous" population, it also created a fundamental divide between the colonizer and the colonized. 3/
In 1875, the tsarist officer Lev Kostenko, who took active part in Russia's expansion in Central Asia, justified the conquest on the pages of "Voennyi sbornik," the official journal of the War Ministry, in quite an emphatic way: 4/
“We can safely say that our Central Asian wars have always entailed the triumph of the ideas of truth and justice, since here civilization has waged and is still waging a struggle against barbarism and ignorance.” 5/
How did the struggle look like in practice? "The spirit of the Turkestan infantry is at a very high level. A continuous series of glorious and brilliant victories strengthened the Turkestan infantry's consciousness of their invincibility and a complete contempt for the enemy." 6/
"For Turkestan soldiers, the native is not a person, but some kind of animal, which has steam instead of a soul. Turkestan soldiers call the natives nothing less but the "cursed horde," "chiseled heads" and by other no less contemptuous names." 7/
Russian rule in Turkestan was in many respects an extension of that in the Caucasus. Kostenko stressed that the soldiers he wrote about were the same who participated in the conquest of the Caucasus. They sang the songs they composed back in Chechnya. 8/
In the Caucasus, Russian troops were portrayed as the bearers of mission civilisatrice, too. Soon after its conquest, the official newspaper "Kavkaz" wrote that “Russian troops were not only the conquerors of the Caucasus, but they brought in the beginnings of civilization.” 9/
It's little surprise that the equation of the local population with animals on the pages of governmental periodicals held true for the Caucasus as well. Let's have a look at an article by another Russian officer in "Voennyi sbornik": 10/
"The life of the Chechen is likened to the life of a beast, which always and everywhere is guided by only one instinct. The beast roams the forest to find its prey; the unbridled Chechen does the same." 11/
The restoration of the imperial vocabulary entails the restoration of respective practices. The refusal to accept the "gift of civilization" from the hands of a purported "benevolent civilizer" is a prelude to the most horrendous war crimes. end/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This image of a European governor of a sub-Saharan province evokes everything we associate with colonialism. Indeed, he and many of his "white" compatriots came to Africa for the benefit of empire.
But there's a nuance: the Tsarist Empire.
🧵on Russia and whiteness in Africa. 1/
We've met this guy already. Nikolai Leont'ev, a landowner from Kherson, an adventurer, a colonial, a man who was behind Ethiopia's diplomatic mission to St. Petersburg. A man who promised Menelik arms and ammo in exchange for a colony for Russia somewhere in Djibouti. 2/
A man who became the head of a newly annexed province in Ethiopia's south. A man who, after all, promised his "rights" to this land to the tsar. As befitted a colonial man of privilege, he was an avid big-game hunter. Elephants were his passion. Just like any other animals. 3/
Footage from liberated towns around Kharkiv show numerous Russian billboards claiming that Russians and Ukrainians are the same nation. Ironically, many visitors to the region 200 years ago found themselves in a "foreign" land. A 🧵on the border between 🇺🇦 and 🇷🇺 near Kharkiv. 1/
The naturalist Vasilii Zuev travelled to Kharkiv from the north in 1781. In Lyptsi, he did not feel he was in Russia any more. There, he met people who were “completely different from Russians in dialect, clothes, and deeds,” but who were “no different from Little Russians.” 2/
The traveller Pavel Sumarokov, upon his arrival in Lyptsi in 1803, was amazed by seeing "other faces, other habits, other clothes" and hearing "a different language." He wasn't sure where he was in this alien land: "Is this the end of the empire? Am I entering another state?" 3/
Putin keeps claiming that Ukraine has never had its own statehood. In stark contrast, authorities of Tsarist Ukraine said and wrote completely different things. They believed that the memory of Ukraine's statehood was very much alive. They only wanted it to die out. A 🧵 1/
That Ukraine enjoyed statehood of its own in the 17th and 18th cc. was secret to none. That Ukrainian elites, however loyal to the empire, raised voices against its abolition in the 1770s, was well-remembered. That they wanted to have it back was the subject of suspicion. 2/
In 1831, Governor-General of Little Russia Nikolai Repnin was quick to report that "the memory of former independence has entirely disappeared in Little Russia." The officials kept repeating the same up until 1917. 3/
The history of colonial warfare knows numerous examples of atrocities unparalleled in the history of "conventional" wars within Europe itself. One of them was the use of skulls as military trophies. Tsarist Russia was no exception to the rule. An important 🧵1/
I'm writing this after watching a video of a Russian militant who, holding a skull of a Ukrainian soldier in his hand, claims that he fights against the idea of Ukraine as "anti-Russia" and that "all bearers of this idea must be killed." 2/
For one thing, this is an eerie illustration of what I wrote about in the thread below. Putin's trope of Ukraine as "anti-Russia" contains the genocidal intent element. Now that the term has taken on a life of its own, it's impossible to control. 3/
One of the most ominous things in Putin’s 2021 article on the "historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians" was the description of Ukraine as “anti-Russia.” So far, nobody has traced the origins of this term. A 🧵 on the rhetoric that paved the way for the Russian invasion. 1/
In his invasion speech, Putin used the term once again, talking about the creation of “anti-Russia” “on our own historical territories.” Since then, the term has provided Russian public discourse with the new way of speaking about Ukraine, with obvious genocidal implications. 2/
The logic is clear: if a neighbouring state exists only to confront you and to deny you, if it's raison d'être is to be the exact opposite of what you are, it should not exist at all. According to it, the all-out war was inevitable as long as there was "anti-Russia" next door. 3/
In May 1910, Tsarist Russia's censorship body, the Main Administration of the Press, received a printed copy of a text that started with the words "Ukraine has not yet perished." This was the first encounter of imperial censors with the future Ukrainian anthem. How did it end? 1/
Naturally, what was recognized as a "revolutionary Ukrainian anthem" was banned and all its copies were subject to arrest. But the censor's arguments are remarkable in their own right. Here, for Ukraine's Independence Day, I publish a document from archives in St. Petersburg. 2/
"The author says," the censor noted, "that, despite all the efforts of its enemies, Ukraine (in the sense of an independent state) has not yet died and that Ukrainians will still see happiness, while their enemies (who deprived Ukraine of independence) will die... 3/