In the clearest sign yet that the concept of irony is often wasted on state officials, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov today rebuked foreign governments that attempt to re-write history in order to serve contemporary political ends.

In a televised appearance at a ceremony honoring Russian diplomats who died during the Great Patriotic War (i.e. World War II), Lavrov declared that, “attempts to make a mockery of history are becoming an element and an instrument of the foreign policy of certain countries.” The Minister went on to accuse the EU and NATO of conniving with these attempts.

Lavrov’s comments are the latest rhetorical volley launched from the Kremlin as part of a rancorous diplomatic row between the Russian Federation and its Western neighbor Estonia. The tiff was set-off late last month when the Estonian government transferred the “Bronze Soldier,” (a monument to Red Army troops who died fighting the Nazis in World War II), from its prominent position in Tynismyagi square in the nation’s capital, Tallinn to one of the city’s military cemeteries. At the same time, the remains of nearly one dozen soldiers resting in an adjoining mass grave (братская могила) were also disinterred. They are scheduled to be reburied in June.

The removal of the monument and the “desecration” of the soldiers’ remains has sparked protests among Estonia’s sizable ethnic Russian minority which comprises just over 25% of the country’s population. It also engendered a week-long protest outside the Estonian embassy in Moscow, calls from numerous members of the Russian State Duma to sever diplomatic relations with the Baltic state, and the sudden announcement that Russian oil and gas supplies to Estonia have been shut-off owing to issues involving “railway maintenance.” No less ominously, the Estonian government has alleged that, over a span of several days, hackers operating out of IP-addresses based in Moscow state institutions have repeatedly brought down the web sites of several prominent Estonian governmental agencies including the office of the president, parliament, cabinet ministers, and the foreign and defense ministries.

President Vladimir Putin, who has publicly denounced the Estonian actions, today weighed in on the related issue of Russia’s contributions to the defeat of German fascism. Speaking in advance of Wednesday’s Victory Day celebrations in Moscow commemorating the 62nd anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany, President Putin noted that “Unfortunately, not everybody understands that Russia lost more people in this war than the rest of the world combined. That’s the way it is, but we pay tribute to the memory of all victims of Nazism. This includes anti-fascists in Germany itself. It includes our allies in World War II.”

Here, at least, Russia’s President has a point. Western citizens are typically unaware of the immense suffering and sacrifice endured by the Soviet people during 1941-1945. The war is a source of pride for many Russians today and it is likely to remain so for future generations who desperately need a “usable past” around which they can form a national identity.
As I noted some time back in a different venue, more willingness on the part of Western officials to acknowledge Russia’s contributions to World War II might go some way towards defusing the blustering emotions that often surround official Russian discussions of the war and its meaning.

Whatever the case, while the Kremlin’s ham-fisted and bullying response throughout the incident has been properly criticized by Western journalists and op-ed writers, few seem to have considered that the government of Estonian Prime Minister Andrus Ansip may share responsibility for this brouhaha. Why is it that the monument’s presence in the Estonian capital suddenly necessitated state action now, sixteen years after the collapse of the Soviet Union? Perhaps tellingly, the country’s head of state, President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, who recently vetoed a proposed “Law on Forbidden Structures” that would have banned public display of monuments glorifying the USSR, acknowledged this past week in an interview with the Financial Times that the issue might have been resolved simply by renaming the monument.

ScP