Ексклюзив
20
хв

Perfect refugees: how the mass relocation of Ukrainians is different from past migration crises in Europe?

Russian invasion of Ukraine has caused one of the largest humanitarian crises in Europe since World War II. Massive flows of people have become a tough challenge for European countries’ economies and social protection services. But Ukrainian migration is different from the ones that have occurred in the world before. How exactly?

Kateryna Tryfonenko

According to Eurostat’s data, there are 4,3 million Ukrainians under temporary protection in Europe right now

No items found.

On June 20th the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) published an annual report with positive feedback towards the European countries’ efforts in Ukrainian people protection. However, it encouraged them to provide proper protection and support to all seekers of refuge regardless of their ethnicity. Are Ukrainian refugees really more desirable in the EU than emigrants from other countries? Does the attitude towards Ukrainians change? Will they send Ukrainian men of conscription age home, and why, despite the scale of migration, they don’t consider the Ukrainian migrants a problem in the EU? Sestry asked a historian, lawyer and migration specialist about it

The EU never called it a crisis

From the perspective of EU residents, the situation that arose after the start of the full-scale war had an entirely different dimension compared to the migration crisis of 2015, as it did not concern African or Middle Eastern countries, but rather close neighbours, citizens of a country that had the status of an EU-associated country and openly declared its intentions to integrate into the European Union, explains Polish historian and political scientist Łukasz Adamski. Two main factors, from his words, were strong sympathy from Europeans, and Poles in particular, and the desire to help:

- Something similar might have happened in the 1990s after the wars in the Balkans.

The first factor - is that this crisis came from Europe to Europe, the cultural similarity has become very important. The second factor - the lack of purely geographical barriers

Many Ukrainians went to Poland, Slovakia, Hungary - these countries have shared borders with Ukraine. When discussing past migration crises, there has always been a physical barrier - the Mediterranean Sea. And Turkey - a kind of buffer zone, a NATO country that separated Europe from lands where war was waging and where refugees were coming from.

When Ukrainians arrived in EU countries in large numbers at the beginning of the war, none of them called it a crisis. Similarly, such a definition has never been heard in the broader circles of the European Union, notes Başak Yavçan, head of research at the Migration Policy Group in Brussels.

- There can be many reasons for this. Political - EU’s active engagement in the conflict due to the Russian threat, social - acceptance of Ukrainian refugees’ cultural similarity, and also organisational - immediate growth of capacities and solidarity networks for better settlement of the refugees after arrival. And we see that crisis discourse only really appears when there is a management crisis.

Dozens of volunteers meeting Ukrainian refugees at the railway station in Wrocław, 2022

Additionally, the reaction of countries that accepted Ukrainians showed what the EU is capable of when it is willing to do something. This has also affected the advancement of integration policies of the recipient countries, especially in Central and Eastern Europe. Even though these countries have been accepting refugees very reluctantly in the past, they turned out to be quite hospitable towards refugees from Ukraine. This deserves praise but obviously leaves a lot to be desired. If such policies only apply to certain groups of people, they conflict with the equality principles and create double standards towards other groups.

Fascination with Ukrainians that is slowly fading

Immediately after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the European Commission provided Ukrainians with temporary protection - a unique legal mechanism that gives Ukrainians the rights to residence and employment, social services and freedom of travel within the EU. The Europeans have opened this mechanism for the first time for Ukrainians, and it was a very successful idea, says an immigration lawyer, officer of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Oleksii Skorbach:

- If we are talking about the refugee status or additional protection that exists in Europe, then those are individual protection options. Meaning the person arrives individually, and their documents, story and country are inspected. And the individual has to undergo a slow and difficult process of explaining personally to foreign officials that they are being persecuted or are in danger at home.

All this is not needed for temporary protection. The sole objective situation in the country the person has fled from already proves the danger. And what is important, temporary protection is provided en masse, meaning one does not have to prove individual endangerment. In this way, countless formalities are put aside, as in such global catastrophes or occupation, the person is often not able to collect the necessary amount of documents or even take their belongings with them. This is why this mechanism is a huge advantage and is genuinely a sign of democracy since it is designed for large numbers of people forced to flee from objective threats.

Although temporary protection has its technicalities - primarily it does not provide subsequent legalisation in the residence country.

At the same time, the EU is interested in the most effective integration of Ukrainians possible. Here too there is a difference between the perception of Ukrainian citizens and emigrants from other countries, says Başak Yavçan, head of the Migration Policy Group in Brussels, referring to research data collected by their centre:

- Ukrainians are considered to be more integrated, their integration policies are more supported - and generally they are more supported. And their relationships with the community that accepted them are assessed as better compared to refugees from non-EU countries.

Although it is not only about Ukrainians themselves in this case, Başak Yavçan notes and reveals an interesting conclusion of her research:

The more effective the local integration policies are, the more favourable attitude towards refugees the people in the communities have

Therefor, the effective reaction mechanisms for refugees’ problems form an overall better attitude towards them.

At the beginning of the full-scale war, there was a massive wave of solidarity with Ukraine, it could even be labelled as Ukrainophilia, believes the Polish historian and politologist Łukasz Adamski. Everyone sympathised, everyone wanted to help. Now the understanding remains that people had to leave Ukraine due to Putin’s criminal war, and we need to help, but the longer the war continues, and the longer the Ukrainians stay abroad, the more mundane problems there are:

- In Poland, for example, if you ask average Poles (and it is stated in various social surveys) they often say that they lack gratitude from Ukrainians and that they do not like the attitude of «You must do something for us, you must give us something». It is hard for me to judge how justified these claims are, but this general opinion comes from sociology.

The protection does not have retroactive effect

At the same time, Lukasz Adamski is convinced that despite all the similar sociological data and occasional public discontent, both the EU in general and Poland in particular have the resources and willingness to help Ukrainians if the security or energy situation worsens and the EU receives a new wave of migrants from Ukraine:

- I try not to be overly optimistic, but it seems to me that there is a readiness to help here. Firstly, we all understand that it will not be a massive wave; even if it happens, it will be at the level of one, two, or three million Ukrainians, and both the EU and Poland can manage it. There is also a belief that the Ukrainian state will endure even under difficult conditions and that the Ukrainian population will be able to survive the winter. Moreover:

I would say that Ukrainians - are perfect migrants, and they do not create threats

In this context, in Łukasz Adamski’s opinion, it is rather Ukraine that is facing a threat, as a new wave of migration can undermine the inner Ukrainian endurance and add to the number of problems within - since someone has to work for the army to be able to fight.

Additionally, Ukraine has been urging EU countries for several months to consider ways to facilitate the return of Ukrainian men to their native land. Consultations regarding those who left illegally are ongoing, as stated by Ukraine's Minister of Internal Affairs, Ihor Klymenko, in an interview with Radio Liberty at the end of June.

Ukraine can make any appeals and proposals to the European Union, explaining that we lack people, however, there is international law that prohibits returning people to countries where events threatening their safety are taking place, emphasises Oleksii Skorbach, an immigration lawyer and officer of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

- Men of conscription age have a constitutional duty to defend their country, but this duty pertains to Ukraine. When it comes to another country, the question arises: why should that country decide for them how they should fulfil their constitutional duty to Ukraine?

There is a rule that you may choose not to provide protection from the outset, but if you have already granted it, it should not have retroactive effect. The cancellation of such protection could turn out to be a much bigger problem

Because all these people received temporary protection precisely because there is a danger in our country. The question is how to address this issue if the danger has not disappeared?

Photos from Shutterstock

No items found.

Ukrainian journalist. She worked as the Chief Editor of the Ukrainian editorial office of RFI and in the international editorial team of TSN (1+1 TV channel). She was an international correspondent in Brussels and collaborated with various Ukrainian TV channels. She also worked in the news service of Ukrainian Radio. Currently, she is involved in information and analytical projects for Ukrainian YouTube.

Support Sestry

Even a small contribution to real journalism helps strengthen democracy. Join us, and together we will tell the world the inspiring stories of people fighting for freedom!

Donate
Bakhmut newspaper «Vpered»

I had been waiting for weeks to speak with «Vpered’s» chief editor, Svitlana Ovcharenko. Finally, late on a Saturday evening, she called me while I was walking along the waterfront of a small Polish town. My thoughts were in the destroyed Bakhmut, among the dispersed community of Bakhmutians scattered by the war.

Eighty-four-year-old Vasyl from Bakhmut now lives in a retirement home in the Czech Republic. In the newspaper «Vpered», he shared, «They gave me a new mattress! I did not want to lie on the old one, and now I do not want to get up from the new one - it is so comfortable». Comfortable furniture, like everything else of value to the people of Bakhmut, has disappeared in the city's ruins. All that remains are the people, the keys to their destroyed homes, and... the city’s print newspaper.

Svitlana Ovcharenko (in the middle) with colleagues during the artistic process of creating a newspaper for Bakhmutians

Readers in the underground

Before the war, the editorial office of the Bakhmut newspaper «Vpered» was located on Peace Street. Chestnut trees grew in the yard, blossoming with soft pink flowers in the spring and dropping shiny brown nuts generously in the fall. Once, they even cracked the windshield of the editorial car.

The eight windows of the office witnessed life: late-night newspaper layouts, meetings with readers, emotions, and debates. Now, only charred trunks and ashes remain. «Those windows are gone, and there is no life behind them. Where there once was a porch where we loved to drink coffee, now there is a black void», says Svitlana Ovcharenko.

The newspaper’s release was only suspended twice: in 1941 when Nazi Germany attacked and on February 24th 2022 - because of the Russian invasion

«Bakhmut was bombed on the first day of the invasion», - Svitlana recalls. - «We had prepared the newspaper on February 23rd, but on the 24th, we could not retrieve it from the printing house in Kramatorsk because the road was under constant fire».

Pro-Russian militants had attempted to seize Bakhmut back in April 2014, but on July 6th of that year, the city returned to Ukrainian control. The war raged 30 kilometres away for eight years, but no one imagined it would reach the city itself.

They would build promenades, lay tiled pavements, develop parks - instead of building defence fortifications

In March, the editor of «Vpered», Svitlana Ovcharenko, left for Odesa with her mother, hoping to wait out the «escalation». She dressed in a tracksuit, packed essential items in a backpack, and slipped two sets of keys - one to the newspaper office and one to her apartment - into her pocket.

The first issue of the newspaper was printed in the Autumn of 2022, in the midst of the war.

During the first months of the war, Svitlana lived glued to the news, keeping track of what was happening across the country. Bakhmut had become one of the most dangerous places on Earth, yet people stayed.

The Russians cut off electricity, gas, and mobile connections, while their propagandists misled the population via radio signals, claiming that everyone had abandoned them, and even local authorities had fled.

«Kyiv has fallen», - blared from the radios

In the first months of the full-scale war, nearly 50 thousand people left the city of 73 thousand. Yet some returned, saying, «There is no one waiting for us there, so there is no point in leaving».

The Russians launched an active offensive in August, and fierce fighting broke out among the city's buildings, the most intense battles since World War II.

Efforts to persuade the remaining residents to leave were unsuccessful. By October, local authorities started bringing in basic heating stoves, firewood, and coal. Every trip outside the basements could be a resident’s last, but nearly 20 thousand people remained in the city.

This jolted Svitlana Ovcharenko out of her stupor. She decided to revive the newspaper to provide accurate information to those who were afraid to leave. There were countless challenges: accounting records, passwords, and access codes had been left behind in Bakhmut. However, thanks to the efforts of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine and a Japanese foundation, the first issue was printed on November 4th 2022, right in the midst of the war.

The first printed edition was brought to Bakhmut by Italian journalists.

Foreign journalists helped bring the newspaper to Bakhmut

The residents took the paper with surprise and joy, believing it was a sign that the end of the war was near. «It was a ray of hope in our hell», they later wrote on social media.

«Vpered» published an interview with the mayor, Oleksiy Reva, who urged civilians to evacuate immediately. «Kyiv has not fallen, and Bakhmut residents will be welcomed in any Ukrainian city», the newspaper wrote. And people began to leave...

Before the war, much had been said about the death of print newspapers in Ukraine. But it turned out that the local newspaper, which people had trusted for years, held great influence. It was no coincidence that Russian occupiers repeatedly forged «Vpered» to spread their propaganda among the locals.

In February 2023, Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk reported that fewer than four thousand residents remained in Bakhmut.

One of the last issues of the newspaper was brought to Bakhmut by volunteer Mykhailo Puryshev’s team in May 2023.

In a room lined with sandbags, stacks of newspapers lay in the middle. People with weary faces gathered around, reading with hope, longing to hear they could stay in their homes. But no - the newspaper reported that the city was close to falling under Russian control. On May 20th 2023, Russia declared the complete capture of Bakhmut.

«Should we keep publishing a newspaper for a city that no longer exists?»

In response, Ukrainian soldiers released drone footage showing collapsed roofs, destroyed apartment blocks, burned-out vehicles… a dead, deserted city. Russian forces had taken control of Bakhmut's territory, but the city itself was entirely destroyed. Experts estimate it will take at least ten years to clear the landmines, and another decade to remove the rubble.

The remains of Svitlana’s apartment in Bakhmut

Svitlana Ovcharenko received a call from Serhiy Tomilenko, the head of the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU). He asked whether it made sense to continue publishing the city’s newspaper, given that Bakhmut no longer existed. Ovcharenko responded: «Bakhmut lives in each of us. As long as we breathe, the city remains alive. Because Bakhmut is more than just bricks and concrete. It is us - the people».

The NUJU involved Ovcharenko in the IRMI (International Institute of Regional Press and Information) project, which was implemented in partnership with Fondation Hirondelle and financially supported by Swiss Solidarity.

The newspaper started being delivered across Ukraine to refugee centres where most Bakhmutians now live. There are already 12 such centres. Some former residents of Bakhmut even pay to have the newspaper delivered via Nova Poshta, spending 55 hryvnias (about 5 zlotys) to receive each issue. «Even the smell of the printing ink on Vpered reminds me of home», admits 62-year-old Nadia, who now lives in Poltava and goes to the post office every two weeks to collect the newspaper.

«Vpered» newspaper arrived at one of the refugee support centres

«I can not part with the keys to my bombed-out apartment»

Svitlana Ovcharenko continues to live in Odesa with her elderly mother in a rented apartment. «Where my apartment in Bakhmut once stood, there is now a massive black hole. My mother's home is nothing but ruins. I was asked to donate my keys to the «Time Capsule» installation about Bakhmut, but I can not bring myself to part with them. As long as I have them, there is still hope that one day I will unlock the door to my home».

«Time Capsule»: keys to apartments that no longer exist

In one of the newspaper's photo illustrations, keys of various sizes and shapes are laid out on an old fabric. These fragile symbols of lost homes each carry the pain and memories of lives destroyed.

In a newspaper story, 71-year-old Lyudmyla shares her experience: «My husband and I settled on the left bank of the Dnipro. The room is small and without repairs - old wallpaper and outdated plumbing. The windows do not work, and the ventilation is poor. It is painful to compare it to our previous home. So much time has passed, yet we are still adjusting to new streets and these everyday inconveniences».

The topic of lost homes resonates deeply with Svitlana Ovcharenko. I had seen her photos and heard her voice - she struck me as a much younger woman. As if reading my thoughts, Svitlana clarified, «I am already retired. I understand my readers. Like them, I still can not sleep soundly in an unfamiliar bed».

Despite her personal struggles, she continues to publish the newspaper. For a long time, she prepared each issue alone. A colleague, who had found refuge in Sumy Oblast, helped format the text for the eight-page paper.

Sometimes, they would start work at 2 AM and continue until morning—this was the only time they both had access to electricity due to the destruction of the energy system. «I set my alarm for 2 AM, wake up, go to the kitchen, brew coffee, and turn on my laptop. I am in Odesa, my colleague is in Sumy».

Now, four people work with Svitlana on the newspaper. They also manage the website, fill social media with updates and shoot videos.

German politician and film director Rebecca Harms pointed out the «Vpered» newspaper as an example of a preserved printed mass media on a meeting with Ukrainian journalists

«Do not repeat Bakhmut’s mistakes»

One of the latest issues of the newspaper features a profile of soldier Volodymyr Andriutsa, call sign «Talent». He was born and lived his entire life in Donetsk Oblast. He died defending Bakhmut. His father, Mykola Andriutsa, recalls with sorrow how long it took his son to accept that Russia had become the enemy.

- There was even a time after 2014 when Volodymyr travelled to Crimea and then to Russia, - recalls Mykola. - Even on a day-to-day level, he saw how much they hated us, Ukrainians. The full-scale war turned him into a true patriot and defender.

Recently, the newspaper editor received a message from an acquaintance asking to anonymously share her husband’s story. He had gone through so much trauma that his life had become a nightmare - he wandered around a foreign city, collecting trash and food scraps, and bringing them back to their rented apartment. His actions seemed senseless, but perhaps he was seeking some personal meaning and stability in the chaos of war.

The people of Bakhmut are now scattered across the world. They are learning to live again, but they still remember their city and dream of returning. «Bakhmut lives as long as we remember it», says Svitlana. And as long as the «Vpered» newspaper keeps them connected, that memory remains alive.

Each new issue reminds the Bakhmutians of their home left in ruins

Next to me, a peaceful Polish town drifts off to sleep. In the quiet evening, I ask the editor of the Bakhmut newspaper what she would say to Polish and Ukrainian readers.

- Do not repeat Bakhmut’s mistakes. Do not forget about the war. Protect your lives. Otherwise, nothing will be left but ruins and memories…

Photos from the «Vpered» newspaper’s archives

20
хв

A Destroyed City’s Newspaper: how Bakhmut’s Paper publishment Saves People from Sorrow and Propaganda

Galina Halimonik
Anne Applebaum, portrait, burgundy

Tim Mak:  So are you calling it “Autocracy Inc.” or “Autocracy Incorporated”? 

Applebaum: I mean, Autocracy Inc. sounds cooler. The only problem with it is that, you know, when you hear it, it sounds like it could be I-N-K. You know, Autocracy Ink!

I like that. I think the double meaning actually makes your book like three levels cooler.

The reason why the book has that title is that I spent a long time searching for a metaphor.

The relationship between modern autocracies: they are not an alliance, they are not a bloc. I don't even think they're an axis because axis implies some kind of coordinated activity. What they are more like is a huge international conglomerate within which there are separate companies that cooperate when it suits them, but otherwise do their own thing.

And I think that's the best way to describe a group of countries who have nothing in common ideologically. You have communist China, nationalist Russia, theocratic Iran, Bolivarian Socialist Venezuela… You have these actually quite different styles of leadership and different ways of claiming legitimacy, but they do have a few things in common. One of them is the way in which they use the international financial system. Unlike the most famous dictators of the twentieth century, most of the leaders of these countries are very interested in money, and in hiding money, and in enriching people around them.

They dislike the democratic world. They dislike the language that we use. They don't want to hear any more about human rights or rights at all.

You know, the right to freedom of speech or the right to a free press. They also don't want to hear about transparency. They prefer to conduct their affairs behind a veil of secrecy. They don't want institutions that expose them, whether those are domestic or international.

And all of them see the language of transparency and rights as their most important enemy, whether mostly because that's the language that their domestic opponents use, whether it's the Navalny movement in Russia, or whether it's the Hong Kong democrats in China, or whether it's the complex Venezuelan opposition — they all use that kind of language, because they all understand that those are the things they are deprived of. 

Autocracy Inc. is an attempt to encapsulate that group of countries.

“Autocracy Inc.”. Photo: advertisement materials

And you write a lot about how they've created this network to steal, to launder funds, to oppress people, to surveil, to spread propaganda and disinformation. I read with great interest your argument that this is not Cold War 2.0. Because you argue that ideals are too disparate, they don't have a unified ideology. 

But I also found that as I was reading your book, I sensed a sort of underlying ideology that does kind of bring all these countries together: China, Russia, Iran, North Korea. It’s more of a worldview. It’s less of a prescriptive ideology.

But it is this worldview of nihilism and cynicism and hopelessness – a sort of future where the truth is impossible to know, so the public shouldn't even bother trying to find out. Isn’t that what unifies this bloc of anti-Western countries? 

I think you're right that those feelings are what they want to induce in their populations and maybe our populations too. They want people to feel that politics is a realm of confusion and something they can't understand.

They want people to feel cynical and apathetic. They want people to stay out of politics. Authoritarian narratives and authoritarian propaganda vary between a kind of advocacy for the supposed stability and safety of autocracy, as opposed to the chaos and degeneracy of democracy. It sort of varies between that and the Russian version, which is streams of lies so that people feel confused and disoriented and they don't know anymore what's true and what's not.

So you're right that aligns them. You could also say that another thing that aligns them is a kind of anti-enlightenment view of the world, and they don't want rational thinking or science. They want to be free of any checks and balances. 

They want to be free of any obligation to report or respond to the truth. They want to mold and shape the world, according to their somewhat different personal visions. 

That's the way they approach the world. So there are things that unify them. There are also things that make them different.

My goal is to not to claim that they're all the same. But they do have some similar goals, and they share certain interests.
Anne Applebaum. Photo: Impact 24 press materials

Using that, though, can we conceptualise what's happening now in the world as the start of a new Cold War, or do you still think that's the wrong way to look at the problem?

I think that's the wrong way to look at the problem. It's true that it's a war of ideas.  But to say the Cold War implies  a geographical separation, a Berlin Wall and it also implies unity on both sides, which we don't have on either side, actually.

And there is also a lot of the world that doesn't really belong in either camp or switches back and forth. There are a lot of complicated countries like India or Turkey or the Gulf states, which play different roles. Sometimes they align with one side, sometimes they align with another. 

And I also want to stress that something I just said, and I'll emphasise it again, that people who align with the autocratic worldview are found inside democracies, and they aren't a fringe. 

In the United States, they dominate the Republican Party, which is one of our two great political parties. In other countries, they play an important role in political coalitions.

The countries you mentioned as being part of Autocracy Inc.: China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and you also add countries like Mali and Zimbabwe as other examples of countries that might fall under this banner. They don't really strike me as innovative, growth places. They don't really strike me as where the future lies. Just to play devil's advocate here, why should we be concerned about them?

First of all, I do think China is a place that's innovative and is very interested in the future of AI and is putting a lot of money into it. So that's a big parenthesis. 

You're certainly right that Mali isn't really a model for anybody.

I don't even think Russia is a model of a society that people want to live in or admire. But we do need to care about them because they care about us.

Although they're not that attractive, they are capable of doing a lot of damage. So their vision is negative. They're very focused on us. They want to undermine us.

Maybe people in London or Paris or Madrid don't wake up in the morning and feel threatened by Russia, China, and North Korea. But there are people in North Korea who wake up every morning and think about us. They're interested in affecting our politics. They're interested in challenging the weaker democratic states.

The Iranian proxies in the Middle East are interested in challenging and overturning the order in the Middle East. They have both military and propaganda and other sources of disruption that they are willing to use against us. We might not want to care about them or think about them, but I didn't think that we have a choice anymore and the evidence is all around us. 

And let me just say a word about Ukraine. Why did Russia invade Ukraine? Part of the reason is that Putin, he's a megalomaniac and he has an idea of himself as the leader of a restored Russian empire, and he's used that language in the past.

People holding a massive flag consisting of Ukrainian, Crimean and Tatar flags combined on the Independence Square on March 23rd 2014. Photo: Sergei Supinsky/AFP/East News

But he also did it because Ukraine felt to him like a challenge, an ideological challenge. Ukraine was another large Slavic country that had been very corrupt. It was heading very much in the direction that Russia went, becoming very much like that, and was very dominated in many ways in the business sphere, in particular by Russia. 

And yet the Ukrainians organised and through civic activism, they overthrew that regime, they changed it, and they created a democracy. Sometimes it seems like a pretty rocky democracy, but it's a democracy, nevertheless.

And they, even during the war in Ukraine, have a sense of freedom of speech and ease of conversation that you don't have in Russia and haven't had in Russia for many years

So the model that Ukraine presents, of a country that's aiming to be integrated into Europe that would like to be part of the democratic world, is very threatening to Putin, because the scenario that he has been most afraid of, unlikely though maybe it now seems, is exactly the 2014 Maidan scenario. He's afraid of civic activism organizing to somehow overthrow or threaten him.

The scenes of the people swarming Yanukovych's golden palace at the end of the Maidan revolution must have frightened him because that's what he's afraid of. And so crushing Ukraine is also about crushing that idea and showing Russians that that's not going to work and we're not going to let that kind of country survive.

And the other purpose of the war was to say to America and Europe and the rest of the democratic world: «we don't care about your stupid rules. And we're not bothered by this norm that you say existed since 1945, that we don't change borders in Europe by force. We're not interested in that. And we're going to show you that it doesn't matter. And we're also going to show you that all your language about never again, there'll never be concentration camps, there'll never be torture and murder in Europe – we're going to show you that we don't care about that either.

We're going to set up concentration camps in occupied Ukraine. We're going to kidnap children, take them away from their parents or the institutions they live in. We're going to make them into Russians. And we're going to continue with this project of destroying Ukraine as a nation and as a state».

And that's a deliberate challenge to the way that the Western world thinks

I keep using the word Western. It’s an old habit, but Western is the wrong word – [I should be saying,] the democratic world.

Ukraine is obviously subject to this physical violence that you've outlined. It's also constantly subject to the propagandistic efforts of Russia through things from troll farms, through narratives that they're trying to spread, and dissent within the society. I was really taken by one anecdote you put in the book - [which has] Bill Clinton giving a speech in 2000 and saying, as a joke, that China has been trying to crack down on the internet and everyone in the room laughs. 

…And it was, it was at Johns Hopkins University. You know, it was a room full of people who do political science and foreign policy…

…Smart, smart people who think a lot about the future, and Bill Clinton said that trying to crack down on the Internet was like trying to nail jello to the wall. 

And so thinking about the developments in politics around the world over the last decade, it really does seem that at the core of this book is an idea: that this original promise of the Internet, a globalised world that would be connected and freed from government surveillance and control, that that original promise is kind of dead. 

I know the jury's still out, but I want to get a sense from you: was the development of the Internet over the last decade fundamentally a net positive benefit for human freedom?

The Internet is a reflection of human nature in a certain way. It was an expansion of already existing trends. So it's hard for me to say, to talk about the Internet as a whole, being good or bad. 

I mean, it's just a reflection of what we are like. I think we can say pretty clearly now about social media, which is a particular piece of the Internet, has created a kind of chaos.

It fundamentally changed the way that people understand the world, particularly the political world and political information.

So the way that people now get information is through short bursts of messages on their phone.

And it's also become just much, much easier to create instant propaganda campaigns. The Soviet Union actually used to run what we now would call active measures or fake news campaigns. There's a famous one that grew up around the AIDS virus. They had started a conspiracy theory that the AIDS virus had been an invention of the CIA and they planted it.

The idea was to make a kind of echo chamber where people would hear it from different places and people would believe in it. And I think it had some impact. I think some people around the world believed it.

You can now do a campaign like that in an hour.

In this group photo, released by the Russian state agency «Sputnik», Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping are attending a concert on the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Russia and China in Beijing on May 16 2024. Photo: Alexander Ryumin/AFP/East News

You mentioned how the Internet was a reflection of human nature. And there is an assumption that democracy and freedom are natural human callings and that we're kind of drawn to it by the nature of what humanity is.

But you can also see if you look around the world that a lot of people are willing to give up their own freedom for a sense of security, or to give up some freedom as long as the government imposes their view of the world on other people they don't happen to like.

And I wonder if you've grappled with or changed your view on the nature of human beings in the last decade or so.

So my previous book, which is called Twilight of Democracy, was much more about this. It was about the attraction of authoritarian ideas and specifically why they're attractive to people who live in democratic countries.

The more you stare at history books and the deeper you look at the origins of our modern democracies, the easier it is to see that most of humanity through most of history has lived in what we would now describe as autocracy, monarchies, dictatorships. 

Democracies are the exception. There are very few of them. Most of them fail. I think almost all of them have failed at one point or another. They require an enormous amount of effort to keep going and to maintain. Even the ancient scholars, even Plato and Aristotle, wrote about how democracies can decline. So it's not as if this is even a modern phenomenon.

Forms of democracy that were known in the ancient world were also considered to be always at risk of being destroyed by the appeal of a strong man or by disintegration. So I don't think democracy is at all normal.

I think it's probably abnormal. And the attraction that people feel for, you know, for dictators doesn't surprise me at all. 

Let’s place Autocracy Inc. in the context of the ongoing situation in the United States right now. We're speaking right after Donald Trump has survived a shooting attempt and a convention where he seems to have unified the Republican party.

You write near the end of the book about Trump that «if he ever succeeds at directing federal courts and law enforcement at his enemies... then the blending of the autocratic and democratic worlds will be complete».

It doesn't seem like you're super optimistic about what might happen next.

What worries me honestly about Donald Trump is the affinity that he has shown for the dictators that I'm writing about. It's not like it's a secret or you have to look at classified documents.

He talks openly about it, his admiration for Xi Jinping, his admiration for Putin, his admiration even for the North Korean dictator who's destroyed his country.

It's a poor, sad, repressed country in contrast to vibrant, successful South Korea. Yet, Trump admires him because he's brutal and because he stays in power for a long time, I guess. 

The second piece of it is that I worry about Trump’s transactional instincts, particularly in a second term, if he were to win. Trump is not interested in an alliance of democracies or a community of values or America playing a role in supporting the stability and viability of democracy around the world.

He's mostly interested in himself. He's interested in his own money. He's interested in his own perceptions of him. He's interested in his own political stability and right now, he's interested in staying out of jail.

Kim Jong Un (in the middle on the right) and Donald Trump (in the middle on the left) walking to a meeting on the southern side of Korean DMZ on June 30th 2019. Photo: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/East News

I would be afraid of that in a second term, when he feels much less constrained, that his interests in his own finances and his children's finances would be one of the prime drivers of his foreign policy. In that sense, he would already be like one of the dictators that I've written about.

He could also, you know, he might also be looking to do deals that benefit business people around him.

And I don't know what joining Autocracy Inc would look like. It's not that there would be some pact between America and Russia or America and China, or maybe there would be, but it’s not necessary at all. It's simply that we would begin to behave like those dictatorships.

And our leaders would begin to behave like the leaders of those dictatorships and we're not that far away from it. So it's not difficult to imagine at all.

Just to wrap up this conversation, you dedicated this book to «the optimists», and I have to admit that I'm having a hard time identifying in that camp right now. And so I'm trying to understand, you know, how do we fix the trajectory of the world that you've identified here? Is it fixable? How do we turn away from, you know, a sort of nothing matters worldview towards something more hopeful and more democratic?

I think the short answer involves a lot of people. Everyone. You, me, everyone reading to think about how they can be engaged in whatever country they live in. 

How do you engage in your democracy? How do you play some kind of role? How do you support and insist on supporting the rights that we're all guaranteed in our constitutions? How do you convince others of why that's important?

It's very important to vote. It's very important to participate in the electoral process in other ways. And that's the best advice I can give ordinary people.

I have a whole laundry list in the book of things that governments could do, and they start with the elimination of the institutions that enable kleptocracy in our own societies. That seems to be the easiest and first thing that we can do. 

But I think ordinary people can also, through their own participation, make a difference.

The original interview titled «Are We in Cold War 2.0?» appeared on the Counteroffensive.news website.

The book will be released in Polish on September 12 by the 'Agora' publishing house.

20
хв

Anne Applebaum: I don't think democracy is at all normal

Tim Mak

You may be interested in ...

Ексклюзив
20
хв

Evgeniy Maloletka: «We came to Mariupol on purpose, to get surrounded»

Ексклюзив
20
хв

The map of Borsch, bitterness and tenderness

Ексклюзив
20
хв

«We are in the biggest drone war in all history of humankind», - a philanthropist Lyuba Shipovich

Contact the editors

We are here to listen and collaborate with our community. Contact our editors if you have any questions, suggestions, or interesting ideas for articles.

Write to us
Article in progress