Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov doubled down on his Hitler references, while speaking to Italian media. He said, “those who have decided to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia have decided to adopt the sad experience of Napoleon and Hitler.” This was after earlier comments in January, just days before International Holocaust Remembrance Day, when Lavrov had described the West’s approach to Russia as being equivalent to Hitler’s “Final Solution.” This is, sadly, a prevailing worldview within the Russian leadership.

Our organization, RealityCheck, is dedicated to rigorous, reliable research studies, and our current project is an examination of the impact of Holocaust education. Our results show that Holocaust education is strongly correlated to reductions in hate crimes: and other positive outcomes. Therefore, it’s important to examine the source of the Russian attitudes, what Russia is getting right, and what Russia is getting wrong.

Traditionally Russia (and its predecessors, such as the Soviet Union) created defensible borders by expanding out to natural barriers: such as oceans, mountains or other similar features, and then filling in any gaps with troops. Memories of invasions by the Nazis in the 20th century and by Napoleon’s armies in the 19th century, remain strong in the Russian collective consciousness, reinforcing the feeling that natural borders are an existential necessity.

For this reason, many Russians genuinely feel that a certain degree of expansion (such as conquering Ukraine) is a matter of national survival. However, Ukraine itself does not contain the natural borders that Russia seeks, but is merely on the way to such natural borders. The protective features that would give Russia comfort actually lie beyond Ukraine: in places like Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, and other countries, many of which are NATO allies. In short, if Russia succeeds in conquering Ukraine, that will not be the end of this war, but only the beginning.

In order to achieve its desired borders, Russia would have to complete a total conquest of Ukraine and then invade NATO allies. The NATO treaty would consequently require NATO members (such as much of Western Europe, the United States, Canada, and others) to directly defend those NATO allies that are under attack. Unlike the merely supportive role the West is playing in Ukraine, this could be a direct military (and potentially nuclear) conflict involving numerous countries and on multiple fronts: in other words, World War III. For this reason, Ukraine’s position is pivotal for the entire world, and the West feels an absolute need to prevent its conquest.

Russia indeed feels a genuine sense of danger within its current borders, yet there are two glaring holes in the Russian worldview: One, the West is not invading Russia, and two, unlike the Jews of pre-war Europe who became the victims of the Nazis, Russia is actively invading and conquering its neighbors.

In the past 30 years, Russia has invaded the Crimea, Georgia, and Moldova, launched attacks in the Caucuses, effectively conquered Chechnya, and has taken part in civil wars in East Prigorodny and Tajikistan, all prior to its current invasion of Ukraine. From the Western point of view, NATO is merely responding to Russia’s military actions, and has neither invaded Russia, nor attempted to conquer it.

Russia is not alone in making Nazi comparisons, Ukraine has done so as well, and equally inappropriately. There is no question that the Nazis made an indelible impact on the national psyche of both countries and it is therefore no surprise that this era of history would be on the minds of each country’s leadership. Russia, in particular, thinks of the Nazis much in the way it remembers Napoleon: as a threatening foreign power, but one that it faced as an independent nation, with its own national army. This contrasts fundamentally with the Jewish experience, in which an armed Nazi government attempted to completely annihilate its own unarmed, civilian, Jewish population.

Thus even from Russia’s own survivalist perspective, the Holocaust comparison is offensive and inappropriate: because Russia effectively equates the utterly helpless Jews of pre-war Europe to itself: a modern nation with a massive army that is currently on a path of conquest. Such a comparison is not only devoid of logical sense, but it places today’s Jews in a historically inaccurate and dangerous position in the eyes of the world.

Holocaust education is filled with stories of individuals, humble heroes, who risked their lives to save others, as well people who, tragically, betrayed their friends and neighbors, often with fierce enthusiasm. When we learn about this history, we learn to think differently — not only about the Holocaust itself, but about each other, about everything we say and do, and about the powerful impact that we, as individuals, have on the world around us.

This is why Holocaust education reduces hate crimes and increases safety far beyond the Jewish world. Whether we are talking about individuals in our own communities, or world leaders like Sergei Lavrov, manipulation of history places us all in danger, while properly conducted Holocaust education accomplishes the reverse.

Russia is trying to marshal one of the greatest evils in history to justify its invasion of a foreign state; endangering not only its neighbors, but also the proper memory of the Holocaust. For the sake of vulnerable groups everywhere, we must not allow this effort to succeed.

As appeared in Algemeiner.