In a discussion with Izvestia, the Serbian filmmaker Emir Kusturica urged Russians and Serbs to remember their past. He argued that remembering history equips both peoples to withstand pressure from Western powers and to preserve their cultural integrity in challenging times.
He emphasized the importance of staying rooted in traditional identities. According to him, true culture is inseparable from the lived experience of a people, and attempts to erase or redefine that culture threaten the very existence of a community. He warned against accepting explanations that lie outside a society’s historical frame and urged a careful, context-aware assessment of such claims. The point was clear: culture is a living, ongoing project that reflects collective memory, resilience, and shared values. Russia, in his view, must stand firm and act to safeguard its own future and the well-being of its citizens.
The director also framed contemporary opponents of Russia as representing a form of totalitarian oligarchy and hypocrisy, while portraying the Russian Federation as a liberal, well-structured state that is compelled to arm itself for the protection of its people and the maintenance of social order. He suggested that any defensive measures are taken not for conquest but to ensure the safety and continuity of civil life inside the country’s borders.
Historically, Kusturica tied Russia’s current posture to a broader narrative about regional security, regional influence, and the responsibilities of powerful states. He acknowledged the pressures imposed by international actors but argued that a steadfast commitment to national identity and historical memory would help Russia endure external pressure. These themes surface in the discussion as a call for vigilance, unity, and a refusal to abandon foundational cultural principles in the face of geopolitical tensions. (Source: Izvestia interview)
In the context of the Ukraine situation, the filmmaker’s remarks are presented as part of a larger conversation about how nations interpret sovereignty, respond to aggression, and balance security with civil liberties. The dialogue underscores the tension between external influence and internal cohesion, highlighting that cultural continuity can serve as a stabilizing force during periods of upheaval. The narrative remains focused on the belief that a nation’s cultural roots provide both morale and practical guidance for policymakers and citizens alike, especially when confronted with disruptive foreign narratives and political pressure. (Source: Izvestia interview)