Russia’s ultimatum toward the U.S. and NATO alongside its military build-up at the Ukrainian border reignited the talk of Russia wanting to restore the Soviet Union. As proof, multiple journalists and political observers point to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s 2005 remark that the collapse of the USSR was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century, and his essay from last year on the so-called historical unity of the Ukrainian and Russian nations.
Although this reasoning seems substantiated, the reality tells a very different story.
An entirely different beast
The Soviet Union was a Communist state in the making.
Buttressed by Marxist-Leninist ideology, it was a socialist totalitarian country with closed borders, a planned economy, and public property.
Except for its vehement opposition to freedom of speech, modern Russia has little in common with that historical setup. It is a highly capitalistic state with robust oligarchic groups and endemic corruption.
It is not the fittest but the richest who survive in modern Russia, installing golden toilets and embarking on exuberant trips to Monaco, of which Soviet apparatchiks could only dream.
Over the years, the country’s economy has also become intertwined with the West, stretching beyond the export of raw materials. Russia’s banks, such as the state-owned Sberbank, operate abroad, including in EU member states such as Hungary and the Czech Republic.
Meanwhile, its corporations like Yandex have affiliated businesses worldwide, including in the U.S. The U.S.-based data labeling company Toloka is one of them.
Although 75% of respondents of a 2020 survey admit being reminiscent of the Soviet days, only 28% of them are willing to re-embark on that path.
Modern Russians enjoy traveling, blogging, and buying expensive Western brands, not working at a factory with simple perks.
They are also used to living in a quirky laissez-faire economy where you are welcome to build your business as long as you “share” with the “right people” while also benefiting from the Kremlin’s social initiatives.
Is it really possible to restore the Soviet Union in such an environment? And who will foot the bill of creating a union with a common economy and socialist agenda, especially if Russia launches an all-out war in Ukraine?
The oligarchs are not exactly up for the job. Although some western media and observers have created an air of mystique around Putin’s methods of ruling the country, the reality is, arguably, much less cryptic.
He is the arbiter, according to some Russian observers, who knows how to play his cards so that the key figures in the country remain content. Forcing them to fund a socialist project would require brutal force, expropriation of factories, and many other socially unpopular things that could have been possible in the economically stagnant, war-shattered Russian Empire in 1917, not contemporary Russia with its appetite for all things chic.
China, which is likewise an isolationist, NATO-unfriendly, and a highly-capitalistic state benefiting from its cheap labor force (an ironic fact given that China is ruled by a Communist party) has little reason to fund such a project.
Its standoff with the U.S. began largely because of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s animosity toward China.
Although China-U.S. relations have deteriorated since Beijing backed Russia’s recent ultimatum, the two countries continue to be extremely dependent.
In 2020, their trade volumes totaled $559.2 billion, meaning that Beijing and Washington will continue to cooperate, regardless of their differences, striking deals when necessary.
Besides, China has ambitions of its own that require hefty investments, such as the Belt and Road initiative.
So, why is this notion popular?
I assume there are several reasons.
Firstly, because the Kremlin is successfully creating this illusion to appeal to some of its voters who are romanticizing the past while living in a strikingly different contemporary Russia.
It is a very powerful distraction and method of blurring the real goals and ambitions, which Putin seems to enjoy very much, judging by how he communicates with his western counterparts.
Secondly, the word “Soviet” is an easy-to-understand brand abroad.
The older generation still remembers the days when the USSR was an antonym of freedom while the youth consumes it in TV series, video games, and travel blogs, showing Soviet “gems”.
As a result, Western journalists and observers, many of whom lack the desire to analyze the region, its strange and difficult past and self-contradicting mentality, opt for cliches that its readers and viewers immediately connect with.
While restoring the USSR is, arguably, unfeasible neither socially nor economically, it does not mean that Russia does not seek to re-assert its global and especially regional, influence.
Given its size, military power, nuclear potential, and conservative agenda, it will always be a power-hungry state using hybrid tools coupled with whimsical military behaviour.
Russia’s military build-up has already caused immense damage to the Ukrainian economy, which makes it an easier target for economic dependence. Although since 2014, Kyiv has increased its trade with the European Union, Ukraine still does business with Russia and trade turnover is on the rise.
Furthermore, once the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline goes online — regrettably, the chance of it being launched is high, not least because Germany is Ukraine’s bogus ally – it would become an additional tool for hybrid influence, which could help it restore what it considers to be its spheres of influence, and create a safe environment for its current political and economic aims.
That would be a much better option than creating a socialist empire in a capitalist world.
But even if all this is wrong and the Kremlin and Putin personally do want to restore the USSR, the good news is that its fate is virtually predetermined: It will collapse just like its predecessor.
