In 'Putin's Revenge,' Lucian Kim traces the lead-up to Russia's invasion of Ukraine
11:32 Share

Hey, it's NPR's Book of the Day. I'm Andrew Limbaugh.

And what I didn't expect in this interview between Kim and here and now's Robin Young was the outsized presence of President George W. Bush, the U.S. president who Kim says had the biggest influence on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. He explains why after the break.

This message comes from Midi Health. If you're a woman over 40 dealing with hot flashes, insomnia, weight gain, or brain fog, you don't have to accept it as just another part of aging. The clinicians at Midi Health understand what you're experiencing and know how to help. Midi Health provides specialized care for perimenopause and menopause covered by insurance. Book your visit today at joinmidi.com. That's joinmidi.com.

This message comes from Carvana. Carvana makes financing your next car easy. Buy 100% online with customizable terms good for 30 days. Buy your car the convenient way with Carvana. Terms may apply.

Why did Putin invade Ukraine? That's the simple question at the heart of a deep new book from former NPR Moscow correspondent Lucian Kim. And a couple of hundred pages later, we have a pretty robust answer. Yes, the root cause was a legacy of Russian imperialism, which Ukraine, the breadbasket, played a key role in. We know Vladimir Putin, the former KGB agent, wanted to resurrect the collapsed Soviet Union.

But for Putin, it was also personal. The name of the book is Putin's Revenge, Why Russia Invaded Ukraine. It begins with Ukraine's 2004 popular uprising, the Orange Revolution, in which Ukrainians installed their candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, as president, even after Putin rigged the election, and ends with an increasingly isolated Putin during COVID. And as Lucian writes, a confluence of factors that led to his unprovoked, full-out war.

So now the bloody consequences on both sides are stalled like some grim old master's mural waiting for a promised peace deal.

Lucian is a senior Ukraine analyst with the International Crisis Group. He joins us in the studio. Welcome. Great to be here, Robin. We've spoken to you so many times over the years. You've covered this conflict or this story out of the Soviet Union, then Russia, Ukraine for what, over 20 years? That's right. Yeah. You are drawn to what, by the way, when it comes to Vladimir Putin? I think I was drawn by Russia and the story of

of an empire that had collapsed, an empire that stretched from Prague all the way to Pyongyang. I wouldn't say I was drawn by the personality of Putin, though I certainly viewed him the whole time as a historical figure of great dimensions. Yeah, and with quite a wake behind him at this point. And so start with 2004, the Orange Revolution. That's the color that people wore when they took to the streets.

Ukraine no longer a Soviet satellite, but also moving away from Russian control. Putin visits, interferes almost laughably in the election. I mean, it's so obvious that he's doing that. What are we learning there that is a thread that we can pull to the invasion? Well, as you said, in the 2004 presidential elections in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin was pushing for the

prime minister to become president, Viktor Yanukovych, and he spent quite a lot of time campaigning. And they rigged the election to make Yanukovych win. Ukrainians took to the streets and they reversed the outcome of that rigged election through a people power revolution.

The election was held again, and a pro-Western candidate ended up winning that election. And I think for Vladimir Putin, that was a key moment. He decided that this was a Western, maybe even U.S. plot to draw former Soviet satellite states away from Moscow and to encroach on what he saw as his sphere of influence.

Enter George W. Bush. You say that he, more than any other U.S. president, helped shape Ukraine's coming confrontation with Russia. Explain that. Right. George W. Bush is a U.S. president now who is drifting into the past. But what occurred to me was the outsized role that George W. Bush played there.

George W. Bush had a very good personal relationship with Vladimir Putin. Russia was the country that he visited most in his presidency. He saw Putin at various meetings around the world, something like 40 times. So there was definitely some kind of personal bond. And at the same time, we saw a drifting already in relations because of his aggressive foreign policy in places like Iraq, which unfortunately,

alienated Putin. Right. Well, Bush was mocked mercilessly for saying that one time that he met Putin and got a sense of his soul. People said, no, this is a soulless man.

Bush did seem to have an ability to warm Putin up just a little bit for a small window. Putin came to the U.S. post 9-11. He did a call-in show with Americans on NPR. There seemed to be opportunity there, but was the biggest division, the reason you say Bush might have helped shape the war that was to come between Russia and Ukraine—

Was it because of Bush's push for Ukraine to join NATO and giving Ukraine the expectation that they would be able to join NATO? Sure. So what we had going on here was on one level, Putin was reaching out to George W. Bush and even offered support for the invasion of Afghanistan.

That partially explains the title, Putin's Revenge, because Putin felt shunned after that moment. He felt that he had reached out to help the United States and that help had been rejected, which burned very heavily despite the fact that he had such a good personal relationship.

On the other track, we have George W. Bush and Ukraine. And Ukraine played an important role in the occupation of Iraq because Ukraine participated in the so-called Coalition of the Willing and put up its own troops to go to Iraq. It was one way of Ukraine showing its openness to the United States as well. And George W. Bush participated.

sought to reward Ukraine by offering a roadmap into NATO. And this was a highly controversial move. The alliance itself, France and Germany, did not think that Ukraine and the country of Georgia, that they were not ready to join NATO. And they were acutely aware of the reaction that this would have in

Russia. It's crucial to this idea of revenge. Just the fact that they entertained the idea of integrating with the West, with the European Union and NATO, that sparked Vladimir Putin's rage because he felt that Ukraine played an integral part in his land empire. Can you, there's so much here, but can you pull together the different threads that, as you say, were a confluence of things that happened before?

that actually led to the invasion itself? I focused quite a lot of attention on 2014, which is when Russia began its invasion. It wasn't a full-scale invasion, but that's when it seized Crimea and fomented a pro-Russian insurgency in Ukraine. Nowadays, whenever we hear about Kremlin officials speaking about possible peace solution in Ukraine, they often come back to the second big protest on Kiev's Maidan Square.

The Russians describe it as a Western-backed or even US-backed coup. Was it a coup? Again, you have sort of a second iteration of the Orange Revolution. You have a lot of Ukrainians going out onto the street. This time they're protesting against President Yanukovych, who had won fair and square an election in 2010. He had decided not to sign onto an association agreement with the European Union after coming under enormous pressure from Vladimir Putin.

These protests, unlike the Orange Revolution in 2004, quickly became violent. Viktor Yanukovych, the president, fled Kiev. Putin says he helped rescue Viktor Yanukovych. In fact, my argument is that it was much more of a Russian kidnapping of Viktor Yanukovych to remove him from Ukraine so that they could begin the annexation of Crimea. Did Putin think he could invade Ukraine?

Absolutely. I think he understood that he could do what he wanted in Ukraine. Ukraine was not in NATO. It was not under this collective defense shield. And I think even more importantly, Putin was very confident that the West wouldn't intervene because of Russia's nuclear weapons.

What do you think the key takeaway is? Like, the thing you want people to know about, as you asked at the beginning, why Russia invaded Ukraine? The legacy of Russian imperialism, that great empire that Vladimir Putin missed, and I think a lot of Russians missed. But

That idea itself of Russia as the center of a great Eurasian empire is not enough to go and invade your neighbor. There has to be another ingredient, which is Putin's dictatorship. You know, when Putin first came into office in 2000, he was seen in the West as a reformer, as someone new, as a fresh face. He talked about imperialism.

Russia may be joining NATO. He was comparing Russia's economic growth with the EU's as something to aspire to. And he became increasingly paranoid the longer he stayed in power and decided that basically everything that was happening around Russia and inside Russia was in some way directed against him. And the ultimate goal of the US and its allies was regime change in Russia and toppling his regime. For me, the real tragedy of this

conflict right now is, of course, there's the narrative that says NATO started this, the Americans provoked it. But in fact, George W. Bush opened that door to NATO, but there was never any real intent to let Ukraine in. All the subsequent presidents, they were interested in something that they felt was much more important, U.S.-Russian relations, and kind of putting a floor under that to prevent any kind of nuclear escalation.

And so it was setting up an expectation that was never meant to be met. Nobody ever really thought that was going to happen, but Ukrainians did. Well, Ukrainians began to think so, but in 2008, there was not a majority of Ukrainians even for NATO membership. It was a very divisive issue within the country. People thought that by joining NATO, their own boys would end up overseas fighting other people's wars.

Ukrainians only began supporting NATO after 2014 when Russia began its aggression and people said, well, NATO is the only alliance that can defend us against Russia. You know, what's interesting is that even Zelensky was not enthusiastic about NATO membership when he ran in 2019. He said NATO membership should be put up for a referendum inside Ukraine and let the people decide.

Zelensky, when he came into office, was accused by his opponents of being a Russian tool and that he would be a pushover in any negotiations with the Kremlin. And as we know, Volodymyr Zelensky, he built his career as a comedian, speaking Russian. His jokes are in Russian, the language that he grew up speaking, and Ukrainian was only his second language.

So Zelensky also changed his mind once becoming president and seeing how intransigent Putin was to negotiate a peaceful settlement. Lucian, thank you so much. Thank you so much, Robin. Lucian Kim, former NPR reporter, now senior Ukraine analyst at the international crisis group, his new book again, Putin's Revenge, Why Russia Invaded Ukraine.

This message comes from Charles Schwab with their original podcast, Choiceology. Choiceology is a show about the psychology and economics behind people's decisions. Download the latest episode and subscribe at schwab.com slash podcast.

This message comes from Greenlight. Parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach. With Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families, kids learn to earn, save, and spend wisely. Get started risk-free at greenlight.com slash NPR.

This message comes from Charles Schwab. When it comes to managing your wealth, Schwab gives you more choices, like full-service wealth management and advice when you need it. You can also invest on your own and trade on Thinkorswim. Visit Schwab.com to learn more.