In a recent development, President Putin’s signing of a new decree allocating funds for the research and registration of Russian property abroad has sparked intrigue, particularly amid Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine. While the decree, as reported by Russian state media TASS, does not explicitly mention Alaska, military bloggers have drawn attention to the possibility of President Putin leveraging this move to contest the legality of the 1867 Russian sale of Alaska to the U.S. The Institute for the Study of War has also underlined the uncertainty surrounding the criteria defining current or historical Russian property. Against this backdrop, the U.S. State Department, on January 22, dismissed reports of Putin’s government exploring “former real estate” abroad, asserting that Alaska will unequivocally remain under American ownership.
Russian Headlines Sparked by Alaska Claims: Putin’s Decree Fuels Speculation
The Acquisition of Alaska: Historical Insights into the 1867 Purchase
In March 1867, the United States acquired Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million following Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War by Britain, France, and the Ottoman Empire. The history of Russian incursions by fur traders dates back to the 1740s, but it wasn’t until the 1790s that permanent Russian settlements began to emerge.
On October 18, 1867, the transfer ceremony occurred in Sitka. Russian and American soldiers marched in front of the governor’s house, marking the moment when the Russian flag was lowered and the American flag was raised amid the sound of artillery.
The late Soviet leader Joseph Stalin reportedly had plans to escalate the Cold War by invading Alaska shortly before he died in 1953. In response to this perceived threat, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover collaborated on a classified initiative, known by the code name “Washtub,” in conjunction with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations.
Russian Propaganda’s Past Claims on Alaska
Rumours that Alaska was not sold but leased to the U.S. for 99 (according to some sources, 100) years, with calls to reclaim rightful ownership, emerged even during Soviet times. Additionally, two other themes enjoy popularity among conspiracy theorists regarding the largest American state: the disappearance of gold that Moscow was supposed to receive as part of the deal, and the alleged actions of Bolsheviks (primarily V.I. Lenin), who, for momentary political gains, supposedly handed over all documentary evidence of Russia’s rights to the disputed territory to the U.S.
In 1990, the Russian national-patriotic band “LYUBE” (ЛЮБЭ) released a song with lyrics urging,
“Don’t act stupid, America!
Give us back the land that is Alaska,
Give us back our precious land!”
https://youtu.be/4wuq1EE8ymc?si=U4fUy66PqdDBe5xZ
This song, featuring music by Igor Matviyenko and lyrics by Aleksandr Shaganov, gained widespread popularity in Russia during the 1990s. In 2016, the anthem of the Russian Ground Forces was written by Matvienko.
In 2014, Russian propaganda reignited claims to reclaim Alaska, sparking a renewed and intense debate surrounding the terms of the agreement that transferred rights to the territory. This revival of discussions raised inquiries into Russia’s fulfillment of its obligations, the United States’ adherence to the terms of the agreement, and potential grounds for challenging this historic transaction.
During a 2014 Q&A session with Russian citizens, Putin addressed a query from Faina Ivanovna about the potential reclamation of Alaska. Putin emphasized the historical sale of Alaska in the 19th century, akin to the Louisiana Purchase. He underscored the modest cost of $7.2 million in gold, describing it as an inexpensive acquisition. Putin also highlighted Russia’s northern climate, suggesting that concerns about Alaska’s status should be tempered given its climatic resemblance to Russia’s northern regions.
In the same year, Russia initiated the conflict in Donbas and annexed Crimea.
“If Russia owned Alaska today, the geopolitical situation in the world would have been different,” Sergey Aksyonov, the prime minister of occupied Crimea, told a Crimean television network in 2017.
In a recent development, the notion of returning Alaska to Russia has resurfaced in 2022, with two Russian officials revisiting the idea. Vyacheslav Volodin, an ally of Putin and the chairman of the State Duma, stated that Russia might consider reclaiming the territory as a response to the substantial sanctions imposed by the U.S., NATO, and the European Union in light of the Ukrainian invasion.
Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy made his sole public statement regarding Russian threats against his state by sharing an MSN article about Volodin. In a concise tweet on Thursday, he remarked, “To the Russian politicians who believe they can take back Alaska: Good luck.”
To the Russian politicians who believe they can take back Alaska: Good luck.https://t.co/5eEVfJR5r5
— Governor Mike Dunleavy (@GovDunleavy) July 7, 2022
On July 7, 2022, billboards with the message “Alaska Is Ours!” were observed, as reported by NGS24, a news agency in the Siberian city of Krasnoyarsk. These billboards are not thought to be installed by Russian authorities, but rather by an individual described as “some local patriot”.
As of November 3, 2022, the Russian media outlet based in Krasnodar, “Morning South,” has reported that there are ongoing preparations for a referendum on the annexation of Alaska to Russia within the United States. This initiative is purportedly originating from Old Believer communities in America, with the news being disseminated through a video posted online by the non-profit organization Alaska Public Media.
Who does this narrative targets?
The narrative about the potential return of Alaska to Russia targets various audiences:
- Domestic Audience: Aims to evoke nationalist sentiments, distract from domestic issues, and rally support for the government.
- International Audience: Serves as a form of signalling or posturing amid geopolitical tensions, conveying Russia’s readiness to challenge historical agreements and potentially creating divisions among Western nations.
- Nationalist Populists: Appeals to nationalist and populist factions within Russia, aligning with their desire for a strong and assertive nation reclaiming lost territories.
- Media and Propaganda Outlets: Strategically amplified through state-controlled media to influence specific audiences and shape perceptions.
- Diplomatic and Geopolitical Circles: Introduces the idea of reclaiming Alaska to gauge reactions, test adversaries’ resolve, and potentially create a negotiating position in geopolitical matters.
What purpose does the given narrative serve for Russia?
The narrative of potentially reclaiming Alaska serves various purposes for Russia:
- Nationalistic Boost: Strengthens domestic support by invoking Russian pride and historical unity.
- Distraction Tactic: Diverts attention from internal issues, providing an emotionally charged narrative.
- Geopolitical Signal: Indicates a readiness to challenge historical agreements, projecting global influence.
- Diplomatic Leverage: Introduces a potential negotiation tool, creating uncertainty in diplomatic discussions.
- Nationalist Appeal: Aligns with narratives of a robust and assertive Russia, resonating with specific segments.
- Criticism Deterrent: Associates critics with external threats, discouraging dissent and fostering loyalty.
- Reaction Testing: Gauges responses, both domestically and internationally, to discussions about territorial claims.
- Division Creation: Exploits historical sensitivities to potentially sow dissent within Western countries.
In summary, the recent discourse on Alaska’s status is a deliberate strategy aimed at bolstering national pride, fostering unity, and enhancing Russia’s geopolitical standing. By invoking historical sensitivities and entertaining the idea of reclaiming lost territories, the narrative serves as both a domestic rallying point and a potential bargaining chip in diplomatic manoeuvres. However, it is essential to acknowledge the impracticality of such a return, given the historical sale of Alaska in 1867 and subsequent confirmations of its status. The international community, including the United States, has unequivocally rejected any notion of altering established borders and agreements.
The used images are screenshots from the referenced pages.
