Russia Doesn't Exist
- 24.05.2025, 17:26
How Putin's advisor Kobyakov multiplied his boss by zero.
Russian presidential adviser Anton Kobyakov has said that the USSR still exists and the war in Ukraine is an "internal process." But if the Soviet Union has not disappeared, then the Russian Federation does not exist, and Putin is the president of something unknown.
What Kobyakov said and how the USSR was actually created and collapsed
At the St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, Putin's advisor Anton Kobyakov told participants a long-known conspiracy theory about the alleged illegality of the liquidation of the USSR. Its essence is simple: the Soviet Union was not dissolved by the same body that created it in 1922. According to the Kremlin lawyer, since the USSR was created by the Congress of People's Deputies, the legal procedure for the emergence of independent states in its place was allegedly violated, and the parliaments of the union republics did not have the authority to ratify the Belovezhskaya Accords. "This is what constitutional law experts, including Western ones, say. If the USSR was not dissolved, then it is logical from a legal point of view that the Ukrainian crisis (as the Kremlin calls Russia's war against Ukraine - "DS") is an internal process," Putin's adviser concluded. And he added that the collapse of the USSR "should be given a legal assessment by experts in constitutional law."
It should be noted here that in Putin's Russia, persons of Kobyakov's stature do not make statements that contradict the general ideological line. But no one in the Kremlin has refuted, much less condemned, this talker. This suggests that the conspiracy about the existence of the USSR, despite its dissolution in 1991, is one of many hybrid myths designed primarily for a Western audience. It is possible that during a phone conversation with Donald Trump Putin could have put something similar into the ears of the American president, who is a fan of conspiracy theories. The Russian dictator is constantly talking pseudo-historical nonsense, then about "Lenin - the creator of Ukraine", then about the non-aligned status in the declaration of sovereignty adopted back in the days of the USSR.
Here we can recall another amusing story that happened two years ago. On May 23, 2023, the head of Russia's constitutional court, Valery Zorkin, showed Putin on camera a 17th century map created by Frenchman Guillaume Sanson on which Ukraine supposedly does not exist. In fact it is there, in capital letters it says Ukraine pays des cosaques - "Ukraine, land of the Cossacks" in French. By that time it was part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Moreover, Crimea on the map is not part of the Russian Empire, but a separate Crimean Khanate.
Continuing the historical excursion, let's remind how the USSR was formed and how it dissolved. Until December 30, 1922, there were socialist republics, closely cooperating with each other in various spheres, but not united into one state. On the penultimate day of 1922, the First All-Union Congress of Soviets met in Moscow and approved a treaty previously agreed upon by the representatives of the RSFSR, USSR, BSSR and ZSFSR.
The last one was the Transcaucasian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, which included Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. This entity was liquidated in 1936, when its subjects joined the USSR as separate republics. That is, one of the co-founders of the Soviet Union has long since ceased to exist as a subject of international legal relations.
Let us be clear: at the meeting of December 30, 1922, they approved the declaration and the treaty on the establishment of the USSR. The last of these documents existed as a draft, only on July 6, 1923 after heated disputes they approved its final version of 72 points. And formally they were approved only on January 31, 1924 after Lenin's death at the Second All-Union Congress of Soviets. This is how the first Constitution of the USSR came into being.
It is necessary to dwell separately on the treaty taken as a basis at the First All-Union Congress of Soviets. First, it was not an interstate treaty, as required by interstate agreements. After that meeting, the USSR did not legally exist, only declaratively. Second, the Ukrainian delegates were given delegate powers "to draft and give final approval to the constitution of the Union of S. S. Republics." Not a declaration or a treaty, but a constitution.
The treaty itself was approved to be taken as a basis. Moreover, only 23 delegates out of 352 delegates signed the documents. Thirdly, Kobyakov, it turns out, cannot read. The Treaty of December 30, 1922 had 26 points. In 25 it says: "Approval, amendment and modification of the Union Treaty are subject to the exclusive authority of the Congress of Soviets of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics". To this paragraph the Putin advisor appeals. But clause 26 asserted, "Each of the Union republics retains the right to freely withdraw from the Union." The right of each republic to freely withdraw from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was also declared in the 1924 Constitution. That was realized by the republics in 1991.
How Ukraine can properly use Kobyakov's long language
In Russia itself there is a movement called "Citizens of the USSR" (other names "Union of Slavic Forces of Russia", "Home to the USSR"). Its supporters believe that the Soviet Union never disintegrated, and that the Russian Federation is only a "closed joint-stock company." The leaders of the movement call not to pay taxes and not to repay loans.
In 2022, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation recognized "Citizens of the USSR" as an extremist organization. The founder of this exotic movement, whose supporters turned out to be a whole advisor to Putin, was businessman Sergei Taraskin. He developed quite a flurry of activity, held various events throughout Russia, until in May 2022 he was sent to a colony for 8 years. Another active member of this movement is Sergei Torgunakov from Novosibirsk. He called Putin the Antichrist. He ended up in a mental institution.
Russian authorities are persecuting the "sect of witnesses of the USSR", not only Taraskin was imprisoned. The reason for the persecution is clear - if the "citizens of the Soviet Union" do not recognize the Russian Federation, they will not recognize Putin. For them, he is not a president, but a usurper of power in a non-existent state. Kobyakov with his statement actually asserts the same thing. So he can even be applauded
For if the USSR exists, then the RSFSR, whose delegation took part in the First All-Union Congress of Soviets, is still legally authorized. And Putin was not elected by the citizens of such a republic, he is illegitimate. Like his decrees, like the laws passed by the Duma and government decrees. Moreover, for all the years since its foundation on December 25, 1991. Also illegitimate is Russia's stay in the UN and in the UN Security Council. Consequently, international agreements with this pseudo-state entity are invalid.
But Kobyakov is not a city madman, but an adviser to Putin. His statement is an element of hybrid warfare that Ukraine can turn against the terrorist country itself. How to negotiate with unknown people? Unlike Russia, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on August 24, 1991 adopted the Act of Declaration of Independence, which on December 1, citizens of the new state in all regions without exception supported at the all-Ukrainian referendum. There was no such referendum in the territories occupied by the RSFSR.
On June 12, 1990, the first Congress of People's Deputies of the still Soviet republic adopted a declaration of state sovereignty, which means that, if we follow Kobyakov's logic, it was Russia, under Boris Yeltsin, that first violated international law. The Ukrainian declaration of sovereignty was adopted only a month later, on July 16, 1990.
The replacement of the RSFSR in the Russian Federation took place without popular approval: on December 25, 1991, the first and last president of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, announced his resignation, after which a Russian flag was raised over the first building of the Kremlin instead of the Soviet flag. On the same day, the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR changed the name of this territorial entity to the Russian Federation. The next day the Supreme Soviet of the USSR held its last session. Its Council of Republics ratified the Belovezhskie Agreements, which is considered the end of the Soviet Union.
So, if the USSR legally exists according to Kobyakov's logic, then the Russian Federation as an independent state - on the contrary, legally does not exist. And if Putin was hanging noodles on Trump's ears about an "internal affair" - that's even better. When Kremlin propaganda picks up on this theme, our position should be that Russia itself confirms its pseudo-statehood.
Separately, I would like to briefly touch on another topic. The Kremlin, as mentioned, likes to show its cards. By the time of approval of the declaration of 26 points of the agreement on the creation of the USSR, the USSR included Taganrog district and Shakhtinsk uyezd, they were transferred to the RSFSR only in October 1925. That is, at the time of the conclusion of all the documents at the beginning of the USSR these were Ukrainian territories.
And if the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine comes to the understanding of the need to proclaim the act of restoration of statehood and legal succession of the current state from the UNR, the need for which has long been talked about, then not only Ukraine's stay in the USSR, but also the annexation of significant territories of the Ukrainian People's Republic by the RSFSR will be recognized as occupation.
Kremlin is very fond of promoting its historical narratives.
Should we act in the same way? We should. Now there is a trend towards the past in the world, it is not very good for the established world order, but if there is such a trend, we must not lag behind. Especially when the enemy himself has given the opportunity to doubt the existence of his statehood. It is necessary to use this to our advantage with an information campaign, which should include everything from the game of historical maps and territorial claims to media support for the "sect of witnesses of the USSR". Why not? First of all, it is quite numerous. Second, they are Putin's opponents. Third, in today's Russia, whose population is apathetic and zombified by propaganda, only the lunatics there are capable of doing anything.
Yuri Vasilchenko, DS