- During World War II, the Germans created foreign legion groups due to manpower shortages
- These groups were put under the command of Henry Himmler and became known as SS Waffen units
- Serhii Plokhi, a historian at Harvard University, discussed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the role of the United States in it
- The United States did not want the Soviet Union to collapse and tried to keep it together until late 1991
- Gorbachev's reforms could have led to a different outcome, but the collapse of the Soviet Union was inevitable due to global processes and the disintegration of empires in the 20th century.

- The collapse of the Soviet Union was inevitable and marked the end of traditional European empires
- Ukraine played a critical role in the Soviet Union's dissolution, leading to its collapse in 1991
- Vladimir Putin views the collapse as a tragedy due to the loss of great power status and unity of the Russian people
- The origins of Slavic nations can be traced back to the marshes in Ukraine, Belarus, and Poland in the 8th and 9th centuries
- The book "The Origins of the Slavic Nations" explores the nation-building projects of Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian elites and their imagined world

- The focus of the video is on the historical development of the East Slavic nations and states, particularly Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian.
- The existence of the state of Kievan Rus' in the medieval period created a common historical mythology and legal code that still influences the region today.
- Kiev was a key trading outpost for the Vikings, leading to the creation of the Kievan dynasty and the emergence of Moscow as the center of the Russian Empire.
- The Slavic people are distinct in terms of language, but share a common linguistic history.

- The piece discusses how language and political tradition create differences between nations, using the example of Slavic nations.
- It explores the impact of a historical text, "The History of the Rus," on the Ukrainian national identity and its role in challenging the Russian Empire's integration model.
- The text claimed the Cossacks as a separate nation, challenging the empire's loyalty based on integration of elites.
- This sparked nationalist movements and led to the development of Ukrainian national identity.
- The piece also touches on the presence of national communism and radical nationalism in Ukraine, including the controversial figure of Stepan Bandera.

- Bandera becomes leader of Ukrainian nationalists and organizes assassinations of Polish officials
- He becomes a hero among Ukrainian youth during his trial
- Bandera collaborates with Nazi Germany in hopes of gaining Ukrainian independence
- He is arrested and sent to a concentration camp during WWII
- Bandera is seen as a hero by some in Ukraine for fighting against Soviet occupation
- There is debate over whether he was a nationalist or a fascist
- His influence and ideology are complex and influenced by various factors

- The speaker discusses the presence of far-right and neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine, but notes that they are marginal and less influential than in other countries.
- The influence of the far-right in Ukraine is lower than in neighboring countries and in Europe in general.
- The speaker questions why Ukraine, despite being at war, does not have a significant far-right presence in its government.
- The concept of denazification is discussed, with the speaker suggesting that it is a powerful propaganda tool for Russia.
- The impact of war on shaping nationalist views and the manipulation of public opinion in Russia are also mentioned.
- The speaker addresses the Yaroslav Hanka incident, where a World War II veteran on the Ukrainian side was found to have been part of the SS, and its impact on the narrative in the region.

- During World War II, the Germans created foreign legion groups when they ran out of manpower
- Non-Aryan soldiers were put under the command of SS and became known as SS Waffen units
- A division Galician was created in Ukraine, and some Ukrainian youth joined
- The division was defeated by the Red Army and surrendered to the British
- The Canadian Parliament's applause for a Ukrainian veteran of World War II caused controversy
- The narrative of a neo-Nazi problem in Ukraine is powerful in Russia
- The story of KGB spy Bogdan Stashinsky reveals the resistance against the Red Army in Ukraine after the war

- During World War II, the Germans created foreign legion groups due to manpower shortages, known as SS Waffen units
- Serhii Plokhi, a historian at Harvard University, discussed the collapse of the Soviet Union and the role of the United States in it
- The collapse of the Soviet Union was inevitable and marked the end of traditional European empires
- Ukraine played a critical role in the Soviet Union's dissolution, leading to its collapse in 1991
- The origins of Slavic nations can be traced back to the marshes in Ukraine, Belarus, and Poland in the 8th and 9th centuries
- The book "The Origins of the Slavic Nations" explores the nation-building projects of Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian elites and their imagined world
- The historical development of the East Slavic nations and states, particularly Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian, is discussed
- The impact of war on shaping nationalist views and the manipulation of public opinion in Russia are mentioned
- The story of KGB spy Bogdan Stashinsky reveals the resistance against the Red Army in Ukraine after the war
- The narrative of a neo-Nazi problem in Ukraine is powerful in Russia, but the influence of far-right groups in Ukraine is lower than in neighboring countries and in Europe in general
- The Canadian Parliament's applause for a Ukrainian veteran of World War II caused controversy
- The existence of the state of Kievan Rus' in the medieval period created a common historical mythology and legal code that still influences the region today
- The Slavic people are distinct in terms of language, but share a common linguistic history
- The piece discusses how language and political tradition create differences between nations, using the example of Slavic nations
- The speaker questions why Ukraine, despite being at war, does not have a significant far-right presence in its government
- The concept of denazification is discussed, with the speaker suggesting that it is a powerful propaganda tool for Russia
- The speaker addresses the Yaroslav Hanka incident, where a World War II veteran on the Ukrainian side was found to have been part of the SS, and its impact on the narrative in the region
- The division Galician was created in Ukraine during World War II, and some Ukrainian youth joined, but it was defeated by the Red Army and surrendered to the British
- The story of KGB spy Bogdan Stashinsky reveals the resistance against the Red Army in Ukraine after the war
"""

- Stashinsky was coerced by the secret police to become an assassin
- He betrayed his family and became an assassin, killing several people
- He later escaped to the West and confessed to the American intelligence
- He disappeared and was later found in South Africa
- The KGB played a significant role in the Soviet Union, especially under Andropov
- The KGB was a massive institution with extensive surveillance capabilities

- The Stasi archives show massive surveillance at home, indicating the extent of penetration in society
- Vladimir Putin's 16 years as a KGB foreign intelligence officer influenced his leadership style
- The KGB was a powerful organization with unique insight and resentment towards the party leadership
- The Russo-Ukrainian war was influenced by the Orange Revolution in 2004 and the Revolution of Dignity in 2013
- The war began in February 2014 with the Russian takeover of Crimea, stemming from Ukraine's potential association with the European Union

- The protests in Ukraine in 2013 were sparked by the signing of an Association Agreement with the European Union, which would have put Ukraine outside of Russia's sphere of influence
- The response from Russia included attempts to topple the government in Kiev, take over Crimea, and influence Ukraine to prevent it from aligning with the West
- The region of Donbass has a mixed ethnic composition, with a significant Russian population, and is also a classical rust belt with economic challenges
- The war in Donbass is described by Putin as a defensive war against the Ukrainian government's actions, but it is seen as an excuse for Russian intervention by some observers

- The speaker discusses the language dynamics in Ukraine, with Russian and Ukrainian being dominant languages in different regions
- The war and loss of Crimea and Donbass has shifted the balance towards mostly Ukrainian-speaking regions
- There is a shift towards younger generations choosing Ukrainian as a marker of identity, especially after the start of the war in 2014
- Putin's essay "On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians" promotes the idea of a unified Russian people, reminiscent of the Russian Empire's beliefs
- The speaker also discusses the impact of the Bolshevik revolution on the recognition of Ukrainians as a separate nation
- The Russian Orthodox Church continues to promote the idea of a unified Russian nation, influenced by pre-Bolshevik times
- Ukrainian intellectual fathers and writings lean towards liberal nationalism, contrasting with the Russian Empire's beliefs

- The piece discusses the historical and cultural differences between Ukraine and Russia
- It highlights the influence of empire on Russian identity and the rebellious nature of Ukrainian identity
- It explores the shock of the Ukrainian people at the bombardment of their cities by Russia
- It discusses the transition of Ukrainians from successful rebels to successful state builders since 1991

- Ukraine's historical development from rebels to state builders
- NATO's role in the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022
- Russian opposition to Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO
- Putin's goals in invading Ukraine in 2014 and 2022
- Zelensky's decision to stay in Kiev during the invasion
- His ability to unite the Ukrainian people

- Stashinsky was coerced by the secret police to become an assassin, betraying his family and killing several people
- He later escaped to the West and confessed to American intelligence, later found in South Africa
- KGB played a significant role in the Soviet Union, with extensive surveillance capabilities
- Vladimir Putin's KGB background influenced his leadership style
- Russo-Ukrainian war influenced by Orange Revolution and Revolution of Dignity
- Russian intervention in Crimea and Donbass sparked by Ukraine's potential association with the EU
- Language dynamics in Ukraine and shift towards Ukrainian identity
- Historical and cultural differences between Ukraine and Russia
- NATO's role in Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022
- Zelensky's decision to stay in Kiev during the invasion and his ability to unite the Ukrainian people

- Zelensky brought unity to Ukraine after winning with 73% of the population
- Peace talks failed due to Russia's unacceptable conditions and Ukraine's realization that they could win on the battlefield
- Claims that Boris Johnson compromised peace talks were denied, and Zelensky is unlikely to take orders from anyone
- The war could end in victory for either side, a stalemate and compromise, or continued conflict
- All three scenarios are possible, and it's too early to predict the outcome

- The borders of 2022 cannot be returned to without political change in Moscow
- Putin included 5 Ukrainian regions into the Russian constitution, making it difficult to negotiate
- The possibility of an armistice is unlikely, and the war will likely continue
- Zelensky's firing of the head of the army is a dangerous development in the war
- Zelensky's popularity may be waning, but his days in politics are not numbered
- The interviewer is interested in exploring Zelensky's state of mind and view of the world

- The interviewer is interested in interviewing Zelensky to explore his views on the Ukrainian elections and the possibility of a second term
- There is concern about the potential for power to corrupt a leader during wartime, as seen in the case of Putin
- The interviewer would ask Putin about the timing and logic of his decisions, as well as the difference between his public and private views
- The "Russian question" refers to the division of Russians between different states, as articulated by Solzhenitsyn
- Solzhenitsyn's original plan was for a nation-state including Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, but his Plan B was taken over by Russia in the 1990s

- The current war between Russia and Ukraine is a division of the Nobel laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn's concept of the "Ukrainian question"
- The Ukrainian question is about the maintenance of Ukraine as a sovereign and independent state
- The war in Ukraine could potentially lead to a shift towards authoritarianism, but it goes against the historical trend of the country
- The speaker also discusses the Holodomor famine in Ukraine and its implications for human nature and ideologies of the 20th century
- There is a warning about the potential for ideologies to devalue and destroy human life, and the need to be cautious about the influence of such ideologies in the future

- The Chernobyl disaster was a result of political and social factors in the Soviet Union, including secrecy, lack of decision-making power, and cutting corners for production.
- The government kept information about the radiation clouds secret from the population, leading to a national mobilization for the truth about Chernobyl.
- The HBO series "Chernobyl" effectively captured the everyday details of the Soviet environment, but also included some dramatic and fictional elements.
- The film explores the cost of lies and the importance of truth, despite the need to go beyond the measures of truth for dramatic effect.

- The speaker believes in the power of individuals to stop wars, not just start them
- Nuclear energy is technically safe, but political, economic, and cultural factors make the industry vulnerable to accidents
- The current war in the Middle East poses a new risk to nuclear power plants
- The speaker predicts that there will be future nuclear accidents, making nuclear energy an unreliable option
- The fear of invisible threats like radiation makes nuclear energy politically unreliable and difficult to count on as a long-term solution

- Zelensky brought unity to Ukraine after winning with 73% of the population
- Peace talks failed due to Russia's unacceptable conditions and Ukraine's realization that they could win on the battlefield
- Claims that Boris Johnson compromised peace talks were denied, and Zelensky is unlikely to take orders from anyone
- The war could end in victory for either side, a stalemate and compromise, or continued conflict
- All three scenarios are possible, and it's too early to predict the outcome
- The borders of 2022 cannot be returned to without political change in Moscow
- Putin included 5 Ukrainian regions into the Russian constitution, making it difficult to negotiate
- The possibility of an armistice is unlikely, and the war will likely continue
- Zelensky's firing of the head of the army is a dangerous development in the war
- Zelensky's popularity may be waning, but his days in politics are not numbered
- The interviewer is interested in exploring Zelensky's state of mind and view of the world
- The interviewer is interested in interviewing Zelensky to explore his views on the Ukrainian elections and the possibility of a second term
- There is concern about the potential for power to corrupt a leader during wartime, as seen in the case of Putin
- The interviewer would ask Putin about the timing and logic of his decisions, as well as the difference between his public and private views
- The "Russian question" refers to the division of Russians between different states, as articulated by Solzhenitsyn
- Solzhenitsyn's original plan was for a nation-state including Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, but his Plan B was taken over by Russia in the 1990s
- The current war between Russia and Ukraine is a division of the Nobel laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn's concept of the "Ukrainian question"
- The Ukrainian question is about the maintenance of Ukraine as a sovereign and independent state
- The war in Ukraine could potentially lead to a shift towards authoritarianism, but it goes against the historical trend of the country
- The speaker also discusses the Holodomor famine in Ukraine and its implications for human nature and ideologies of the 20th century
- There is a warning about the potential for ideologies to devalue and destroy human life, and the need to be cautious about the influence of such ideologies in the future
- The Chernobyl disaster was a result of political and social factors in the Soviet Union, including secrecy, lack of decision-making power, and cutting corners for production.
- The government kept information about the radiation clouds secret from the population, leading to a national mobilization for the truth about Chernobyl.
- The HBO series "Chernobyl" effectively captured the everyday details of the Soviet environment, but also included some dramatic and fictional elements.
- The film explores the cost of lies and the importance of truth, despite the need to go beyond the measures of truth for dramatic effect.
- The speaker believes in the power of individuals to stop wars, not just start them
- Nuclear energy is technically safe, but political, economic, and cultural factors make the industry vulnerable to accidents
- The current war in the Middle East poses a new risk to nuclear power plants
- The speaker predicts that there will be future nuclear accidents, making nuclear energy an unreliable option
- The fear of invisible threats like radiation makes nuclear energy politically unreliable and difficult to count on as a long-term solution
"""

- The speaker discusses the fear of radiation and the current world order, mentioning the war in Ukraine and the return of the Cold War
- Russia's attempt to regain control and become a global power is discussed
- The speaker highlights the importance of learning from the Cold War to prevent global conflict
- The Cuban Missile Crisis is used as an example of how luck and leadership played a role in preventing nuclear war
- The fear of nuclear weapons and the actions of leaders during the crisis are emphasized

- The Cuban Missile Crisis was a result of the fear of nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union
- The crisis was resolved because leaders were afraid of the power of nuclear weapons
- The perception of nuclear weapons is important in preventing future crises
- The conversation ends with a quote from Ernest Hemingway about war being a crime
- The speaker thanks the guest and encourages support for the podcast

The speaker discusses the fear of radiation and the current world order, including the war in Ukraine and the return of the Cold War. Russia's attempt to regain control and become a global power is highlighted. The importance of learning from the Cold War to prevent global conflict is emphasized, using the Cuban Missile Crisis as an example. The fear of nuclear weapons and the actions of leaders during the crisis are emphasized, and the conversation ends with a quote from Ernest Hemingway about war being a crime. The speaker thanks the guest and encourages support for the podcast.

Serhii Plokhy is a Ukrainian historian at Harvard University, director of the Ukrainian Research Institute, and an author of many books on history of Eastern Europe, including his latest book The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History. Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
- Eight Sleep: https://eightsleep.com/lex to get special savings
- Shopify: https://shopify.com/lex to get $1 per month trial
- NetSuite: http://netsuite.com/lex to get free product tour
- AG1: https://drinkag1.com/lex to get 1 month supply of fish oil

TRANSCRIPT:
https://lexfridman.com/serhii-plokhy-transcript

EPISODE LINKS:
Serhii's X: https://x.com/splokhy
Serhii's Website: https://history.fas.harvard.edu/people/serhii-plokhii
Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute: https://huri.harvard.edu/
Serhii's Books: https://amzn.to/3OS2EqK
2006 - The Origins of the Slavic Nations
2010 - Yalta: The Price of Peace
2012 - The Cossack Myth: History and Nationhood in the Age of Empires
2014 - The Last Empire: The Final Days of the Soviet Union
2015 - The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine
2016 - The Man with the Poison Gun: A Cold War Spy Story
2017 - Lost Kingdom: The Quest for Empire and the Making of the Russian Nation
2018 - Chernobyl: History of a Tragedy
2021 - Nuclear Folly: A History of the Cuban Missile Crisis
2021 - The Frontline: Essays on Ukraine's Past and Present
2022 - Atoms and Ashes: A Global History of Nuclear Disaster
2023 - The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History

PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: https://lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: https://lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4
Clips playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41

OUTLINE:
0:00 - Introduction
1:18 - Collapse of the Soviet Union
17:27 - Origins of Russia and Ukraine
30:30 - Ukrainian nationalism
38:13 - Stepan Bandera
1:07:13 - KGB
1:22:11 - War in Ukraine
1:58:27 - NATO and Russia
2:09:30 - Peace talks
2:23:17 - Ukrainian Army head Valerii Zaluzhnyi
2:29:54 - Power and War
2:40:45 - Holodomor
2:47:17 - Chernobyl
2:57:51 - Nuclear power
3:07:28 - Future of the world

SOCIAL:
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/lexfridman
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexfridman
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lexfridman
- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lexfridman
- Medium: https://medium.com/@lexfridman
- Reddit: https://reddit.com/r/lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/lexfridman

What happened during World War II was that once the Germans started to run out of manpower, they created foreign legion groups.

But because those people were not Aryans, they couldn't be trusted.

So they were put under the command of Henry Himmler, under command of SS, and became known as SS Waffen units.

And 1 of such units was created in Ukraine.

The following is a conversation with Serhii Plokhi, a historian at Harvard University and the director of the Ukrainian Research Institute also at Harvard.

As a historian, he specializes in the history of Eastern Europe with an emphasis on Ukraine.

He wrote a lot of great books on Ukraine and Russia, the Soviet Union, on Slavic peoples in general across centuries, on Chernobyl and nuclear disasters, and on the current war in Ukraine.

A book titled, The Russo-Ukrainian War, The Return of History.

To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description.

And now, dear friends, here's Serhii Plokhii.

What are the major explanations for the collapse of the Soviet Union?

Maybe ones you agree with and ones you disagree with.

Very often people confuse 3 different processes that were taking place in the late 80s and early 90s, and the 1 was the collapse of communism as ideology, another was the end of the Cold War, and the third 1 was the end of the Soviet Union.

All of these processes were interrelated, interconnected.

But when people provide ideology as the explanation for all of these processes, that's where I disagree.

Because ideological collapse happened on the territory of the Soviet Union in general.

Soviet Union lost the Cold War, whether we are talking about Moscow, Leningrad, or St.

But The fall of the Soviet Union is about a story in which Vladivostok and St.

Petersburg ended up in 1 country, and Kiev, Minsk, and Dushanbe ended in different countries.

So the theories and explanations about how did that happen, for me, these are really very helpful theories for understanding the Soviet collapse.

So the mobilization from below, the collapse of the center, against the background of economic collapse, against the background of ideological implosion.

That's how I look at the fall of the Soviet Union and that's how I look at the theories that explain that collapse.

So it's a story of geography, ideology, economics, which are the most important to understand of what made the collapse of the Soviet Union happen?

The Soviet collapse was unique, but not more unique than collapse of any other empire.

So what we really witnessed, or the world witnessed back in 1991, and we continue to witness today with the Russian aggression against Ukraine, is a collapse of 1 of the largest world empires.

We talked about the Soviet Union and now talk about Russia as possessing plus minus 1 sixth of the surface of the Earth.

You don't get in possession of one-sixth of the Earth by being a nation-state.

And the Soviet collapse is continuation of the disintegration of the Russian Empire that started back in 1917, that was arrested for some period of time by the Bolsheviks, by the communist ideology which was internationalist ideology, and then came back in full force in the late 80s and early 90s.

So the most important story for me, this is the story of the continuing collapse of the Russian Empire and the rise of not just local nationalism, but also rise of Russian nationalism that turned out to be as a destructive force for the imperial or multi-ethnic, multinational state as was Ukrainian nationalism or Georgian or Estonian for that matter.

Or you said a lot of interesting stuff there, 1917 Bolsheviks, internationalists, how that plays with the idea of Russian empire and so on.

But first let me ask about US influence on this.

So 1 of the ideas is that, you know, through the Cold War, that mechanism, the US had major interest to weaken the Soviet Union and therefore, the collapse could be attributed to pressure and manipulation from the United States.

The pressure from the United States, this is part of the Cold War.

And Cold War, part of that story, but it doesn't explain the Soviet collapse.

The United States of America didn't want the Soviet Union to collapse and disintegrate.

They didn't want that at the start of the Cold War in 1948, we now have the strategic documents.

And certainly they didn't want to do that in the year 1990-91.

As late as August of 1991, the day of coup, the month of the coup in Moscow, President Bush, George H.W.

Bush, travels from Moscow to Kiev and gives famous or infamous speech called Chicken Kiev speech, basically warning Ukrainians against going for independence.

The Soviet collapse was a huge headache for the administration in the White House for a number of reasons.

The Soviet Union was emerging as a junior partner of the United States in the international arena.

And on the top of that, there was a question of the nuclear weapons, unaccounted nuclear weapons.

So the United States was doing everything humanly possible to keep the Soviet Union together in 1 piece until really late November of 1991, when it became clear that it was a lost cause and they had to say goodbye to Gorbachev and to the project that he introduced.

A few months later, or a year later, there was a presidential campaign and Bush was running for the second term and was looking for achievements.

I basically treat him with great respect, but destruction of the Soviet Union was not 1 of those achievements.

He was on the other side of that divide, but the politics, the political campaign, of course, have their own rules, and they produce and give birth to mythology, which we, still at least in this country, we live till now, till today.

So Gorbachev is an interesting figure in all of this.

Is there a possible history where Soviet Union did not collapse and some of the ideas that Gorbachev had for the future of the Soviet Union came to life?

Of course, history, on the 1 hand, there is a statement, it doesn't allow for what-ifs.

On the other hand, in my opinion, history is full of what-if.

That's what history is about, and certainly there are scenarios how the Soviet Union would continue.

Would continue beyond, let's say, Gorbachev's tenure.

And the argument has been made that the reforms that he introduced, that they were mismanaged and they could be managed differently, or there could be no reforms, and there could be continuing stagnation.

What I think would happen 1 way or another is the Soviet collapse in a different form on somebody else's watch at some later period in time, because we're dealing with not just processes that were happening in the Soviet Union, we're dealing with global processes and the 20th century turned out to be the century of the disintegration of the empires.

You look at the globe, at the map of the world in 1914 and you compare it to the map at the end of the 20th century in 1991, 1992 and suddenly you realize that there are many candidates for being the most important event, the most important process in the 20th century.

But the biggest global thing that happened was redrawing the map of the world and producing dozens, if not hundreds, of new states.

That's the outcome of the different processes of the 20th century.

Look, Yugoslavia is falling apart around the same time.

Czechoslovakia goes through what can be called a civilized divorce, a very rare occurrence in the fall of multinational states.

So yeah, the writing was on the wall, whether it would happen under Gorbachev or later, whether it would happen as the result of reforms or as the result of no reforms.

But I think that sooner or later that would happen.

Yeah, it's very possible hundreds of years from now the way the 20th century is written about as the century defined by the collapse of empires.

You call the Soviet Union the last empire.

So is there something fundamental about the way the world is that means it's not conducive to the formation of empires.

The meaning that I was putting in the term the Soviet Union as the last empire was that that was the Soviet collapse was the collapse of the last major European empires, traditional empires.

That was in the 18th century, 19th century, and through most of the 20th century.

The Austria-Hungary died in the midst of World War I, the Ottoman Empire disintegrated, the Brits were gone and left India.

And there was, the successor to the Russian Empire called the Soviet Union was still hanging on there.

And then came 1991, And what we see, even with today's Russia, it's a very different sort of policies.

The Russia, or Russian leadership, tried to learn a lesson from 1991.

So there is no national republics in the Russian Federation that would have more rights than the Russian administrative units.

So The structure is different, the nationality policies are different, the level of Russification is much higher.

So it is in many ways already a post-imperial formation.

And you're right about that moment in 1991, the role that Ukraine played in that seems to be a very critical role.

What role Ukraine played in the collapse of the Soviet Union?

History is many things, but it started in a very simple way of making notes about, on the yearly basis, what happened this year or that.

Chronology in the history of the collapse of the Soviet Union is very important.

You have Ukrainian referendum on December 1st, 1991, and you have dissolution of the Soviet Union by the leaders of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus 1 week later.

Ukrainian referendum is the answer, but Ukrainians didn't answer their referendum question of whether they want the Soviet Union to be dissolved or not.

They answered very limited in terms of, it's been in question, whether you support the decision of Verkhovna Rada of your parliament for Ukraine to go independent.

So why then 1 week later the Soviet Union is gone?

And President Yeltsin explained to President Bush around that time the reason why Ukraine was so important.

He said that, well, if Ukraine is gone, Russia is not interested in this Soviet project because Russia would be outnumbered and outvoted by the Muslim republics.

Ukraine happened to be the second largest Soviet republic and then post-Soviet state in terms of population, in terms of the economy, economic potential, and so on and so forth.

And, as Yeltsin suggested, close culturally, linguistically, and otherwise to Russia.

So with the second largest republic gone, Russia didn't think that it was in Russia's interest to continue with the Soviet Union.

And around that time, Egor Gaidar, who was the chief economic advisor of Yeltsin, was telling him, well, we just don't have money anymore to support other republics.

We have to use oil and gas money within the Russian Federation.

Imperial projects, at least in the context of the late 20th century, they costed money.

It wasn't a money-making machine as it was back in the 18th or 19th century.

And the combination of all these factors led to the processes in which Ukraine's decision to go independent spelled the end to the Soviet Union.

And if today anybody wants to restore not the Soviet Union, but some form of Russian control over the post-Soviet space, Ukraine is as important today as it was back in December of 1991.

Let me ask you about Vladimir Putin's statement that the collapse of the Soviet Union is 1 of the great tragedies of history.

His formulation was that this is the greatest geopolitical catastrophe, a tragedy of the 20th century.

And I specifically went and looked at the text and put it in specific time when it was happening.

And it was interesting that the statement was made a few weeks before the May 9 parade and celebrations of the victory.

Key part of the mythology of the current Russian state.

So why say things about the Soviet collapse being the largest geopolitical strategy and not in that particular context, the Second World War?

My explanation at least is that the World War II, the price was enormous, but the Soviet Union emerged as a great victor and captured half of Europe.

1991, In terms of the lives lost at that point, the price was actually very, very low.

But for Putin, what was important that the state was lost, and he in particular was concerned about the division of the Russian people, which he understood back then like he understands now in very, very broad terms.

So for him, the biggest tragedy is not the loss of life.

The biggest tragedy is the loss of the great power status or the unity of those whom he considered to be Russian nation.

So at least this is my reading, this is my understanding of what is there, what is on the paper and what is between the lines.

So both the unity of the sort of quote Russian empire and the status of the superpower.

You wrote a book, The Origins of the Slavic Nations.

We can look at that from different perspectives and we are now making major breakthroughs in answering this question with the very interesting innovative linguistic analysis, the study of DNA.

We are getting into a prehistorical period where There is no historical sources.

And from what we can understand today, and that can of course change tomorrow with all these breakthroughs in sciences, is that the Slavs came into existence somewhere in the area of marshes, Pripyat marshes, northwestern part of Ukraine, southwestern part of Belarus, eastern part of Poland, and that is considered to be a historical homeland of Slavs, and then they spread.

And they spread all the way to the Adriatic, so we have Croats, we have Russians spreading all the way to the Pacific, we have Ukrainians, we have Belarusians, Poles.

Once we had Czechoslovaks, now we have Czechs and Slovaks.

So that's the story of starting with the 8th and 9th century.

We can, even a little bit earlier, we can already follow that story with the help of the written sources.

Mostly from Byzantine, then later from Western Europe.

But what I was trying to do, not being a scientist, not being an expert in linguistics, or not being an expert in DNA analysis, I was trying to see what was happening in the minds of those peoples and their elites in particular, whom we call today not Slavs but Eastern Slavs, which means Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians, How they imagined themselves, how they imagined their world, and eventually I look at the so-called nation-building projects.

So trying to answer the question of how we arrived to the situation in which we are today, where there are not just 3 East Slavic nations, but there are also 3 East Slavic states, Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian.

I end, admittedly, in that particular book, I end on the 18th century, before the era of nationalism, but then there are other books like Lost Kingdom, that where I bring the story all the way up to today.

So what aspects of the eighth and ninth century, the East Slavic states permeates to today that we should understand?

Well, the most important 1 is that the existence of the state of Kievan Rus' back during the medieval period created the foundations for historical mythology, common historical mythology, and there are just wars and battles over who has the right, or more right for Kievan Rus.

The legal code that was created at that time existed for a long period of time.

The acceptance of Christianity from Byzantium, that became a big issue that separated then Eastern Slavs from their Western neighbors, including Czechs and Poles, but united in that way to, let's say, Bulgarians or Serbs.

And the beginning of the written literature, beginning in Kiev, so all of that is considered to be part of heritage, all of that is being contested.

And this debates that were academic for a long period of time, what we see now tragically are being continued on the battlefield.

What is Kiev, what is Rus that you mentioned?

You mentioned them as sort of defining places and terms, labels at the beginning of all this.

Kiev became a capital or the outpost of the Vikings who were trying to establish control over the trade route between what is today's Western Russia and Belarus and northern Ukraine, so the forest areas, and the biggest and the richest market in the world that existed at that time, which was in Constantinople in Byzantium.

So the idea was to get whatever goods you can get in that part of Eastern Europe.

And most of those goods were slaves, local population.

Put them on the ships in Kiev, because Kiev was on the border with the steppe zones.

Steppe zones were controlled by other groups, Scythians, Hermitians, Polovtsians, Pechenegs, and so on, you name it.

And then staying on the river, being protected from attacks of the nomads to come to the Black Sea and sell these products in Constantinople.

Vikings tried to practice that sort of business model also in other parts of Europe.

And like in other parts of Europe, they turned out to be by default creators of new politics, of new states.

And that was the story of the first Kievan dynasty.

And Kiev as the capital of that huge empire that was going from the Baltics to today's central Ukraine and then was trying to get through the southern Ukraine to the Black Sea, that was a major, major European state, kingdom, if you want to call it, of medieval Europe, with creating a lot of tradition in terms of dynasty, in terms of language, in terms of religion, in terms of, again, historical mythology.

So Kiev is central for the nation-building myth of a number of groups in the region.

So in 1 perspective and narrative, Kiev is at the center of this Russian Empire.

At which point does Moscow come to prominence as the center of the Russian Empire?

Well, the Russian Empire is a term and really creation of the 18th century.

What we have for the Kievan, we call it Kievan Rus, again, this is a term of the 19th century, they call themselves Rus'.

And there was metropolitanate of Rus' and there was Rus' principalities.

So very important to keep in mind that Rus' is not Russia because that was a self-name for all multiple groups on that territory.

And Moscow doesn't exist at the time when Kiev emerges as the capital.

The first reference to Moscow comes from the 12th century when it was founded by 1 of the Kaven princes.

And Moscow comes to prominence really in a very different context and with a very different empire running the show in the region.

The story of Moscow and the rise of Moscow, this is the story of the Mongol rule over former Rus lands and former Rus territories.

The part of the former Rus eventually overthrows the Mongol control with the help of the small group of people called Lithuanians which had a young state and young dynasty and united these lands, which were mostly in today's terms Ukrainian and Belarusian.

And what is today's Russia, mostly Western Russia, Central Russia, stays under the Mongol control up until late 15th century.

And that was the story when Moscow rises as the new capital of that realm, replacing the city of Vladimir as that capital.

For those who ever went to Russia, they are familiar with Vladimir as the place of the oldest architectural monuments, the so-called Golden Ring of Russia and so on and so forth.

Vladimir is central and there are so many architectural monuments there because before there was Moscow, there was Vladimir eventually in this struggle over control of the territory, struggle for favors from the Mongols and the Tatar Horde, Moscow emerges as the center of that particular realm under Mongols.

After the Mongol rule is removed, Moscow embarks on the project that historians, Russian historians of the 19th century called the gathering of the Russian lands.

Using Russian now for Rus and trying to bring back the lands of former Kievan Rus', but also the lands of the former Mongol Empire.

The Russians get to the Pacific before they get to Kiev, historically.

And really the quote-unquote gathering of the quote-unquote Russian lands ends only in 1945 when the Soviet Union bullies the Czechoslovak government into turning what is today's Transcarpathian Ukraine to the Soviet Union.

It is included in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.

So that's the moment when that destiny, the way how it was imagined by the 19th century Russian historian was eventually fulfilled.

Moscow was in control of all these lands.

So to what degree are the Slavic people 1 people, and this is a theme that will continue throughout I think, versus a collection of multiple peoples, whether we're talking about the Kievan Rus, or we're talking about the 19th century Russian Empire conception?

1, the most obvious, the most clear is language.

And there is no question that Poles speak a separate language than Slavs.

And there is no question for anyone going to Ukraine and hearing Ukrainian, realizing that this is not Russian.

The level of comprehension can be different.

You can understand certain words and you don't understand others.

And the same would be with Polish and the same would be with Czech.

So there is this linguistic history that is in common.

But languages very clearly indicate that you're dealing with different peoples.

Americans speak a particular way of English.

Australians speak a particular variant of English.

But for reasons of geography, history, we pretty much believe that despite linguistic unity, these are different nations and different peoples.

And there are some parts of political tradition are in common, others are quite different.

So the same when it comes to language, the same when it comes to political tradition, to the loyalty to the political institution applies to Slavic nations.

So that's, again, there is nothing particularly unique about the Slavs in that regard.

You wrote the book, The Cossack Myth, History and Nationhood in the Age of Empires.

It tells the story of an anonymous manuscript called The History of the Rus.

See all Lex Fridman transcripts on Youtube

Serhii Plokhy: History of Ukraine, Russia, Soviet Union, KGB, Nazis & War | Lex Fridman Podcast #415