Troy Cullen is a sophomore majoring in history and minoring in Chinese at the College of William & Mary, all while enrolled in W&M’s Hacking for Defense program.
He is pursuing a career in National Security and has worked in conducting open-source intelligence analysis. During the summer he will be working in W&M’s NukeLab, researching emerging technologies in national security.
Troy is also the author of the top-prize winning essay, “The Legacy of the Soviet Union in Putin’s Foreign Policy,” published in the 2021-2022 issue of the Monitor, William & Mary’s journal of international relations.
According to the student-led editorial board, “The Monitor exist to reflect the unique perspective of undergraduates.”
Indeed, in his essay, Cullen didn’t quote experts on Putin’s thinking. Instead, through diligent, careful research, he documents what Putin said and wrote during the past two decades on how he sees the world and Russia’s place in it.
“In a 2005 speech, Russian President Vladimir Putin famously declared the collapse of the Soviet Union the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century,” Cullen writes.
He then continues, “During the sixteen years since then, Putin has constantly referenced Soviet history in his speeches, interviews, and articles. Although some of his remarks are critical, the vast majority range from sympathizing to outright venerating, the past deeds of the Soviet Union, its people, and its leaders.”
Cullen points out that attempting to decipher what Putin genuinely believes about the USSR’s history is pointless. But analyzing the historical narrative he has publicly presented can give key insights into his political strategy for world affairs.
Putin has constructed a narrative of Soviet history that depicts the USSR as a benevolent defender against Nazism, a champion of international order, a protector of Russians against Western aggression and a strong unifying force for greater Russia. By arguing that these characteristics have carried over into modern day Russia, Putin can wield this narrative to garner support for his foreign policy from the Russian people and the world.
According to Cullen, Putin’s central tenet of the narrative is the glorification of the Great Patriotic War, which Putin has made into the founding legitimizing myth of modern Russia. Putin argues that the Western nations planned for Nazi-Germany and the USSR to destroy each other and that they considered aligning with Germany to form an “anti-Soviet front.”
But once the war started, Putin argues, the Soviet Union fought an altruistic war to save all of humanity from Nazis, making extraordinary, selfless sacrifices to defend itself and the rest of the world.
For the controversial aspects of Soviet history, Putin takes a far more nuanced and ambiguous position to minimize the risk of his narrative losing popular appeal.
“This tactic is made apparent by his delicate approach in discussing Joseph Stalin, whom Putin never outright endorses or denounces,” Cullen writes.
In conclusion of his essay, Cullen emphasizes that while Putin seeks to build pride for USSR history, his public views on it are not exclusively positive. By simultaneously glorifying Soviet Russia and taking an ambiguous stance on its controversial aspects, and acknowledging some of its failures while minimizing others, Putin seeks to maximize public support for his foreign policy.
No doubt, the aim of that policy is to restore the Soviet Empire in some form and make Russia a dominant player on global scale.
Cullen quotes Putin: “After the dissolution of bipolarity on the planet, we no longer have stability. The power of the Soviet Union was necessary to balance against the U.S. and its allies and maintain international order during the Cold War period. Now that the USSR is gone, the balance of power is lopsided and destructive.”
Putin, it seems, is determined to change this.
Shatz is a Williamsburg resident. He is the author of “Reports from a Distant Place,” the compilation of his selected columns. The book is available at Bruton Parish Shop and Amazon.com
