From the Times and the Sunday Times, this is the story. I'm William Hague. The story today, an insider's view of the Kremlin and Putin's next move with Professor Nina Khrushchev.
Well, Nina, it's a great pleasure to have you on the story. Introduce yourself for our listeners, for those who haven't heard about you, tell us about who you are, about your name and your job title and where you're speaking to us from.
Hi, thank you very much for inviting me, Nina Cresheva. I teach international affairs at the New York City, New School University. I am a Russian. I was born in the Soviet Union, so sometimes I introduce myself as a Soviet, which I have to say absolutely make people flabbergasted, because how dare you think of yourself this way, which
is always an interesting reaction. So that's where you were born. That's where I was born in Moscow. In Moscow. And since you asked me about the name, I am a great granddaughter of Nikita Khrushchev, who was the head of the Soviet Union. This is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from
It's sort of considered 10 years from Stalin's death in 1953 to 1964 when Khrushchev was ousted from his job and was the first Soviet leader that essentially went into retirement but wasn't killed, which he considered his great achievement. So here I am and here is my heritage. But do you remember him? Because you were born, I think, into his last year in office, but did you know? He died about seven years later.
So yes, I never experienced him as a premier as in charge of the Soviet Union. But I remember him, of course, as a pensioner. I remember him as a grandfather. He was a huge figure. Prime Minister McMillan of Great Britain had quite a lot of dealings with him. In fact, came to the Soviet Union.
Khrushchev gave him a gift of an artificial fur hat and I have this wonderful pictures of McMillan and Khrushchev both wearing those winter hats that are made out of artificial fur. Khrushchev was very proud of that chemistry. So yes, I remember him and he was a very fun grandfather indeed.
Will you remember the hat? Some of us in Britain. We can picture Millen in that hat. That's an important point in relations between the UK and the Soviet Union as it was then. And you did your undergraduate degree in Moscow, I think. And then why did you leave? How did you come to be an academic in America?
Well, it sounds grand as an academic. I mean, I teach international affairs. I write books, but I just... That isn't academic. I think, but it sounds very grand. You know, people tell me often that, oh, all these privileged Soviets are privileged. Russians live abroad.
And I always want to push back on that. I mean, hard to believe, but there was really little privileged about this. It was all due to Mikhail Gorbachev, when he started Perestroika in Glassnost, and he said that the Soviet Union is going to be a free country and people there can do whatever they want to do.
And I thought, oh, I'd really like to be a foreigner. I'd like to see what it is. So I'm not an immigrant. I'm an expat. I just chose to live somewhere, like a lot of Brits live in the United States or in France. And so this is a privilege of a free country, that what Gorbachev said it's going to be. I think, yes, when you live in a despotic country, like Russia has become, it's not your choice. I mean, the state kicks you out.
But in my case, it was my free choice. I applied to graduate schools in Europe and in America, and even Moscow University, where I did my undergrad. And I didn't get into Moscow University, amazingly enough. I didn't get to Princeton and other great universities, but here. So Princeton was my first choice, and so I ended up being here. And so I thought when I graduated, I thought I would stay in America if I get a job. But that was it. And I was very lucky. I had a postdoc.
lost research assistant to the great George Kennan, to the great American diplomat, which was amazing. And Jack Matlock, who was the man, essentially, very helpful in ending the Cold War. And so when I was done with my post-doc, I already had credentials to be an analyst of political affairs.
What a powerful curriculum this is to have got into Princeton to have that experience working with people around the end of the Cold War, but still to have the knowledge of what was the Soviet Union, what is now Russia. And I think you've been back there recently in Russia. I think so. Describe for people what Russia is like today on the on the inside, because it's mysterious to most British people. It's they don't go there anymore on the whole.
which is a shame. I mean, it really is a shame that this relationship, I mean, people-to-people, kind of the Cold War thing, when people-to-people relationship, that Christian, in fact, started and now severed. I've been going for three years. I was there before the war began. And then I've been going for three years now to see how it changed. And so when you ask me what it's like, now it's different from what it was when I got there after three months or four months of war in May.
June 2022. It is a big change. It's also not a big change, but it is a big change in the sense that at the beginning it was complete discombobulation of where we are because after the war began and
in many ways, the confrontation with the West also began. And so the West was saying that Russia is not us. And Putin was saying we are trying to protect ourselves against the West, and the West no longer matters. And so my first few months, I was looking at, oh, okay, I guess the Italian pizzeria is going to turn into something Chinese, or
There would be no more exhibits that have Degas or they have Picasso that's no longer because we're not part of the global culture. And so my first year I was looking for evidence that we are. And so it was interesting because people, I was in St. Petersburg in June of 2022 and there's this kind of tradition in tourist cities where you have the street artists that paint your pictures.
and Benjamin Combebratch was everywhere. And Angelina Jolie was everywhere. He said, wait a minute, aren't you supposed to paint something else? So it was sort of this, something that Orwell described. This is just kind of a split personality that on one hand, you're told something. On the other hand, you haven't caught up with that. So you still live in the normal world, in a sense. And now it's much, in three years it changed. You're in the much less,
normal world and war is much more present everywhere.
How do you see that now? What are they wearing? What are they telling you? And have they stopped drawing pictures of Angelina Jolie? How has it changed? They have, but not because they want to. And I actually asked the same artist three years later, who is there in his painting, Russian actors or Narendra Modi of India, because he's a friendly guy, but also has this kind of big PR presence. And he said, well, I don't want to get arrested.
At the beginning, of course, you would wear all the, I don't know, signs of Princeton or Harvard or we love London or something. And now they would be more cautious. It doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I mean, people still do this, but they are not displaying it just in case because there's a lot of squealing going on. But I mean, it's not this here, this here, it would not have happened. But last year in 2023,
remember when Barbie and Oppenheimer were all over the world. Yes. Yes. Barbie Heimer. And so in St. Petersburg, you go on Nevsky Prospect, which is their main avenue. And right there, there's a movie theater, which is giant billboard.
Oppenheimer, Barbie, and some Russian fairy tale that's supposed to fight against this universe of Hollywood. And there were two kids, I mean, young people, a couple, came out of the movie theater and asked them what they watched. And they said, Oppenheimer. And I said, well, but it's forbidden. I mean, it was already forbidden, and yet it was public. And they said, yes, probably the movie theater people are going to get in trouble. And we are sorry for that, but it was a great film. And so I think this year, so that's 23.
In 24, it's not going to happen. So you're much more every time when you encounter foreigners. You're like, oh. And yet, another part of it, I mean, I keep talking about split personality disorder because Russia is somewhat schizophrenic. And it's shown in its...
code of arms, the double eagle. I mean, that's basically a symbol of what Russia is. So most European, American, whatever fashion, Western fashion is gone. This was replaced by Russian houses of fashion, which didn't exist before, very small, but now they are. One of them is prominent. It's called lime.
wonderfully Russian name written in English, Lyme. And you walk here and it was like Banana Republic 10 years ago when Banana Republic was this preppy, J. Cruish, but more expensive type of clothing. With all the science, I mean, love is great, life is beautiful, all in English today in the center of Moscow, Smiley and St. Petersburg. So on one hand, you
say we're no longer part of the West. Oh, but we're still imitating the West and we're making it our own. So it's that discombobulation that now is more present and more mysterious because now the state is hammering into you that you are
Separate civilization, religion is everything. Soviet Union was great. I mean, they just had the celebration of my university, 270th anniversary of Moscow State University, where the study was on stage, which is shocking because I didn't grow up with Stalin. So that's your Russia today.
I see. So this is a, it's not just the pushing out of Western influences, the reimagining of Russia, actually, as well, the reimagining of Russian history is going on here, bringing back Stalin, as you said, you know, bringing heroic figures back who actually weren't regarded as heroic in the recent past.
Well, they wouldn't. I mean, of course, they grant figures and Putin is big on the greats. I mean, he often thinks of himself. He's presented as Peter the Great, which is always sort of slightly remarkable because Peter was about seven feet tall and Putin is five-six saying he's five-seven. So that's a bit of a stretch. So it is a reimagining of history, but the reason it's so remarkably
Russian is that Russia's reimagining of its own greatness is always through the lens of the West. So the way I talk about it, you think of Russia, is Russia is the unwest. We are Russia is an imitation culture, but always pretends that it's doing something unique while imitating Western formulas. And that's why this fashion brands are so interesting to me. It's like, wait a minute, you're creating your own based on things that you see in
or used to see in British, French, Italian, or American fashion journals.
What's the purpose for Putin in all of this? You can see how, of course, in a war, you have to create a stronger national identity, a distinctive feeling of being together, of being different. You have to create some hostility to the West that is imagined as the enemy and so on. So there must be all those parts to it, but is there any other aspect to what is going on here?
Well, it is. I mean, all of this is, and I have to say, the West is very helpful in this, because the amount of hatred that is sounding from Western capitals, actually, he doesn't even need to create that much propaganda. You just put on repeat or saw a fondant line, or sort of a borel, who used to be the diplomat of Europe. And so that's it, because they keep saying, you know, we need to defeat Russia, Russia is not us.
And I was on BBC somewhere two years ago, I think. And one of the guests on the panel said that first, from a European capital, she said, well, first we were thinking about taking Putin out. And then we thought it was a bad idea. And it just couldn't believe it. I couldn't believe that she was saying it on air. Basically, like, wow, you just validated everything that Putin ever said.
It's a constant validation of Russia and Russians need to be eliminated. So that works for him. But I think also, let's remember that he's in power for a quarter century. That's a lot of years. Stalin was in power for over a quarter century. Leonid Brezhnev, Khrushchev successor, who ousted him. He was in power for 18 years. And I was growing up during that time. And it seemed endless, ageless. I mean, it was forever. So it's 25 years.
And you know, absolute power corrupts absolutely. That's what it is. And even I remember my grandmother kept saying to me already when Khrushchev, of course, was dead. And she and I spent a lot of time together. And she was saying, well, you have to understand that Khrushchev of 1958 is not Khrushchev of 1962. By 1962, it was very difficult to talk to him. Putin has been in power for 25 years.
25 years yes and he actually I met him quite a bit around 2010 to 2013 you know I even took him I hosted him at the London Olympics because we have a common interest in in judo I sat with him in the Kremlin and he even then this is now
That's 14 years ago, let's say. He exalted in power, just on your point. He would love to come late to a meeting to tell some people they have to, on his own side, they had to leave the meeting and dismiss them to throw away a lot of the briefing cards in front of him and then put them aside as if I know what I want to talk about. Everything exuded power. And you're quite right. If you add another 10 to 15 years of that,
You can't ever give up power then, can you? I mean, in this case, like Stalin, Putin doesn't ever intend to stand down. He doesn't ever intend to be removed like Khrushchev.
No, absolutely. There is no way. And exactly. I mean, that's not only what you experience, but also, I mean, five foot six, saying your five foot seven explains a lot. I mean, it's not a put down of people who are short, but it's certainly there is a certain type. Also, let's remember that in KGB, where he was, where he used to work before, he was a major. He wasn't a general. So he's a man who needs to prove himself that he has this power.
that he has these 11 time zones of Russia, that he's God of that. He can do whatever. But it's also sort of the Tsar behavior. I mean, you are not controlled by anything because that's how you perceive yourself. I mean, Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, do you think Catherine the Great wouldn't throw things away from her table and say, well, I want to talk about something, something.
But in his particular case, when you get that much power of such a giant historic land, it does get into your head. I mean, I just wrote a book about Khrushchev, a biography of Khrushchev, just published in Russia. And I remember him in a very different way, of course. But I myself was shocked to find out how rude he could be to people by the end of his leadership. Because he already thought he knows it all. He has it all. He thinks it all.
And Putin was influenced that, actually, there was a great biography of people having read it by Stephen Lemair of The New York Times, I think it was called The Lost Star. It was a wonderful biography. And he describes one time when Putin was still trying to get to the KGB. Remember, he wasn't invited. He didn't know he would get it. Finally, he got a call, supposedly, from the KGB. And that gentleman he was meeting from the KGB was late.
And Putin was incredibly impressed by this because that's how you exhort power. You show that you so don't care that you can be late. But Russia is a land of extremes, and so it's major president, president who is major in the KGB is also kind of prone to extremes. So he's not going to be late for half an hour. If he's going to be late for Angela Merkel, it's going to be four hours.
for the Pope for hours. Now, this is going to be interesting, isn't it, for all of us who watch these things closely? Because now he's got to deal with an American president who also loves power. And the relationship between them is going to be a very big factor in international affairs. So from your vantage on both sides of the Atlantic, how do you think that Trump put in relationship is going to evolve?
Well, we saw in 2018 remember when they met in Finland and Putin basically ate Trump for breakfast. That was quite a great victory. And I remember it was interesting because the analysis was Trump wasn't prepared. Trump didn't know what he was talking about. He was winging it because that's what he does. And Putin is prepared. But we are seeing slightly more
assertive Donald Trump, let me put it this way. And more experienced, Donald Trump, he is, whatever we think of his policies, he's more experienced. Absolutely. And he has a team who've thought about what they're going to do further in advance than last time. Exactly. And we're already seeing that docido that they're doing, that kind of tango is that, oh, I'm going to congratulate you. Oh, Putin wants to meet with me.
I was like, well Putin never said that he wants, but okay. And the Russians are still giving Trump kind of the benefit of the doubt. But if Trump pushes, I think Putin doesn't plan to step down. Putin doesn't plan to lose. And if the country loses, which it has already, but it doesn't matter to him because as long as he's in power, overseeing those 11 time zones, even if there is no people in it because they all went to war, he's gonna do it.
So he, unlike others, actually have very little to lose because that history that we were talking about sort of this creation of new history is for Putin, everything or nothing. And so the question is how Trump wants to play because I don't see Putin becoming Greenland and saying, well, we're going to negotiate with you just so you wouldn't damage us because Putin is ready for damage.
Coming up, will Putin invade any other countries? Putin himself doesn't want to fight a bigger war. But if the rhetoric continues, I wouldn't pass Putin saying, you know what? You know, you convinced me. I'm so tired. You keep telling me that I'm just going to take Estonia. Let me do this. Because often Putin does these things because he needs to make a point. Don't make him make a point. That's in just a moment.
So this is going to be more difficult, isn't it, than it ever looks or sounds, to people when Trump says, of course, he's backtracked now from saying, end the war in 24 hours, maybe six months, but he's clearly going to make a real effort to try and end the war in Ukraine.
That looks to me like that's going to be a much more difficult and protracted process than people might think in the incoming administration in the United States. Because for the reasons you've just given, Putin is not going to make any easy bargain for the United States. He's not going to leave himself in a position where he's not been vindicated by history, where Ukraine has really lived to fight another day with a lot of Western support. Putin isn't going to settle for that, is he?
So when Trump was saying it's going to be 24 hours, everybody was saying that this is a PR campaign. I mean, nobody did you. I would think that it could be possible in 24 hours. Of course not. Six months, if you're really very lucky. So everybody knew that. I think Putin, depending on how Trump plays it, I think Putin may be willing to make concessions, but these are going to be small.
I mean, this plan that he'd been circulating around probably some sort of a fake and a sham and I don't know who put it in, that the Trump administration already suggested a plan for 100 days and, you know, Ukrainians are looking at it, Europeans looking at it. That's a great plan for Putin because, you know, he would keep the territory they already got. They would promise that they're not going to
attack Ukraine if it doesn't join NATO. But what's very important for him, for him that is also a giant victory, is that when the Russian language and Russian culture and Russian history is not going to be purged from Ukraine. And that's something I think is going to be a point of
contention and negotiation that pushkin, the great Alexander pushkin, is not going to be kicked out and then not cracker. The ballet is not going to be forbidden because I think that's part of his historic legacy is that I protected us from being purged in Ukraine, which is our sphere of influence. What do you think? Is there anything that we can do in the way that Trump could do to put Putin under more pressure to agree to a deal
I mean, which Ukraine would survive in some form. We've had sanctions on Russia now for several years from Western countries. They haven't ended the war, although they've had an effect, varying effects on the Russian economy. Is there anything we could do that really would put Putin under pressure? Are we missing something in the West?
You're not stopping Russia. You're just talking about stopping Russia. So you think we could do more? Well, you could do more. But also, I think the canceling Russia so giantly at the beginning was a big mistake because if you're going to use gas, if you're not going, if you're going to use oil, if you're going to use all these other things, then don't declare that you're not doing it. Western hypocrisy gives Putin more opportunity to tell to the Russians, fine, you don't like what I'm doing or you think it's a problem.
But look at them. And people are looking at them as like, okay, then, yes, I guess, he has a point. So I think that kind of this blank in hatred with sanctions. I mean, sanctions, you say that, of course, they influence Russian economy. And if it goes for another 10 years, it's going to be a problem. But it's also going to be a problem for
the western countries and in Putin's understanding, and even in some Russian understanding, they don't want to admit it, but I'm just going to be honest about this, Russians used to live in worse times more than they used to live in better times. I know it sounds
dramatic and existential, but it is true. I mean, and under Putin, they lived better than ever before. They really did. And so the economy, yes, it is harder, but it's not collapsing. I mean, it is true that you go and things are there. And, of course, now with sanctions, you need to make different choices.
plenty still available. So the semblance of normalcy is going on. And one of the things that I always compare today to the Bolshevik Revolution and that swept the way the Tsar, Nicholas II, is that there was also a war, which he didn't get into, the World War I.
And then the queues appeared because suddenly Russian economies stopped existing. So as long as the queues are not there in Russia today, as long as the people have diminished choice, but still a choice, as long as the services work, Putin is okay because his argument is I'm defending
you from being destroyed by the Western-Western hatred, but I'm still allowing you not to give up normal life. That can be very powerful propaganda. When you start deconstructing it, it's of course ridiculous. But how many people, average people, if we can't call them that, deconstruct messages?
Okay, so this is a sobering message for the West that Russians are resilient. But what about the fear in Europe that if Putin came out with satisfactory deal for him at the end of this, that more of Europe would be at risk. You know, the fears of the Baltic states, of people in Poland, that he'd be back for more.
I want to push back on when you said a sobering message that kind of shows an incredible Western hubris. And in many ways, actually, Angela Saxon. I mean, I sound like mighty as I had over the spokesperson for the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But in some ways, sort of Joe Biden, Boris Johnson at the time, hubris is like, well, Russia is going to collapse any time.
just going to defeat it and no problem and we're just going to fight because who is that Putin? And I think that's always a mistake. And that is a mistake because it is a giant country with giant history and giant history responding to this kind of things. And I think the second part of this question is that if Putin is coming for more, Putin himself doesn't want to fight a bigger war. But if
The rhetoric continues. I wouldn't pass Putin saying, you know what? You convinced me. I'm so tired. You keep telling me that I'm just going to take Estonia. Let me do this. But for now, he doesn't want it. We see it in Kursk. For example, there was an incursion in Kursk. Under other circumstances, that would have been a declaration of war.
We see British American weapons shooting into deep into Tatarstan, which is very far away from the border. Hasn't happened. So he doesn't want it, but he can have it if he's pushed or needs to make a point, which is another horrible thing, because often Putin does these things because he needs to make a point. Don't make him make a point.
Well, on that point, let's think how we handle future crises then, because we did try very hard to treat him with dignity, to not have any angry rhetoric, you know, to reset relations with Russia. That's why I was going to see him all those years ago. And President Obama and Hillary Clinton were trying to reset with Russia. Angela Merkel was trying to be very friendly to him. So we all tried. That didn't work out. You know, he still
invaded some neighboring countries and then spectacularly so in the case of Ukraine. But now we've got new problems coming up such as what's happening in the Sahel region of Africa, the swathe of land sitting like a headband around the north of the continent, a lot of Russian involvement and presence there. Sometimes it's very popular like in other parts of Africa, the Central African Republic.
Can we do better on that sort of thing as the West being too slow or too arrogant or outmaneuvered by the Kremlin in areas of the world like that? Well, I always think that the West is too arrogant at all times. And, you know, one of the reasons for that war is as hard as everybody tried. It is that, but despite the fact that the West is too arrogant, there are the ways of dealing with it. And Putin just chose to make a point, like, okay,
You're supporting that, so let me just go and shoot. One of the things, and I think that's part of the arrogance, I'm not an expert in expansion in Africa, but one of the problems is that, at least I know from the United States, I'm not speaking for European countries, is that America does have a short political attention span. As I mentioned, I was when I was working with George Kennan, he kept saying that the problem of American foreign policy thinks in two years, maybe in five, it needs to think in 20.
We see it and with Afghanistan. I mean, he's been going on for 20 years and suddenly he's like, oops, gone. Oh, okay, didn't work out. So expecting that Russians are not going to be in there is a failure of strategic thinking on the West.
OK, well, that's very clear advice. We shouldn't leave those gaps. And taking your advice to think about the longer term in foreign policy. Let's imagine some years on that there will have been some resolution of the war in Ukraine. Your famous relative and the West work together in many ways. There were confrontations like the Cuban Missile Crisis that you mentioned.
But actually, there was the negotiation of treaties that, you know, there were the meetings with Harold McMillan that you talked about. There was agreements on stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Can you see a future where we're doing that again with Russia on AI and arms control? If we look far enough ahead, is there a better future that we can find together?
Well, we always want a better future. We always think that there is. I think it will be, and I'm looking at it from the point of also for kind of a Russian history, because historically it's a pendulum swing. As I said, you know, the double ego, it's important, so it's an extreme
in a nation of extremes. So it has kind of absolute negation of the West and confrontation. And then Gorbachev comes in, or Khrushchev comes in, Yeltsin comes in and says, no, no, no, no. We are part of that even Putin. I mean, I'm sure you, I don't know if you met them already early on in the 2000s when I think his first trip was to London, right? His first trip, he was very friendly with Tony Blair.
Yes, he had some meetings blab. Yes, that was before I met him. He was getting a little more tricky by the time I met him. Yes, he was. But there was an optimistic period. Totally. And he was saying, Russia is part of the West. He spoke German to... Yes.
I think in Bundestag, because his German is so very good, he said, well, I can't imagine NATO being an enemy and whatnot. So Russia is a history of pendulum swings, and so there will be a swing back. The question is,
when, how, and also would both, I don't even speak about governments, would both nations, Russia and other nations, the community of Western nations, would they forgive each other?
for all the horrors that they perceive being inflicted on them. I am actually optimistic. And the reason I am is because, as I said, I just published a book on Khrushchev. And so by the end of the book, you know, you kind of think, what do you learn from writing a book?
And so my outcome from the book was that for every Stalin, there is a Khrushchev. And if there is a Khrushchev for every Stalin, then there is a policy, politics, similar to what was during Khrushchev or Gorbachev. That is, with all the questions, all the problems, all the potential animosity, there is still cooperation.
So, after Putin, there is a different figure. There is a swing of the pendulum, whenever that is. We hope. In the future. We hope. We hope. And is that what Khrushchev would think if he was able to look back with us? Now, looking at how he came after Stalin, Gorbachev came to Brezhnev and so on, as you say, would that be his main reflection? The pendulum will swing again.
I don't know if Khrushchev would think that, because Khrushchev was really not necessarily a very philosophical figure in this. But he denounced Stalin's crimes, to be famous. He was a reaction against his predecessor. He was. But not because he was thinking. He actually said,
you know, we allowed it to happen we shouldn't have. And he was the only one of all the Stalin flunkies of which he was one and very sincere and enthusiastic one for a long time. He said, my hands are covered in blood up to the elbows. So that was one of his reasonings, that they shouldn't be covered. But I think Gorbachev, who thought about political philosophy much more or thought, unlike Khrushchev, who didn't.
Gorbachev would have said absolutely for every Stalin there is a Khrushchev and for every conservatism in Soviet politics there is a Gorbachev. We must conclude it's been fascinating to listen to you. Would you ever go back there to live when that pendulum swings? Will you be back there?
My home is in New York. I mean, I didn't go back to live. I just went as an expert. You go as an expert, you go where you go. But if yes, absolutely, I go and I stay and I want to be that part of the new cruise ship Gorbachev era.
Well, there is an optimistic note to end it on, and it's very good for us across many parts of the West to have such a clear perspective from both sides of the Atlantic, in a way. So Nina, Chris, thank you so much for spending this time with me. Thank you.
That was Nina Kresheva, professor of international affairs at the New School in New York. Today's producer was Olivia Case, the executive producer was Fiona Leach. Sound design and theme composition was by Mao Lassetto. And I'm William Hague. If you've enjoyed this episode, you might like our previous one, The Underwater War Against Russian Sabotage.
We're in a Cold War again, aren't we? But arguably even worse, because now there's apparent sabotage going on. And that's a pretty direct threat. It's a really, really dangerous moment. There's a link to it in the description of this podcast. Do leave us a review. It helps others find us. And if you'd like to get in touch, it's thestoryatthetimes.com. See you again soon.