Saturday, 5 March 2022

The invasion of Ukraine — Putin’s final battle with reality


The invasion of Ukraine — Putin’s final battle with reality


By Maxim Trudolyubov

How did a war with Ukraine become possible at all? The answer is in the alternative political ‘reality’ constructed by Russia in the last few years with the aid of lies, manipulations and the creation of fakes. It was so poorly executed that it seems unbelievable that anyone amongst the decision-makers (including those who created it) actually believes in it. As it turns out, someone evidently does. His name is Vladimir Putin.

In its many years under Vladimir Putin, the Russian establishment has led a ruthless, militant battle against social reality. Political administrators (yes, these are administrators and not politicians, because no one elected them) have persecuted all forms of independence and pushed out activists, politicians and journalists from the public space if they have shown themselves to hold independent views.

Their positions were passed on to figureheads whose task was to feign action and create smokescreens. Officials in the presidential administration busied themselves with identifying, infiltrating and converting any organised parties, groups, and structures that showed any sign of opposition into manageable “cells.”

How the destruction of society leads to war

Everything contemporary was declared alien, foreign, hostile, extremist and even “terrorist”. Let’s remember the civic movement created by Alexei Navalny, which aimed for non-violent political struggle against the regime and was declared therefore, in essence, to be “criminal”.

As far as destruction goes, the successes of officialdom were impressive. Let’s not forget that such “successes” were achieved by direct assassinations, force, and the expulsion of people beyond our borders. Faceless officials, at different times working under the leadership of Kremlin political bosses — Vladislav Surkov, Vyacheslav Volodin, Sergey Kiriyenko — led the charge in close cooperation with intelligence services. The results of these activities are truly horrifying.

Let’s remember the imprisoned activists. Let’s remember those forced abroad and those who gave up public activity, having soberly assessed the risks associated with it. We shan’t forget the assassinated politicians, journalists and public figures, whoever might be behind their deaths.

Putin’s officials tried not only to control civic society, but sports results as well. The logic of fair play was blasted to smithereens: the leader, clearly, did not believe in it. Russian sportspeople had to be better than all others, at any cost. Thus, competitions were replaced by doping programmes, designed to paint the leader a picture of astonishing success. The Winter Olympics in 2014 became a project meant to guarantee victories. The orchestration of the Games was in the end exposed by a defector, the former head of the Moscow Anti-doping Laboratory, Grigory Rodchenkov. Thanks to him we have a detailed picture of this sordid affair.

Creation, even by criminal means, is harder than destruction, which is why Putin’s theatrical construction of fictional alternatives to organic society is an abject failure. Those who transformed us into “others” (or “aliens,” or “undesirables”) have never created anything of their own, on their own initiative, by their creative inspirations or through the callings of their hearts. They could not create their own social space for discussions, could not create space for robust politics, trustworthy analysis, reliable sociology, political science or a healthy opposition and press.

This alternative reality is a warped reflection of our current social discourse: we have clowns in the place of politicians, artificial creations in the place of civic organisations, propagandists in the place of journalists and analysts.

It was easy enough to live with it: one does not have to vote for clowns, read the words of fake analysts or listen to figureheads who are devoid of any independent thought. They are merely bad actors, reading someone else’s texts, tools of crude political gamesmanship. Everything was so transparent that the conviction arose that they would burst at their seams as soon as the coercive grip of the state weakened. The trigger for such weakening, I used to think, might be some fairly organic process — an economic crisis, a drop in a leader’s popularity, or a change of generations in power.

A crisis would wipe out artificial constructs: “politicians” and “journalists” (that’s right, in inverted commas) would simply disappear from the airwaves, since they, like automatons, work only when plugged into the state charger. Russian citizens would suddenly have freed themselves of all illusions and would have seen how the decorations fall apart. Let’s remember the ending of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland: the King, the Queen, the knights and judges ended up being merely a deck of cards. Or the end of Vladimir Nabokov’s novel Invitation to a Beheading, “The propeller airstream picked up and spun dust, rags, painted sawdust, broken bits of gilded plaster, cardboard bricks…”

Except that today, missiles, explosives and bombs are bringing upon Ukrainians a very real death. The airstream from the propeller blowing over Ukrainian land is perfectly real, and the broken bits and bricks are real. Our lackadaisical attitude towards Putin’s alternative reality was a ubiquitous and tragic error, one of which I am also guilty. The sense of a virtual reality was deceptive. The decorations did not turn out to be gilded plaster, the stones did not turn out to be made of cardboard. Quite the opposite: the crude theatrical curtain, painted over by painters paid enough to buy food, has been drawn back, revealing death and suffering.

I recognise my own profound meagreness in my efforts to demolish the ornamentation when that was possible, before the war. I was convinced the fictions would fall under their own weight.

How your worldview can kill the world

To believe that life, honour, talent and recognition can be bought and sold is a mistake — a harmful view deserving of contempt. It is no innocent error. A man who convinced himself that everything could be bought and sold, that a society could be the subject of a military occupation in order to create in its place his own paid-for reality, has brought not only the country, but the whole world, to a catastrophe.

Not only did he fall for his fictional reality, but he has also made it the foundation for his actions in the real world. It is now clear that his plans for a brief military operation in a friendly country got bogged down in his own constructed fiction. He was evidently expecting that the use of force by a “genuine” — that is, “his” — country could bring about the immediate demise of the “not genuine” Ukrainian statehood.

He thought he was dealing with a piece of decor ordered by forces hostile to him — perhaps created by America or Europe, a fiction with its origin in methods like his own. He really seems to have believed that his manufactured “popularity” would turn out to be real support for his actions by Russian society. He thought they would believe in the threat of Ukrainian “fascists” and in his mission as a liberator. He must have surmised, likely having listened to his own toadies, that Russia is ready for war and for sanctions.

Putin had convinced himself that Ukrainian society is the same kind of theatre into which he — using murder and intimidation — has transformed Russia. He thought that Ukrainians — from privates in the frontlines to the top leadership so loathed by him — would crumble into a deck of cards and recognise his authority. The president of Ukraine is a former comedy actor, the mayor of Kyiv, a former boxer; who do they think they are? It seems he seriously believed he has psychological and moral superiority over today’s Ukraine and over the global democratic community. His flawed worldview prevented him from realising that his “superiority” was fabricated by his court jesters. His television and radio had only one producer and real viewer — himself. He poisoned himself with his own lies.

He enjoys no moral superiority over anyone. His only superiority was in his military might. But in order to make that superiority real, you require a clear mission, focus, and the justness of your cause. Only Ukraine and the Ukrainians now have such a mission, focus and justness. It is possible that right now Putin is facing a choice whether or not to launch the nuclear weapons at his disposal. This will bring more deaths and suffering. And change nothing of substance.

His war against reality should have been a personal matter. If you want to live in resentment and anger against the whole world — go for it. But he imposed himself on the Russian people using force, manipulation and lies. For many years, he assured his “popularity” by using fair means and foul. By force and intimidation he imposed himself on to Russian society and debased the identity of his own people who once fought side by side with the Ukrainians in a mutual, just war.

He poisoned not only himself but also Russia. He predetermined the contempt with which the whole world will see not only him but every one of us from Russia. For many years ahead we will not manage to convince the world that “we are not like that”, that “this is not us”. For many years — after Putin — it will be up to us to rebuild in Russia a civic system free of any political decor or fiction.

Russia has lost this war morally, simply by starting it. Irrespective of events on the battlefield, Russia has lost this war as a political, economic and social unit, as a member of the commonwealth of nations. There was once a time when the word “war” — without any qualifiers — commonly referred to the Great Patriotic one. Now, this word has a different meaning. This is the war he initiated, the one that made me and all Russians liable for the catastrophe created by him. DM

A number of independent media outlets in Russia have been closed by Russian authorities in recent days, particularly those critical of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Meduza.io has announced that it is placing all its reportage relating to coverage of the Ukraine invasion into the public domain under a Creative Commons licence and making it available for republication. This is a translated version of an article that appeared on 1 March. Russian legislation permits certain organisations and persons to be declared “foreign agents”. The provisions of that legislation require every article published by such “foreign agents” to be prefaced by the following notification:

“This message (material) was created and (or) published by a foreign media performing the functions of a foreign agent and (or) a Russian juristic person performing the functions of a foreign agent.”

This article was translated by Sebastian Chatov, the founder and chief executive of Appanagium Capital. Chatov finished his primary and secondary schooling in Russia and is fluent in Russian. He is an independent observer of Russian affairs. The original article appeared on Meduza.io.


https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2022-03-04-the-invasion-of-ukraine-putins-final-battle-with-reality/

Friday, 4 March 2022

Last 6 years – 364 Farm murders in South Africa, only 33% of perpetrators were convicted

 

South Africa: Last 6 years – 364 Farm murders in South Africa, only 33% of perpetrators were convicted

AfriForum

Last 6 years - 364 Farm murders in South Africa, only 33% of perpetrators were convicted
Last 6 years - 364 Farm murders in South Africa, only 33% of perpetrators were convicted

The civil rights organisation AfriForum on 3 March 2022, released a comprehensive report on farm attacks and farm murders during a media conference. The report provides an overview of the characteristics of farm murders over the last six years (from 2016 to 2021). During this period 364 farm murders could be verified.

In its report, AfriForum highlights the poor arrest and conviction rates of perpetrators involved in farm murders in this timeframe. Using an open-source media analysis, AfriForum examined and assessed the arrest of suspects, as well as the conviction of perpetrators.

“An average of 47% of known attackers during farm murders were arrested, but only 33% of the arrested perpetrators were convicted. This is truly shocking and shows how the criminal justice system fails victims of farm attacks,” says Ernst Roets, AfriForum’s Head of Policy and Action.

The report also found that there is not a single year in which torture did not occur and that, on average, 15% of farm murder victims were tortured. According to Johan NortjΓ©, a researcher at AfriForum, this is extremely concerning and warrants urgent attention. In 2020 the percentage of murder victims who were tortured was 24%. “This shows that farm attacks are not just an ordinary crime and should be prioritised,” says NortjΓ©.

The report also highlights the following:

Gauteng had the highest number of documented farm murders, whereas the Northern Cape had the lowest.
More than 50% of murders occurred on farms, not smallholdings.
The average age of victims was 57 years, and most murder victims were male.
While most murders occurred between 18:00 and 20:59, murder incidents occurred during any time of day.
Shootings were the leading cause of death in 52% of murder victims whose cause of death was known.

“In the light of the murder and torture rates on farms, it is now necessary for farmers to take their safety into their own hands. AfriForum aims to make farmers and their families more defensible against farm attacks. AfriForum will continue to drive projects, actions and campaigns to improve the safety of our farmers and support them where we can,” concludes Roets.

Read the report here

Read about more farm attacks here

https://southafricatoday.net/south-africa-news/last-6-years-364-farm-murders-in-south-africa-only-33-of-perpetrators-were-convicted/



 


THIS IS OF COURSE A LIE, BUT SUCH NICE PICTURE OF A CUTE PIGGY


What’s cooking today: Twice-cooked picanha steaks

 

What’s cooking today: Twice-cooked picanha steaks



Since discovering picanha steak three years ago I’ve become a fanboy of this super cut and the Brazilian way of cooking it.ondWords

You know you’ve done something right when the dinner table is agog with oohs, aahs and other exclamations of intense pleasure to the point of blushing. With all the humility I can muster, I think this might have been the best steak I’ve ever cooked; yes, even better than that reverse-seared steak you all loved so much. Seems I’m on a steak roll, so to speak. (This from a cook with a life-long history of messing up steak, so I’m enjoying this immensely.) Best I write it down for you then…

Picanha is the tail end of the rump (which of course is the tail end of the beast), but a rump steak can have as many as five separate muscles whereas picanha is just one. This makes for even cooking and tenderness.

A picanha is best cooked whole, first, then sliced into steaks and grilled again. For the first time, I marinated a picanha, for as long as 36 hours. Hooboy, this was so good.

One key factor is that you must score the fat cap. And whatever you do, don’t trim the fat, because picanha is all about that fat cap. Cooked to perfection, the crisp fat is the most delicious part of the cut.

For extra citrus tang I included yuzu paste in the marinade, which gives it a bit of bite as well, as does the mustard. Yuzu is made from the zest of yuzu fruit mixed with chilli and sea salt.

Ingredients

Picanha on the braai. (Photo: Tony Jackman)

8 fat garlic cloves, chopped

½ cup olive oil

Juice of 1 lemon

1 Tbsp yuzu paste

1 Tbsp mustard powder

2 Tbsp fresh oregano leaves

2 tsp black peppercorns

Method

Picanha sliced and ready for the second grilling. (Photo: Tony Jackman)

Using a very sharp knife, score the fat in a diamond pattern without piercing any of the meat.

Mix together the olive oil and juice of a lemon and stir in the yuzu paste, mustard powder, garlic, oregano and black peppercorns. It’s an unusual mix and there’s a mighty amount of garlic in there, but trust me, it is truly delicious.

Marinate the picanha in this mixture for 24 hours or more, mine went for 36 hours-plus.

First, braai the whole picanha over very hot coals, turning frequently, until you have a beautiful crunchy and golden brown exterior.

Remove the whole picanha to a board and cut it into thick steaks: reference the photo. 

Now put those steaks back on the braai and cook them quickly on both sides over a high heat. Ideally, leave them pink in the middle. About 2 minutes on each side ought to be enough, but that depends on the strength of the heat under it. More heat is best for this cut of meat.

Serve it up and sit back and be overwhelmed by what you’re eating and the expressions and sounds of enraptured carnivores at the table. Bibs may be useful. DM/TGIFood


https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2022-03-04-whats-cooking-today-twice-cooked-picanha-steaks/

Thursday, 3 March 2022

Political cartoon of the day: Reeks One Big-Gas Mistake

One Big-Gas Mistake



https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cartoons-slideshow

Throwback Thursday: Chicken Kyiv

 

Throwback Thursday: Chicken Kyiv



Is it Ukrainian or Russian? Or even French? Like everything in contemporary life, it’s complicated, and the origin of the world-famous dish traditionally called Chicken Kiev is disputed.ndWords

Like many things in modern life, the origins of Chicken Kyiv are murky and hard to pinpoint. What is it? In essence, it’s a chicken breast fillet that has been pounded and given a stuffing of cold butter, then crumbed and cooked. That is the tradition as found in hotel restaurants, particularly in the latter decades of the 20th century and in recent decades in supermarket freezers as a ready-meal. What it is not, purists say, is a chicken breast filled with flavoured butter.

Chicken Kyiv is seen as a modern variation on CΓ΄telettes de Volaille, or kotleta de-voliay, a stuffed chicken breast dish which a host of sources cite as being of Russian origin with French influences. In the 1840s, Russian royals, as they were wont to do, sent their chefs off to Paris in search of new fare for their bounteous table, who then returned with a dish for chicken “cotelettes”, or cutlets, stuffed in the way we know Chicken Kyiv to be. 

Wikipedia elaborates that the “main difference between the old time cΓ΄telette de volaille and the modern chicken cutlet Kiev-style is that the elaborate stuffings of the former are replaced by butter”.

That Chicken Kyiv is French, or French-influenced, does make sense, given that the dish appears to be a variation of the famous French-Swiss chicken Cordon Bleu, which is pounded chicken (or pork) fillet wrapped around cheese, or cheese and ham, and then crumbed and baked or fried. Chicken Kyiv contains no cheese or ham, but rather cold butter which warms while it cooks. Variations for which the butter is blended with either garlic or parsley, or both, or neither, are frowned upon as not traditional but do appear on many menus under the name Chicken Kiev. It is even argued by purists in Kyiv itself that while most of the butter inside will melt, just a little should remain cold when served on the plate.

But let’s go further back. Enter the “Pozharsky cutlet”. This was a breaded patty made from chicken mixed with butter, and popular in Russian cuisine in the first half of the 19th century, cites Wikipedia. It adds: “This dish was a widely appraised invention of 19th century Russian cuisine, which was also adopted by French haute cuisine and subsequently by the international cuisine.”

Wikipedia concludes that “while the roots of Chicken Kiev can thus be traced back to French haute cuisine and Russian cookery of the 19th century, the origin of the particular recipe known today as Chicken Kiev remains disputed”.

Stepping forward to recent decades, the dish is made, strictly speaking, with only cold butter in the centre of the lean breast before it is crumbed and cooked. Variations that include parsley or garlic, or both, are regarded as latter day French or British-influenced variations of the dish that was prepared in Kyiv restaurants.

How the dish got onto those Kyiv menus is another thing and, yes, also disputed. “Modern” Chicken Kyiv/Kiev, says Wikipedia, was invented at the luxury Continental Hotel in the centre of Kyiv in the early 20th century. The hotel fell to Nazi mines during World War II. Wikipediia cites “oral tradition” in the city as the source of this knowledge, as well as “contemporary memoirs” citing it as the hotel’s signature dish.

But here’s the pertinent part: “‘Chicken cutlets Kiev-style’ were listed in Apportionments for dinners, separate dishes and other products of public catering (1928) which served as a standard reference for Soviet catering establishments,” says the Wikipedia entry, adding, “The book demanded renaming of many traditional restaurant dishes to replace the (mostly French-style) ‘bourgeois’ names with simple ‘proletarian’ forms. In particular, the ‘cutlet Kiev-style’ had to be renamed into ‘chicken cutlet stuffed with butter’. This programme was not realised immediately (at least not completely), and its successor, The Directory of Apportionments for Catering (1940), published by the Soviet Ministry of Food Industry, still included the traditional names.

“In post-World War II publications of this directory and in other Soviet cookery books, such as Cookery (1955), the ‘Kiev-style’ name was retained, but the terms de volaille and Γ  la MarΓ©chale were indeed dropped in favour of simple names…”

The Economist casts more light. In a piece asserting that the dish “was modified to perfection in the 19th century by a Ukrainian chef, hence the misleading name”, it brings “Chicken Kiev” right into the glasnost era and May 1990 when the Soviet Union disintegrated and “its leader Mikhail Gorbachev made what was, in effect, a concession speech to assembled dignitaries after a dinner at the Soviet embassy in Washington. Socialism in one country, the inward-looking dogma of the Russian Communist Party, was over.

“Instead, announced Gorbachev, ‘We have figured out we live in one world, in one civilisation.’ The dish that the General Secretary and his guests had just polished off was a perfect symbol of Russia’s new internationalism and consumerism. Chicken Kiev: a Russian speciality that had become a staple in supermarkets around the world.

“According to the Russians, chicken Kiev originated in the Muscovy region of the old Empire… This story reflects Russia’s traditional policy towards Ukraine: to let it exist as a distinct entity, but keep it firmly under the thumb of its old imperial master. In the Russian Federation, government canteens have cheekily rebranded the dish ‘chicken Crimea’.”

The Economist dubbed it “the world’s most contested ready-meal”.

In the world’s restaurants of the 20th century, Chicken Kyiv came to be a staple on almost every menu. In New York restaurants such as The Russian Tea Room it went on to menus and became a US staple, but that’s hardly worthy of any claim that it should be seen as an American dish. There was nearly 150 years of Chicken Kyiv history before that happened. In Britain, well, it became sort of “British” in the way that Chicken Tikka is sort of British. Ubiquitous, but not truly owned.

CΓ΄telettes de Volaille, or kotleta de-voliay, Pozharsky cutlet, Chicken Kiev. Call it what you will. I’m calling it Chicken Kyiv. You have the freedom to decide whether to use the butter plain or with parsley and/or garlic.

Ingredients

For the butter:

6 Tbsp butter

2 cloves garlic, minced (optional)

1 Tbsp chopped parsley (optional)

Salt and pepper to taste

For the chicken:

4 chicken breasts

Canola oil for deep or shallow frying

For the coating:

1 cup plain flour

Salt

Pepper

½ tsp Cayenne pepper

1 tsp good old South African chicken spice

2 eggs, beaten

For the crumb:

2 cups breadcrumbs

Zest of 1 small lemon

½ tsp Cayenne pepper for the crumb

Salt and pepper

Method

Mix butter ingredients together and refrigerate until needed.

Mix dry ingredients in a plastic container except for the breadcrumbs, and stir so that seasonings are evenly distributed.

Beat eggs in a separate container for dipping the prepared breasts into.

Pour the breadcrumbs into a third bakkie and stir in the seasoning.

Butterfly the chicken fillets. Lay out a sheet of plastic cling film. Using a small, very sharp knife, slice side-on into each breast but not all the way, so that you can fold it out (hence, butterflied). Place another sheet of cling film on and pat/push the flesh down with your palm and the side of your hand to thin it and increase its area, but being careful not to break the flesh. Lay out all 4 breasts in front of you, uncovered.

Divide the cold butter into four pieces. Spread it evenly over the centre of the breasts.

Fold all ends over to make a round ball.

Turn each one over so that the smooth side is at the top.

Wrap them in cling film and refrigerate for 40 minutes or so.

Bread the chicken balls by dipping them first into flour, then egg, then the crumbs.

Return them to the fridge for 20 minutes.

Preheat the oven to 200℃ and heat oil in a deep pan to 160℃.

Pan fry the breasts until golden then transfer to an oven tray lined with foil and bake for 15 to 20 minutes. DM/TGIFood


https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2022-03-03-throwback-thursday-chicken-kiev/

Wednesday, 2 March 2022

Escape from EgyptπŸͺπŸ—» moment on the Coconut Whisperer: Life flashing before our eyes

 

Life flashing before our eyes: Study records brain activity in a man's final moments


A man was attached to a machine that scanned his brain for signs of seizures when he had a heart attack and died. But his death - and the fact that his brain activity was recorded throughout - offered scientists a unique opportunity.


Sky News, Wednesday 23 February 2022 

https://news.sky.com/story/life-flashing-before-our-eyes-study-records-brain-activity-in-a-mans-final-moments-12549232


Human brain
Image:
The man's brain activity was recorded, including during the 15 minutes around his death. File pic

Scientists have accidentally recorded the most complex human organ as it shuts down - providing an insight into what might happen in the moments before we die.

A study, published in Frontiers In Aging Neuroscience, focused on an 87-year-old man being treated for epilepsy.

The man was hooked up to an electroencephalogram, which records brain activity, when he had a sudden heart attack and died.

But the electroencephalogram continued recording his brain activity, including during the 15 minutes around his death.

Scientists saw that, in the 30 seconds either side of the man's final heartbeat, there was an increase in a certain type of brain wave.

These brain waves - gamma waves - are associated with more sophisticated cognitive functions and are especially active when we are concentrating, dreaming and meditating, as well as retrieving memories and processing information.

The recorded brain waves - known as gamma oscillations - suggest that, as we die, we experience the same neural activity as during dreaming, recalling memories, or meditating.

It raises the question of whether our lives really do "flash before our eyes" in our final moments.

Dr Ajmal Zemmar, a neurosurgeon at the University of Louisville, who led the study, told ZME Science: "These findings challenge our understanding of when exactly life ends and generate important subsequent questions, such as those related to the timing of organ donation."

He added: "As a neurosurgeon, I deal with loss at times.

"It is indescribably difficult to deliver the news of death to distraught family members.

"Something we may learn from this research is that, although our loved ones have their eyes closed and are ready to leave us to rest, their brains may be replaying some of the nicest moments they experienced in their lives."

The researchers cautioned that the study was the first of its kind and involved a brain that had already been injured due to epilepsy.

However, it could pave the way for further research and a deeper understanding of what goes through our minds in our last moments.


πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺπŸ—»πŸͺ



πŸͺπŸ—» This has been an Escape From Egypt  moment on the Coconut Whisperer blog in honor of the former Escape from Egypt channel on the Disqus channel  network 2018-2019 with 34K followers and was the absolute weirdest, wackiest and strangest news channel ever on Disqus !πŸͺπŸ—»

The easiest way to open a Coconut is to whisper it a joke & it will crack up with laughter



Please Recommend this page and follow us

Tuesday, 1 March 2022

Putin has gravely miscalculated

 

Putin has gravely miscalculated


The invasion of Ukraine appears to have been a grave miscalculation on the part of Russian president Vladimir Putin. It would be surprising if his regime survives this.

I used to think – like Russia’s president Vladimir Putin – that the West was weak and spineless, divided by culture wars, and distracted by petty political correctness

I used to think that if Putin wanted to invade Georgia, or Ukraine, or any other non-NATO state on his borders, there would be little to stop him.

Putin views the fall of the Soviet Union as a great tragedy and humiliation. He views himself as a sort of irredentist Peter the Great, who can return Mother Russia to her former glory and restore it to what he believes is its rightful place as a world power.

The thing is, Russia is not a world power. If it didn’t have nuclear weapons and natural gas, it would be just another stagnating economy run by a tinpot dictator. Compared to the United States, the EU and China, Russia’s GDP is an accounting error. 


Since the fall of the Soviet Union, even sub-Saharan Africa has outperformed it. If I weren’t loath to use words like ‘shithole’, I’d use it for Russia. And all of this happened on Putin’s watch, or, briefly, that of his puppet Dmitry Medvedev. 

(This explains why South Africa is sucking up to Russia, though: Putin is our buddy at the wrong end of every conflict and at the bottom end of every economic chart.)

So you can see why Vlad Putin has a terrible inferiority complex. This explains his need to be seen macho and shirtless on a horse, or hunting with a very big gun, and why he is suspiciously homophobic.

Putin’s Afghanistan

When Putin’s invasion of Ukraine proper began on 24 February 2022, it seemed that Russia would fairly easily win, and that neither NATO nor any other Western force would put boots on the ground (or even planes in the sky) in support of Ukraine.

The balance of forces was clear. Ukraine had a military budget of $5.4 billion. Russia’s budget for war was $61.7 billion. Ukraine had 255 000 active personnel, while Russia had 1 154 000. Ukraine had 2 105 tanks versus Russia’s 12 270, 326 total aircraft to 5 552, 63 naval vessels versus 664, 6 990 armoured fighting vehicles to 26 831, 3 721 total artillery to 18 497, and zero deployed nuclear warheads to 1 600.

It should have been a doddle, and I’m sure that’s exactly what Putin expected. But it wasn’t. 

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, turned out to be more than just a comedic actorballroom dancer and populist. He could have fled to Lviv, or even to Poland, but he stayed in Kyiv, rallying the Ukrainian armed forces and the Ukrainian people to resist Russia with everything they had. 

And they did. On day four of the invasion, Russia has hardly advanced at all from its  opening day positions, and hasn’t taken any major cities.

Russia’s invasion into Ukraine, as at 27 February 2022


Propaganda

It would be a mistake to trust media reports on casualties, since Russia is keeping very quiet, Ukraine is pumping out propaganda, and armies of social media junkies are milking the war for clicks, likes and advertising revenue. 

Yet it seems clear that the Russians have taken heavy casualties, have failed to win air superiority, have overstretched supply lines, and that their army is demoralised, directionless, and even hungry.

Russia isn’t the first and won’t be the last military power to discover, painfully, that people who are fighting to defend their families, their children, and their homeland are ten times the soldiers that underpaid, unmotivated conscripts are. 

Russia’s silence alone should speak volumes, too. It isn’t bragging about glorious victories, because there aren’t any. 

‘We captured an abandoned nuclear power station the glorious Soviet Union managed to blow up 36 years ago,’ isn’t exactly awe-inspiring.

Excuses

Putin has tried to justify the war by blaming it on Ukraine’s proposed accession to the North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).

He claims that NATO’s eastward expansion constitutes ‘aggression’, even though there is literally zero chance that any NATO country, incumbent or new, would ever attack Russia unprovoked.

On the contrary, by invading Ukraine, Putin has proven that the non-NATO countries on his western flank really do need NATO protection. He threatened a military response should Sweden and Finland choose to join NATO. Instead of scaring them off, that might be just the motivation they need to apply for membership.

Germany has turned volt-face on two fronts. It dropped its historic objection to sending arms to conflict zones, and will supply military weapons to Ukraine. In addition, it announced a major, permanent boost to its defence spending

Having Germany take a more robust posture in NATO has been an objective of its alliance partners for decades, but Germany has always been timid, having been on the losing side in World War II. Putin’s invasion appears to have achieved what US and European persuasion could not.

In NATO countries everywhere, bitter political foes stopped their domestic squabbles to unite in condemnation of the invasion of Ukraine. 

So, by lashing out at Ukraine over the supposedly ‘aggressive’ eastwards expansion of NATO, Putin has revitalised NATO and given it new purpose. His actions have made it clear that Ukraine does belong both in NATO and in the European Union, whereas Russia does not. If Ukraine survives, I expect it will be on a fast track to EU and NATO membership.

Toppling a tyrant

Putin described the ousting of Ukraine’s pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 as a ‘putsch’, without mentioning that the Ukrainian Parliament voted him out of office after he fled the country in the wake of widespread popular protests against his authoritarian and deeply corrupt rule. This is the guy that in the midst of poverty and economic crisis built an outrageously opulent palace using money that belonged to the Ukrainian people.

Even if Yanukovych had been a modern Trajan, however, his ouster was a purely internal matter, offering no grounds for war, then or now.

Putin has also slandered the Ukrainians as ‘neo-Nazis’. This is not entirely far-fetched, though it is a gross over-generalisation. Ukraine does have a neo-Nazi militia problem. These militias have successfully fought against Russian-supported separatists in the breakaway Donbas region, which must have annoyed Putin. Most Ukrainians, however, were grateful to the militia forces for defending their country when the formal military wasn’t up to the task.

Again, though, the existence of right-wing militias in a country does not constitute a valid casus belli. If neo-nationalism, nativism, and xenophobia are so offensive to Putin, why did he have a cordial meeting with Hungary’s right-wing prime minister Victor OrbΓ‘n mere weeks ago?

Putin has also accused Ukraine of genocide, over its response in containing Russian-backed separatist forces in Donetsk and Luhansk. Nobody else considers that response genocidal, or anything other than defensive. The only genocide in the Ukraine was the Holodomor, perpetrated by the very Soviet Union that Putin mourns.

Putin apologists have brought up Western military interventions, like those in the former Yugoslavia, in Iraq and in Afghanistan. How those are relevant, however, is anyone’s guess. You can’t justify an invasion by arguing that other countries, at other times, and in other circumstances, have also invaded countries. 

Each war has to be judged on its own merits. Even if one accepts that historical military interventions by Western countries were not justified, that would not justify an invasion of Ukraine, which posed no threat to Russia and took no aggressive action towards it, or anyone else.

The new Russia

Although other countries had no obligation to – and could not risk – getting militarily involved in the defence of Ukraine, Putin’s invasion has galvanised anti-Russian sentiment around the world (except in South Africa, of course, and except for Donald Trump, who thinks Putin is just brilliant).

The sanctions piled onto Russia are extensive and severe. Russia has been entirely cut off from the financial systems of much of the world, and the US has frozen its central bank assets. Air and sea links with Russia have been severed. Trade between Russia and the West is on ice. Sports tournaments scheduled to be held in Russia have been moved, and sponsorships have been cancelled. Europe is determined to wean itself off Russian natural gas. Russians have been blocked from social media and gaming platforms, including from services such as Twitch, YouTube and OnlyFans which for many struggling Russians were their only chance of earning an income.

Even Switzerland, the infamous protector of Nazi gold, broke its centuries-old policy of neutrality to freeze Russian assets, including those of Putin himself. 

At all levels of society and the economy, Russia has become a pariah state. Conversely, Ukraine has been receiving aid, in arms, money and even cryptocurrency, from far and wide. Ukrainians are earning the world’s admiration for their brave resistance to Russia’s violent onslaught.

The rouble, Russia’s currency, lost a quarter of its value after the invasion, the central bank more than doubled the interest rate, and long queues were seen at ATMs as a run on banks began. The sanctions will continue to bite for months, and years, to come, and will flush Russia’s weak economy down the toilet.

Miscalculated

Putin has gravely miscalculated. He has started a new Cold War, with his own weak country as the primary antagonist against a reinvigorated NATO alliance. His army is ripe for mutiny. Even with the best will in the world, Russia looks like getting bogged down for a long and costly occupation of a hostile land, like the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan during the 1980s.

Russia’s people, both the aristocrats and the peasants, will pay a heavy price for Putin’s rash invasion, which will fuel widespread discontent, including among the generals and politicians who surround Putin.

Even if the takeover of Ukraine eventually succeeds, Putin has set his country back 30 years. The new Russia will be an outcast on the world stage. It will get to trade only with China, North Korea, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Venezuela. It will be isolated and alone. 

Ukraine was once Russia’s ‘bridge to Europe’. Putin is burning it with gay abandon.

The only questions now are whether Putin can survive this politically, and whether, in desperation, he’ll reach for the proverbial big red nuclear launch button.


https://dailyfriend.co.za/2022/03/01/putin-has-gravely-miscalculated/