The Scholars' Attack on Ivan Katchanovski

Why this approach is misguided

Ivan Katchanovski’s book The Russia-Ukraine War and Its Origins, published by Palgrave Macmillan, is causing quite a stir on social media. One hundred people have signed a “collective warning” to readers because of the exceptional number of downloads and its endorsement by Elon Musk and David Sacks. On April 28, the letter was published by Ukrainska Pravda

The book is described as pro-Kremlin propaganda. The signatories include some of the leading scholars in Ukrainian studies. The initiator of the warning is Andreas Umland, a professor at the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy.

The letter ends as follows:

It would be even more sad if a political utilization of such publications by populist forces will lead to a reduction of Western help for Ukraine in its fight for survival and thereby facilitate Russia's undisguised attempt to destroy the Ukrainian nation.

I have serious doubts whether the book—any book on the topic for that matter—is going to lead to a reduction of Western aid to Ukraine. Nor do I think the fact that Musk and Sacks were born in South Africa has any relevance.

Admittedly, I have not read the book yet, though it is on my list. I did wade through the introduction, which is essentially a list of the author’s credentials and achievements.

I have read Katchanovski’s earlier book on the Maidan massacre and many of his articles. They are polemical in tone and seemingly intended to overwhelm the reader with a mass of facts, figures, information, and evidence of his thoroughness. That is not to say they are of no value. He is a native of Ukraine and familiar with many things.

I would also say that his work is one-sided, in that Ukraine, Zelensky, the West (however one wants to define that term), and Maidan protesters are invariably savaged. Moreover, the general tenor is to blame all of these for the start of the Russia-Ukraine war and downplay the fact of the Russian invasion, or Moscow’s motives.

But I do not agree with the blanket condemnation of Katchanovski and his work. Nor do I like the frequent dismissal of him as a “part-time professor” at the University of Ottawa. Many of my colleagues at the University of Alberta fall into that category. It is a 2020s syndrome, one that was not faced by many of us who hold tenured professorships today.

Scholars have an obligation to treat every publication on its merit, based on reviews. I don’t know of a single journal that has sent Katchanovski’s book out for review, but perhaps reviewers are daunted by the size of the book and the notoriety of its author on social media. They should not be. All scholarly books should be reviewed.

The most effective way to evaluate the book is through a scholarly review, not denunciations in an open letter, which has the effect of making the author a martyr, like a deer attacked by a pack of wolves. It’s unfair, unbalanced, and ineffective because it is counterproductive.

And if it is revealed that the book is mainly propaganda, it should be exposed as such. If not, the book should be assessed on its merits. It matters little whether Elon Musk endorses it. He has no expertise on Ukraine. And there are a lot of publications that become viral in terms of their circulation, whether or not they are academically sound and well-reasoned. So what?

Having reached the end of a busy university term and graded over 113 exams, about 55 midterms, and term papers from my seminar class, I intend to take a short break and do some travelling, after which I will undertake the task of reading and reviewing Katchanovski’s book.

But whether or not I write something negative or positive, I would never endorse such a blanket condemnation of his publication or his character. How many of the 100 signatories read the book in its entirety? And what does it say about the world of Ukrainian studies if we respond to a book with a virtual gang assault rather than through scholarly reviews or conference discussions?

Wars give rise to polarization and extremist responses. The narrowness of the attacks on Ukraine among the American realist camp is a case in point, usually emanating from scholars who have never set foot in Ukraine. In turn, the threats—including physical ones— to inflict harm on frequent social media contributors such as Marta Havryshko for her critiques of “busification” and far-right activism are also unfortunate.

Sometimes I think the only social media solution is to use private groups for conversations that require rigorous guidelines for membership. Openness on such platforms leads naturally to venom, name-calling, character assassination, often by people with limited knowledge of the subject matter.

That is the drawback of having academic discussions on such forums as Facebook or X. They are generally unmonitored.

On the other hand, scholars who study Ukraine can now meet their peers from around the world online for webinars, discussions, and conferences. It should be a positive force.