Did Putin really write his recent article for The National Interest, written in English, on his own?

Question

I just came across an article by Putin in The National Interest and got quite impressed by his English writing proficiency. As an undergraduate student learning English, I know how much time and effort are needed to master English to such an admirable degree, especially if you do not live in an English-speaking country. What's particularly amazing is that Putin started learning English around 2000, when he was about 50 years old, and has since been learning English while holding a full-time Russian-speaking job. Amazed, I carefully checked whether the article mentions any co-author, contributor, translator, or an original Russian text. It doesn't.

But before I start telling my friends and fellow students about this truly inspiring example, I'd like to ask here whether I'm not being too naive. Sure, I find it unthinkable that the president of a developed country will usurp the authorship of an article written by someone else or fail to acknowledge a translator. And I'm aware that there have already been a few talented writers among Russian leaders, with Lenin, Khruschev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev having written books as solo authors. But the skeptic in me is whispering that it's a bit of a stretch to believe that Putin could achieve excellence of a whole new level, emerging as a writer in a foreign language he learned while serving as Russia's president.

My question: Are there any facts, statements, or pieces of evidence that confirm or refute that Putin wrote the article on his own? I am curious, for instance, whether his spokesman or close associates said anything about that, whether magazines like The National Interest require that all authors sign an authorship statement like in research journals, and whether Putin's English is good enough to write such articles.

Answer 1

There are a few possibilities. Here they are, in descending order of probability:

• First, he might have asked someone else to write the article. The Russian government certainly does have advisors who can do that. The president tells them what they want to say, perhaps supplies a few notes and sketches, and the advisor writes it, then submits it to the president. This is not an usurpation of authorship; the ideas are those of the president, not (necessarily) those of the advisor.

• Second, he might have written the text in Russian, and have an advisor to translate it. There is no real reason why the advisor shouldn't remain anonymous in this case either. They are paid do perform such jobs, after all.

• Third, Putin might have written the whole thing in English. It wouldn't be published before being very carefully revised by advisors, who would suppress mistakes and Russianisms.

• Or, fourth, Putin may be a very proficient English writer. After all, he can have a couple advisors to teach him and improve his English at any time, and certainly a considerable library at hand that he can read from.

Answer 2

Putin is a competent English speaker, yet he does not appear to be a confident speaker, it is a third language for him. His second language is German. As a KGB operative, he lived and worked in Dresden, Germany for five years.

He rarely uses English, for example he will talk to a journalist in English in a relaxed chat. But he switches to Russian for the formal interview. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiFAeluRtao

The article was clearly by a professional writer, but I have no way of knowing if it was translated from a Russian original, or if it was re-written/copyedited from English copy. The text is rather littered with clichés like "feel a lump rise in [one's] throat" or "sweep under the carpet" which suggests a slightly "textbook" style of writing. And, unfortunately, "failing to acknowledge a translator" is the normal standard. Translators get paid, but they don't get their name on the by-line in the newspaper. (It's different in literary translation).

Answer 3

Professor Mariusz Wołos, of the Pedagogical University of Krakow, has conducted an interview with the Polish Press Agency about this very issue. He claims not only that Putin didn't write the article, but that it was written by a group of researchers, and that he would feel confident guessing the identity of one of the researchers in particular. The transcript of the interview (in Polish) is found here, but I've translated the relevant part below:

Polish Press Agency: Why did Russian President Vladimir Putin decide to publish an article about World War II and what is his main goal?

Professor Mariusz Wołos: First of all, it should be emphasized that this is not a text written by Putin, but signed with his signature. Of course, he also takes full responsibility for its content. Most likely, the authors of this article are specialists from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO) and he was consulted with several historians from the Russian Academy of Sciences. It even seems to me that I know which of these researchers has made a decisive contribution to the preparation of this text. I won't mention this name because it's just a guess. It was also not President Putin who deliberately and selectively selected the documents cited in this article.

Answer 4

After I posted my question here, Russia's state news agency, TASS, published statements of Putin's spokesman, Peskov, about the matter in question:

Песков отметил, что Путин, заинтересовавшись этой темой, "работал с Росархивом, с разными историками, большая часть работы была проделана самим президентом". "Не то чтобы он сам сидел в архивах, но он живо знакомился со всеми архивными документами, которые ему передавали", - добавил представитель Кремля.

My translation:

Peskov mentioned that having become interested in the topic, Putin "worked with the Federal Archival Agency and various historians, and a large part of the work was done by the president himself." "He didn't really spend time in the archives, but he vividly acquainted himself with all archival documents that were brought to him," added the representative of the Kremlin.

So Putin's spokesman confirms that the article was a result of joint work that involved "various historians."

Interestingly, the news publication goes on to quote Peskov's explanation of why the English version of the article, published in The National Interest, and the Russian version, published on the Kremlin website, provide different numbers of Russian casualties in the Battle of Rzhev:

Отвечая на вопрос о причинах разных данных о потерях СССР в Ржевской битве в годы Великой Отечественной войны в англо- и русскоязычной версиях статьи главы государства, Песков пояснил, что в журнал National Interest англоязычная версия статьи была отправлена заранее, "а работа в архивах по уточнению данных о погибших продолжалась фактически до последнего часа, когда уже в издательство отравлялся русский, аутентичный текст".

My translation:

Answering a question about the reasons why the English and Russian versions of the article by the head of the state provide different numbers of the USSR's casualties in the Battle of Rzhev, fought in the Great Patriotic War, Peskov explained that the English version had been sent to The National Interest earlier (than the Russian version had been sent for publication elsewhere), "whilst the work in the archives to get more accurate data regarding casualties had continued practically till the last hour before the Russian, authentic text had been sent to a publishing house."

So Peskov says that the original text was written in Russian. And if it's true, it's hard to imagine that the president himself spent time and effort translating the Russian text into English, especially given that he isn't a professional translator.

A comment by User under my question provides a link to a video in which Putin answers in English a question by a journalist of Sky News. Here is the relevant moment in the video, and here is my transcript:

Journalist: Mr. Putin, how worried are you that the protests will affect your election victory? Are you concerned?

Putin: No, I am not concerned. I think about people, ordinary people of Russia. Of course, I see the protests, groups, and I think about it, what I can to(sic!) do with(sic!) all our citizens.

Interestingly, the Russian subtitles translate the last sentence into Russian as, "Конечно, я вижу группы протестующих и думаю о том, что я могу сделать для всех наших граждан," which means, "Of course, I see groups of protesters and think what I can do for all our citizens."

Such a level of English language proficiency is clearly not enough to write the English text of the article in question, although it should be noted that the video was shot in 2012. Putin may have improved his English language skills since then, although he was already 60 years old at that time.

Finally, I discovered that it's not really uncommon for newspapers and magazines to publish articles by politicians who don't speak the language of the article, and without acknowledging the translator. For instance, Pravda, a Russian newspaper, published an article authored by Sen. McCain and written in Russian and for Russians. The article is titled "Россияне заслуживают лучшего, чем Путин" ("Russians deserve better than Putin").

So in view of all the evidence and the answers to my question I find it extremely unlikely that Putin himself worded the English text of the article, although he may have contributed to the original Russian text, most likely by giving some general guidance, making corrections to better reflect his foreign policy agenda, and approving the final version.

Answer 5

I don't know the details of how the article was produced, but there's an easy explanation: The National Interest copyeditors fixed any awkward English. You can be sure The National Interest has copyeditors (because any awkward English that actually gets published reflects badly on the magazine), and fixing awkward English is literally what they're paid for.