Historian Serhiy Plokhiy on Russian Imperialism, Decolonization, and Why Putin is So Obsessed with Ukraine

In 2019, at the International Book Festival in Edinburgh, Scotland, Ukrainian-American historian Serhiy Plokhiy drew attention to crucial aspects of Russian imperialism and its influence on current events in Ukraine. According to Plokhiy, even before the onset of Russia's full-scale war in 2022, the country laid the groundwork for distorted narratives regarding its 'legitimate' claims to Ukraine.

Modern misunderstandings surrounding empire, identity, and legacy, both of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, continue to shape Western views on Russia and Ukraine. While these narratives may not pose an immediate threat like Russian drones and missiles, they are designed to harm Ukraine, often in ways that extend far beyond its borders.

In an interview with the Kyiv Independent, the renowned historian discusses why there is no doubt that Russia has always been an empire, how the movement for an independent Ukrainian state in the 20th century began as a leftist project, and why Russia is more interested in destroying Ukraine than any other country.

Plokhiy notes that Russia, unfortunately, has quite effectively weaponized its history, particularly the history of the Soviet Union. Many people in the West still perceive it as a righteous project, when in fact it was an imperialist endeavor. He explains why it remains difficult for many to understand that Russia has historically always been an empire.

'Russia often evades responsibility for its imperial history, territorial expansion, and crimes committed during its imperial era, and there are several reasons for this. One reason is that Russia is—and has historically been—a land empire, whereas our perspective is largely shaped by the Western imagination of empire, which also includes maritime dominance,' Plokhiy states.

He emphasizes that even the anti-imperialist rebellion in what is now referred to as the Global South is framed through the lens of Western vocabulary and geographical imagination. Thus, empire can only be seen as a Western concept in this context. 'The very idea of anti-imperialism needs to be depoliticized, and this is partly happening during this war,' he adds.

Plokhiy also points out that today, Russia is the largest country in the world by territory. 'This is not a coincidence—you do not acquire such a vast amount of land as a nation-state. You obtain territory of this scale by being an empire,' he explains.

Russia has a way of turning global anti-Western sentiments into a tool for its own agenda. Even with its past and current imperialist policies, Russia often presents itself as a champion of the Global South, the so-called 'Third World,' allegedly fighting against imperialism—which in practice means opposing the West. This framing poses a serious problem when it comes to global perceptions.

This narrative can be observed not only in countries with their own imperial histories but also in the West, where during the Cold War, the Soviet Union was often simply referred to as 'Russia.' When people spoke of the Soviet Union as Russia, they typically imagined it as a mono-ethnic state or at least as a typical nation-state, failing to recognize its true diversity or imperial structure.

When the Soviet Union collapsed and 15 separate republics emerged, many were genuinely surprised to learn that Russia was just one of them. For those who grew up during the Cold War or earlier, this was a complex reality to grasp—and this confusion persists today.

Moreover, Plokhiy highlights that the ongoing full-scale war is not the first instance of Ukraine fighting for its independence from Russia. He recalls the Ukrainian War of Independence from 1917 to 1921, discussing some of the most interesting figures on the Ukrainian side during this period and their controversial visions for Ukraine.

'Ukraine, like several other countries in the region, gained its independence not only from one empire but from several. For instance, Poland in the 19th century gained its independence from the Russian Empire, Austro-Hungary, and Prussia simultaneously. In Ukraine's case, things were a bit simpler,' Plokhiy notes.

According to him, at the end of World War I, Ukraine was divided between two empires: Russia and Austro-Hungary. 'Thus, Ukraine actually experienced two separate independence movements. The first major declaration occurred in early 1918 when independence was proclaimed from the Russian Empire,' he states.

'At the end of 1918, Ukraine proclaimed its independence again, this time after the collapse of Austro-Hungary. At that moment, various ideologies came together to form—or at least proclaim—a Ukrainian independent state. It is important to note that the modern project of the Ukrainian national state (in the early 20th century) was, from the very beginning, largely a leftist movement,' emphasizes Plokhiy.

Most of the parties that emerged in the early 20th century and actively supported the Ukrainian cause—whether for greater autonomy or full independence—were leftist. For example, in the Austrian part of Ukraine, one of the key cultural figures was (author) Ivan Franko, who was associated with the Narodovtsi, or People's Party, which was quite leftist. Other prominent Ukrainian cultural figures, such as (writers) Mykhailo Kotsyubynsky and Lesya Ukrainka, were also involved in social-democratic circles.