The Eurasian Knot

In 1917, the Bolshevik Party had roughly 24,000 members. A decade later, it boasted about 1.2 million. Recruitment came in waves and so did the purges. Still, Party members were found at the top and bottom of the system. In the Kremlin and in the factories. The Party rank and file were vital to the establishment of the Soviet system, its day-to-day functioning, and the human material for campaigns whether they be for literary, industrialization, collectivization or terror. But who were these people? How engaged were they in politics? Were they a constituency for Party leaders to appeal to or was the rank and file mere material to be mobilized and directed without its own agency? There are few studies looking at the Party at the shop floor and its place in shaping Soviet socialism. Yiannis Kokosalakis’ book Building Socialism does just that. The Eurasian Knot spoke to Kokosalakis to learn more about the role of the Bolshevik rank and file in the early Soviet system.Guest:Yiannis Kokosalakis is a visiting researcher at Bielefeld University. He’s the author of Building Socialism: The Communist Party and the Making of the Soviet System, 1921-1941 published by Cambridge University Press.

Joseph Stalin died today, March 5, seventy-three years ago. So, I thought it would be a good idea to dig out, re-edit and remaster, the interview I did with Joshua Rubenstein back in 2018 about the dictator’s final days. What did Stalin focus on in the final years of his life? How did Soviet leadership react to his death? Soviet society? And internationally? Let’s revisit what Rubenstein had to tell us from his book, The Last Days of Stalin.Guest:Joshua Rubenstein is an associate of the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University. He’s the author of several books on Soviet history. His most recent is The Last Days of Stalin published by Yale University Press.

When societies are in crisis, people tend to seek alternative belief systems to give them comfort, explain a complex world, or fill a space left vacant by discredited ideologies and faiths. Like the embrace of spiritualism after the mass death during the American Civil War. The growth of millenarian movements and cults for fear of the end times. Or even the embrace of conspiracy theories to explain the unimaginable. The Soviet Union was no exception. As the system broke apart and Marxism-Leninism was tossed aside, a questioning of dominant narratives took root. Soviet citizens began to seek new belief systems–astrology, gurus, alternative medicines, sects and cults, and fantastical historical narratives. Joseph Kellner was struck by this explosion of belief seeking and wanted to understand it. Why did Russian citizens gravitate to new forms of belief? What was lost with the collapse of the Soviet system and what opportunities did a new society offer? And what does this all say about the need for humans to believe in, well, something? The Eurasian Knot spoke to Joseph about his book, The Spirit of Socialism: Culture and Belief at the Soviet Collapse, to get a sense of this urge to embrace new beliefs and how they shaped experience during the collapse of the Soviet Union.Guest:Joseph Kellner teaches Russian and Soviet history at the University of Georgia. He’s the author of The Spirit of Socialism: Culture and Belief at the Soviet Collapse published by Cornell University Press.

As a Cold War kid, I remember the intense rivalry between the United States and USSR during the Olympics. Of course, we remember the US’ boycott in 1980 because of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And the Soviet boycott in 1984 in response to the American boycott. Who bested who was not just about national pride. It was a testament as to who had the better system: communism or capitalism. What I didn’t know then was that for Moscow, winning was everything. Losing came with consequences. Why was it so important for the Russians to win? So much so, as we saw a few years ago, at the risk of being banned for a state-run doping operation? These are just a few questions the Eurasian Knot posed to Bruce Berglund, author of The Moscow Playbook: How Russia Used, Abused, and Transformed Sports in the Hunt for Gold. I’ve never been much of an Olympic watcher (my sport is the NBA), but now I better understand why that hunt for gold is such a Kremlin obsession.Guest:Bruce Berglund is a historian of Europe, Russia, and world sports and teaches at Charles University in Prague. He’s written several books on sports, including The Fastest Game in the World, a global history of hockey. His new book is The Moscow Playbook: How Russia Used, Abused, and Transformed Sports in the Hunt for Gold published by Triumph Books.

A quick scan of the hundreds of books on US-Russia relations gives the impression that the two countries only met in the 20th century. But relations go back to the early days of the American republic. And, surprisingly, throughout most of the 19th century, the United States and Russia were amicable powers joined in their mutual suspicion of Britain. Relations only began to deteriorate as the US increasingly entered global politics beyond the western hemisphere. What was the historical nature of American and Russian encounters? How did the relationship ebb and slow between distant friends and initiate enemies? And how did this dynamic shape self and bilateral perceptions? The Eurasian Knot turned to three of the best historians on the subject, Victoria Zhuraleva, Ivan Kurilla, and David Foglesong to talk about their new book, Distant Friends and Intimate Enemies: A History of American–Russian Relations about long history of the US-Russia dance.Guest:David Foglesong is a professor of history at Rutgers University. Ivan Kurilla is a visiting professor at Ohio State University.  In 2024, he left Russia after being dismissed from the European University at St. Petersburg for opposing the war in Ukraine.Victoria Zhuravleva is Professor of American History and International Relations and Chair of the Department of American Studies at Russian State University for the Humanities.Together they are the authors of Distant Friends and Intimate Enemies: A History of American–Russian Relations published by Cambridge University Press.

The history of borders and nations in Eastern Europe is fraught. What we even call the region is a site of contestation. Is it “Eastern Europe,” “Central Europe,” or “East Central Europe”? For Pitt historian Gregor Thum, space and how it’s delineated matters.  This is especially the case for Germany and its eastern borderlands and people. Empire, war, ethnic cleansing, and shifting borders have left their marks on regional identity and memory. To the point, as Thum explains, a simple photograph he took in Poland can be interpreted with suspicion. How did the German empire regard its east? How do its shifting borders continue to live with us today? And how do we wrestle with the fractured memories that inhabit the national bricolage of Eastern Europe? The Eurasian Knot spoke to Gregor Thum to highlight his scholarship for a Pitt REEES Faculty Spotlight.Guest:Gregor Thum is an Associate Professor in the History Department at the University of Pittsburgh. He specializes in the history of empire, forced migration and memory in Central Eastern Europe. He’s the author of Uprooted: How Breslau became Wrocław during the Century of Expulsions published by Princeton University Press.

What is Russia? There’s no easy answer. Travelers, scholars, philosophers, and journalists have pondered the question for centuries. And though answers vary, there is one point of consensus–whatever Russia is, you won’t find it in large cities. “Russia” exists out there, deep in the countryside, in the small towns and villages. For journalist Howard Amos, Russia begins in the provincial city of Pskov. “Russia Starts Here” is its slogan, and Amos uses it to pry open the lives of the region's citizens in his first book, Russia Starts Here: Real Lives in the Ruins of Empire. Amos conducted over 30 interviews during his decade stint in Russia until he left after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. There’s the elderly couple who are the last of their village. The shattered young family whose’ father was killed in Ukraine. The oppositionist politician that risks it all to push back against Putin. And the priest, Father Tikhon Shevkunov, Putin’s supposed “spiritual father.” The Eurasian Knot spoke to Amos about his reporting and being a reporter in Russia, what people told him about daily life, the war in Ukraine, and where the country’s been and where it's going. Did Amos find Russia? Maybe just a snapshot. The country is just too big and too complex for anything more.Guest:Howard Amos is a writer and journalist who spent a decade as a correspondent in Moscow. He left Russia in the days after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and, based out of Armenia, did a year-long stint as editor-in-chief of The Moscow Times in exile. His first book is Russia Starts Here: Real Lives in the Ruins of Empire published by Bloomsbury Continuum.

Alexander II’s Great Reforms were sweeping. They freed over 22 million serfs, overhauled the judicial, university, and municipal systems, and loosened censorship, among others. It was one of those pivot points in Russian history. If successful, Russia would have charted a more liberal path or stay on the autocratic road if a failure. Most historians have ruled them a failure. But what were the reforms trying to accomplish? What kind of Empire did it seek to create? Could they turn subjects of an autocracy into citizens of a nation? To discuss such a “big topic,” the Eurasian Knot spoke to Tatiana Borisova about her research into Alexander’s judicial reforms and their historical consequences. Can Russia’s attempt at reform in the mid-19th century provide some hope for a different Russia in the future?Guest:Tatiana Borisova is an Associate Professor of History at the Higher School of Economics St. Petersburg. Her most recent articles in English include: “Imperial legality through ‘Exception’: Gun control in the Russian Empire” and, with Jane Burbank, “Russia’s Legal Trajectories.” She co-edited, The Legal Dimension in Cold-War Interactions: Some Notes from the Field. Her newest book, in Russian, is Когда велит совесть: Культурные истоки Судебной реформы 1864 года в России published by Новое литературное обозрение.