29 February 2024
In recent days, media attention has been focused on the interview of the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, on February 8, 2024, with the American journalist Tucker Carlson. In the interview, Putin spent a lot of time on a historical tour of Ukraine from the early Middle Ages to the present day, attempting to justify the large-scale aggression that began in February 2022. As a result, this has become the inspiration for many internet memes and jokes.
Such an approach is not new. In 2019, during an interview given after the so-called "Gavrilov Night," Putin described politically motivated, falsified facts about the history of Georgia with precise accuracy regarding years, aiming to lend more credibility to his statements. However, the 2019 interview was not the first time Putin spoke with a special focus on Georgia and its occupied territories.
On August 28, 2008, CNN journalist Matthew Chance conducted an extensive interview with Vladimir Putin. Given the Western media's awareness of the instigator behind the hostilities in Georgia in early August, they directed their questions to Putin instead of the de facto president, Dmitry Medvedev. In the initial segment of the interview, Putin denied any involvement and emphasized Medvedev's role as the commander-in-chief. However, this was an attempt to mislead the public. Putin stated, "As you know, at that time I was indeed in Beijing, attending the opening of the Olympic Games. Even considering this, I couldn't have been involved in the decision-making process. However, President Medvedev was aware of my stance on the matter. To be frank with you, and there's no secrecy about it, we did discuss all potential scenarios, including the possibility of direct aggression from the Georgian government".
Of course, the CNN journalist was less interested in the historical excursion and more focused on discussing the causes of the war. However, Putin, in his typical style, interrupted Matthew Chance, as he did with Tucker Carlson, and began delving into historical narratives.
"I think both you and your audience today will be interested in learning a little more about the history of relationships between peoples and ethnic groups in these regions of the world. Little or nothing is known about it. If you think it is insignificant, you can cut it. Don't hesitate, I won't mind.
Back in the middle of the 18th century, in 1745-1747, Ossetia was the first to become part of the Russian Empire. At that time it was united - North and South Ossetia were one state.
In 1801, if memory serves me correctly, Georgia itself, which was under some pressure from the Ottoman Empire, voluntarily joined the Russian Empire.
Only 12 years later, in 1812, Abkhazia became part of the Russian Empire. Until that time, it remained an independent state, an independent principality.
It was only in the middle of the 19th century that a decision was made to unify South Ossetia into the Tiflis Governorate. In the context of a unified state, this issue may not have seemed significant. However, subsequent years revealed that the Ossetians were displeased with this arrangement. They were effectively brought under the jurisdiction of what is now Georgia by the central government of the king.
When the Russian Empire collapsed after World War I, Georgia declared itself an independent state, while Ossetia chose to remain part of Russia. This occurred following the events of 1917. In 1918, due to this decision, Georgia carried out a rather brutal punitive operation in the region, and in 1921, it repeated the same action.
When the Soviet Union was created, these territories, by Stalin's decision, were finally transferred to Georgia. As you know, Stalin was ethnically Georgian. Therefore, those who claim that these territories should continue to belong to Georgia are Stalinists: they defend the decision of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin”.
Putin's narrative once again falsifies history. In reality, a united Ossetia did not exist in the 18th century or earlier, nor did a separate territorial unit named South Ossetia exist in the 19th century. The Russian President made an identical statement on July 9, 2019, in response to the events that unfolded after Gavrilov's visit to Tbilisi.
In both cases, the propaganda narrative of the Kremlin actively develops the topic of the so-called "genocide", which at different times even took the form of a draft law to be submitted to the Russian Duma, and is mainly used as a weapon of a hybrid warfare against Georgia.
To a CNN journalist's question about arming the separatists and supporting de facto institutions, thus accusing Russia of provoking the conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Putin responded by falsifying the history of the 1990s:
"I can answer this question easily. These conflicts are recent history, and they started because of the decision of the Georgian side, which deprived Abkhazia and South Ossetia of their right to autonomy. In 1990 and 1991, the Georgian government restricted Abkhazia and South Ossetia's autonomy rights - the rights they enjoyed within the territory of the Soviet Union, Soviet Georgia. As soon as this decision was made, ethnic strife flared up and armed conflict began. During this period, Russia signed a number of international agreements and fulfilled all of them. We had only the number of peacekeeping forces on the territory of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which was specified in the mentioned agreements, and we never exceeded the quota".
In this case, Putin once again interprets history through a narrative favorable to the Kremlin. The restriction of rights during the period of Zviad Gamsakhurdia affected political groups supported by Russia and involved in separatist actions. It is a proven fact that there was active participation of North Caucasian militants and entire groups trained by the Russian Intelligence Service (GRU) in the conflicts. Additionally, the provision of arms to the separatists and the framing of the occupation of Georgian territories as an "ethno-nationalist" conflict and a struggle for the "self-determination" of small nations have been confirmed.
Historical revisionism is indeed a multi-pronged strategy of the Kremlin aimed at shaping public perception of the history not only of Russia but also its neighbors. This tactic is employed to further the regime's political goals and consolidate power. By manipulating historical narratives, the Kremlin seeks to justify its actions, assert control over neighboring territories, and maintain influence in the region.
Some of the main methods of historical revisionism include:
1. Selective interpretation of historical events: Putin and his administration often selectively interpret historical events to minimize Russia's past crimes or highlight its achievements. This may include emphasizing the positive aspects of Russia's history while downplaying or completely denying negative events such as mass human rights violations or aggression against other nations;
2. Promoting Nationalist Narratives: The Putin regime promotes nationalist narratives that glorify Russia's historical role as a strong and just nation. The Kremlin presents Russia as a defender of traditional values, a victim of external aggression and a force of stability and order in the world;
3. Promotion of alternative historical theories: The Kremlin actively cultivates and promotes alternative historical and conspiracy theories. These theories contradict established narratives in Western historiography. They often try to undermine Western interpretations of historical events and portray Russia as a victim of Western conspiracies;
4. Historical research and media control not only for internal but also for external audiences.
Today, the manipulation of historical narratives is primarily directed towards Ukraine, Poland, and Eastern Europe, serving the larger context of the war launched in Ukraine. However, Central Asian countries, Georgia, and Armenia are also periodically targeted. Putin's historical revisionism often becomes fodder for internet memes and jokes, but its implications are far more insidious than may initially appear. Firstly, historical revisionism serves as a catalyst for the Kremlin's geopolitical interests, including aggressive foreign policy and populist nationalism. By downplaying Russia's historical wrongdoings, exaggerating its achievements, and grossly falsifying facts, the Kremlin aims to mislead both domestic and international audiences. Unfortunately, Western academia and mainstream media often fail to adequately research and disseminate these issues. As a result, a significant portion of Western society may uncritically accept the lies propagated by the Russian president, which can have a detrimental effect on overall sentiment and public discourse.
In the case of the occupied territories of Georgia, when Putin asserts that South Ossetia and North Ossetia were united in one state, which became part of Russia in the 18th century, he conveniently overlooks the fact that the issue of historical independence and the unity of North Ossetia only became prominent after the opening of the Roki Tunnel in the 1980s. Prior to that, this territory had no political or logistical connection with North Ossetia. This fact is widely known and can be confirmed simply by examining a map. However, a significant portion of Western listeners of such interviews may not independently verify this information, which underscores the potency of historical revisionism.
