Westerners have spent two decades wondering why the Russian people have fallen under the spell of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Diplomats, historians, economists and pundits have all failed to provide a satisfying explanation, but where academics and strategists have failed, perhaps the denizens of Sesame Street, from Kermit the Frog to Elmo, might succeed.
It was 1996. My homeland was in the midst of “shock therapy” — the rapid liberalization and privatization of its economy by decree, after the Soviet Union’s fall — and I was at Princeton University working on my doctorate.
One day, a report about Russia on CNN caught my attention. Unusually, it was not about a killing or business takeover or an oligarch’s rise or fall — negative coverage delivered with a holier-than-thou tone that never failed to rankle. Instead, it was a seemingly positive story: The Muppets were headed to Moscow.
Illustration: Yusha
Listening to the CNN host’s arrogant commentary, my relief quickly gave way to frustration. The establishment of a Sesame Street in Russia was not, apparently, an example of cultural cross-pollination, enabled by the country’s opening. Rather, Miss Piggy and Big Bird would ensure that US democratic sensibilities took root in the hearts and minds of children across the vast post-Soviet space — not just in Russia, but also in Estonia, Ukraine, Georgia and other former Soviet republics.
I changed the channel.
A children’s television show, defined by its positive messages about learning and sharing, was being twisted into propaganda, presented as a form of pedagogical salvation, and used as yet another declaration of the US’ Cold War victory.
However, Russia had its own rich culture, which included not only Leo Tolstoy and the Bolshoi Theatre, but also Good Night, Little Ones!, a Soviet children’s show as clever and warmhearted as Sesame Street.
Fortunately, the team behind Sesame Street did not succumb to the attitude of moral superiority and cultural contempt that pervaded US news reports and was likely internalized by many ordinary Americans.
On the contrary, according to a new book by Natasha Lance Rogoff — who, in the early 1990s, was an executive producer in charge of bringing the Muppets to Russia — the story of the show’s formation for Russian audiences was one of genuine cultural cooperation, not condescension or conquest.
In Muppets in Moscow: The Unexpected Crazy True Story of Making Sesame Street in Russia, Lance Rogoff does not shy away from the story’s political thread. She openly admits that the US Agency for International Development and then-US senator Joe Biden “spearheaded congressional support for an international Sesame Street,” touting the Muppets as “ideal ambassadors to model democratic values and the benefits of a free-market economy to children in the former Soviet Union.”
She also said that “translating Sesame Street’s ebullient and idealistic outlook to Mother Russia was not only incredibly difficult, but also incredibly dangerous.”
Lance Rogoff’s narrative includes bizarre, sordid and all-too-human details about the morbid racketeering of the early post-Soviet years, when journalists and businesspeople were murdered on spec and Miss Piggy could be embraced as a role model for the utterly ruthless.
Her rationalizing, normalizing and modernizing of the post-Soviet system reminded me of David Remnick’s insights, in his 1994 book Lenin’s Tomb: The Last Days of the Soviet Empire, into how Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika transformed Russia.
Perhaps most important, Lance Rogoff shows that, even if Russia’s Sesame Street was fundamentally a US show, it was not about the US. It certainly was not designed to serve as US propaganda.
Instead, it depicted basic human values like friendship and communication — as much for the Russians and Americans who put the show together as for viewers across the former Soviet Union.
Watching Sesame Street while on a visit to Moscow in 1996 — not long after seeing that CNN report — I was pleased to encounter a generous, sweet and well-produced show, which contained tie-in stories from the US original, as well as unique stories with Russian puppets.
The show’s creators had clearly worked hard to develop characters that would resonate with Russians, from the problem-solving orange monster Kubik to the imaginative pink Muppet Businka. Zeliboba — a fuzzy, red-nosed house spirit, dressed in a leaf-covered cloak — was probably the most interesting (and certainly the most polarizing).
Lance Rogoff does sometimes fall prey to cliche. There are too many “Boris and Natasha” moments, with Russians being depicted as cartoonish stereotypes — absurd, bumbling, affected and heavily accented.
For example, one of the female tycoons involved in the show, Irina Borisova, clicks toward a meeting late in Christian Louboutin stilettos. The late Boris Berezovsky, who was approached for funding, calls “Bik Burd,” an “i-cone” of US culture, “as famous as Elvis Pray-esly.”
Nonetheless, Lance Rogoff deserves praise not only for her storytelling, but also for her perseverance and devotion, without which Russian Sesame Street would not have happened. That would have been a loss for Russian children.
As Yuliya Borisova said when she decided to offer funding, “every self-respecting individual understands that it’s time to do something for Russian children, but unfortunately, very little gets done — except talk.”
At a time when Russia was “changing so quickly” — and was “still very violent” — she believed that a “show like Sesame Street could model for our people how to live in a peaceful society.”
The key, as Lance Rogoff understood, was to show, not tell — to act in good faith, with decency and humanity, rather than delivering contemptuous, self-aggrandizing lectures.
In the 1990s, Russians were mimicking all things American, but they were also deeply conflicted, as reflected in the debates Lance Rogoff describes over Sergei Rachmaninoff and rock and roll. Russian culture is marked by extremes, and the oscillation between imitating Western models and violently rejecting them is no exception.
Russian children watched Sesame Street for nearly 15 years — until 2010. Lance Rogoff says it was taken off the air because Putin no longer saw any use for it. That many other cultural collaborations were also ended at about the same time supports her case. Putin had decided that Russian culture must be of and by Russians — and only he could decide what Russianness meant.
In the 1990s, Russian society was so shattered by the breakdown of the communist order that it lost touch with its own values. That did not mean it was going to become a US knockoff. Sesame Street worked because it embodied universal values. Would the Russian reality be different today if more Americans had understood this?
Nina Khrushcheva, a professor of international affairs at The New School, is the coauthor (with Jeffrey Tayler), most recently, of In Putin’s Footsteps: Searching for the Soul of an Empire Across Russia’s Eleven Time Zones.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS