Whether it is in the form of the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union or the Russian Federation today, the Kremlin occupants are driven by the desire to recognize that it is a “great power”.

These aspirations are explored by the British Russian historian Sergey Radchinko in his book to operate the world: the attempt to the Cold War in the Kremlin for the global power.

Radchenko spoke to the island about Moscow’s need for legitimacy on the world stage and the role it played in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Al -Jazeera: Given the hostility between Moscow and the West, can we live in another cold war?

Sergey Radchenko: The cold war had two forces opposing each other. One of them was the Soviet Union, one of the United States. In today’s environment, we have something similar to that competition, but between the United States and China, that is, the competitors of peers, not Russia.

As much as Putin wants to say that, Russia Not real In the same league as China and the United States.

During the Cold War, there was a clear overlap between these two competitors – the capitalist world and the socialist world. Today, it seems that the United States is certainly under the president [Donald] Trump and Russia have more coordination From the contradiction of values. We no longer hear about democracy in exchange for tyranny.

But there is also continuity, and the main continuity appears to be the presence Nuclear weapons. They inevitably remain as part of the image.

Al -Jazeera: To what extent do you want to admit to the Kremlin policy?

Radchenko: This is the biggest continuity, I think, between the Cold War and the Cold War. I claim that the foreign policies of the Soviet Union, China and Russia today are driven above all by the desire to admit that they are wonderful powers. You can see that during the Soviet Cold War-they wanted to recognize their status as an equal superpower with similar rights such as the rights of the United States. What they extracted from this recognition is legitimacy, and sometimes they were ready to make concessions.

This was even true [Soviet leader Josef] Stalin. People have said all kinds of things about Stalin, and many of them are true, about being a hideous dictator and a person who was very satirical and manipulated … [But] Even for Stalin, it was the smaller gains, but with American recognition, better than the greater gains without American recognition. He withholding support from the Communists in the Greek Civil War until 1947 because there was an agreement with the British that Greece was in the field of British influence.

Therefore, I think the principle of external recognition, especially the American recognition of Soviet gains, I think it has continued and spread to Russian foreign policy. If you look at Putin’s foreign policy today, what does he want above all? He wants the American recognition of Russian gains in Ukraine as legitimate. He is obsessed with this idea. He feels as if he could Decide the fate of Ukraine On the heads of the Ukrainians and the Europeans specifically because it does not care about them. He cares about America, giving him an equal superpower.

Al -Jazeera: How does this great view of the world look like?

Radchenko: It is Russia’s vision in the nineteenth century as a great power in the midst of its influence, as it can show its strength to its neighbors. The Soviet leaders also thought about the countries next to the Soviet Union directly as lying in their field of influence – Stalin was imperial in the nineteenth century.

What made them think they deserve it? In 1963, Soviet Prime Minister Nikita Khrushchev met [Cuban leader] Fidel Castro in the context of the Sino -Soviet division. Castro asked him, “Why are you quarreling with the Chinese?”

“They want to play the first violin,” Khrushchev replied.

In a company, someone is identified as a leader and this happens normally, by virtue of the superior qualities … Thus Khrushchev felt that the Soviet Union deserves to be a great power and the leader of the socialist camp, because it was better than anyone else and deserves it. It is not logical to ask why – they only do, right?

Putin, in many ways, continues this tradition. When they feel that others deny them, they then bear the responsibility for confirming this claim of greatness through violence. This is what we have with Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Countries in this field of influence must be postponed to the desires of the Kremlin, and if not someone, like Ukraine, provides a reason to punish them in order to show their place to others.

Thinking all over the world, it is clear that if Russia has the right to obtain its field of influence, then you think that the other great powers are also permitted. Here, Putin has some parallel thinking with Trump. You can see it directly in Trump’s speech about Panama channeland Canada As a country 51, the way in which it occurs Greenland All of this means that he thinks about the Western hemisphere as the American stadium.

During the Cold War, any challenge to America’s global interests was seen as important. If they had happened in Vietnam, in Afghanistan [or] Africa, all of this is important for the United States because they were participating in this global struggle to influence the Soviet Union. Even in West Berlin, away from America, surrounded by the Soviet -controlled East Germany, the Americans were ready to go to the edge of the nuclear war to defend their right to stay there.

Today, Trump’s vision seems to be another. The interests of America are no longer universal.

Al -Jazeera: How can one distinguish between the great powers and the “less” countries?

Radchenko: America was mainly the great power that it wanted naturally to recognize it. But gradually and reluctantly, they also realized that China is almost a natural right to be a great power.

But at the same time, they formed a very negative view of many European countries, a feeling that their age has already passed. During the Second World War, they concluded that Europe was a consuming force. For a while, they thought that the Great Britain may also be a great power in Europe, but this impression faded as soon as it became clear that Britain was just an island there and not an empire capable of confirming its imperial greatness, for example, during the Suez crisis.

Although even today you have some obsession in Russia with “Angloxone”, such as having a kind of a Conspiracy To return the UK to a great strength.

Al Jazeera: Russia has many social problems. Why does this energy not spend in improving the life of the Russians?

Radchenko: The country, which was historically conditional on thinking about itself as a great power, and the ruling to be dominated by its weakest neighbors, determines the greatness through that lens. In other words, they only feel satisfied when they can control others – then highlights the greatness of Russia in the eyes of many Russians. I think they will give priority over almost anything else.

One of the things that occurred in the Soviet Union was that this deal was eventually not standing. The Soviets claimed that they were a great power, but they were not completely able to surrender their people.

Today, Russia is trying to achieve a balance: on the one hand, this imperial greatness has offered and sold to its people; On the other hand, there is still toilet paper. Yes, the quality of life is not as high as Russia could have focused on its internal problems and did not launch wars against neighbors. But it is not a terrible situation as in the Soviet Union. It allows more flexibility of the Soviet model.

Editor’s note: This interview was lightly edited for clarity and brevity.