Q: With your permission, Professor Mikhail Epstein, we will open with a quote: "People normally say that a country acquired nuclear weapons, but in Russia's case, it not only possesses nuclear weapons, but in a sense is also possessed by them, and it is now in a situation that can lead to its detonation and the destruction of the whole world." When we read your words, we get the impression that the current war in Ukraine is the most dangerous one the world has ever seen.
"Yes, this is exactly so. In my profession and milieu, many feel that the war disconnected them from the past and that all the years we invested in Russian culture and science became lost. It seems to me that the opposite is true: Russia is now receiving much attention because humankind needs to know where its end will likely come from. Yes, Russia was home to distinguished authors and great composers, Russia was a country that inspired hope, but after the 19th century, it became a country that failed the hopes for cultural greatness rather than strengthening them. Now, Russia has become the center of the world – an abyss that the world is likely to fall into. Therefore, we must look where we step because we will likely fall."
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Q: Do you think that the war is really likely to end in a nuclear disaster?
"It is a possibility."
The pessimistic quote in the first question is taken from the book "The Russian Anti-World: Politics on the Verge of Apocalypse", published last January in New York. Its back cover states that it is "the first philosophy book on the first year of the war." Its author is a philosopher and philologist Mikhail Epstein, a cultural theory and Russian literature professor at Emory University in Atlanta, a decorated researcher who published 37 books and approximately 700 articles. In his book, Epstein presents a new and groundbreaking analysis of the war that is making waves in the world: he provides a perspective that allows us to understand how the cultural conditions that led Russia to not only invade Ukraine but also indiscriminately commit atrocities came into being.
In an exclusive interview with Israel Hayom from the United States, Epstein describes with great worry how he thinks the war crimes being committed in Ukraine – shooting at civilians, torture, horrendous acts of rape, and the execution of hostages – do not always deviate from the Russian army's norms, but instead came to life from a wide-ranging and poisonous cultural orientation that emerged within the Russian elite, and which received a sort of ideology of its own in Putin's time, which was named "the Russian World." According to him, the attempt to apply this ideology in the field needs to be a cause of concern for us all.
A world of "us" versus "them"
"The Russian World is the primary guiding concept of today's Russia, and its expansion is the country's primary goal," writes Epstein at the beginning of his book. "In comparison with previous hegemonic ideas that controlled Russia, such as the 'Orthodox Kingdom,' 'Moscow, third Rome,' 'Communism,' or 'World Revolution,' the idea of the Russian World seemed weak. Now, Russia does not identify with any general term – rather only with itself." In other words: if, in the days of the czars, Russia viewed itself as the observer of "true" Christianity or as the one with the "most advanced ideology" in the Soviet Union era, today the Russian leadership does not carry with it any ideology with substance. In an interview with Israel Hayom, he says that the last two wars the Russian Army waged demonstrated this: Georgia and Ukraine are Orthodox and capitalist countries, just like Russia.
Q: You write that the "Russian World" is a weak idea because it does not point to anything besides itself. But maybe this is its strength?
"The idea that the world needs to be more 'Russian' entails basic binarism: a sharp distinction between 'us' and 'them,' everything on 'our' side being all superior and holy. According to some researchers, there is no neutral area in Russian culture, only Heaven and Hell. Because of this binarism, if there is a revolution, it is a sign that the whole world is divided into communism and capitalism; if the government is Orthodox, then there are only Orthodox and heretics. Thus, everything is boiled down to Russians versus non-Russians, hence, Russia versus the entire world."
Vladislav Surkov, a former close advisor to Putin, popularized the political use of the "Russian World" ideology. Surkov wrote as early as 2009 that "our mission is how to speak about the empire and our will to expand, without hurting the feelings of the international community." Eventually, Surkov was appointed as the one responsible on behalf of the Kremlin for the "Donetsk People's Republic," which was created by Russia in the territory it conquered in eastern Ukraine in 2014. Two months before the war began, Surkov had already rationalized the need for expansion as a natural step that must be taken. According to him, chaos reigns in every society, and when the system is closed – the disorder in it becomes greater. How can this be solved? One option is granting Russian citizens more freedoms, which is "too dangerous" for the government. In his opinion, the second and preferred option is to allow the system to expand outward. "For hundreds of years, the Russian state survived only because of its persistent ambition to expand beyond its borders," he rationalized, "for Russia, ongoing expansion was not only one of its ideas but was its foundation."
Epstein calls this the "territorial curse." The reason for Russia's misery is its size, accompanied by a matching feeling of greatness. The country's vast territory empties it from within. This land belongs to everyone and no one. This is a land whose rulers also do not really feel at home in it: they steal everything from the periphery, and the people living in the periphery do not want to work for the rulers in the capital, who smuggle and hide their treasures abroad. Russia also suffers from 'the resource curse' – its vast wealth in natural gas, oil, and other natural resources whose constant income it provides prevents the development of technology and human resources – but the territorial curse is bigger than it. This territory can neither be given away nor absorbed into the country.
"I experienced this myself when I participated in delegations all over Russia," says Epstein. "In 2006, I visited Lake Seliger. It is a gorgeous lake, surrounded by quiet and the utmost splendor, but surrounding all that is the feeling of near death. On the one hand, the view's beauty is divine, and on the other hand, there is an old church in which trash is piled a meter high, and instead of the church's dome, there is a gaping hole under the sky. Everything is polluted and ugly. Besides the local elderly women whose dialect we documented, the only living place in the area is a small village built by workers from Tajikistan. The rest looks like it is in a transitional phase to the next life. The Russian people are not thrilled about building on their own land; what lifts their spirits is expanding their own territory and conquering the lands of others. Putin tried to promote various national projects in his first two terms but saw that nothing came of it. He also understood that if he succeeded, his gain would be outweighed since while he would be planting roots in his land, he would also want to influence its fate and choose the leaders it needs. The only thing that can unite a nation like this is their roaming, and thus Putin reverted to the old paradigm: to conquer territories – and thereby unite the nation."
"Corruption is a basic component"
Before he began his conquests, first in Georgia (2008) and now in Ukraine, Putin resorted to anti-Western rhetoric. The Russian president marked the West as a central enemy, despite his trading with it until the invasion of Ukraine, and the entire Russian elite preferred to purchase assets in the West and keep its money there. Epstein sees a demonstration of the Russian love-hate relationship with the West in this double standard.
"There are two especially important characteristics of Russian culture: dependence on the West and opposition to the West. In fact, from the time of Peter the Great, Russia adopted the West's technology and education systems in order to turn them against it. This is a culture of jealousy and competition that finds its purpose in challenging other cultures and marginalizing them based on the accomplishments that were adopted from them," writes Epstein. "Russia's tragedy is embedded in the fact that it is not independent and innovative enough to build a unique civilization of its own that will be able to compete with the West's and East's greatness, and at the same time, it is too large and too proud to become a part of other civilizations and be content with a lesser role."
Q: Can we escape this trap?
"This is the question of all questions. Russia experimented on itself for several hundred years. It always wanted to become something great: the leader of the Orthodox-Christian world or the Communist world. At the same time, it cannot become this, like the underground man in Dostoevsky's novel. The underground man only sticks out his tongue, teases, and tries to sabotage – but is incapable of offering anything himself. In practice, Putin embodies that "underground man": He is incapable of suggesting anything to the world but rather only annoys it and tries to pinch it. He is an underground man that has reached the summit of leadership. In the underground world, the 'anti-world' has become the world itself in Russia."
Q: In the West, corruption is a crime and is viewed as a perversion. On the other hand, corruption in that criminal "anti-world" is almost the glue that keeps Russian society together.
"A few years ago, there was an investigation into the extent of the corruption of former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev. The investigation tore off many masks and exposed the theft of up to a hundred billion dollars in public funds. The details it exposed were so humiliating that people could have thought that Medvedev was done for. And indeed, his ratings were down about 10% for several months – but afterward, they returned to normal without Medvedev doing anything positive. Why? Because according to common perception, if people steal, they are one of us, one of the boys. The average Russian observer discovers that Putin owns mansions. So, what? Of course, he does. Otherwise, we would not respect him. The czar needs to own mansions. This began as early as Peter I, who decided to eliminate theft in Russia and decided during a State Council meeting: If the rope used to hang the criminal were worth less than the amount stolen, the thief would be hanged. Then, one of the aristocrats stood up and said: Your Highness, if this is so, you will not have any subjects left to rule. And this was 300 years ago."
Epstein thinks that this phenomenon has deep religious roots as well. "One of the first works in ancient Russian literature is the 'Sermon on Law and Grace,' which claimed that although there is law, there is also grace above the law. Thus, when a clerk steals, he bravely violates the law in the hope of receiving grace from the government. He can even receive respect for violating the law – just like Medvedev and others receive today because the government's origin is a violation of the law. At first, Putin tried to uphold the law but later reset everything, including the law. Therefore, corruption in Russia is a phenomenon different from that in the West. Over there, it is an anomaly, a perversion that needs to be fought. In Russia, it is one of the foundations of humankind's existence. If you are innocent, you are not one of us. If you sin and I sin – we all sin before God, and He can pardon us. So let us all sin because our sin is the expression of our trust in the forgiving and merciful God. Law is a dead letter."
Q: If so, is it possible that all the wars on corruption – for example, of Putin's opposer, Alexei Navalny, and his supporters – are destined to fail?
"Look, most of the Russian population is simply used to obeying their leader. 70% are not 'for' or 'against' something, but rather 'for' whoever is in power. I am not ruling out the possibility that Russia could have been placed on the path of upholding the law if consistent efforts and reforms were made."
"Like martyrs in Islam"
Q: The book's entire first section is devoted to the "anti," and I could not help but ask you: is there anything positive Russia creates?
"Certainly. Russia created an incredibly significant culture. However, it did so by productively engaging with the West. In the Middle Ages, there was monastic literature in Russia – the life of holy people, sermons, and functional texts. Russian culture gradually became independent, and in the 19th century, it received worldwide significance, but only in the process of contact with the West. The second the Bolshevik Revolution established the Iron Curtain, all sources of Western enrichment were cut off, and the Russian state began destroying the culture it had."
Q: And is Russia now creating something positive?
"Russian culture has great significance, but it is like withering grass that grows on the edge of a cliff overlooking an abyss. Dostoevsky, Pushkin, Tolstoy, Platonov, Bulgakov – their power lies in that they are at the edge of the abyss. We see in them the Russian culture's ability to grow in impossible conditions. Russian culture breaks through the political powers that try to crush it. The good it created is not thanks to the state but despite it. Just like Russian intelligence: it is a flower on the edge of a cliff that shows us what culture can be in a place where it cannot be."
Q: Life on the edge of the cliff reminds us very much about what you write about the great curiosity about torture and living-on-the-edge experiences in Russian culture, or in your own words: "to understand the border of existence and capture life in it." Is this not the flower on the cliff?
"In Russia, life and its value are known only under torture. When testimonies are extracted from people, when they bang their heads against the wall and cry out in bitterness, they find the most precious thing in life: testimonies to life on the brink of death. There is no in-between, no flower between flowers. Russian culture is one of suffering. We have testimonies from Maxim Gorky and Ivan Bunin about life in Russian villages from the time of Russian culture's peak, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. Gorky was familiar with Russia, and he said that he never, in all his travels, met a farmer who exhibited, for example, the people's wisdom and warm nature that Tolstoy idyllically described. What did he see? Animal-like cruelty, suspicion, and no respect for strangers. Bunin also wrote about this: According to him, he never saw anything crueler than the lifestyle of villagers. He describes battles between villages, fought with sticks and pitchforks, clashes between neighbors."
Epstein also emphasizes the Russian Orthodox Church's role in promoting the government's ideology. The church's current leader, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, stated last year that deaths in the Russian Army's ranks in Ukraine "erases all the sins", and, on a different occasion, called the "special military operation" the war on Satan. Epstein claims that under Putin, the Russian Orthodox Church is becoming a new state religion whose components can be identified as fascism, Russian nationalism, imperialism, sectarianism, worship of the army, and apocalyptic orientation.
"This concept is similar to the martyrdom institution in Islam: Destroying yourself and Allah's enemies leads the martyr to heaven, where the virgins wait for him," writes Epstein. "But there is a profound difference: in Islam, there are those who side with the killing of infidels, however not for their redemption. They will not go to heaven. In Russian terrorism, the situation is different: Russian Orthodox Church believers need to be murdered and ascend with them to heaven. By murdering you, I am redeeming you and myself as well."
Putin's philosopher
Joining this boiling reactor is Aleksandr Dugin, also known as "Putin's philosopher," who has made the headlines again this year after his daughter, propagandist Darya Dugina, was killed in a car bomb attack near Moscow last August. Dugin was and still is one of the ideologists who believe in denying Ukraine's existence, but this is only one part of his beliefs, which call for Russia to take over the world so that it "will be redeemed". Dugin, who as a youngster was a member of the neo-Nazi "Black Order of the SS" movement, said, among other things: "We must not think about whether or not the end of the world will arrive; we must think about how we can bring it. This is our mission." On a different occasion, he refined the violence necessary for the achievement of this goal: "Where we are – is where the center of hell lies."
Q: Dugin is the essence of the "anti-world"?
"Correct. History must be hanged, and Russia will be the noose by which it will be. This correlates with the horrors that occurred in places like Bucha, Irpin, and Izyum. Dugin uses Freud's terms, such as Eros and Thanatos (the drive for life and drive for death, respectively) – and writes that the Russian Eros has no connection to passion. This is an Eros that traps bodies in it, dirty pants, ruins, and women; an Eros that cannot be made distinct from Thanatos. In this, he sees Russia's uniqueness. What happened in Bucha is the removal of the border between the two drives."
Q: In the book, you describe Russia galloping toward its history's depths. But perhaps in this lies the message: to achieve the same order that first unified the Russian territory and then dismantle it.
"In the nineties, until before the fall of the Soviet Union, I suggested a script for a dismantlement such as this. I wrote an article whose main idea was that not only the Soviet Union is supposed to fall apart but also that the Russian Federation needs to return to the point where there were many lands with governmental buildings, traditions, and customs of their own. This variety lays everything out. If Russia's central government were to be taken apart, different 'Russias' could be created – Ural's Russia, Siberia's Russia, etc. – that together can create something like the European Union. Maybe this union will be even more organic because of the language all the new Russias share. This is the only way this territory will not threaten the world. We speak about the fear of what will happen to nuclear weapons if Russia falls apart. Let's start with the fact that it is most difficult to supervise nuclear weapons in the hands of an imperialistic superpower like Russia in our times. If Russia falls apart, we can negotiate how to destroy its threatening nuclear arsenal."
Q: How do you see Russia in five or ten years?
"Weakened, depressed. How dangerous it will be – is difficult to say. I do not see much light on the horizon in the coming years. In any case, the generation in power today will last another ten years approximately. It will not leave of its own volition because it obeys the criminal laws of honor. It cannot allow itself to blink. Otherwise, it will be eaten alive in Russia. Civilization has never before faced a concentrated power such as this. This power is demonstrated by the fact that the biggest country in the world possesses nuclear weapons. Some of Putin's elite hope they will live the rest of their lives with their families in bunkers, and after they go, the flood can come. Something exceptional must be done to neutralize them. Some say that Russia's entire nuclear arsenal is not fit for use and that the weapons are rusty. I am no expert and would also like to think this is so. But I am proceeding according to cultural assumptions, and regrettably, I think we are standing on the edge of the abyss."
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
