Response to Igor Romanov

I thank the editors for offering me the possibility of responding to Igor Romanov’s letter.

However, before I address the issues specifically I would like to firstly state the following. It is now nearly a year since the Russians invaded Ukraine and almost daily we have news of the growing catastrophe, the reports of the carnage of war, the relentless bombing of civilians. I think we might be in danger of becoming fatigued by these images and we need to retain our capacity to be shocked. I am deeply aware that I write this letter from my secure, comfortable world with only a distant appreciation of what Igor, his friends, family and colleagues face.

In my article I point out that seeking to understand some of the factors involved in any socio-political event must be distinguished from justifying it. In my view, Romanov does not grasp this fundamental analytic distinction. Perhaps an analogy will help: there is a huge wealth of literature that has sought to deepen our appreciation of the historical, economic, and cultural forces, which both created the soil for Nazism and, because it served their interests, colluded with its growth. One might cite the aristocracy, catholic church, haute bourgeoise and various financial interests. Pursuing this broader understanding would, I think, not easily be misunderstood as exonerating Hitler (by using this example as an illustration, I do not mean to imply here that there is any particularly useful comparison to be made between Putin and Hitler).

Thus, it is entirely appropriate, indeed I would argue vital, that we engage in this broader understanding at our current historical juncture. As psychoanalysts we should be wary of the simple binaries which so easily serve to paint ourselves (the so called ‘West’) as excessively virtuous and so obscure any responsibility for the current situation.

As I suggest in my paper, there is a wide tranche of opinion, not only on the Left, that views the war in Ukraine as related to geopolitical pro