The return of Stalin, By Chris Adetayo
Old heads will remember the tv series, “Return of the Saint”. Well, it turns out that even in international politics, we do have “returns” and reincarnations. There’s the desire or campaign to return to or reclaim old territories, known as irredentism. One can situate some of the arguments around Russia and it’s neighbours on this.
But the interest here is on the return of a personality. Joseph Stalin, the man who built an empire in the 20th century. Stalin was Vladimir Lenin’s handpicked deputy (well, General Secretary to the Party). As Lenin’s health deteriorated, eventually leading to his death in 1924, Stalin’s powers and influence increasingly grew. Those powers were used to bring neighbouring republics under Russian influence and eventually as part of the USSR. Some, like the Baltic states (Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia), were forcibly conscripted.
From 1924 to his death in 1953, Stalin wielded absolute powers. Opponents and allies alike were ruthlessly taken out. Dissent was crushed. Along the way, he won WW2 after halting Nazi Germany at his own doorstep. By the time death came calling in 1953, the USSR was the world’s biggest country, spread over 11 time zones. More importantly, it was one of the world’s 2 superpowers, complete with nuclear arms. The competition with the US for supremacy started under him and led to an arms race, uneasy peace in Europe, and multiple centres of proxy wars and conflicts around the world.
In Putin, we find parallels to Stalin’s reign as Soviet leader. Like Stalin, Putin was handpicked by Boris Yeltsin as his successor. His selection was not the result of any consensus or discussion. While Yeltsin was no Lenin, it is doubtful if both desired or expected to have authoritarians as their successors.
Also like Stalin, Putin met Russia when it was down. It had recently lost a long drawn Cols War and relied on support from its erstwhile enemies in the West for a lot of sustenance as its economy was in shambles. National prestige was low and pockets of insurgency bedeviled the country. From Gtound Zero, Putin set about rebuilding a demoralized country – militarily and economically. The success on the former speaks to why he’s confident taking on his neighbours.
But it’s in the area of policies that we find even more staggering similarities. Putin’s use of strong arm tactics to shut down internal dissent is straight from the book of Stalin. Assassination of opponents are not uncommon. While Russia is nominally a democracy, there’s no doubt who is in charge. Despite having to step aside for 4 years (2008-2012) to take the role of Prime Minister owing to constitutional term limitations, everyone knew that the then President, Dmitry Medvedev, was a figure head. Putin has now got the constitution amended to allow him reign till at least 2032. By the time he’s done, ceteris paribus, he would have matched if not surpassed Stalin for longevity as Russia’s leader.
Like Stalin, Putin is unbothered about what the world thinks of him, or how he handles the affairs of his country. He does not hide his belief that his country deserves to be better respected and more feared. He has a morbid fear and distrust of the West (some of it for good reasons). He wants to see Russia back to it’s glorious days as a superpower. He sees the West as hypocritical and untrustworthy. He sees his neighbours as expendable, and toys with their security at will. True to Stalin’s playbook, he is keen to ring fence Russia with vassal states. If he cannot bring back the USSR, it won’t be for a lack of trying; and even if he fails, he is going to ensure that his neighbours do not serve as “security risks” to motherland Russia.
It is not often that we can read the intentions of a leader from looking at a predecessor or historical figure. In the case of Putin, we got lucky. Hopefully, this knowledge is put to use to protect the world from needless conflagrations.
