Putin’s Crusade Against Pro-Western Christianity

Editor’s note: This is the second article in a two-part series. Click here to read the first article.

Putin’s confrontation with the West is not just about geopolitics, but about religion. His government argues that Russia, not the West, is now the home of authentic Christianity. The restoration of a mighty Russia will compete with the West on the world stage—in geopolitics, in trade, in military might and in faith.

As I mentioned in my last article, Putin is broadcasting his religiosity and coupling it with hyper-nationalism and anti-Westernism. His moves on the world stage must be seen in this context.

Putin’s Christian Marxism was originally promoted by the KGB. As a former KGB officer himself, this version of the faith would appeal to Putin as a way of reconciling Russian nationalism, service to the state and personal religious beliefs.

Putin’s aggressive nationalism on the world stage is fused with his faith. Even the annexation of Crimea was justified with religious undertones, as Pat Buchanan pointed out in his article, “Whose Side is God on Now?” He quotes Putin as saying:

“[Crimea] is the location of ancient Khersones, where Prince Vladimir was baptized. His spiritual feat of adopting Orthodoxy predetermined the overall basis of the culture, civilization and human values that unite the peoples of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.”

Putin links his faith with the unification of ethnic Russians inside and outside his country’s official borders. In March, he delivered a speech where an astute observer noticed he switched his terminology.

He stopped talking about the “Rossisskii”—meaning Russian citizens—and started talking about the “Russkii,” a term that includes ethnic Russians outside the official borders of his country. He said that Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, is “the mother of ‘Russkie’ cities.”

He also said:

“Millions of ‘Russkii’ went to sleep in one country and woke up in another, instantly finding themselves ethnic minorities in former Soviet republics, and the ‘Russkii’ people became one of the largest, if not the largest, divided nation in the world.”

Putin’s nationalistic/Christian-Marxist agenda was apparent years ago.

In 2009, I foresaw a Russian takeover of Crimea when it was reported that Russian passports were being distributed in the area, granting them citizenship. This came after Russia, unsatisfied with taking over South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia, engineered a coup with the objective of controlling the rest of the country. Russian covert operations to destabilize Georgia continued, including a bombing near the U.S. embassy. Russia consistently accuses Georgia of sponsoring terrorist attacks on its soil, setting up the pretext for retaliation.

In 2010, pro-Russian forces toppled the government of Kyrgyzstan. At the very least, Russia tried to instigate it with its media outlets. Since then, the leadership has overseen the country’s “transformation into a Russian client state and military bulwark,” in the words of Professor Baktybek Beshimov.

Now, unsatisfied with just taking Crimea, Putin is mobilizing his forces for a likely invasion of Ukraine. Already, Russian covert operatives are stirring up trouble in eastern and southern Ukraine. Pro-Russian operatives have established the pretext for Putin by leading a takeover of government buildings in Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv. The protestors want a referendum on unification with Russia.

The question is who is next.

Putin’s former top economic advisor says Putin “claims to have ownership” over “significant parts of Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic States and Finland.” The long-term objective is to bring Russia back to the days of Tsar Nicholas II.

The NATO Supreme Allied Commander thinks the next target is Moldova, specifically the Trans-Dniester region that declared independence in 1992. Its leadership openly desires unification with Russia and a vote was 97.2% in favor of unification in 2006. The overall population is one-third Russian and the country hosts 1,300 Russian soldiers.

A British politician is accusing Russia of encouraging separatism among the Serb minority in Bosnia. Reuters noted that the Serb leaders are, like Putin, Orthodox Christians.

Kazakhstan must also be concerned, but less so because its leadership is supportive of Russia. Its leader, President Nazarbayev, told Putin in a phone call last month “that Kazakhstan, as a strategic partner, treats with understanding the position of Russia, defending the rights of national minorities in Ukraine, as well as its security interests.”

About 24% of the Kazakh population is Russian (3 million people), with the northern part of the country being almost evenly split between Russians and non-Russians, with some parts being Russian-majority. However, 70% of the Kazakh population is Muslim. It’s unlikely, but not inconceivable, that Putin would risk getting into a major jihad in order to confront a friendly neighbor.

Others see Estonia as the next goal. Last month, a Russian diplomat conveyed his government’s concerns about Russians in Estonia, a NATO member. He said, “Language should not be used to segregate and isolate groups;” another way of taking responsibility for the welfare of Russians in the country.

The country is an appealing target for Putin because of his stated desire to stop NATO from expanding up to his sphere of influence. If he succeeds in taking even a part of Estonia, he will have discredited NATO as a credible military alliance.

“We are not opposed to cooperation with NATO…We are against having a military alliance making itself at home right in our backyard or in our historic territory,” he said last month.

Northeastern Estonia, specifically the city of Narva, is 82% Russian, 36% have Russian citizenship and 94% speak Russian. The country as a whole has been subjected to Russian intimidation, including major cyber attacks in 2007. It has historical importance to Russia, having served as a major port city.

Dr. Daniel Berman describes Estonia as “the point of maximum weakness for the alliance” because the local Russian population is genuinely marginalized. If Russia applies the Crimea model to Estonia, NATO would be in the position of opposing self-determination. Putin, he says, “could ask for no better battlefield.”

It is hard to see NATO having the appetite for a military confrontation with Russia over this piece of Estonia. Dr. Peter Vincent Pry analyzed the military balance and concluded, “Never during the Cold War did Moscow enjoy such an advantage against NATO’s frontline states in conventional and nuclear forces as it does today.”

The problem is that the very foundation of NATO rests upon collective defense. Estonian President Ilves  sums up the implications if NATO takes a pass on its treaty obligations: “Then every country is on its own. As soon as that happens, NATO no longer exists as an alliance. It’s simple.”

Russia’s aggression towards its neighbors is part of a bigger global ambition. The treatment of ethnic Russians is not the reason for Russia’s coddling of Iran, Syria and North Korea, nor is its strategic alliance with China.

American policy towards the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran has driven Egypt into the arms of Putin. Bahrain and other Arab states are threatening to do the same. The Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, are also looking at China as a replacement for U.S. influence.

At around the same time as the annexation of Crimea, Russia announced it was seeking access to eight bases in Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Algeria, Cyprus, Singapore, Vietnam and Seychelles. Once finalized, the deals would expand Russia’s ability to deploy its navy and strategic bombers.

All of these moves are meant to put Russia on the West’s level on the world stage, creating a choice for the countries of the world and Christians globally.

As Putin’s quote in the beginning of the article shows, he sees faith, ethnic unity and Russian greatness as intertwined. The key to greatness is unity and both rest upon the Orthodoxy. Putin is already positioning Russia as the defender of Christianity; the filler of a religious void left by the West’s increasing immorality.

This isn’t a return to the Cold War where the choice is between the “Godless Communists” and the democratic West based in Judeo-Christian values. Instead, Putin wants to lure Christians to his side by making them feel like the West is the antithesis of their faith; that the future of genuine Christianity is with Russia, not America.

The news media is focused on Russia’s geopolitical and military offensive but it’s missing the third leg of Putin’s stool—the religious offensive.