Dmytro Yagunov: ‘Russian Spirit’ as the Cultural Engine of Imperial Expansion

In the allegorical Soviet fantasy film “City Zero” by Karen Shakhnazarov (1988), a Soviet prosecutor articulates what should be considered the most compelling explanation of the mysterious ‘Russian Spirit’ – a concept that illuminates Russia’s imperialistic trajectory from the Moscovian Principality through the modern Russian neo-empire:

“Since the Mongol-Tatar invasion, the main idea that unites us all, the idea that generations of our ancestors served, is the idea of Statehood. A powerful, great State is the ideal for which the Russian people are ready to suffer, ready to endure any hardship, ready, finally, to give their lives.

This is an irrational idea. It is not pragmatic. It is the idea of the Russian Spirit, which subjugates and dissolves your and my individuality but in return gives you and me a hundred times more. It is this feeling of belonging to a great organism that gives a sense of the spirit, a sense of strength and immortality.

The West has always sought to compromise the idea of our Statehood. But the greatest danger to our idea lies not in the West, but in ourselves. It is we ourselves who cling to these endless fashionable Western ideas, seduced by their obvious practicality and rationality, without realising that this is precisely where their destructive power lies.

But never mind. Our own idea always prevails in the end. Look, all our revolutions ultimately led not to destruction, but to the strengthening and consolidation of the State. And so, it will always be”.

Here, we should stress that Russia’s expansion from a tributary principality of the Golden Horde into a transcontinental empire spanning eleven time zones represents one of the most profound geopolitical shifts in human history. Unlike the maritime empires of Western Europe, which projected power across oceans to establish discontinuous colonies, the Russian Empire engaged in ‘contiguous colonialism’, an organic, relentless absorption of neighbouring territories across the Eurasian landmass. This report provides an exhaustive analysis of the colonial wars that drove this expansion, examining the strategic evolution of the Imperial Russian Army, the fierce and varied resistance of indigenous peoples – from the frozen tundra of Chukotka to the arid deserts of Turkestan and the precipitous peaks of the Caucasus – and the administrative mechanisms that consolidated these conquests.

The historiography of colonialism has traditionally prioritised the ‘saltwater’ model of Western Europe, characterised by the overseas projection of naval power and the establishment of distinct metropole-colony dichotomies. Russian imperialism, however, defies this categorisation. It was a terrestrial process where the frontier was not a distant shore but a permeable borderland that required constant security stabilisation.

Considering the above, we should take a very brief look at the history of the Russian colonial policy and related colonial wars which were mostly deleted from the memory of the Western society due to a very sophisticated imperial and neo-imperial propaganda.

First, it is necessary to stress that the history of Russia is a history of endless colonial wars. Russian colonial wars encompassed a series of military and territorial expansions conducted by the Muscovite Principality from the late 15th century through the mid-20th century. This expansionist project primarily targeted indigenous, nomadic, and semi-nomadic populations across regions including Siberia, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. Contemporary Ukraine represents a continuation of this historical pattern, though numerous other nations remain similarly threatened.

Imperial propaganda has always concealed colonisation and conquest behind ‘territorial development’ and ‘the desire of small nations to fraternise with the Russian people’. A famous Russian novelist Valentin Pikul writes: “If the Americans had the Wild West, we had the Wild East, and our Russian ‘great track’ to the Pacific Ocean looked more dangerous and much longer than America’s ‘great track’. In a historically short period of time, the Russians crossed all of Siberia, colonised the Kolyma, the Kuril Islands and Kamchatka, sailed and rowed across the ocean, became neighbours with the Native Americans in Alaska, and bordered Spanish possessions in California. Yes, it was truly a ‘great trek’! Foreigners do not deny the greatness of the feat of the Russian explorers… The advance of the Russians across Siberia during the 17th century was astonishingly rapid. This unknown army accomplished a feat that will forever remain a monument to its courage and enterprise, unmatched by any other European nation”.

However, this expansion was far from ‘territorial development’. The initial phase of Russian expansion commenced under Ivan the Terrible, who launched military campaigns against native Finno-Ugrian populations and nomadic tribes. Throughout subsequent centuries, successive Russian rulers – including Ivan IV and Peter I – pursued aggressive territorial acquisition strategies aimed at subjugating indigenous populations, consolidating fragmented territories, and establishing control over critical trade routes. The Table below represents a brief summary of the historical and political phenomenon which is called ‘Russian colonial policy’.

In general, all Russian colonial wars and armed conflicts should be structured in the light of the different types of invasion:

1. TERRITORIAL CONQUEST (approximately 85 wars):

• Siberian expansion;
• Central Asian conquests;
• Caucasus subjugation;
• Baltic expansion;
• Polish partitions;
• Far Eastern expansion;
• Soviet annexations 1939-1945;
• post-Soviet neo-colonial interventions.

2. SUPPRESSION OF INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENTS (approximately 45 wars):

• Bashkir rebellions (multiple);
• Kazakh uprisings (multiple);
• Polish uprisings (multiple);
• Chechen wars (multiple);
• Georgian conflicts (multiple);
• Baltic independence struggles;
• Ukrainian resistance (1917-1921, 1940-1960, 2014-present);
• numerous other ethnic and national rebellions.

3. MAINTENANCE OF COLONIAL EMPIRE (approximately 30 wars):

• anti-communist insurgencies in Eastern Europe;
• Soviet interventions in satellite states;
• post-Soviet ‘frozen conflicts’;
• Russian “peacekeeping” operations in former USSR.

4. IMPERIAL RIVALRY (approximately 30 wars):

• wars with Ottoman Empire;
• wars with Sweden;
• wars with Poland-Lithuania;
• Napoleonic Wars;
• Russo-Japanese War;
• Cold War proxy conflicts.

However, it is important to highlight not only the quantity of colonial wars by Russia but also the methods of patterns.

Direct conquests and annexation were ‘signatures’ of the Russian Empire. It includes direct military conquest followed by administrative integration, elimination of indigenous political structures, and establishment of Russian/Soviet administrative control.

No less important was Russian settler colonialism including mass settlement of Russian populations in conquered territories, displacement of indigenous populations, mass russification policies, and creation of ‘new’ Russian or Soviet territories.

Colonialism is always concerned with resource extraction. Here, the Russian state was not original in emphasising policies such as control of fur trade (Siberia), agricultural resources (Ukraine, Kazakhstan), mineral resources (Caucasus, Siberia, Central Asia), and strategic resources (oil, gas in modern period).

No less important was Russian cultural colonialism including forced conversion to Russian Orthodox Christianity (Tsarist period), imposition of Russian language and culture (Ukraine especially), Soviet atheism and communist ideology, and suppression of local languages and cultures.

Military occupation was also a priority of the Russian imperialistic policy (permanent military bases in conquered territories, garrison cities and fortifications, use of military force to suppress resistance, and punitive expeditions against rebellious populations).

Administrative colonialism includes Russian/Soviet governors and administrators, integration into imperial/Soviet legal system, economic integration and dependency, and political subordination to Moscow and St. Petersburg.

A colonial state cannot imagine itself without implementing the principle of ‘divide and rule’, in which the Russian authorities have achieved stunning results playing ethnic groups against each other, creating artificial administrative boundaries, privileging certain groups over others, and fostering dependency on imperial power.

Many conflicts involved large-scale ethnic cleansing or genocidal policies: 1) Circassian genocide (Caucasian War 1817-1864): mass deportation and death of Circassian population; 2) deportations of ‘punished peoples’ era (Chechens, Ingush, Crimean Tatars, and others) during WWII; 3) Holodomor (famine-genocide in Ukraine, 1932-1933); 4) ethnic cleansing of Georgians from Abkhazia (1992-1993); 5) ethnic cleansing of Georgians from South Ossetia (2008).

Since 1991, Russia has maintained colonial relationships through what can be termed ’frozen conflicts’, creating dependent pseudo-states in regions like Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh. The approach involves maintaining military bases in former Soviet republics and exercising economic dependency through energy politics and economic leverage. Political interference takes the form of support for pro-Russian politicians and parties, while direct military intervention has been used to prevent Western integration, as seen in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine from 2014 to the present. Additionally, Russia has employed military intervention through the use of Wagner Group, Africa Corps and similar entities in Africa and the Middle East.

This post-Soviet neo-colonialism operates through five key imperial strategies: territorial expansion with a continuous drive to expand borders and spheres of influence, systematic suppression of autonomy by crushing independence movements, military dominance using overwhelming force against weaker opponents, strategic depth through the pursuit of buffer zones and security perimeters, and imperial ideology justified through civilizing mission narratives, whether Tsarist, proletarian internationalism under the Soviet system, or protection of Russian speakers in the modern era.

The historical record demonstrates that Russian state formations, from the Principality of Moscow to the modern Russian Federation, have engaged in over 200 military conflicts over 760 years. A substantial majority of these conflicts (approximately 60-70%) exhibit clear colonial characteristics: 1) conquest and subjugation of non-Russian peoples; 2) territorial expansion through military force; 3) suppression of independence movements; 4) extraction of resources from conquered territories; 5) settler colonialism and demographic manipulation; 6) cultural imperialism and forced assimilation; 7) maintenance of empire through military occupation.

This pattern of colonial warfare has been remarkably consistent across different regime types (monarchy, communist state, post-Soviet federation), suggesting that colonialism is a fundamental characteristic of Russian statecraft rather than an aberration of any particular political system.

The colonial nature of Russian expansion has resulted in: 1) incorporation of vast territories into the Russian state; 2) subjugation of dozens of ethnic groups and nationalities; 3) destruction of indigenous political entities; 4) large-scale population displacements and ethnic cleansing; 5) ongoing conflicts in former colonial territories; 6) persistent neo-colonial relationships in the post-Soviet space.

Understanding this colonial history is essential for comprehending contemporary Russian foreign policy, particularly the ongoing war in Ukraine and interventions in other former Soviet republics and beyond.