Author Philippe Sands was told it is ‘unacceptable' to read Russian writer Tolstoy amid Ukraine war
Sands is a lawyer and the author of bestselling books including The Ratline and The Last Colony. In 2016, his memoir East West Street: On the Origins of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity won the Baillie Gifford Prize for Non-Fiction.
The 64-year-old appeared on a panel at the 2025 Hay Festival, which has partnered with The Independent for a second year. He was joined by Swedish philanthropist Sigrid Rausing, academic Adam Rutherford, and The Independent's chief international correspondent Bel Trew.
Responding to Rausing's concerns over 'how far Ukraine is going to go' in retaliating against the Russian invasion, Sands said: 'I've got no objection to that. I've got no objection to them targeting Russian bridges.'
He continued: 'The issue I've found in Kyiv, and in other places in Ukraine, is I want to read a short story by Tolstoy and I'm told I can't do that because it's unacceptable.'
Russian novelist Tolstoy, who died in 1910, was the author of seminal books including War and Peace (1869) and Anna Karenina (1878). The latter has been the subject of numerous film adaptations, including a critically acclaimed version starring Greta Garbo in 1935, and Joe Wright's 2012 adaptation starring Keira Knightley.
'It's an issue right now because [Ukrainians] are feeling very beleaguered,' said Sands. 'On the other hand, there are people who say, 'No, absolutely there are many good Russian writers, and many good Russian people...' so that is complex.'
He added: 'But in terms of going into the Russian side, absolutely. [Ukraine have] got to defend themselves.'
The discussion came in light of the news that at least seven people had been killed and dozens more injured when bridges collapsed in separate incidents across Russia.
Moscow Railways initially blamed the collapse in the Bryansk region, which borders Ukraine, on 'illegal interference in the operation of transport', in a likely reference to Ukrainian saboteurs, but its Telegram post was later removed.
Prominent Russian military blogger Semyon Pegov, who uses the name War Gonzo, called it 'sabotage'.
Neither report could be independently verified. There was no immediate comment from Ukraine.
A second bridge collapsed hours later when a freight train was crossing a bridge in the Kursk region early on Sunday (1 June), according to a local governor, causing a similar derailment.
Russia's Investigative Committee said on Sunday that the two bridges had collapsed following explosions.
In a third, separate incident, a prominent Ukrainian partisan group claimed responsibility for an attack on relay systems in the occupied Donetsk province, which brought a new Russian rail line to a standstill.
Russia has been hit by dozens of sabotage attacks since Moscow launched its offensive against Ukraine in 2022, with many targeting its vast rail network. Kyiv said railways are targeted because they are used to transport troops and weapons for deployment in the war.
You can follow updates on the Ukraine-Russia war in The Independent's live blog.
Elsewhere during the panel, Sands, a visiting professor of law at Harvard Law School, said that reports of 'rampant antisemitism' at the prestigious university are 'complete nonsense'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
China and Russia Keep Their Distance From Iran During Crisis
When Russia enlisted the aid of China, North Korea and Iran in its war against Ukraine, some American and British officials began talking about a new 'axis.' It appeared that the four countries were united by anger, authoritarianism and animus against the United States and its allies. But Iran's sales of drones and ballistic missiles to Russia for its war and oil shipped to China did not pay off when it mattered, raising doubts about unity among the nations. None of the other three states rushed to aid Iran during its war with Israel or when U.S. forces bombed Iranian nuclear sites. China and Russia, by far the two most powerful countries among the four, issued pro forma denunciations of the American actions but did not lift a finger to materially help Iran. 'The reality of this conflict turned out to be that Russia and China didn't run to Iran's rescue,' said Alexander Gabuev, the director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. 'That just exposes the limitations of the whole 'axis' idea.' 'Each of them is pretty selfish and doesn't want to get embroiled in the wars of others,' he added. 'These are very different wars and different sets of conflicts. The countries are not necessarily sharing the same structures and values and institutional links the same way the U.S. and its allies do.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Europe's Dilemma: Build a Military Industry or Keep Relying on the U.S.
European countries have committed to spending nearly double on military investments over the next decade, with high hopes that it will benefit their defense industries. But it is not clear that all that money — perhaps as much as 14 trillion euros, or $16 trillion — will fuel a flurry of high-end innovation in Europe. That is because of what one might call the F-35 problem. Europe lacks quality alternatives to some of the most needed and desired defense equipment that American companies produce. Among them is the F-35, Lockheed Martin's famed stealth fighter jet, whose advanced abilities are unmatched by European counterparts. Patriot missile-defense systems are also imported from America, as are rocket launchers, sophisticated drones, long-range artillery guided by satellite, integrated command and control systems, electronic and cyber warfare capabilities — along with most of the software required to run them. And because many European nations have already invested in American weapons, they want new purchases to remain compatible. The pledged investments have created a tension. Should European nations build their own military industry? Does the war in Ukraine and the threat of a militarized Russia allow that much lead-time? Or should they continue to invest, at least in part, in America's already available, cutting-edge technology? Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
A Brilliant Writer Whose Books Offer Traps, Not Escapes
Roving Eye is the Book Review's essay series on international writers of the past whose works warrant a fresh look, often in light of reissued, updated or newly translated editions of their books. We're used to stories in which buried secrets are forced to the surface, prompting some kind of reckoning — and in that reckoning's wake, transformation. KILLING STELLA (New Directions, 87 pp., paperback, $14.95), a newly translated 1958 novel by the Austrian writer Marlen Haushofer, charts an opposite trajectory. This is a book that gets more, not less, mysterious as it goes. As for transformation, forget it. Even when a few shards of truth wiggle their way aboveground, they change nothing. Everything stays obscured by a dense fog of repression. It's the air the characters breathe, even when they think they're spitting it out. This is true most of all for the main character and narrator, an Austrian housewife and mother. Left home alone for two days, she's writing down her account of some recent disturbing events. An old friend's teenage daughter, Stella, came to live with the narrator's family some months earlier; now Stella is dead. It looked like an accident; the narrator is sure it wasn't. Terrible things have happened — some recently, some further back — but they can't be processed or even acknowledged. Doing so, we sense, would rip the fabric of postwar, middle-class normalcy, a condition that makes the narrator miserable, but that she is nonetheless committed to preserving at all costs. For American readers already familiar with Haushofer's work, this mood of jittery claustrophobia might seem, at first, like a departure. Her reputation here rests almost entirely on 'The Wall,' a cult classic first released in 1963 and reissued two years ago. (Both novels were translated into English by Shaun Whiteside.) 'The Wall' tells the story of an Austrian widow confined to a rural valley by the overnight arrival of a mysterious force field. As far as she knows, everyone else on Earth is dead. Much of the novel is focused on the ins and outs of this woman's quest for survival, including her interactions with the land, animals and her own body. Her situation gives the writing an earthy immediacy. Repression appears mostly in the rearview mirror, a feature of the dissatisfying life she has been severed from. But in 'Killing Stella,' no fantastical force fields come down to cleave the narrator from her stifling circumstances. All she gets are her two days of solitude. By writing down the story of Stella's time with her family, she clearly hopes to stop thinking about it. 'I have to forget her if I want to resume my peaceful life,' she writes. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
