Homo Sovieticus and ... where do we go from here?

 War continues to rage, the death toll continues to rise. World-wide we stand united in our support and sense of awe at the unfettered courage of this people and their leader, Volodymyr Zelensky. Here in Thessaloniki a well-known sea-front installation sports the Ukrainian colours as a mark of support and respect. Certainly, those sentiments are appreciated by and encourage the war victims, but are they enough?                                                    

 When teaching in the High School, I used to encourage students to think analytically by offering them the following syllogism to consider:

·         State X is virtually crime free

·         Crime is bad

·         Therefore, this state is good.

Then we went on to read Ray Bradbury’s short story The Pedestrian of a crime-free dystopian state where the population, constantly sitting before tele-screens, is policed for ‘non-conformity’ by a robotic police-car. The pedestrian of the title is apprehended for going for an evening stroll. After reading this, we return to reconsider the syllogism.

This came to mind the other day when someone said it was Zelensky’s fault and that he must go so that the war would stop. We would all agree that the war is horrendous but making it thus stop is not of necessity a good thing. Possible consequences could be Ukraine losing its right to self-determination and ethnic cleansing. The Russians have already stated their intention to ‘purge fascism’ despite the fact that in the latest elections right wing parties gained more seats in Russia than in Ukraine. Moreover, Putin’s acquisition goals are likely to spread over a wider geopolitical frame.       

                                              

So, what is a possible outcome of this entire combat? To consider that we need to examine the Russian psyche. Martti J Kari, of the Finnish Defence Intelligence, explained his understanding of nardnost - the sense of Russian national identity. He sees it as epitomising endurance and the tolerance of two realities; he exemplifies this by giving two Russian words for truth:   

pravda - tactical truth, what it is expedient to classify as true.

istina - the opposite of falsehood, a fundamental truth.

He also contrasts the terms tenure and possession – the latter being a concept that is not in synch with Communist rationale. Instead, those within the current hierarchy enjoy tenure of position, resources, property, etc. The higher up the hierarchy one is, the greater power and profit one can access. Which goes hand in hand with the degree of corruption that is tolerated. Overstep what your position allows and you’ll be shot down – perhaps literally.

Homo Sovieticus, your average Russian, is fed mis/disinformation is filtered through the tv channels which are largely state-controlled. The people are seen as products of long-term social engineering, by which they are made increasingly dependent on the state and have become ready to trade their freedom in return for not having to make decisions or accept responsibility.

 Since 2019 the ‘fake news law’ has made it a criminal offence to publish ‘unreliable’ information and to express disrespect for society, government, the constitution, etc.  The vague wording allows for its selective application to deter or silence critical voices. There have, indeed, been some dissenters – below you can see a demonstration in Moscow of anti-war protesters - but only something on a huge, unified scale could dismantle the political structure.

                                             
Negotiation attempts have so far not been fruitful. Lenin himself stated:

‘Russia is deaf to the logic of reason, but sensitive to the logic of power.’

Yuval Noah Harari, the Israel historian, says Putin is not interested in negotiation but only in annexing Ukraine.

NATO, the USA and the EC needed to show more steel and early on. But they still have time.

 Or can we place hope in Russia’s youth, more globally educated, au fait with and more informed by the social media, to put this warlord in his rightful place?

                                                            

ON WAR

 My last post focus was on Ukraine; this time I’d like to consider war itself, which we have seen unveil itself on our doorstep in Europe.  It can be defined as a state or period of armed hostility or active military operations between two or more countries or groups.

 I heard someone say that Russia does not have the right to invade Ukraine, a sovereign state. True, but when that right is assumed, what then? There is evidence that Russia has already been using white phosphorus munitions in civilian areas as well as using cluster bombs – both classified as illegal. There are rules of engagement which establish the circumstances under which the military forces should operate, a combat code of behaviour, if you will. Failure to observe those rules and act beyond the established bounds can lead to conviction of war crimes. To me this sounds quite a paradox. I mean, we can’t expect at the onset, representatives from both sides to meet and agree to follow the rules as football players showing respect to the referee before they engage with the opposing team. War is not like that – it is in itself a crime.                                                             

We talk of the theatre of war – the geographic area involved in the conflict – and since the Gulf War with the significant role played by the social media in relaying front-line news coverage, there has been a kind of ghoulish interest in watching bloodshed from the comfort of your living room settee.

War mongering – encouraging aggression – reminds me of ironmonger which relates to the production and selling of ironware, so maybe they are quite strongly semantically linked. Waging war seems to be associated with payment and the dogs of war, the mercenary soldiers, who engage in warfare solely for profit, are not held in the highest regard. So why do non-mercenaries participate in warfare? Often the reason may not be absolutely clear-cut. I likened the ‘Irish Problem’, one that was ongoing from the reign of Queen Victoria, to a huge pot of soup that had been simmering continually and was no longer a clear broth whose key constituents could no longer readily be discerned.

 The most common reasons for resorting to strife are:

·         Economic gain

·         Territorial gain

·         Religion

·         Nationalism

·         Political: civil or revolutionary

·         Defence

In a nut shell, it is usually a question of interest at different levels:

·         Personal - self-interest, egotism

·         National - acquisition, expansionism

·         Global - Cold war East vs West, balance of power

Putin’s motives appear to be of a personal nature - a strong ego lies behind all this. The vastness of his negotiating table – here he and President Macron are talking Ukraine – shows how significant he needs to show he is.                                                         

 But he is also clearly goading global powers to strengthen his national standing. Talking of a possible ‘accident’ at Chernobyl nuclear power station is a clear example of that.  

Someone once said, “A little warfare in the border areas is needed to maintain a patriotic spirit” and that is, in part, Putin’s game plan.

Jorg Himmelreich, an academic in Paris, reckons that a stable democracy in Ukraine is a real threat to what he calls Putin’s ‘kleptocratic dictatorship’. The country is rich in desirable resources, which is also a relevant, desirable factor.

People try to makes things slightly more bearable: below the Italians have expressed their contempt by doctoring a Gillette advertisement.                                                           

 But the cost of this bloodshed is tragic in dimension. Just consider the human side of things. Mothers were sending their children to school with name tags, along with information as to what blood group they belonged to.  The implications of that don’t bear thinking about. You see families leave with family pets tucked into rucksacks – just so endearing! People arriving at refugee centers without food or water and with no changes of clothing in freezing conditions, so desperate was their need to escape. Who dares to say that all is fair in war?

 For me what is indelible in my mind’s eye is the You Tube clip of a distraught little being trudging along on his own, carrying a favourite toy in a plastic bag, sobbing his little heart out, without understanding what is happening. Just imagine his sense of hunger, cold, fear.  Aware of this hostile environment whose sights, sounds, smells and sensations will be eternally etched on that child’s mind! And how many more are there like him?

 Below I have copied a link which should lead you to the clip that allows us to share a few steps in this tragic trip. I understand he arrived safely with his mother in Poland’s Medyka.

https://youtu.be/I94A7lLiFiY

If this does not open, I’m adding a recent work by the artist Uta Kaxniashvili which develops the theme and is just as heart-breaking as the video clip.

                                                            

      

May peace be restored as soon as possible, one way or another!