The world has been waiting for the Tucker Carlson Putin interview with both anxiety and excitement. And having only been released on X a few hours ago, already at the time of writing this it is at 56 million impressions. To say that this is a controversial and captivating interview is understating it to say the least.
Most of the Interview is a history lesson, a history lesson which Putin purposefully prepared to give, as it explains Russia’s claims to the Ukrainian regions “east of the Dnieper.” Essentially the whole eastern side of Ukraine. Tucker explained at the start on the interview in a monologue that it seemed as though this was a “filibuster” tactic, meaning a tactic to waste time. But it is clear to me, and seemingly not to Tucker at the start of the interview as you can see him becoming agitated and “annoyed”, that this history lesson was the vital message Putin wanted to send to the West.
What Putin didn’t touch as much on at the start, although he did at times, was that these areas are full of Russian people. Donbass and Crimea are both Russian majority areas which match up to his history lesson, of which I know is all largely true, except I’m not certain on the claim that the Polish were working with World War II Germany. This may be something that you could look up if you’re interested enough.
But the interview was not as cheerful and friendly as most people, including myself, thought it was going to be.
Tucker started off irritated and annoyed, and Putin was happy to drag Tucker around through his long stories and avoid initial questions. Later on, Tucker would take a slight dig at Putin, asking who backed the coup in Ukraine, and pulled a seemingly nervous or snarky facial expression while doing it. This prompted Putin to take a hit at Tucker saying “with the backing of the CIA of course, the organization you wanted to join back in the day… as I understand”. Putin would have known bringing something like that up, considering his fan bases relative hatred and distrust of the CIA, would pull Tucker in line.
It was over all, a strength projection and claim legitimizing approach Putin took. Whilst Tucker was more concerned with asking the big questions, sometimes not getting an answer for them only until Putin was ready.
But are Putin’s claims justified?
Historically as explained by Putin, and as I myself also understand, most of Ukraine and especially the eastern side of the Dnieper used to be Russian territory. All the way up to the eastern side of Poland was also Russian territory. Not just in the days of the USSR, but also many centuries before that. Even the Baltic states and Finland were at times under Russian control, but with not as large a population of Russians. However, he didn’t bring up the Baltic states or Finland in his claims. He mainly spoke of Ukraine and Poland, yet not Belorussia, this could be because he was looking at that whole area as Poland-Lithuania, and just calling it Poland, which he mentioned, or because he already considers Belorussia as under his control.
The Attack by Ukrainian forces on the Russian people in the Donbass region transpired several years before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The annexation of Crimea also happened before the invasion of Ukraine. In both instances, the Russian people in these areas wanted to leave Ukraine and join Russia. Crimea held a referendum where 97% of people voted in favor of joining Russia with a 83% voter turnout rate.
All this seems to line up to a fairly legitimate claim to at least these regions, but all the lands east of the Dnieper seems more related to the historical claims.
Tucker was not easy on Putin when it came to these claims.
He asked him several times that if these claims were true, why didn’t he bring this up 20 years ago when he took power? Putin avoided this question for sometime. As far as I saw, he didn’t answer that. But he did give a lengthy explanation of the build up of NATO aggression.
So are these claims completely clear cut?
Is this Russia exercising its right to save its people from the oppressive CIA influenced regime in Ukraine? Or is this a direct reaction to the aggressive expansion of NATO and the claims are being made only to counter NATO’s encroachment?
This is something that should be discussed at length. And everyone in the West, whether conservative, progressive or otherwise should be having rational and calm discussions about this. As this situation could quickly boil over into a third world war. Having healthy discussions on the topic is key to understanding the most peaceful and beneficial solution going forward.
And I believe this too, was going through Tuckers mind as he stared out of his window into the dark, snowy Russian sky, on his flight to Moscow.
Alex James.