The visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to France and his meeting with the newly elected President Emmanuel Macron aroused great interest and elicited a suitable response not only in the two countries involved, but also in Ukraine. The formal occasion for Putin’s visit was the opening of a Peter-I-themed exhibition in Versailles, which is dedicated to the 300th anniversary of the Russian tsar’s visit to Paris that launched the permanent bilateral diplomatic relations between Russia and France. Meanwhile, the experts believe that the informal reason for Putin’s unplanned visit was the need to sound out France’s stance on bilateral and wider international issues and establish personal contacts after the presidential election in that country. Russians are attempting to urgently rectify the situation, because they effectively openly supported Macron’s rival Marine Le Pen during the election. The latter even visited Moscow during the campaign.
This issue has not gone unnoticed by journalists. During a joint press conference held by the two presidents, they asked Putin about it. “Given that Madame Le Pen asked us for a meeting, why should we have denied that request? It would have been strange for us to spurn European politicians who want to develop multifaceted cooperation with Russia,” Putin replied. In turn, Macron coldly responded: “It is not up to me to comment on the March visit of Madame Le Pen. The election saw the sovereign people of France making their choice, and they did not vote in favor of the National Front’s candidate.”
Overall, experts and social networks believe that Macron had the better of Putin in this encounter. The assessment is primarily based on eye contact and behavior of the presidents, because little has been made public regarding details of the talks which lasted three hours. In general, in addition to bilateral issues, they addressed three themes of wider international nature: the counter-terrorism fight, the war in Ukraine, and the Syrian issue. “We discussed the counter-terrorism fight, in particular the fight against the ISIS. We would like to join our efforts with Russia,” Macron said. As for Syria, he stated that “any use of chemical weapons would bring an immediate response.” As for restoring peace in Syria, the president of France believes that a political solution would help.
Even back during the presidential campaign, Macron was called “the pro-Ukrainian candidate.” He did support Ukraine and stated that sanctions against Russia should be strengthened if need be. “We discussed the implementation of the Minsk process. Our desire is to hold negotiations in the Normandy format as soon as possible,” the French president said after the meeting. “I would like to use the Normandy format framework to hear from the OSCE on the situation in eastern Ukraine, and wish that we finally reach a de-escalation of the conflict. I also stand by my words: the sanctions should be strengthened if need be, but that applies to the case of an escalation occurring.”
Still, what made the greatest impression in Ukraine was Putin’s statement about “the Russian princess Anna Yaroslavna.” “The history of Russian-French relations did not start with Peter I’s voyage to France,” Putin said. “It has much deeper roots. The educated public in France knows about Anne de Russie the Queen of France. The youngest daughter of our Grand Prince Yaroslav the Wise was the wife of Henry I and made a significant contribution to the development of France, being one of the founders of two European dynasties, the Valois and the Bourbons, one of which still reigns in Spain.”
In fairness it should be noted that the real issue is not so much with the words of Putin, who is used to stealing not only our territory, but also history, but with the Ukrainian public’s, and most importantly, Ukraine’s rulers’ understanding of the need to fight for their own history. “I have always said and wrote that Muscovy’s thousand-year war with Rus’-Ukraine is a war for a place in history... Anna Yaroslavna is a clear example of that!” Den/The Day’s editor-in-chief Larysa Ivshyna posted on Facebook. “Our series Ukraine Incognita Library has been appearing for over 15 years. During this time, our government could not only re-educate its public, but also achieve a successful cultural expansion. Putin is ‘powered’ by our sins. By the way, having stolen Crimea, he wasted no time in amending school history textbooks... and a new generation of our neighbors is growing up with a distorted world map in their minds, where our country does not exist. This is not a joke. This is how the war for a place in history is being waged.”
The bottom line is that although Putin tells lies, he does wage this war and does care about history. He meets with history teachers and has erected a monument to Kyivan Prince Volodymyr the Great near the Kremlin. Who does such things here? There is no national cultural policy. Over the years, the government has not even supported what is done by civil society bodies. Our readers are aware of the invaluable contribution made by Den’s Library over 15 years, with its first book being Ukraine Incognita which was followed by The Two Rus’s, and then by The Power of the Soft Sign that offered a quality groundwork for those who wish to know the true Ukrainian history and understand who is the heir of Kyivan Rus’ (hint: Muscovy definitely is not). All this was done at the expense of private sponsors. However, our Library is not all there is. For example, on the occasion of the 1,00th anniversary of the start of the reign of Kyivan Rus’s most influential statesman Yaroslav the Wise, Den declared 2015 to be the Year of Yaroslav the Wise. In that framework, the newspaper held a series of events, including our participation in the student research conference “Yaroslav the Wise: the Most Successful Grand Prince of Kyiv,” hosted by Kharkiv National Law University, which is named after that outstanding statesman of ours.
Is this due to simple neglect or deliberate policy? Why does the government fail to support private initiatives? Why does our society fail to use the knowledge that already exists?
AN OCCUPIER’S “LOGIC” IN THE CONTEXT OF HISTORY
Ihor SIUNDIUKOV, editor of “History and I” section of the newspaper Den, winner of the James Mace Prize:
“Den wrote literally on dozens of occasions about how the current Kremlin regime ‘annexed’ (grabbed in a hostile takeover manner by declaring ‘and this is mine because might makes right’) our Ukrainian history space. First of all, they have targeted the history of Ancient Rus’-Ukraine (this is probably a more fitting name than the traditional Kyivan Rus’). We prepared and published the book The Power of the Soft Sign back in 2011, before the Russian aggression, and it deals with that very subject.
“However, Russian imperialist claims to foreign, but so attractive for Putinist chauvinists history of Rus’ continue with undiminished aggressiveness. At a joint press conference with the French President Macron in Versailles, Putin publicly declared that Yaroslav the Wise was ‘our beloved prince’ while his famous daughter Anna, the wife of Henry I, King of France was a ‘Russian queen.’ Expanding the boundaries of the so-called history of Russia in Putin’s manner can continue, of course (for instance, 16th century Muscovite tsars claimed descent from... Julius Caesar and Augustus).
“However, this bizarre nonsense, while looking similar to delirium tremens, follows its own logic, and it is a very dangerous one. This is a ‘logic’ of an occupier, a ‘logic’ of an aggressor who knows that armed seizure of foreign lands, physical seizure of territories of other countries should be preceded by intellectual ‘annexation’ of history of these lands, these countries. For it is in this way that a brazen invader proves its ‘Aryan right’ to rule (as we can see with rabid adherents of the ‘Russian World’ these days) lands far away from their borders (and Putin recently joked in Joseph Stalin’s trademark black humor manner: ‘The borders of Russia are limitless...’).
“We, Ukrainians, need to both defend the homeland with arms and intellectually prove ‘the power of the soft sign’ to dispel the deceptive propaganda of the modern imperialist fascism. We need to do it even under the harsh conditions of our scary world where, in the words of Senator John McCain, ‘Russia is a premier and most important threat, more so than ISIS.’”
“HERE IN FRANCE, PRINCESS ANNA IS KNOWN AS ANNE DE KIEV”
Galia ACKERMAN, head of the Russia department of the journal Politique Internationale, Paris:
“On the one hand, it was important for Macron to receive Putin with, let us say, royal-like pomp, while on the other, he needed to show that France is far from inferior to Russia when it comes to the splendor of its royal past. After all, when Putin receives important guests in the Kremlin, he tries to impress them by the Kremlin’s splendor. And here, the splendor of Versailles was used to fight back. Thus, Macron positions himself on an equal footing while representing a nation much smaller than Russia.
“One should have paid attention to their gestures. While before the meeting, the two leaders smiled while on the red carpet, the expressions on their faces after the long negotiations showed that the conversation was tough, especially on Macron’s part. Looking at Putin, one could say that he had drunk a bottle of vinegar. Moreover, it all looked like the whole game was played by the rules of Macron, not Putin. Most probably, the French president told Putin what Francois Hollande did not dare to say, perhaps.
“Speaking about the topic of Ukraine, Macron mostly stuck to platitudes, although certain specifics were present. After all, his spokesman noted a few days before that the sanctions could be strengthened. The same thing was said at the G7 summit, explaining this not only by the situation in the Donbas, but also by the terrorist attack that downed the Malaysian MH17. It can be seen that Macron, like many others, believes that the blame for the Boeing tragedy lies with Russia.
“I think that Putin’s words about ‘the Russian princess Anna’ went unnoticed in France to some extent. Of course, this was a terribly stupid statement on the part of Putin. It was a transparent attempt to claim Kyivan Rus’ as the birthplace of today’s Russian state. This is on par with erecting a monument to Prince Volodymyr in Moscow. This is a claim to someone else’s history and traditions. It seems that the Russians just cannot leave that Kyivan Rus’ issue alone. Deprived of Kyivan Rus’, they immediately turn out to be some sort of barbarians whose statehood is just 600 to 700 years old. I think it is rather unwise to prove your point by dynastic marriages. This is like someone saying that half of the Russian tsars were ethnic Germans. So what? Putin’s statement targeted mostly the domestic audience, and it will have no impact on the French one. Here in France, Princess Anna is known as Anne de Kiev.”
