How Russia’s school history lessons are reframing Stalin, Gorbachev, and the war in Ukraine
Since 2023, history in Russian high schools has been taught from a single, standardized textbook, whose lead author is Putin aide Vladimir Medinsky. Its creators have made no secret of the fact that their main goal is to “foster patriotism.” Starting in September 2026, all schools will switch to the same textbook series, beginning in fifth grade. In an interview with the Russian newspaper Kommersant, Vladislav Kononov, the project’s executive secretary and a presidential administration official, discussed the thinking behind it. Meduza translated some of his more notable remarks into English.
On the reason for a unified textbook
A single, standardized textbook provides the foundation for a shared civic identity. There is no alternative history, just as none of us has — or could have — different parents. You can reflect and ask questions. But if you begin to despise your country’s past, you have no future as its citizen.
On whether the textbook has errors
Our textbook has undergone extensive review. Three institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences examined it, and the Education Ministry conducted its own evaluations. What is happening now is effectively a nationwide trial phase: we’re collecting feedback, which is a normal part of the process. Textbooks are constantly refined and improved — this has always been the case across all subjects.
There have not been many comments from teachers. The document compiling feedback on the ninth-grade textbook runs to just 15 pages. The process is, in a good sense, endless, since there will always be second-, third-, and fourth-order remarks. But there are no factual errors in the textbooks.
Follow Meduza on Google News to stay up to date — just go to this link and click “Follow” (or tap the star on mobile).
On criticism of the textbook
Textbooks for grades 10–11 were openly and aggressively criticized only by “foreign agents.” It’s been gratifying to see [their reactions]: for once, they immediately understood that mass speculation on historical topics is coming to an end. I don’t buy the idea that those inside Russia were simply afraid to criticize.
On Stalin
Repressions cannot be justified under any circumstances. But we should try to understand why they happened, what drove them, and what consequences they had. There’s no “glorification” of Stalin in the textbook, as some “foreign agents” have claimed. It’s just that, for the first time, a 10th-grade textbook includes his biography and his role in history. In the 1990s, it seemed as though the Soviet people had won World War II without a supreme commander. He was shamefacedly kept out of sight. We didn’t do that.
We’re in favor of an objective, balanced view of history — including controversial figures like Stalin. [Stalin’s secret police chief Lavrentiy] Beria is not listed among the marshals of victory because he has not been rehabilitated. Stalin, on the other hand, was never tried during his lifetime.
On Vladimir the Great
The fact that the textbook does not mention that Vladimir killed his brother isn’t glossing over history. You have to keep the audience’s comprehension level in mind. If sixth graders are introduced to Prince Vladimir as a fratricide, that’s what will stay with them — not that he baptized Rus’.
The most important thing Prince Vladimir did has nothing to do with the negative episodes in his life. Had he not chosen Orthodoxy, there would have been no Old Russian state. Ideally, one would tell everything about everyone, but space in a textbook is limited. We’re not trying to create some kind of myth about Vladimir.
On Gorbachev
The textbook doesn’t portray Mikhail Gorbachev as responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union — that’s a very simplified reading. We’re inviting students to assess Gorbachev themselves. But there’s a clear criterion for evaluating a statesman: what he inherited and what he left behind. If Gorbachev became the leader of the Soviet empire, and then the empire ceased to exist — draw your own conclusions.
On the Decembrists
The classic liberal approach — and later the Soviet one — was to idealize the Decembrists. Later, that assessment flipped to the exact opposite: rebels, conspirators, terrorists who challenged the foundations of the state. There still isn’t a consensus or a single, clear-cut assessment in historical scholarship today. We allow for a range of views.
On other textbooks
Why don’t we have an alternative multiplication table? […] Parents can hold any views they like — no one forbids it. They are free to discuss them with their children.
On what students should know
You should know the heroes of the “special military operation” — learn their names from the textbook, know their feats, and then you’ll pass the Unified State Exam [Russia’s college aptitude test]. If you don’t learn them, you won’t pass.
Sign up for Meduza’s daily newsletter
A digest of Russia’s investigative reports and news analysis. If it matters, we summarize it.