Peter Pomerantsev is an interesting journalist in terms of contexts. He is a British journalist with Ukrainian roots (his family emigrated from Kyiv due to the persecution by KGB), who had spent nine years in Russia, working as a TV producer there. His book Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia, which explores ideology, power and modern television, was presented in the Ukrainian translation. The Day has met Peter Pomerantsev and the conversation went on about why Ukraine, unlike Russia, has a future and why do information technologies lead us to the past.
Not so long ago I spoke with a Polish colleague who had said: “Ukraine is no longer a hot topic, it has been replaced by refugees.” What had happened to humanity in the 21st century, if a war can no longer be a hot topic in the media?
“The knowledge of how many Russian tanks had entered Luhansk area is important to us; it is not very exciting to the world. News must be new. The more news sources exist, the more you strive for extra. It is also believed that the more news sources, the better for democracy and the society – the diversity of opinions, you name it. But it turns out that’s not always true. On the one hand this is good, on the other – it forms a perpetual race to broadcast a dead baby. Ukraine is yesterday to the world media. Maidan was represented, but not as much as it may have seemed. ‘Revolution in Ukraine’ is a story, but not that important one. ‘Russia as the aggressor’ is a significant story. It was precisely when Russia had launched the attack, when Ukraine had reached the first pages. Maidan was present in the newspapers, but more often not on the first pages – more like a third page or so; except for peak moments, such as when people were shot. Ukraine sells few newspapers, and Russia is a big country and a wonderful enemy for a news editor. Putin actively plays the villain of the James Bond films. ‘Bad Russians’ is a better newspaper story than Ukrainians. There is no idea of Ukraine in people’s minds, there is no emotional resonance. But Russia, which is able to start the Third World War, is a clear and concise story. Actually, it is good to have Ukraine not in the top stories of the world media – it means that everything is getting better here.”
“THE LEADERSHIP CULT IN RUSSIA IS NURTURED AND SUSTAINED BY PROPAGANDA”
Speaking of war and society... Russia is constantly at war with someone, but no civil resistance arises in Russia itself. Why?
“Generally, Russians do not protest much. Even perestroika began with changes within the elite. Whereas in Ukraine you protest and fight, in Russia the society is very passive. When the protests on Bolotnaya Square began in Russia, I came to Moscow to see the ones who came out to the streets. I thought they would be the Moscow bohemia, but those are quite passive. The bohemia has a good life with their magazines, living within a little pseudo democracy given to them. Not the bohemia were engaged in those protests, but the people from the province, often with a scientific training, and the Bolotnaya Square had some connotation with a university campus. They did not like this government, because it lived outside the reality and was lying all the time. And their worldview is completely different. I think this to be the main driving force of the conflict in Russia – self-made people, who are forced to think scientifically and rationally by life itself. And something stops these people. In Ukraine, there are many more of those, so to say, ‘everyday democrats.’ But the most pressing issues remain to be connected with the economy. A huge problem is the oil, which creates the separate class of liberals completely dependent on the state. There is also a tradition of power, of a very passive attitude towards it. Someone regards that problem in terms of geography, that there is a tradition of being very dependent from your superiors. The leadership cult is nurtured and sustained by propaganda, and the connection between the people and the government is very deep, having been built on mutual corruption. The army is one illustrative example. In many countries, the army is an accepted way to glue the country together and educate patriots. In Russia, the most important thing is to avoid conscription. My colleagues from the television [Peter Pomerantsev worked in Moscow as a TV producer. – Author] had always been speaking of the need to go to a hospital for a week, so that the army would not reach them. And thus the cycle of corruption begins. You have been broken; you’re already part of it. You are 18-19 years old, and you are already as bad as they are, you attended a pseudo voting, you avoided the pseudo conscription. And so it goes – pseudo parties, pseudo parliament, pseudo presidents. And all of it seems normal. You do not even notice how you have been recruited.”
And how can one get out of this pseudo reality, which was created, in particular, by the media?
“Economic collapse is one thing which will make people live in reality again. Putin is a bullfighter and reality is a bull. Here you see him waving a red cloth of war in Ukraine, here is Crimea, and here is Syria. But a moment will come when the bull of reality catches up on him. Economy is a reflection of your attitude towards life. Education does not mean everything, as intellectuals often fall in love with dictators. Of course, there are sober ones, but most of them live in the utopias.”
We have already explored the topic of the tradition of power. Iryna Pavlova, historian and journalist, expressed her opinion in an interview for the The Day, that it was Stalin’s mechanism of power that had become a model for the modern Russian Federation government.
“They cite Stalin and use it for intimidation. When the Kremlin says Stalin, this is used as a secret advertising: ‘Remember Stalin and fear us, we will do the same.’ Fear and love are very close in Russia, unnaturally so. The concept of a ‘powerful hand’ is a complete perversion. The desire for Stalin is a signal; it is a game with the public. Russians are all the time engaged in this subtle game with the authorities. When an autocracy runs out of money, it relies on propaganda and security services. Nowadays I am a lot more concerned about Ukraine, because here the people are changing, and here we are able to talk about the future. In Russia, the idea of the future is no more, it is lacking even in the common language, in the newspapers. There is only solid monstrous nostalgia. And all the intellectuals live in the inner emigration.”
“WE THOUGHT THAT CYBERSPACE WOULD NOURISH DREAMS OF THE FUTURE, BUT IN FACT IT’S QUITE THE OPPOSITE”
What should be changed in Ukrainian journalism in order to speed up the formation of the country and of the civil society?
“It must exist. There are good newspapers and magazines, but they are not enough. The idea of a public television, in my opinion – is a key, not only for Ukraine. The true television, which forms the reality and the public discourse, has not yet been created. This is not only a problem of development, now it is a problem of security as well. In the summer I had traveled the eastern Ukraine and noticed some things on which others have not yet been able to focus. The purpose of my trip was to understand the workings of information and propaganda, what strategy will or will not be successful in this new context. I was interested in the issue of people’s motivation and military mobilization in the context of a hybrid war, when it has not been recognized officially, and when the enemy has not been announced. We must rebuild our propaganda efforts (and I mean positive propaganda), we must abandon the lectures on Western and European values in favor of the real discussions and understanding of micro-contexts and communities. And it happens not only here, but all around the world – how can one shape the common reality in the era of hundred million channels and the misinformation? In this respect, Odesa is no different from London. How to arrange and organize a city to make it live and work is a very big challenge. The topic of nostalgia is also very interesting. In Kharkiv I saw a nostalgic sentiment as a reaction to the present that did not happen. And the tendency is enhanced by the information technology, which lead us to the past instead of the future. When those ‘dreams of the past’ are not taken care of critically – ISIS and DPR appear. We had thought that cyberspace would nourish dreams of the future, but in fact it’s quite the opposite.”
How should Ukraine position itself to enter the global discourse not only in the wake of the war?
“Many of the problems I see here are global problems. Ukraine absolutely fits the agenda of the 21st century. One of the many messages you can send the world to make it more interested is such: Ukraine is a place where the answer to the question ‘what is democracy in the 21st century’ is being actively sought in the circumstances of life and death. In this regard, Ukraine is not behind us, it is ahead of us. Ukraine is an insane country of the 21st century. The questions you are looking the answers for are very important and avant-garde for our time. Europe today is a model of the 19th and 20th centuries; it has been outliving itself slowly. Ukraine should demonstrate itself as a modern country. It is only that the present time is very complex. Ukraine is in the point of the future; it’s not having some process the other countries went through 200 years ago. In order to understand what life will be in the 21st century, and whether it would be at all – one should take a look at Ukraine.”
