By John Q. Hosedrinker 
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte condemned Russia’s obstruction of Ukraine peace talks, highlighting the unexpected presence of a historian who presented a lecture on Russian history dating back to 1250. Rutte shared this during a joint press conference with US President Donald Trump, who recalled US involvement in launching the negotiations in Istanbul and lamented the ongoing lack of progress. Trump also emphasized the significant casualties on both sides, mentioning a high number of Russian soldiers killed since January.
Read the original article here
Rutte’s take on the situation is that Russia undermined peace talks in Ukraine by sending a historian to recite history since 1250. Honestly, my immediate thought was, “Is this a parody?” It’s hard to believe that in a serious international setting, the basis for discussing territorial integrity and the future of a nation would be a history lesson stretching back nearly eight centuries. And not just any history lesson, but one that seems to cherry-pick facts to support a very specific, and frankly, bizarre argument. This feels like Russia is trying to evoke some “peaked in high school” vibes – like, remember when we were totally into world history, and then we got *really* into rewriting it?
Thinking about the sheer audacity of this historical argument is staggering. Imagine the landscape of the world in 1250. Constantinople was still Constantinople, firmly under Greek rule. Parts of Spain were under Moorish control. Northern Italy was under German influence. And what about the Grand Duchy of Moscow, which would eventually evolve into Russia? It was still a fledgling entity, a client state of the Mongol Empire! If we’re going to play the “back in 1250” card, shouldn’t we have the Mongolian UN representative on hand to point out that Russia essentially owes its existence to the Mongols? In fact, given Russia’s own twisted logic about Crimea and Ukraine, shouldn’t Russia *technically* belong to Mongolia? All those millions of descendants of Genghis Khan, they could put in a petition at the UN to redraw some borders!
If Russia is suggesting we revert to 1250 as the basis for territorial claims, then logically, we can’t stop there. By this reasoning, Poland and Lithuania could make a strong case for reclaiming vast swaths of Ukraine, Belarus, and even parts of western Russia, given the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth’s dominance in the region during the 15th-17th centuries. Or how about Sweden? They held territory in Russia’s northwest, like Novgorod and Ingria, in the 17th century. And France? Didn’t Napoleon march into Moscow in 1812? Does that give France a claim to the Russian capital? The whole thing is absurd.
And let’s not forget the origin of the Kievan Rus, the so-called foundation of Russian identity. It was founded by Vikings. So, by that logic, shouldn’t the Nordics be the ones laying claim to the land? Honestly, thanks to this whole charade, it’s clear the Russians weren’t serious about peace to begin with.
The absurdity of using history since 1250 as the basis for international law highlights an almost Orwellian willingness to twist historical narratives to fit a political agenda. It’s the same twisted logic that was the basis of Nazi ideologies. The historian they sent, according to everything I have gathered, is a propagandist, ready to twist facts as necessary to fit the current party line. And, it’s worth underlining, it wasn’t even a “Greek” Constantinople in 1250, but the Eastern Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire. This all just emphasizes the sheer, preposterous nature of Putin’s whole argument.
It’s fascinating how the concept of using ancient history to justify modern claims is actually a double-edged sword. The argument reminds me of the Israeli 2000 year claims argument. But like with the Israeli-Palestine conflict, Putin’s use of history is a self-defeating argument. If the Russians are willing to go back to 1250, well, it seems like the indigenous peoples and the landback movement are going to be the only ones who are happy with the results.
In the end, Russia’s attempt to undermine peace talks by pulling out a long historical argument is an utter disaster. It’s a clear sign of bad faith. If this is truly how they intend to negotiate, then the world may be better off starting from scratch.