by Miceál O’Hurley
TORONTO — In sharp contrast to international efforts to sanction Russia for its brutal invasion of Ukraine, Russia continues to enjoy a measure of success in eluding condemnation in international sport competition and the wider arts community. Russia began its war in Ukraine in 2014 and redoubled its efforts in February 2022 when it tried to topple the Kyiv government and seize the country in a lightning strike at Ukraine’s heartland and capital. Russia’s war has long been recognised for its forces’ tendency to engage in brutal war crimes such as rape, torture and the summary execution of civilians. The Kremlin’s ‘soft diplomacy’ in service of its war continues, however, to find sway in the arts community. Currently, the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) and Venice Film Festival are both screening Russians at War, a film widely criticised as a propaganda work of the Putin regime.
The documentary, directed by Russian-Canadian filmmaker Anastasia Trofimova, has come under fierce criticism for portraying Russian invaders of Ukraine as “victims”. The documentary, which is promoted as providing a “unique glimpse into the life of Russian soldiers near the frontlines in Ukraine” has gained acceptance in several of the world’s film festivals despite its propagandist narrative. Trofimova has vehemently defended the film, saying, “The point of view of Russian soldiers is not usually heard”. In an echo of former Trump advisor Kelly Anne Conway’s disinformation model which promotes “alternative facts”, Trofimova claimed the world needed to grasp the importance of “understanding the war from multiple perspectives” to cut through the “fog of war”.
The film, and the decision by film festivals to screen Russians at War, raises fundamental questions about the ethics of producing and showing such films, especially for their supposed artistic merit. The film goes well beyond Trofimova’s claim to simply portray the experience of soldiers following orders in a war in which they may not agree or understand their role. Despite its 129-minute run time, Trofimova fails to parse the disparity between Russian conscripts and the volunteers who willingly participate in the invasion of Ukraine. Russia’s claimed reasoning for their war on Ukraine, including the preponderance of independent and verified evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity inflicted by Russian forces.
Rob Gill, an Irish filmmaker and producer who was an organiser of the Richard Harris International Film Festival was asked by Diplomacy in Ireland – European Diplomat about Trofimova’s Russians at War, saying, “Documentarians don’t have the same obligations of impartiality as journalists; it is editorial rather than unbiased reporting. However, they still have an obligation to be witnesses to truth and to be upfront with their biases”. Beyond the personal responsibility of artists, the issue of the international arts community providing a platform for propaganda works raises fundamental questions about artists and their obligation to truth. According to Gill, “Festivals that screen documentaries have an obligation to ensure that documentarians have acted in good faith and haven’t misrepresented themselves as independent if that is not the case. Avoiding misrepresenting a film to audiences is a basic responsibility for festival programmers”.
Aside from Trofimova directing, starring, producing and sharing co-writing credits with Rolande Schlimme, she ignores to treat the critical issues of Russia’s persistent and ongoing targeting of civilians, residential housing, hospitals, schools, cultural centres and critical infrastructure. If Trofimova wanted to portray the true activities of the soldiers with whom she was embedded for some 7-months an honest approach would have been to include their participation in such violence and crimes. Trofimova has emerged as a modern-day Lenni Riefenstahl, using film to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, promote a heroic view of the invaders and sidestep any serious scrutiny of the war crimes and crimes against humanity they combine to commit.
Trofimova follows closely in the footsteps of Riefenstahl who was commissioned by Reich Minister for Propaganda Joseph Goebbels to produce films like ‘Triumph of the Will’ and ‘Olympia’ to celebrate Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich and lionise its soldiers. The decision of Trofimova to echo Riefenstahl’s projects should have alarmed the organisers of the Toronto International Film Festival and Venice Film Festival. While Reifenstahl’s propaganda works won acclaim at film festivals in the 1930s, the post-war realisation that they played a critical role in Hitler’s propaganda machine led to Riefenstahl becoming an outcast in the artistic community.
Following the war, the French government confiscated her production company, Riefenstahl-Film GmbH’s assets and confiscated her film stock. The film was later returned to her after lengthy judicial proceedings. In 1954, Riefenstahl produced Tiefland for release during the Cannes Film Festival. The festival remanded the film to the “non-competition” category. Critics of the film claimed it was an allegory of an oppressive regime that deprived the characters of their sense of agency, reducing them to victims. Trofimova’s work echoes Riefenstahl’s attempt to cleanse Russian soldiers of culpability and responsibility for their actions as though they were characters from Riefenstahl’s revisionist work, Tiefland.
La Biennale di Venezia has decided to screen the film, however, in the “out of competition” category.
Russia has long prohibited independent journalist from being embedded with, or covering their combat units invading Ukraine. Trofimova’s unbridled access to frontline units over a 7-month period could only have been facilitated by the Kremlin with Trofimova’s agreement to refrain from criticism of Russia, the war or the soldiers who volunteer or serve as conscripts to engage in warfare in neighbouring Ukraine. “It is inconceivable in the case of Russians at War,” said, Gill, “that the film-makers could have operated in a war-zone independently of the occupying power. To blithely declare that they witnessed no war crimes without contextualising that for audience is misrepresentation. Furthermore, to argue that they would have been arrested as spies by Ukrainian authorities is another gross misrepresentation that wasn’t explained or challenged by the Globe and Mail”. Canada’s Globe & Mail media interviewed Trofimova and reviewed the film, largely taking an editorial position defending its inclusion in the Toronto International Film Festival despite the over propagandist nature of the work.
Russians at War is the product of being co-produced between Canada and France. Boasting a $340,000 (Canadian) investment from the Canadian Media Fund, this private-public production raises fundamental questions about the ethics of covering war from the perspective of the invader. While Trofimova claims she created an “anti-war” film there is no discernable condemnation of the war or Russian tactics in prosecuting the war – only the occasional befuddlement of Russia soldiers who claim they don’t always understand why they are fighting Ukraine. There is a large chasm between questioning one’s participation in a war and condemning it.
Canada, which in 2022 boasted an ethnic-Ukrainian population of 38.93m people, has been at the epicenter of protest against the film. Speaking to Global News, Ukraine’s Consul General in Toronto, Oleh Nikolenko said, “We believe this film is Russian propaganda”. Other Canadians have asked why Canadian taxpayers are subsidising Russian propaganda at a time when the Canadian people and Government are protesting the “wanton” brutality of Russian soldiers, such as the ones the film attempts to depict as “victims” of war. A Canadian Member of Parliament, who wished to remain un-named, told Diplomacy in Ireland – European Diplomat, “I really don’t know what we are doing anymore. Ottawa has sent more than $352m (Canadian) to Ukraine to defend democracy and shore-up European security and now I’ve discovered we’ve spent $340,000 to undermine our own efforts by financing Putin’s propaganda machine. It’s insane and irresponsible”.
The Canadian Media Fund did not return calls for comment prior to publication. Anastasia Trofimova did not return messages despite repeated efforts to contact her.
