The Russia–Ukraine War Didn’t Start in 2014

Field Historian Daniel Armes explains the deep historical ties between Russia and the Ukraine, and how that context is significant to the current conflict on GNSI’s “At the Boundary” podcast.

Along with Tad Schnaufer, PhD, Armes breaks down his “Journal of Strategic Security” article which broadens the perspective of the region’s tension. The struggle between the two countries dates back to the 800s, and is influenced by the Byzantine Empire, the Great Schism of 1054, and the impact of the Mongol invasions. 

The episode also touches on how the Russia-Ukraine war affects other global and national security issues.

Links from the episode:

• Daniel Arme’s JSS Article
• USF article on research investment rising and outpacing AAU members
• Tampa Bay Business & Wealth Article on 5th Best City
• Video Series Interview with Austin Becker
• Episode 5 Generalship Series 
• SPCWA Conference
• Cyber Beacon Registration
• GNSI Tampa Summit 6 Registration 

GNSI on X
GNSI on Linkedin
GNSI on YouTube

At the Boundary  from the Global and National Security Institute at the University of South Florida,  features global and national security issues we’ve found to be insightful, intriguing, fascinating, maybe controversial, but overall just worth talking about.

A "boundary" is a place, either literal or figurative, where two forces exist in close proximity to each other. Sometimes that boundary is in a state of harmony. More often than not, that boundary has a bit of chaos baked in. The Global and National Security Institute will live on the boundary of security policy and technology and that's where this podcast will focus.

The mission of GNSI is to provide actionable solutions to 21st-century security challenges for decision-makers at the local, state, national and global levels. We hope you enjoy At the Boundary.

Look for our other publications and products on our website publications page.

Transcript

At the Boundary (EP 114 Daniel Armes)

SUMMARY KEYWORDS

Russia-Ukraine war, historical context, religious divide, Byzantine Empire, Mongol invasion, Ukrainian identity, Polish influence, Russian Orthodox Church, independence movements, ethnic migration, Putin's perspective, self-determination, cultural centers, military conflict, peace talks.

SPEAKERS

Daniel Armes, Glenn Beckmann, Tad Schnaufer

Glenn Beckmann  00:12

Hi everybody. Welcome to another episode of at the boundary, the podcast from the global and national security Institute at the University of South Florida. I'm Glenn Beckman sitting in for Jim Cardoso today on at the boundary.

Glenn Beckmann  00:30

Today on the podcast, we're going to talk with the author of an article that appears in the latest special issue of our academic journal, The Journal of strategic security. This latest issue published a few weeks ago, focuses specifically on the Russia, Ukraine war. It features 16 in depth articles examining the war from nearly every angle. Our guest today, Daniel arms is a 15 year veteran of the Florida National Guard. Armes' article focuses on the historical context of the conflict, as Ukraine's struggle to be a free and independent state dates back centuries, with both Russia and Europe staking claims to Ukraine's legacy. He'll be speaking today with GNSI strategy and research manager, Dr Tad schnaufer himself, a 17 year veteran of the Florida National Guard who spent a lot of time in Eastern Europe, including deployments with the Florida guard. Let's listen in as they discuss slavo Ukraine, solving Ukraine's present with the past.

Tad Schnaufer  01:37

Well, Daniel, welcome to the podcast. Thank you, Ted and good to be here. Excellent. You know, you wrote an awesome article for the Journal of strategic security recently covering the mixed history as well as the religious and cultural background between the Russians and the Ukrainians. So obviously, they have a shared history for most of their existence, and that spawns into how they use and narrate that history today. So let's why don't we start at the beginning. Where do we see Russian and Ukrainian history first merging and then how did it eventually kind of spawn off into two separate lines?

Daniel Armes  02:14

So the ancestry for the Russians and the Ukrainians goes back to the eight hundreds. So we immediately delve into a history that is long before anyone you know, especially in America, remembers really reads about they came from Norway, and it was, it was the Vikings. So the Vikings were looking to get they were looking for trade routes to the Mediterranean from the Baltic. And in their search for those trade routes, they end up in the lake lagoda area. And that's where some of the first, the first ruse settlements were they integrated with the local fit, the local population, which were the Finns, and that's where the Russians come from. And then the Ukrainians, they integrated a little further south with the local populations that were there, and those populations grew for about 200 years, and then they ran into the Byzantine Empire when they finally made it down to made it down to the Black Sea, and from there, that's really where we start seeing the beginning of the Russian the Russian culture. They really emulated the Byzantine Empire. They saw what they had. They loved their architecture, which is why all Russian culture really emulates the things that the Byzantine Empire had. As far as that, they saw that, and they saw the block and the brick and the metal work, and they looked at that, and they looked at their wooden architectures that they had brought with them, and they said they wanted to, they wanted everything that the Byzantines had. So they did a really good job of adopting that. Along with that, they adopted Christianity. So Christianity, as the as I talk about in the paper, has that big split in 1054, as a result of differences between the Catholic Church, which was in the West, they spoke Latin. So the Byzantines, they were Greek. So obviously they spoke Greek, and they had some differences that had really been building for 400 years. As far as you know, the role of the Pope, you know, who's the head of the church? What's, what's his job? Different things, the original sin, you know, what the what both sides of Christianity thought that. Meant, you know from you know, and then other topics that they just they couldn't reconcile. And that really finally came to our head in 1054, with this, with this great schism. And the interesting part was it was down to one letter. So the Great Schism was based on one letter that they couldn't decide, or that the book that both sides couldn't reconcile, where the Holy Spirit came from. So that was an issue that the Byzantine sent their their envoys to Rome to go talk to the Pope, and the Pope did likewise, and it ended up both sides excommunicating each other, though that was the big schism. And then in my papers, though, what is what I trace the religious breakup between the Russians and the Ukrainians.

Tad Schnaufer  05:59

So with, you know that religious division between the Great Schism, this divide between East and West, what aspects of that play out even today? So you know, almost 1000 years later, you still have this religious divide that's playing out in the current war.

Daniel Armes  06:19

So if it wasn't complicated enough, with the issues of the Great Schism, there have been multiple attempts over the last, oh well, since 1054 to reunite the eastern and the western churches, and that's where this uniate church came from in the 1200s I believe it was they tried an effort at unification, and it didn't work. The Union church was the one effort at reuniting the churches that actually did work, and they kept the Liturgy of the Catholic and the Orthodox Church. They essentially ignored the issues that had caused the rift in the first place. So you've got the Catholic Church that sees this as reconciling, but then you've got the Orthodox Church, which sees it as, you know, kind of reconciling. But at the same time, the Orthodox Church considers the Catholic Church heretical, and they consider Moscow to be the Third Rome. So they see themselves as the only church, and the Union a church, kind of, as just, you know, almost as a way for, you know, back in the day, they would say it was a way for Poland to exert influence over Russia and to convert Russians to Catholicism. Right?

Tad Schnaufer  08:03

Yeah, because Ukraine's right there, obviously right there on the border between those two, and that's where you see the history that they have had with the Poland Lithuanian Commonwealth, with the Lithuanians converted to Catholicism, you have that influence. And then on the other side of it, you have the Russians and the Orthodox.

Daniel Armes  08:18

And going back to some of the history. So in one of the conflicts they were that I address in the paper, there was King Dan Daniel who converted to Catholicism so that he could get the European powers to fight the Mongols. He wanted a crusade, essentially. And the Pope said, Okay, you'll get a crusade, but you have to convert to Catholicism.

Tad Schnaufer  08:45

And where was King Daniel out of? Was he at a Kiev? Or where was he out of?

Daniel Armes  08:52

Yes, he was. He was Prince of the ruse in Kiev. So 1240, the Mongols sat Kiev three times, and that's that's what I consider the cultural division between the Russians and the Ukrainians, because when he asked for that crusade, your didn't come to help there, and there was no one to help him. So essentially, he had to resubmit to the Mongols, and Kiev was sacked three times, like I said, and that, that was a start of the RUS diaspora. You had a lot of the you had Rusco west to Lviv and then east to Novgorod, and that's where your historic Russians come from. Interesting enough. Lviv was actually founded in 1265, by King Daniel's son. So it's actually named after Lee. Who was the eldest son of King Daniel. So with that being a Polish Lithuanian city, the Lithuanians also claim ancestry to the ruse heritage, because, well, their one city that was in their Commonwealth was founded by King Daniel who, or by King Daniel son, who essentially was like the guy for the Russian for the ruse people,

Tad Schnaufer  10:30

when that's interesting to see is the roost people Spread out, spread out across to the some of the other principalities. So novograd Muscovy, so how did those rise up, and then how does this narrative play into the current conflict?

Daniel Armes  10:45

So muscovia was was sacked by the by the Mongols, but it didn't, it didn't suffer the same fate as Kiev. Kiev is significantly south of Moscow, so even though the Mongols were able to conquer that area, their influence wasn't as significant as it was in Kiev. So the Muscovites were able to form more of a cultural center. And there really wasn't much left in Kiev. Like I said, it was sacked three times. They, they, I mean, they razed the city to the ground. So your cultural centers then became Novgorod, which is, which was the capital for, you know, eventually it became, it moved to Moscow, and then that's where the Russians come from. But then in Lviv, it was Catholic. So we see these two cultural centers, one that is Orthodox and one that's Catholic.

Tad Schnaufer  11:50

And within the ruse people themselves. So you see a divide within the same peoples who spread out because of the Mongol invasion. And then now they're greeting these external influences on the religious back with the Catholics from the populist wanians, and then the traditional Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox.

Daniel Armes  12:10

Yeah, so you're seeing these, and I'm just gonna say Russian, because they're ruse, right people. But you see these Russians like they were 200 years ago. They or 200 years they were the same families. And then you have this, you know, Kiev is sacked, and then they have this diaspora. So by the 1400s you have two completely different cultures.

Tad Schnaufer  12:38

So when does the Ukrainian identity really, so you're noting that it's the Mongol invasion. Is kind of when that Ukrainian identity starts to form. Is that? Is that how your arguments formulated?

Daniel Armes  12:50

So the Ukrainian people were, it's a, it's a, not a black and white question, because there have always been people that there have always been ruse people living in Ukraine. So they consider themselves Ukrainians, because they've been in the land for 1200 you know, for hundreds of, you know, 1000 years, Ukraine didn't really become a term until the 1800s so they they just saw themselves as as the people that lived there. They were the Cossacks. It really wasn't a Ukrainian thing. They were, they were the residents. They were the RUS, people that just had always lived there. And it was really a battle between the Polish, Lithuanian commonwealth and Russia, and then the Ukrainians were the people that had been living there. So they had their identity based on their ancestry.

Tad Schnaufer  14:06

And so how does that today play out? So what? How does both sides, the Ukrainians and the Russians, how do they communicate their history?

Daniel Armes  14:14

So a lot changed in the 20th century. So with a Russian Revolution. Ukraine had its first chance of independence in 1917 and they were briefly it was briefly the Ukrainian Republic from 1917 to 1921 and then it became the Ukrainian socialist Soviet Republic. And what Stalin believed with socialism was that it's ethnic based. So in between 1921 and even through world. Or two and beyond, there were a there were mass migrations forced by the government. They wanted people to live in their ancestral heritage land. So when we look at Ukraine now, the reason you see a high concentration of Russians in eastern Ukraine is because Stalin wanted it that way. He wanted the ethnic, I guess, homogeny, to be in the land that the peoples came from. So when he did that, effectively, he made Western Ukraine to be more under the Polish influence, and then Eastern Ukraine took on more of a Russian influence, even though they he did create that border that this is The country of Ukraine now. But he he separated the heritage.

Tad Schnaufer  16:05

And so what about as we come up to today? You know, Putin has said, had his big article in 2021 leading up to the 2022 invasion. He talks about the Russians and Ukrainian people and how they're pretty much one people. So how does this history of these two two people is kind of intertwining as we've discussed the religious base. How does Putin say that this is playing out?

Daniel Armes  16:31

He looks at it from the state perspective. So there's a there's some treaties with Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, where they rejected Mongol influence. Peter the Great defeated the Swedes and European powers and reconquered land. Catherine the Great was able to expel the Muslims in the Ottoman Empire, from historic Russian territory. And Putin looks at that from the state perspective of, well, we are Russia. We're the ones that are actually protecting this land. So we are the Russians. And Ukraine looks at it as again, they're the people that have always lived there. They just haven't been given a voice or the opportunity to really have a say in it, because with all these treaties, whether it's between Poland and Lithuania, Russia, the Ottomans, the Mongols Ukraine is given almost like a they're given a seat at the table only to, you know, placate them, like make them think that they have some say in it. But then when it comes to making the decisions, they're really left out. And you see that a lot with with the treaties that in World War One and World War Two, the the Allied Powers didn't really acknowledge Ukraine. They weren't familiar with it. They didn't know much about it. So when it came time to split up, you know, to the winner goes the spoils, Ukraine was left out of it, and Russia was, you know, kind of given whatever they wanted. So that's how it typically works out for Ukraine.

Tad Schnaufer  18:30

So does this? Does the current 2022, war, you know, to the present? Does that have a religious element

Daniel Armes  18:39

to it? The Russians would say it does just because they're they don't see this as a as a 10 Year War. They see this as, you know, Putin draws us back to the 1700s and he says that that this is them protecting, you know, their their ancestral lands, which are Orthodox lands, and with the Russian state and the Russian Orthodox Church under the current administration, with a current patriarch of The Russian Orthodox Church, they're very much intertwined. So the current head of the Russian Orthodox Church is very much pro Russian. So he sees that, he sees this as a as a military effort to regain Russian Orthodox, the old Russian Orthodox land.

Tad Schnaufer  19:45

And what, from the Ukrainian perspective, what's, you know, church and leadership. Are they? Are they pulling in this case? So, because they're not, they're not, you know, they have some Catholic populations, but they also have the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. There's a couple other churches that are dealing with so, what? What's it on their side,

Daniel Armes  20:01

the Ukrainians pulled away from religion as the as one of the main factors for their nation building. Back in the 1800s or around around World War One, they were able to build some independence movements that really transcended religion. So in the Galatia Volhynia area, which is it's Western it's Southwestern Ukraine, heavy influence by Poland, by the Catholics, they were able to supply the Eastern Ukrainians with a lot of the intelligence. They had a lot of the material. So they were able to put, you know, literature. They were able to do books and pamphlets and a lot of ways to spread ideas, so they were able to be the logistics or the Eastern European, the Eastern Ukrainians who were orthodox. So the two movements kind of worked together because they saw that they needed each other. And for the first time in in the history of Ukraine, that kind of transcended religion and became more of a politics united them more than religion.

Tad Schnaufer  21:29

Yeah, that's very interesting. We see that today, obviously with the external threats from Russia. So what you know is, going back to your article, what's the big point that you're trying to get across when you're when you when someone picks this article up and starts reading it. What is some what are the key point that you want them to take away

Daniel Armes  21:49

the first point, and it's, I don't know if it's the most serious point, but I just want people to understand that this is not a conflict that started in 2014 I want people to understand that. You know, here in America, we're like 250 years old. But in 1985 Kiev celebrated their 15 100th anniversary, and they had, you know, they had coins minted for and we, we tend to have this very short sighted view on history, that if it didn't happen in our lifetime, it doesn't matter. Whereas you go to Eastern Europe or to these places that have existed for 1000 1500 years, they draw on their history to legitimize their actions that they do now, so when policymakers look at what's going on over there, now you know it's okay to not have an understanding of or not have necessarily an answer, because it's hard to it's hard to explain to somebody how 1500 years of history legitimizes in a person's actions now, when we're trying to say that you know, something that happened five years ago shouldn't set precedent for something that we're going to do today. So it's really the point of my paper was to give people a better understanding of there's parts of the world that have a very different understanding of time than we do. And if we want to be advisors and policy makers and influence policy and decisions that are being made over there, we have to understand where their people are coming from.

Tad Schnaufer  23:42

No, I think that's an excellent point, and your paper draws that out well, that other countries can see history different differently, and in this case, even the Russians, Ukrainians see their own histories differently, and they use those narratives that you said to legitimize their actions to legitimize their current, you know, government scheme to and then also to add credence to why they fight, to what land is theirs and what land is not. Because if you look at a map of Europe, you don't see Ukraine pop up until, you know, the 1900s so when Ukraine says we have this 1000 year history, it's like, well, where are you on the I'm not seeing you on the map. And it makes it difficult, in some ways, for you know them, to craft that narrative, to ensure you know we are, we are our own people. We have our own you know, whether it's religious, cultural, language, heritage, the Russians, and going back to how Putin frames, it is that they're essentially just Russian peoples, you know, just like the Belarusians and other groups that the Russians pretty much claim that there are, you know, they're, they're just Russians,

Daniel Armes  24:49

yeah, and ignorance really played, ignorance has really played a a significant part in the history of Ukraine with the. With the Treaty of Versailles and the Treaty of Riga, the treaties that they, you know, essentially affected Ukraine. At the end of World War One, there was so much mistrust in the allies as far as Ukraine because they didn't have an understanding of what Ukraine was. A lot of the allies thought that Ukraine was just, was Russia, or that it was, you know, so similar to Russia that it was going to pretty much fall in line with exactly what Russia wanted to do. But if you read what, what the people that were leading the independence movement in Ukraine were trying to do during the First World War, like they weren't Soviets necessarily. So they truly wanted an independent Ukraine, and unfortunately, sometimes Ukrainian leaders will do what they have to do to secure independence, and unfortunately, it made them look like they were siding with Russia, especially in World War One, so that hurt them. But ignorance has hurt Ukraine, especially in a globalized society.

Tad Schnaufer  26:22

Now it's interesting, because in the aftermath of World War One, a lot of the peace agreements were focused on self determination. That's where you see the reintroduction of Poland back onto the map. Poland was off the map for about just over 120 years at that point, as we're looking at 1918, 1919, so with that in mind, you know, the Ukrainians not getting that self determination. Obviously, their political movement was not able to get out their message to the when the leading powers, and maybe that's something that they're still dealing with today, is getting the message out and, you know, making sure that they're on, not only on the map, but people know where they are, what they stand for, and you know where they're trying to go.

Daniel Armes  27:06

Yeah, and Stalin's policies, Stalin devastated Ukraine, especially with the five year plans and the famines and everything, but splitting people into the ethnic regions, really helped solidify now the independence movements of Ukraine, because you look at Western Ukraine, or you look at almost all of Ukraine like they are hardcore, pro Ukrainian, anti Russian, and Then you look at the resistance that Ukraine is offering now because not to justify what he did, but Stalin's ethnic breakup of the country really, really made the Resistance movements, where we're the precursor to the Resistance movements that we see today, because he concentrated ethnic Ukrainians back into their own land. So now they're now they're saying, We've been here the whole time, and we we actually can fight for ourselves.

Tad Schnaufer  28:16

So does this history piece actually play a role that you know, does actually influence the events, or is it just Putin it just Putin saying, hey, you know, we're using history to justify our actions, and maybe Zelensky, does, you know, the same thing for the Ukrainian side. Does it act? How much influence does it actually carry? From your perspective? I mean,

Daniel Armes  28:34

in Eastern Europe, tradition is such a is so emphasized with a Russian Orthodox Church. It's, it's very much tradition based. And they bring up tradition all the time. They use tradition to justify, you know, a lot of the doctrines that they have. So they just, it's just carrying over to everything else that they do. So they see this as a as a tradition, as something that always has been, as something that shouldn't change.

Tad Schnaufer  29:14

Is it righting or wrong? In a sense that the Ukraine got its own independence, and the Russians feel like they, you know?

Daniel Armes  29:21

I mean, that's, that's a, that's a, that's probably one of the contentious issues, because the Russians would say, Well, we are righting a wrong right. We are returning ethnic Russians and Imperial Russian land back to us, whereas the Ukrainians are saying, well, we're righting a wrong that should never have happened and that, you know, we finally get a voice. We finally have the ability to self determination and to answer for ourselves.

Tad Schnaufer  29:57

You. Well, what can we expect as the conflict obviously continues, there's some peace talks as negotiations. But what can we expect the role of history, religion, the number of factors that you mentioned your paper. How do you how do you foresee those playing out in the next year or so, as the conflict continues and hopefully there's some sort of peace deal in the near future?

Daniel Armes  30:21

That's such a tough question, because I thought this. I thought that the peace deal was going to be reached before this paper published. I was kind of excited to see what would come of that, but I think we should expect that history doesn't move as fast as we think it does. So you look at all the conflicts that Ukraine has been through in the past, and we try to summarize that. And then, when you look at it, some of those conflicts took decades. So in the scope of things, 2022, to 2026, is only four years. I would love if they could come to some quicker cessation of hostilities due to the technology and the speed that the world moves at today. But I, I think it tells us that both sides are no less determined to their ideology than they were 1000 years ago.

Tad Schnaufer  31:30

Fascinating point. Well, thank you so much, Daniel for joining us today.

Daniel Armes  31:33

It's been a pleasure. Thank you for hosting me.

Glenn Beckmann  31:39

Perhaps there is hope for Ukraine in its past, but first, that country and its people need to find a way to escape the present. Many thanks today to author Daniel arms for discussing his article in the most recent special issue of our academic journal, The Journal of strategic security. Thanks as well to tajnoffer for sharing the insights and experiences he gained while spending considerable time in Ukraine and Eastern Europe. We hope you enjoyed their conversation today. By the way, you can find this special Ukraine issue of the JSs online. We publish the journal quarterly in cooperation with USF libraries. It's also the last issue from Editor in Chief, J tamsett. He's edited the journal since its inception. In 2008 he's heading off to new adventures, but he leaves behind a great legacy, 2 million plus downloads of the journal, as well as a journal that's ranked by Google Scholar in the top 10% of all military studies journals, many thanks to Jay and we wish him great success in his new chapter. Before we let you go today, a couple of quick notes. More great news involving USF this week, a new story shows the university is increasing its investment in research faster than the vast majority of its AAU peers. The story shows USF increased its research investment in 2024 by 13% year over year. That's a bigger increase than 90% of AAU members. USF is currently ranked number 47 according to the story among all 422 public universities. You can read more on it on the USF website. We'll post a link and a big feather in the cap this week for the city of Tampa as it was named the fifth best city in America for corporate headquarters, according to the magazine site selection, a local economic development leader credits USF with playing a key role in that ranking in an article published by tampa bay business and wealth Craig Richard president and CEO of the Tampa Bay Economic Development Council praised the relationship between USF and the EDC, saying. Quote, from the start, USF has been more than a partner. USF has chartered our course for connecting talent, research and entrepreneurship. End, quote, read the article for yourself. We'll drop a link in the show notes. Don't forget about some great events coming up on our calendar. On February 11 at the USF St Pete campus, will be the annual St Petersburg conference on world affairs. This year's theme outer space, international collaboration and competition. On March 11, we're happy to announce the rescheduled date for cyber Beacon, the flagship conference from the College of Information cyberspace, from the National Defense University. It's the first time CIC has taken their conference on the road, and we're super excited to host them here at USF. If you recall, it was originally scheduled for October, but the federal government shutdown caused the postponement, but we now have the event officially rescheduled. March 11. This year's theme cyber and information reimagined artificial intelligence as a strategic advantage. And on March 24 and 25th we'll host GNSI Tampa summit six here at USF, this year's summit is theme. Cracks in the lamp, freeing the nuclear Genie, and examines the question of whether or not we're heading into a new nuclear age. We'll drop links to all of these events in the show notes. Be sure to visit our YouTube channel. We've dropped a couple of new videos there, episode five of general Mackenzie's studies of generalship series, as well as an interview with Dr Austin Becker from the University of Rhode Island. That's a follow up interview to the Florida security forum port and maritime security event in November, next week on the podcast, we're happy to welcome retired Coast Guard Rear Admiral Mark Fedor, who's now working with a veteran owned company called operator solutions, which specializes in solutions for the commercial and private space flight sectors, that includes the recovery of what colloquially is known as space junk. There are quite literally tons and tons of it up there, and he's going to talk to us about he and his team take care of it. Should be an interesting conversation. We hope you can join us for that. Thanks for listening today. If you like the podcast, please subscribe. Let your friends and colleagues know and ask them to subscribe as well. You can follow GNSI on our LinkedIn and X accounts at USF underscore GNSI And check out our website as well. Usf.edu/gnsi edu slash GNSI.

Glenn Beckmann  36:28

That's going to wrap up this episode of at the boundary. Each new episode will feature global and national security issues we found to be worthy of attention and discussion. I'm Glenn Beckman sitting in for Jim Cardoso this week, thanks for listening today. We'll see you next week at the boundary. You.