We present to you the second part of the interview series with Vitaly Naumkin.
– Mr Naumkin, your life experience is truly unique. Nobody else has been a member of the high-level group, nobody else has presented the report written collectively by your twenty-member group to the UN Secretary-General, not to mention your experience in working with Yevgeny Primakov…
– I dare to hope that my experience may be useful for others.
– The cessation of hostilities and the search for political settlement mechanisms in the protracted Palestinian-Israeli conflict in the Gaza Strip remain uncertain. On the contrary, the conflict is escalating, and its geography has expanded dramatically: the Yemeni Houthis, the United States, the United Kingdom, as well as Iran, Pakistan and Iraq, are involved in the confrontation. What could the conflict in the Middle East lead to in the future and what position should Russia adhere to?
– Our President determines which position Russia should adhere to. We have departments and ministries, first and foremost the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that are working on the country’s foreign policy vector. I would not want to interfere in that.
As scientists, we have a modest function: to support the efforts of the state that we have something to add to. Here I can give an example of our extremely fruitful cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; we are tasked with holding events that, for various reasons, are not very convenient for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to host officially.
For example, we have already held four inter-Palestinian meetings in Moscow. We invited the Palestinian factions, fronts and organisations, which for many years could not agree among themselves, as guests of our Institute. I shall not go into professional details right now, far from everybody would find it interesting to delve into who is with whom and who is against whom. One thing is clear: there is a big split between the Palestinian factions, each of which has its own philosophy and its own truth. In this case, we acted as mediators.
– Palestinians trusted you to be the moderator. I know that 14 organisations were present at the last meeting.
– I shall not hide that I was pleased that they did not question who would preside. My knowledge of Arabic was beneficial, as I could communicate with them in their language using dialectal features. I am happy that my work has been assessed positively by both the Russian and the Palestinian side.
Everything went fine, but not fine enough to reconcile the Palestinians – even with the powerful resource provided by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, particularly the Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation for the Middle East and Africa, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov.
Yes, the Palestinians came closer to each other. This is clear from the many issues on which they have become more friendly towards one another and more realistic in terms of policy initiatives and base positions. Despite the fact that it was not possible to overcome all existing differences, a few days of these consultations were useful from the point of view of our professional interests. This is in addition to the fact that we worked to achieve our shared political goals.
– Could you clarify what exactly you managed to achieve?
– We established contacts that we continue to develop. By the way, this is an example of what we do, so to speak, the practical side of our work, in addition to writing scientific papers and the massive number of articles that we publish in our journals.
It is very unfortunate that Israel, with which Russia has had good relations lately, has turned away from the path of realism. The massacres and repressions that are taking place in Gaza are horrifying. A journalist I know said that Gaza has become the largest children’s cemetery in the world. I have to enter into your profession a little and speak on the Great Game [note: the ‘Great Game’ is a Russian political talk show], where I keep saying that, unfortunately, there is no progress in this matter. Israel is ignoring the fact that there is a Palestinian problem and that it must be solved, that the national rights of the Palestinians must be respected.
I do not want to be biased and focus on criticising Israel, but I do not see any progress on reaching a peaceful settlement yet. It seems to me that there are external forces that are not interested in bringing peace to the Middle East.
– You have anticipated my next question. Is it possible to stop the violence in the Middle East?
– I will answer briefly: not yet.
– How do you feel about President Trump’s idea of resettling Palestinians? Will the world community be able to stop this process?
– This is terribly foolish! There are many positive aspects of Trump’s policy that allow us to respect his determination and courage in asking questions. But when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict, he is biased. He is a very pro-Israeli US president.
– In Soviet times, the goal of foreign policy was to ensure a friendly environment. How would you describe the friendliness level of Middle Eastern countries towards us today? Have there been any changes in recent years?
– It seems to me that there is a lot of progress in this matter. There are several things to note. First of all, in the Soviet era there were traditionally states that were our friends on a mainly ideological basis. These were first and foremost leftist regimes, and they should not be discarded. Recently, in one of the discussions on the Great Game, my colleague Karen Shakhnazarov said that the left is not always our ally. We work more with conservative governments, but the left has a history of friendly relations with Russia.
– There are different kinds of leftists, and one can and should continue to be friends with some of them.
– I agree with this statement. There are many left-wing parties who are not in the same camp as us now, but they nevertheless have a certain positive attitude towards us.
Another very important fact is that we have been able to make friends with conservative regimes. We did not even have diplomatic relations with the Arab Gulf countries before, yet today everything is going alright.
Saudi Arabia, who would have thought? Although… I wrote a book about the diplomatic relations between the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia in the 1920s and 1930s, and there were some very interesting points. For example, Saudi Arabia once asked the USSR for a loan. Since oil had not yet been found on their territory, they lived quite poorly. The Soviet Union was unable to provide such assistance. On the one hand, this was unfortunate – although it is likely that nothing would have grown out of it – as there was too much imbalance and inconsistency in the spiritual foundations of the states. Back then, they were repelled by atheism and support for revolutionary movements. And the repression against diplomats played a sharply negative role. But, by and large, the foundations of future relations were still being laid.
Today’s leaders communicate amicably with the Saudi king and the ruling family, the United Arab Emirates is one of our main partners. At the same time, there are traditional relations with the states that adhere to more radical values. For example, Algeria, which we supported during its national liberation war with France, and they remember this well.
– Today, we often speak of the importance of historical memory…
– There really is a historical memory. The memories of what the Soviet Union did for Algeria at the time are alive and well, and working in our favour. Or take all the other Arab countries that we helped at one time, built infrastructure, enterprises, roads. They remember all of this. They also remember the Aswan Dam, which is still operating, and other facilities. I will not list them, since there is a huge number of them.
I have seen a lot over the course of my long life, including the first stage of the Aswan Dam in 1964. At that time, I had my first baptism of fire as a military translator, and before that, I studied at Cairo University, where I was sent for an internship. This was also a very interesting, important experience.
Returning to the issue of a friendly environment… Arab states respect those leaders and political forces who can carry out their plans fully. Sometimes it is said that strength is respected in the Middle East, but this is not the case. Strength, of course, is respected everywhere (smiles). But they may not respect you. Here, it is not about strength, but about the determination and political will that Russia and the Russian national leader have. And, of course, the ability to mobilise resources so as to withstand pressure. This is exactly what a friendly environment provides us with today. Perhaps not all of the friends are real; some are just fellow travellers, some are, as we say, situational friends. For example, we are building excellent relations with Türkiye despite many issues.
I believe that our leader can solve the most complex and difficult issues and resist against a vast array of strong powers and states – this is the second point that needs to be emphasised.
– Can it be said that many of the friends we have made are following our leader today?
– Absolutely. Although some small states have to endure, we are trying to ease the burden of pressure on them. They see us as a force capable of balancing the world order that is still taking shape. A new world order based on equality, sovereignty, respect for sovereignty, national rights and respect for the desire of each state to live according to its own spiritual values.
The third important point that I would like to mention: the elements of a new world order are taking shape. They are forming in our favour, in favour of the values that we stand by, despite all the difficulties and shortcomings (here I do not want to be overly confident, arrogant).
We communicate a lot with foreign scientists. Recently, we hosted a large group of Pakistani military personnel at our institute and talked about the Indo-Pakistani conflict. We are listened to, we are respected, we have partners everywhere. May I boast a little bit (smiles) about our team? The Institute of Oriental Studies has achieved a very high reputation. We are not just the oldest institute (almost 210 years old) and not just the largest (about 500 people), respected in terms of reputation.
– You have authored a massive number of books and academic articles. You have been and continue to be published abroad regularly.
– I believe that it is not necessary to black-list everyone in unfriendly states. There is a significant circle of people there who continue to seek contact with us and respect our work. Of course, we have insurmountable contradictions of a political nature, but we are respected for what we do professionally, namely how we study the Middle East.
– I know that more than 50 candidates and doctors of sciences have been trained with your participation. At the Institute of Oriental Studies there are still some of your students.
– Yes, they are working. And not only here, but also in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other structures.
– Isn’t there an Institute of Oriental Studies in St. Petersburg, too?
– It is called the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts. Once upon a time, in Soviet times, it was a department of our institute. Just as, for example, there was an Institute of Archaeology in Moscow, and there was its St. Petersburg branch. Then came a wave of sovereignisation and the institutes became independent, the archaeological branch became known as the Institute of Material Culture.
At that time, I was the director and remember perfectly well how I signed a large number of papers on the division of assets. This is how our branch became the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts. They inherited a very powerful legacy of more than 10,000 manuscripts that were collected by Orientalists over the centuries. They specialise in antiquity and the Middle Ages, and do not deal with modernity.
– Is there a division of orientalists into Moscow and St. Petersburg?
– There is. Traditionally, it was believed that the Moscow school produced people who spoke foreign languages fluently, they travelled and knew a lot about the world, while St. Petersburg students sat and studied books and manuscripts. Of course, these two schools had certain contradictions and rivalries. Orientalists have this feature; they believe that they are smarter than everyone else.
But a new time has come… recently I had the honour of being awarded the Demidov Award. It may be less prestigious than the State Award, which I also have, or the Peter the Great Award, but it is especially dear to me because it is awarded by my colleagues in a closed vote. And no political influence can force them to give it to someone instead of someone else. While it was being discussed, Mikhail Piotrovsky, who voted for me, said that I had contributed to the reconciliation of the Moscow and St. Petersburg schools of Oriental studies. Now we are friends.
– For the peoples of the Global South, Russia’s victory over the West in the proxy war in Ukraine is vital. One may say that this conflict highlights the confrontation between two visions of the world: the hegemony of the West against resistance in the name of equality and international justice. Or are there other important components that can be highlighted here?
– Spiritual values. I would not like to mention malicious topics like LGBT*, but, unfortunately, it exists. When you watch some Western television programme, it just makes you feel sick. It is no coincidence that a leader like Donald Trump came on the wave of opposition to this trend. In many ways, he is our opponent and will remain as such. We must abandon illusions. 125 long-range missiles, which he allowed to be transferred to Ukraine, is serious and long-term. But he is our ally in the fight against moral decay. And we need to use this fact. Our management has its own well-established relationships.
To be continued…
*Recognised as an extremist organisation by the decision of the Supreme Court, its activities are prohibited on the territory of Russia.
Interview by Yulia NOVITSKAYA, writer, journalist, correspondent for New Eastern Outlook
