At this rate, it seems this word will probably be included in the next update of the OED:
Нелицеприятный мем о Путине набирает обороты. #путин #putin #звезды pic.twitter.com/tFKClIjh1C
— Я журналист (@newreporter_org) August 8, 2014
RT @UKinUkraine: @LyallGrant: Continuing separatist violence responsible for worsening humanitarian situation #Donbas http://t.co/kqam96H12j
— Simon Smith (@SimonSmithFCO) August 8, 2014
Gov't daily RG tells Russians to eat Russian food, with this 2010 pic of Putin/Medvedev posing with Russian products pic.twitter.com/kd86hhVs6V
— Steve Rosenberg (@BBCSteveR) August 8, 2014
Georgetown University's Anders Aslund has been ruminating on the possibility of Russia invading Ukraine. Drawing on what happened during the Soviet-Finnish Winter War of 1939-1940, he argues that any Russian incursion into Ukraine might not be a foregone conclusion:
The Finns had to take on the Soviet attack without any hope of significant international support. The international community condemned the Soviet Union. The League of Nations deemed the attack illegal and expelled the Soviet Union swiftly on December 14, 1939. But the Finns had to fight on their own just like the Ukrainians. It was a very bloody war. In the course of three months, the Finnish soldiers killed 127,000 Soviet soldiers while losing 23,000 of their own.
Despite deploying 800,000 troops in the end, Stalin failed to conquer Finland. Rather than sacrifice more Russians and aggravate his embarrassment, he yielded to the brave Finns and settled. Rather liberally, he claimed only 11 percent of Finland’s territory in the Moscow Peace Treaty on March 13, 1940. No mediator was needed and hardly any international leader bothered to talk to Stalin. The peace treaty was bitter for Finland, which lost 11 percent of its territory, but it maintained independence. Goliath does not always win.
Ukraine is in a far stronger position than Finland was in 1939. However terrible Putin is, Stalin was incomparably worse. The clownish Moscow PR man Alexander Borodai, who postures as self-appointed “prime minister” in eastern Ukraine, is no Stalinist like Kuusinen. Unlike Putin, Stalin enjoyed some important international support because Nazi Germany recognized Finland as in the Soviet sphere of interest in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of August 1939. Stalin had a clear plan to conquer Finland, while Putin does not seem to know what he wants in Ukraine but is improvising. Ukraine is ten times larger than Finland and Stalin was prepared to sacrifice far larger military resources than Putin is. The Ukrainian troops have already liberated three-quarters of the territory held by the rebels in Donbas and we are waiting for the battle for Donetsk.
Right now, Putin is facing a pivotal choice. Either Russia invades Ukraine with regular military forces on a massive scale, or the Ukrainian military will oust the Russian terrorists. He should take his cue from Stalin in this case. Sometimes it is better to lose face.
Read the entire article here
A low-flying Ukrainian fighter jet has been shot down over territory controlled by separatists near #MH17 wreckage site. #Ukraine
— Douglas Herbert (@dougf24) August 8, 2014
BBC: Huge #Russian warship fascinates #French in Saint-Nazaire http://t.co/tiMnW3aACD
— Kyiv Post (@KyivPost) August 8, 2014
The Global Post's Europe editor Gregory Feifer (formerly of this parish) has been discussing the possible risks Vladimir Putin faces with his food ban:
Despite Russian nostalgia for life in the past — which supposedly provided cradle-to-grave security regardless of the strictures and deprivation — life wasn’t as stable as it would appear. How cozy was the general practice of carrying string bags in case hours-long lines materialized for food or basic goods that were unavailable in most stores? How pleasant to pay bribes to ensure medical care that was supposedly free? Providing food, shelter and products many in the West took for granted presented daily stresses not usually experienced in Europe and the US.
Which leads to the crucial difference Russians see between communism and what came after. It’s no accident that Moscow plays host to a consumer-culture orgy, with sushi restaurants seemingly on every corner and Bentleys common on traffic-choked streets. Goods and services may be expensive, but for those who can afford it, freedom to purchase what they want has been enough to help swallow the end of democratic elections and free speech and to witness the systematic enrichment of Putin’s cronies in ways that make the reviled oligarchs of the 1990s look reasonable.
Imports make up around 30 percent of Russia’s food consumption — far more for the urban elite that shops in the many supermarkets stocking imported products almost exclusively. With the enactment of a near-total ban on food from the US, EU and other counties that set up sanctions against Russia over its actions in Ukraine, Putin has begun openly dictating what Russians can do in the one hallowed sphere of life in which freedom of choice has remained all-important. Some Russians believe that’s meant as a patriotism-inducing, us-versus-them prelude to invading Ukraine.
Whatever the case, whether and how long such Soviet-style manipulation of people’s consumer choices is popular remains to be seen. Twitter has already exploded with anguish. But what's clear is that after a decade and a half of clamping down on freedoms with relative impunity, Putin has just opened a very risky new chapter for himself.
Read the entire article here
Good morning. We will start today's live blog with this report from RFE/RL's news desk on where Moscow might find alternative sources for the food items affected by its embargo:
Russian officials have made plans with South American countries to boost food imports to replace those lost in Moscow's ban on food produced in the United States, Australia, Canada, Norway, and EU countries.
Andres Rebolledo, the head of Chile's trade organization Direcon, said that he and officials from other Latin American embassies met with Russian officials about increasing food exports.
The sanctions announced by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev yesterday -- banning fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, and dairy products from about 32 countries -- came only days after Moscow signed deals with two dozen Brazilian poultry companies and five pork producers.
Russia's food embargo was launched in retaliation against those countries' sanctions over Moscow's alleged role in supporting separatists in eastern Ukraine.
Chilean official Rebolledo said Russian officials pledged to provide a list of products that they hoped Chile could provide to Russia.
(Reuters, AFP)
This ends our live-blogging for August 7. Be sure and check back tomorrow for our continuing coverage of the crisis in Ukraine.
RFE/RL asked Russian tourists in Prague what they thought about Moscow's embargo on most food imports from the United States and the European Union. The action was taken in retaliation for Western sanctions imposed on Russia for its support of separatists in eastern Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea. (RFE/RL's Russian Service)
