In seeking information on the relationship between Russia and the West I found this interesting piece written by a British academic whose speciality is Russian literature, and who has been visiting Russia regularly for decades. Her perspective is different from that of most commentators and is worth adding to your collection.
A very interesting read. But I note its dated 2014. A lot changes in politics and economics in 10 years, in any country. Im a ballet fan and read a few year ago the book Bolshoi Confidential, https://www.amazon.com.au/Bolshoi-Confidential-Secrets-Russian-Ballet/dp/0871402963 which turned out to be more than just about ballet but almost a political history of Russia. The Bolshoi, in fact ballet itself, is more than just a elite 'thing', its very much at the heart of the Russian people. There is a cultural sophistication to the Russians that is somewhat overshadowed by the gruffness and overbearing but dispirited impression created in western media.
Also reading the history of the Cossacks gives an understand of a culture of war which is a central thread through Russian history. And modern Russian cannot be understood without factoring in Marxism, Leninism and all that period.
My impression of Putin is of an intense desire, rooted in an obsessive belief of an historical 'right' is to recreate the tsarist glory days of Russia. In this respect he sees Ukraine as belonging to Russia therefore his invasion is entirely historically justified.
I hold another view. Ukraine is sovereign to the Ukrainians. It is their right to choose under which regime they are ruled, a regime that they choose or a regime imposed upon them. But in this instance that decision is being decided through blood not votes.
I'm pleased that you're trying to make sense of this conflict Ken.
Back in 2022 I found myself very puzzled by the narrative coming through the media, and set about trying to understand the CAUSES of the conflict. This took me down a long and winding road as I tried to find my way through all the propaganda and deception (a common feature of conflicts) and in the process found that I had to modify many (or even most) of my pre-conceived notions. After about 18 months I felt that I had sorted through this sufficiently to produce an (amateur) article, as follows:
I'm not trying to impose my views on others, just encouraging people to do research and in the process be very wary of propagande, including western propaganda. I hope this assists.
John. Ive had a good read of your first analysis. I know a little of European history, more the West than the East but still aware of the East. One thing Ive learned is that anyone can mount a story for almost any European nation (or now disappeared nation), pick a point in time and run a credible argument that that nation has an entitlement both actual and moral to some piece of land or other. I feel that you analysis pick the Russian perspective and exclusively argues the situation from the moral and actual right of Russia over Ukraine or big parts of it at minimum. This was pretty much the thrust of Putins interview with Tucker Carson. Putin argued the historical right of Russia. That's a legitimate perspective to have. But almost any other country can do the same. I think that to take the perspective of just one nation without the counterbalance of other perspectives is to miss the (highly complex) nuances. In the end, all that matters is what is happening now. And that 'now' is always complex and fraught with claim and counter claim. At some point each nation must accept drawn boundaries and respect those. To do otherwise is to invite mass slaughter as is happening now and has happened through history. In Australia Im so thankful that (essentially) we don't 'have history' so our situation is so comparatively simple. Rgds and thanks for your links. Ive subscribed
You are deluded. If the most corrupt country otherwise known as Ukraine wins, the rest of the world will loess. Russia will never permit its region to be taken over by the globalists. We will see Nuclear bombs before Ukraine can declear a win.
Thanks for your comment. Understand Ive just summarised what bloggers and commentators 'on the ground' are saying and have drawn some observations from that. I make comment as a complete amateur on the issue. But yes, Im well aware that Ukraine has a substantial history/evidence of corruption but Id argue that Russia under Putin is far worse. However the issue is the respect for borders. Now Im not sure but do you hold the view that Ukraine is Russian territory and Russia's invasion is entirely correct?
Putin wants to speak with Trump. And for good reason. Trump is not on the side of globalist attack on Russia through NATO which is backed heavily by the US war machine. This is why Trump has a better chance
But with the European countries now heavily backing Ukraine and the latest move by Ukraine into Russian territory what bargain chips does Trump have for Putin. This is all about 'the art of the deal.' And the cards on the dealers table seems to be shifting
Hi Ken
In seeking information on the relationship between Russia and the West I found this interesting piece written by a British academic whose speciality is Russian literature, and who has been visiting Russia regularly for decades. Her perspective is different from that of most commentators and is worth adding to your collection.
https://catherinebrown.org/deconstructing-russophobia/
Thanks Joseph.
A very interesting read. But I note its dated 2014. A lot changes in politics and economics in 10 years, in any country. Im a ballet fan and read a few year ago the book Bolshoi Confidential, https://www.amazon.com.au/Bolshoi-Confidential-Secrets-Russian-Ballet/dp/0871402963 which turned out to be more than just about ballet but almost a political history of Russia. The Bolshoi, in fact ballet itself, is more than just a elite 'thing', its very much at the heart of the Russian people. There is a cultural sophistication to the Russians that is somewhat overshadowed by the gruffness and overbearing but dispirited impression created in western media.
Also reading the history of the Cossacks gives an understand of a culture of war which is a central thread through Russian history. And modern Russian cannot be understood without factoring in Marxism, Leninism and all that period.
My impression of Putin is of an intense desire, rooted in an obsessive belief of an historical 'right' is to recreate the tsarist glory days of Russia. In this respect he sees Ukraine as belonging to Russia therefore his invasion is entirely historically justified.
I hold another view. Ukraine is sovereign to the Ukrainians. It is their right to choose under which regime they are ruled, a regime that they choose or a regime imposed upon them. But in this instance that decision is being decided through blood not votes.
Rgds and thanks for the article link
I'm pleased that you're trying to make sense of this conflict Ken.
Back in 2022 I found myself very puzzled by the narrative coming through the media, and set about trying to understand the CAUSES of the conflict. This took me down a long and winding road as I tried to find my way through all the propaganda and deception (a common feature of conflicts) and in the process found that I had to modify many (or even most) of my pre-conceived notions. After about 18 months I felt that I had sorted through this sufficiently to produce an (amateur) article, as follows:
https://johnalden.substack.com/p/a-beginners-guide-to-the-conflict?r=23yy4s
and followed up 6 months later with an update:
https://johnalden.substack.com/p/the-tragedy-of-ukraine-requiem-for?r=23yy4s
I'm not trying to impose my views on others, just encouraging people to do research and in the process be very wary of propagande, including western propaganda. I hope this assists.
John. Ive had a good read of your first analysis. I know a little of European history, more the West than the East but still aware of the East. One thing Ive learned is that anyone can mount a story for almost any European nation (or now disappeared nation), pick a point in time and run a credible argument that that nation has an entitlement both actual and moral to some piece of land or other. I feel that you analysis pick the Russian perspective and exclusively argues the situation from the moral and actual right of Russia over Ukraine or big parts of it at minimum. This was pretty much the thrust of Putins interview with Tucker Carson. Putin argued the historical right of Russia. That's a legitimate perspective to have. But almost any other country can do the same. I think that to take the perspective of just one nation without the counterbalance of other perspectives is to miss the (highly complex) nuances. In the end, all that matters is what is happening now. And that 'now' is always complex and fraught with claim and counter claim. At some point each nation must accept drawn boundaries and respect those. To do otherwise is to invite mass slaughter as is happening now and has happened through history. In Australia Im so thankful that (essentially) we don't 'have history' so our situation is so comparatively simple. Rgds and thanks for your links. Ive subscribed
Thanks for the feedback Ken.
Thanks John. I'll try and find time to read your anlaysis
You are deluded. If the most corrupt country otherwise known as Ukraine wins, the rest of the world will loess. Russia will never permit its region to be taken over by the globalists. We will see Nuclear bombs before Ukraine can declear a win.
Thanks for your comment. Understand Ive just summarised what bloggers and commentators 'on the ground' are saying and have drawn some observations from that. I make comment as a complete amateur on the issue. But yes, Im well aware that Ukraine has a substantial history/evidence of corruption but Id argue that Russia under Putin is far worse. However the issue is the respect for borders. Now Im not sure but do you hold the view that Ukraine is Russian territory and Russia's invasion is entirely correct?
Putin wants to speak with Trump. And for good reason. Trump is not on the side of globalist attack on Russia through NATO which is backed heavily by the US war machine. This is why Trump has a better chance
But with the European countries now heavily backing Ukraine and the latest move by Ukraine into Russian territory what bargain chips does Trump have for Putin. This is all about 'the art of the deal.' And the cards on the dealers table seems to be shifting