Hello, dear Ms. Gabriele Krone-Schmalz! This is Hieromonk Ioann (Kurmoyarov), a priest of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR (A)) and Doctor of Theology, writing to you. A few days ago, I watched your video on YouTube, in which you criticized Western politicians for their biased attitude toward Russia and their failure to understand the reasons that prompted the Russian leadership to launch the Special Military Operation in Ukraine. I confess to you that I am deeply outraged by what you said in that video. Therefore, I felt it necessary to convey my position on this matter to you. Please forgive me for this untimely response. As far as I understand, you recorded your video (or posted a fragment of your speech) over a year ago. However, at that time, I was in prison and therefore physically unable to respond to you. This opportunity arose only after my release from prison, when, for security reasons, I left the territory of the Russian Federation.
I believe I have the right to oppose you, as from the very beginning of the SVO (Special Military Operation), I condemned this criminal aggression, for which I was arrested on July 7, 2022, and sentenced to three years in a general regime penal colony. At the same time, the human rights organization ‘’Memorial’’ recognized me as a political prisoner. As I already mentioned, after serving my sentence, I was forced to leave the Russian Federation. However, even in exile, I continue my anti-war and peacekeeping activities. In particular, I believe it is necessary to convey to the European community the truth about what is happening in modern Russia.
I’m sure you’ll also be interested to hear the opinion of an eyewitness who was able to see from within the system how the Russian justice system works and, more generally, what the Russian state is like today. Moreover, in your speech, you yourself stated that before drawing any conclusions, we first need to understand everything.
So, based on what I heard in your speech, I can say that you haven’t fully grasped the situation, and therefore have drawn erroneous, hasty conclusions about what’s happening, incorrectly answering your own question: Is Russia pursuing imperialist goals or is it concerned with creating a workable security architecture? You were certainly right when you said that to answer this question, we need to understand the interests of the parties to the conflict, based on the facts. However, in analyzing the situation, you made two fundamental errors that led to false conclusions:
Firstly, in analyzing the situation, you relied exclusively on the facts cited by the Russian side and completely ignored the arguments of its opponents.
Secondly, you forgot to analyze (or chose not to) the Ukrainian side’s arguments. As a result, your arguments seemed one-sided and overly biased. So let’s now analyze your arguments more thoroughly and try to give them an objective assessment. So:
1. In your opinion, the interests of the current Russian leadership include ensuring peace within the country and at its borders, and achieving cooperation and security guarantees from the West, which are necessary for the continuation of the reform process and the further development of the Russian state. Fine, so be it, but then answer me the following questions:
Who threatened Russia in the 21st century, and when? You may not be aware, but within the country, the Russian government has completely and utterly destroyed the opposition and effectively banned any manifestation of public protest. Opposition leaders were either killed (Navalny, Nemtsov, Starovoitova, etc.) or forced to flee abroad. The government has destroyed all independent media, taking complete control of the information sphere. An independent judicial system has also ceased to exist (if you don’t believe me, I can tell you more about this separately), as a result of which people receive hefty prison sentences for any criticism of the government or disagreement with the conduct of the SVO. Laws in Russia exist only for the “rabble,” while the authorities have no laws, so they easily violate the law and the Constitution. In other words, we are dealing with an authoritarian regime, similar to Stalin’s, in which the supreme ruler and his cronies wield unlimited, unchecked power in the country. This means that they are not in any danger inside the country.
2. But then, perhaps, the threat from Russia was lurking at the country’s borders? Perhaps a multi-million-strong NATO army was stationed near Smolensk in 1922, ready to invade Russia? Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? But you were talking about Ukraine, which was amassing troops on the border with Donbas and Crimea. After all, it was precisely this troop concentration that you considered a real threat to the Russian Federation.
If you were to carefully compare the military and economic potential of Russia and Ukraine, their ability to mobilize their populations and wage a protracted, full-scale war, you would easily see that Ukraine has no chance of success in a war with Russia, as it is vastly inferior to Russia in every respect. The latter could simply maintain an appropriate military force in Crimea and Donbas, thereby resolving the issue of guarantees for these territories.
I’ll go further: today, no country in the world would even dream of attacking Russia, as it possesses the world’s second-largest nuclear potential. This is precisely what Kremlin propagandists proclaim day and night, on all Russian television channels. Any country in the world that encroaches on the integrity of the Russian state will be immediately attacked by the nuclear triad. What does this mean? It means that Russia’s NUCLEAR TRIAD is a guarantee of its inviolability. And this means that Russia’s security on its borders is completely guaranteed.
So the question arises: why did the Kremlin leadership need to start this war in a situation where the Russian state was not threatened either internally or externally? When economic ties with the West were established? When gas and oil (and much more) flowed to the West (as well as to China and Turkey), and similar flows of gas and oil, dollars, and euros flowed back into Russian banks? Perhaps this money should have been invested in the country’s development, making it an advanced, developed, and prosperous state in every respect? But for some reason, the Russian leadership decided to throw money away, investing in a senseless, bloody, unnecessary war that yields no dividends or any benefit whatsoever? The war is in its fourth year, trillions of dollars have been wasted, hundreds of thousands of Russians have died, and hundreds of thousands more have become disabled, and all this for what? To annex four more regions? Or is Russia running out of land? Perhaps it was to protect the Russian-speaking population of Donbas? Then why was it necessary to destroy that same Donbas to the ground? After all, it still needs to be rebuilt. And that would again require colossal investments. Couldn’t a simpler, cheaper, and more humane approach have been possible, if the Russian leadership had genuinely cared about the Russians in Ukraine?
I must confess that until recently I lived in Ukraine and was a citizen of that country. In 2018, I decided to move to my homeland, Russia. And I did so without the slightest difficulty under the compatriot resettlement program. Why couldn’t they have resettled every Russian-speaking citizen who wanted to come to Russia? Russia isn’t Israel, or even Germany. If they wanted, they could resettle all of China in Russia and still have room left over. This could have given a boost to economic development. If the Russian leadership had even a shred of common sense, we could have simply flooded the world with our goods and technologies and finally kicked the oil and gas habit. Most developed and less developed countries would have lined up, eager to befriend such a Russia. But no, the most senseless, most ineffective solution of all was chosen.
3. Now let’s look at the goals the Russian leadership set for itself when justifying the need for a strategic military operation in Ukraine: the denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine, its non-aligned status, and the prevention of NATO expansion. And what came of it?
After Finland and Sweden joined NATO, Russia’s border with the organization expanded by more than a thousand kilometers. And it turns out that no one in Russia is concerned about this? The same is true of the threat of intelligence operations against Russia, which NATO allegedly could conduct from Ukrainian territory. But such operations could also be conducted from Finland, Sweden, Norway, Turkey, and the Baltic states, which have long been NATO members. But why does no one in Russia care about this? Look at Russia’s shared border with China; maybe they should be more concerned about Chinese intelligence?
You’re saying the Kremlin is demanding non-aligned status for Ukraine? But at the start of the Special Military Operation, Ukraine already had non-aligned status. Furthermore, if the Russian leadership is so concerned about the accession of countries bordering Russia to NATO, then why was there no reaction to Finland and Sweden joining NATO?
“Nothing came of the demilitarization either. Moreover, Ukraine experienced a militarization unprecedented in its history. As for denazification, never before have Russians been so hated in Ukraine as they were after the start of the Second World War.”
So, all the measures taken by the Russian leadership to achieve the goals of the SVO have had the opposite effect. Now the question: can you call people reasonable who set goals and then achieve the opposite result? What would you call a builder who set out to build a house, but failed to do so and instead destroyed all the surrounding buildings? Isn’t that a rhetorical question? So why do you consider the actions of the Russian leadership reasonable and appropriate?
So, from all this, it’s clear that there has never been, and still is, no threat to Russia, either from NATO or, especially, from Ukraine. Therefore, all talk of such threats is completely groundless. This is where the main question arises: what was the reason for the Special Military Operation in Ukraine?
This is a very big question, the answer to which could fill an entire book. But I’ll try to answer briefly, in outline.
Today, power in Russia is in the hands of a terrorist group known collectively as the FSB. This structure stands above the state, waging terror against both its own citizens and neighboring states. To be clear, the FSB is the successor to the Soviet government’s punitive agency, which at one time bore various names, from the Cheka to the KGB. This agency now controls all government structures in the Russian Federation. Today, no senior official in Russia, including judges, can be appointed without FSB approval.
You’re mistaken about the main thing: you view modern Russia as a state governed by the rule of law whose goal is to improve the well-being and security of its citizens. However, in reality, the FSB has transformed Russia into a fascist state whose goal is to expand living space and engage in mass terror against all dissent. I think you should become more familiar with the works of such ideologists of the modern Kremlin regime as A. Dugin, A. Prokhanov, and others. For example, already in the 1990s, A. Dugin (sometimes called the “Kremlin’s gray cardinal”) was actively promoting the idea of ”national Bolshevism,” which later evolved into a neo-Eurasian philosophy. And although Dugin’s views have undergone some transformation over time, their foundation has always been a belief in the special, sacramental calling (“special path”) of “Russian civilization” in opposition to the godless civilization of the Anglo-Saxon world. One of the fundamental narratives of Dugin’s worldview is the notion of Russians as the most important ethnic group for fulfilling the civilizational mission of forming a Eurasian empire. This is essentially analogous to Nazi racial theory. Naturally, the United States and the Anglo-Saxon, Western world as a whole are declared the main threat to the existence of this empire. Dugin considers dictatorship and a totalitarian state structure with complete ideological control over society to be the most preferable form of future imperial rule.
Dugin and other ideologists of the current Kremlin regime have very subtly captured the imperial sentiments of the contemporary Russian Cheka-GB elite, which in the 1990s suffered post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following the collapse of the USSR (very reminiscent of Adolf Hitler’s PTSD, which he acquired following Germany’s defeat in World War I). Indeed, today’s Kremlin ideologists cannot imagine any future for Russia other than imperialism. They firmly believe that Russia has always been and must remain an empire, and the loss of imperialism is perceived as a loss of Russia itself. This is perhaps why the current Kremlin leadership considers the collapse of the Soviet Union the greatest tragedy of the 20th century (as Putin has repeatedly stated in his speeches). In their view, this event called into question the very future of the Russian state. This post-traumatic stress disorder, a result of the collapse of the USSR, defines the Russian leadership’s line of conduct today, the main slogan of which is: the Empire must be restored at all costs! Anyone who disagrees with this geopolitical position is declared an enemy of the Russian state. The saddest thing is that religion is also drawn into the orbit of this imperial ideology. I am saying that the current leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate fully supports the criminal aggression against Ukraine, which runs counter to the Gospel commandments of peacemaking, love, and brotherhood among people.
Let me reiterate: today, the heirs of a terrorist organization that carried out repressions against both their own and neighboring peoples have come to power in Russia. This is confirmed, for example, by the mass unveiling of monuments to Stalin and Dzerzhinsky in Russia (FSB officers have a particular fondness for the latter). For example, a six-meter-tall monument to Dzerzhinsky, the bloody executioner and ideologist of the “Red Terror,” during which millions of people were exterminated, was recently unveiled in central Omsk. It’s like erecting a monument to Ernst Röhm in Germany.
Apparently you’re not very familiar with Russian history? But if you’d delved even a little deeper, you’d know that violence isn’t such a terrible crime for the security officers who rule modern Russia. For example, in Russia today, murder typically carries a prison sentence of 7-9 years. An anti-war post online can carry 10-12 years. And donating to a Western or Ukrainian human rights organization, not to mention aiding the Ukrainian Armed Forces, can be punished even more. In other words, murder is a lesser crime for them than dissenting from the government. Do you know what the main narrative promoted by Russian propaganda and the Moscow Patriarchate is today? It’s the narrative that killing in war is not a sin! And all soldiers who die in the name of Russian victory are considered saints. Doesn’t this, by any chance, remind you of the ideology of certain Islamic terrorist organizations?
You must understand that the current Russian leadership considers not only Ukraine, but also the Baltic states, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and the Central Asian countries of the post-Soviet space, to be its ancestral territories (territories of the “Russian World—Holy Russia”). Therefore, the primary goal of the SVO in Ukraine is to restore the Russian Empire within the borders of the former USSR and impose its agenda on Western countries. And they will stop at nothing to achieve their criminal goals. You speak of them as civilized people, not realizing that before you are bloodthirsty maniacs, ready to destroy millions of people to achieve their illusory goals.
The saddest thing is that you, a German woman of the post-war generation, failed to recognize in modern Russia a fascist state led by the Führer of the Russian nation. For me, this was the greatest disappointment I experienced after watching your video (which is why I decided to write to you). In my naiveté, I always thought that Germans, after World War II, would have developed a “genetic” sensitivity to fascism. Apparently, I was gravely mistaken. If Germans fail to understand what happened in Russia and what led to the SVO, then I fear hard times await us all.
4. Now it’s time to talk about Ukraine’s interests, which you forgot to mention in your video. Did you ask Ukrainians why they resist and don’t want to be under the control of Putin and his cronies?
Tell me, what was a country supposed to do that found itself neighboring a terrorist fascist state? Of course, it had to take care of its own security. I admit, I’m far from idealizing modern Ukraine, a country where I’ve lived half my life. But I completely understand and support the Ukrainians who decided to break free from Russia’s influence and join the Western community. That’s why, on two Maidan protests, they protested against their country being governed by Putin’s protégé, the criminal Yanukovych (I think you’re aware of his criminal record), as well as against the pro-Kremlin system of government itself. And they had every right, without regard for the Kremlin, to join any unions and organizations they wanted and to independently decide their own security matters. Why, tell me, should Putin and his entourage decide what to do, who to befriend, and how Russia’s neighbors should live? I’ll say it again: No one is threatening Russia, nor is anyone planning to do so, simply because threatening Russia is a very dangerous undertaking. But Russia also has no right to interfere in the affairs of other states, even if those states were once part of the Russian Empire or the USSR. Russia itself has plenty of territories that weren’t originally its own. These include Crimea (which only became part of Russia at the end of the 18th century, while the Crimean Khanate lasted for over 300 years), Siberia, the Caucasus, the Urals, Kaliningrad (formerly Königsberg), and the Kuril Islands. Perhaps then we should return these territories to their former owners? But surely you must understand that this logic of redividing the world is the logic of World War III? Then why aren’t you bothered by Putin’s fascist logic?
You’re saying the US and Europe are responsible for starting this war? That’s an unthinkable lie, and I don’t understand why you’re spreading it. If the US and Europe are responsible for anything to Ukraine, it’s for failing to admit it to NATO in time and protecting it from Russian aggression. Yet that was, and remains, the only true way to end this war. I’ll put it this way: I’m a pacifist by conviction, but I can’t bring myself to condemn Ukrainians defending their country from a rabid maniac. Ultimately, Ukraine had every right to restore order on its own territory, meaning Crimea and Donbas. But no one has, nor should they have, the right to destroy the European security architecture by invading another country. Today, there are no protests in the West regarding Russia’s special operation in Chechnya in the 1990s. So why are you denying the Ukrainian authorities the same right? Because they didn’t take into account the wishes of the Russian-speaking population? Did Russia really take these wishes into account when it completely destroyed towns and villages in eastern Ukraine? In my opinion, Ukraine could have resolved the problem of the Russian-speaking population through civilized means, with the help of the European community, without Russia’s interference in its internal affairs.
5. Now, regarding the negotiations in Istanbul and the subsequent refusal of the Ukrainian side to participate in these negotiations.
Let’s start with the fact that Ukraine was right to refuse these negotiations. One of Russia’s conditions was a significant reduction in the Ukrainian army, which would have jeopardized the very existence of the Ukrainian state. After all, in that case, Russia could have renewed its aggression and completely conquered Ukraine at any moment. Or don’t you know how Putin so confidently lies to both his own people and the international community? He continues to lie, constantly postponing peace talks because he has absolutely no interest in them. In this sense, what’s surprising isn’t Putin’s position, whose lies have become so commonplace, but the position of Western leaders, who constantly fall for his tricks.
Putin lied about the Istanbul talks, and for some reason you believed him? After all, according to Putin’s version (which you so confidently convey), Boris Johnson convinced Zelenskyy to reject Russia’s demands on April 9. But the retreat of Russian troops began long before that. On April 1, Ukrainian troops entered Bucha, where they saw evidence of Russian military crimes. If this was a planned withdrawal, then why was it necessary to kill civilians? Of course, Putin wants to save face when he claims it was a planned troop withdrawal, in accordance with the agreements reached in Istanbul. In fact, the retreat of the Russian army began long before Boris Johnson supposedly dissuaded Zelenskyy. On March 25, Russian troops were pushed back from Kyiv and were at risk of encirclement by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. They also made no progress in their offensive on Kharkiv, while Ukrainian troops launched a counteroffensive toward Kherson. On March 27, the Ukrainian side announced a tactical counteroffensive in the Sumy, Kharkiv, Kyiv, and Kherson oblasts. In the first half of April, Ukrainian forces in the northern sector completely liberated the Kyiv, Zhytomyr, Chernihiv, and Sumy oblasts.
Was the situation exactly the same with the Ukrainian offensive in the fall of 2022? Why did Russian troops retreat there, given that their retreat wasn’t the result of the Istanbul “agreements”? Why did they leave Kherson, Izyum, and so on? I think you’ve placed too much faith in Russian propaganda and the omnipotence of the Putin regime. Unfortunately, I must disappoint you: it’s a colossus with feet of clay, which is why they failed to achieve any of their goals.
6. And finally: Are you unhappy with NATO’s determination to weaken Russia? But I’m sure you wouldn’t object to criminals being deprived of the opportunity to commit crimes through isolation from society. I don’t think you understand the criminal nature of Putin’s fascist regime. As long as it remains in power, as long as it has the resources to wage war, it will be a threat not only to its neighbors, but to the entire civilized world. Only by weakening Russia (primarily economically) can we gain any hope for peaceful coexistence with this state in the future, as well as hope for future democratic reforms in this country. Today, Russia is a dangerous beast, a bear hunting and seeking prey. But sometimes bears are tamed, placed in zoos, or even turned into circus performers. Therefore, this beast’s fangs must be pulled out and it must be muzzled. What do you propose? Consider the interests of the predator? Then be prepared to constantly make ritual sacrifices to him, in the form of destroyed cities, thousands of dead civilians and soldiers, trillions in military spending, and instability in Europe. I think even a child should understand that this is not a solution. Remember what happened to Chamberlain’s “peace” initiatives, when he trusted Hitler and tried to accommodate Nazi interests? Isn’t that the lesson we need to remember now?
In fact, Russia’s true interests (not those of Putin and his accomplices) lie in a swift end to this aggression, the collapse of Putin’s authoritarian, fascist regime, the democratization, denazification, and demilitarization of Russian society, and repentance for the crimes committed against Ukrainians. It’s not about constantly pressuring its neighbors with imaginary security guarantees. Don’t you find it funny to see a situation like that, where a raging monster demands security guarantees from a defenseless child?
As I’ve already said, in my view, there’s only one way to save Ukraine and peace in Europe today: immediately admit Ukraine to NATO and deploy its combined forces on its territory. And, in addition, impose the harshest sanctions on the Russian economy. In the meantime, we should be grateful to Ukraine for protecting the European community from this bloody monster, which demands ever more victims.
In conclusion, I will say the following: I don’t know what motivates you or why you spoke out in support of Russia, but I ask you to understand the most important thing: today, anyone who supports Russian aggression or in any way attempts to justify the actions of the Russian leadership is an accomplice to the crimes of the Russian authorities. Can you really remain completely indifferent to the suffering and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, including a huge number of women, children, and the elderly? Therefore, I ask you to stop appealing to sympathy for Russia’s interests. Remember those whom Russian shahids and bombs kill in Ukrainian cities every day. Call on the Russian leadership to immediately end this criminal aggression and withdraw its troops from Ukrainian territory. And call on Western leaders to support Ukraine as strongly as possible and provide guarantees for its security. Only then will your public initiatives be meaningful. Otherwise, you yourself become an accomplice to the crimes committed by the Russian leadership and the Russian military. I believe there should be no greater shame for a German than supporting fascist youths, no matter what their nationality. Consider this, dear Ms. Gabriele Krone-Schmalz.
Hieromonk Ioann (Kurmoyarov)
Video by Gabriela Krone-Schmalz on YouTube: https://youtu.be/AreZTsAhkBo?si=z-P_8Krrq9pCPSmn