In his latest book, Russia vs. Modernity, Russian historian Alexander Etkind predicted the disintegration and collapse of the Russian Empire, calling it "the last."

Etkind follows events related to Russia and the region from an in-depth analytical angle that integrates history books with the present in all its details, from his office at the Central European University in Vienna, where he is a professor in the Department of International Relations.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera Net, the Russian historian stressed that the Ukrainian war launched by Russia more than a year ago and the political isolation it faces and internal conflicts, may lead it to the brink of collapse.

Here is the transcript of the interview:

Professor Alexander Etkend predicted the collapse of the Russian Empire (Al Jazeera)

  • In your latest book, Russia vs. Modernity, you predicted the collapse of the Russian Empire. What was it based on?

Initially, many empires collapsed in the twentieth century, including the British, German, Austro-Hungarian and others, one of which was when the Russian Empire fell in 1917. In our time, I expect to witness the disintegration of the Russian Federation.

Normally, a collapse must go through a period of wars and revolutions, but the process is slow and painful for the Russian Empire; after World War I and the Civil War, the empire became the Soviet Union, which collapsed in 1991, and Ukraine, Georgia, and other countries became independent from Russian hegemony.

It is important to note that the Russian Federation, the heir to the Soviet Union, consists of dozens of parts that are very different from each other and are governed by Moscow with an iron hand. I believe that Russia could have lasted for years or decades if the war in Ukraine had not started, but this conflict would cause Farman to disintegrate in a peaceful or violent way.

  • Russia is witnessing internal divisions and the Wagner Group rebellion. In your opinion, what are the repercussions of what is happening now on the future of the country?

The Yevgeny Prigozhin rebellion marks a stage in Russia's internal crisis and could be the first step in an emerging civil war. The country avoided a bloody battle, but this rebellion exposed the regime's weakness.

Since all Russian troops are in Ukraine now, it may be easy for the regime's domestic or foreign enemies to intervene easily.


  • In a previous interview, I pointed out that Putin is influenced by Fyodor Dostoevsky, especially his statement that "the world is boring, gentlemen." Can we apply this statement to what is happening in Russia now and to Putin himself, and has the war been born of boredom?

I don't think Putin is influenced by Dostoevsky, but the Russian novelist and philosopher helps us understand Putin for sure.

In his short novel Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky tells the story of a pathetic character who has accumulated feelings of envy and bitterness to the point of wanting to bury this boring, balanced, and rational world in an exaggerated way, ending up insulting his girlfriend, and the boredom of this character leads to destruction and self-destruction.

Thus, we can find Dostoevsky's motive in Putin's statements and actions, but of course there are many real or imaginary reasons and pretexts for the outbreak of the current war.

  • Putin presented himself with an open-minded modernist thought at the beginning of his political career, but what are his current motives for separating modern Russia, which was founded over the past 30 years, from the modern world?

Vladimir Putin's story can be described as "tragic"; on the one hand, he came to power by chance at a time when the country was in great turmoil. On the other hand, this crisis ended his previous job and his respect for all the institutions he knew.

The Russian president has left aside his inherited values and ideas, with the exception of one of them: preserving the unity of his country even though it was collapsing before his eyes. He fought war after war, winning it, and learning how to make big money without attracting attention, even if relatively. He was also convinced that it was all about oil and gas only.

He has also exploited every opportunity to stay in power, ironically obtained mainly from his enemies in Western countries. He became one of the richest men in the world but generated the hatred and anger of rational and moderate people over money "which he learned to hide skillfully."

For these reasons, I said it was a tragic story and resembled the events of the famous film "There Will Be Blood" based on the book "Oil". Putin's recent explosion also killed hundreds of thousands of people he claimed to be his citizens, whether Russians, Ukrainians or others.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said he did not rule out Russia doing the Zaporizhia nuclear plant like it did to the Kakhovka dam in the Kherson province.

Read more:https://t.co/7IaLnBmItP

pic.twitter.com/3fn16XIbtw

— Aljazeera.net • Al Jazeera Net (@AJArabicnet) June 23, 2023

  • Could Russia's hysterical reaction to the West's assistance to Ukraine, the global energy transition, and political isolation hurt its interests like what happened at the Kakhovka Dam?

The war in which Russian forces occupied Crimea and parts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions in 2014 damaged its existential interests.

In the past, NATO did not accept Russia's accession, leading Moscow to continue to fear the alliance would expand eastward. The current war seems counterproductive, with Finland becoming a NATO member and Sweden soon to follow, and perhaps Ukraine as well.

I described what is happening in my book as "revenge," a principle that plays a key role in politics and simulations are used in the arts. In other words, revenge differs from justice because the latter needs a third factor, a court or a god, to make it happen.

Something similar happened at the Kakhovka Dam after it was destroyed by Russian forces, helping the Ukrainians regroup and fighting the Russians.

  • Between the past and the present, do you think the Kremlin's flirtation with China and African countries would be useful or a double-edged sword?

China and India agreed to buy pre-war Europe oil in Ukraine. Despite the imposition of a cap on oil prices and high transportation expenses, this trade is very beneficial to Moscow. Thanks to this cooperation, Russia maintains its economic stability and finances its war.

So, I won't say it's just a flirtation but a serious and unfortunate relationship, but I stress that there is another side to this story: through his words and deeds, Putin awakens old and repressed political shocks everywhere in the world. When he justifies his war on Ukraine in the form of previous deep Russian grievances, he recalls his interlocutors from Asia and Africa the losses they suffered and the humiliations they suffered in the past.

For example, China suffered from unjust imperialist wars in the nineteenth century in which its defeat in the Opium Wars led to the loss of large areas to the alliance of Western countries, such as Hong Kong and Manchuria.

When Hong Kong returned to China after the British Empire took it, the Russian Empire annexed Manchuria, now part of the Russian Federation and the southern part of Siberia.

Today, when Putin tells Xi Jinping about his historical grievances over Ukraine, his Chinese counterpart remembers the legacy of the Opium Wars, or "100 years of shame," as the Chinese call them.

In the same vein, I believe that the transfer of Russian troops from the Chinese border to Ukraine will open the door to some forgotten questions, such as "We managed to retake Hong Kong, will we take back Manchuria?"


  • Why did you think it was impossible to remove Putin's regime and what changed?

The answer is simple: follow the money.

Over the past three decades, Russia has received most of its money from oil and profits have gone to the state treasury and the people have not benefited from it. In other words, Russia's petrostate has become richer and heavier to the point that it is difficult for its people to overthrow it.

Today, this rich and superpowerfully "parasitic" state has started a war it cannot afford, which will lead to its internal depletion and collapse.

  • What is the reason for the "extinction" of the intellectual class in Russia?

The petrostate does not need intellectuals, it considers them not only reckless individuals but also potential nuisances.

On the other hand, the Soviet Union relied on its ideology created and supported by intellectuals, as the Soviet state, which competed with the West, wanted to develop its knowledge, techniques and equipment at the time. Despite its repression of citizens, it has maintained the respect of its loyal intellectuals.

Then came the post-Soviet petroleum state to reshape the whole landscape, believing that it could buy all the necessary knowledge and technology with a fraction of its oil revenues.

The current intelligentsia arguably reflects a legacy from the Soviet era but after being deprived of income and respect at home, it began to protest against Putin's authority, especially in 2012.

Since then, intellectuals have become a nuisance for the Kremlin, leading to the death of some and the emigration of others, while the rest have been forced to serve the regime.

  • In your opinion, how will future historians describe Putin's motives for the war in Ukraine?

In short: a suicidal act of an empire in a state of collapse. The wrong choice by the wrong person. The whim of history. A helpless battle against modernity.