Steven P. BarrettIMPERIAL RUSSIAN NATIONALISM: IT DIDN'T LEAVE WITH COMMUNISM (LINK)
August 15th 2008 16:12
By Steven Barrett
One of the nicities of studying history is learning how the ironies can somehow work together to make a good read. Not necessarily a pleasant read, but a good one. Even if have to deal with an unpleasant topic, you don't have to give it and its author the scorched earth treatment you feel he or both deserve. But I'll get to that in a bit. Let's say that the events can do the job for them over time.
Here we have a situation in Georgia, a former "republic" of the Soviet Union, aka Evil Empire (and no, I'm NOT going to put quotation hooks on what was demonstrably evil) that has successfully divorced itself from the new and supposedly improved Russian (Bear) Empire, more legally known as the Commonwealth of Independent States. Try running that by the Balts whose computers are regularly hacked by Russians trying to re-seize their lands, the Ukrainians who want both civic and religious freedom from Moscow and the Patriarch (some old habits die hard, the Orthodoxy came back in full force when the Bolshie statues fell.) And nobody in the old Warsaw Pact nations that now belong to NATO still feel confident enough.
When you have "allies" like their new fellow European neighbors, particularly France, whose former President Chirac could never stop looking down his Gallic nose at them, only to be followed up by one of the most maleable weasels to lead that nation (and worse, yet, the EU when it comes to foreign policy matters) -- you have reason to be worried, esp. when they stand between you and your newest strong ally, albeit former potential enemy, the United States. In fairness to our new Eastern European allies, they were only "enemies" because the Bear told them to be our enemies.
Georgia's special because it's the birthplace of the real architect of modern Soviet/CIS/Russian Republic/Putin's Plutarchy: Josef Stalin. It's also where Russia's oil pipe line to the west passes through. Now, you'd think a newly redeveloping capitalist nation like Russia wouldn't want to risk this pipeline to more prosperity which in turn brings in more revenues to build a larger military for "future uses."
When you have a huge army that can move with impunity in remote, but strategic areas, lots of lackey reporters in the dwindling West, and beaucoup diplomats and worse, "leading statesmen" like Nicholas Sarkozy underminning everything your potential enemies are SUPPOSED to stand up for, you can pounce them with impunity like the proverbial playground bully because nobody's willing to stand up to you.
Perhaps much of this can be found in Solzynhisten's address to Harvard 30 years ago; much of this can be found in our fears of further economic losses, and much of this can be traced to some residual fears of what some of us still know all about: Russian Nationalism.
Excuse me; let's make that Imperial Russian Nationalism.
Now, thanks to Nicholas Sarkozy's sham pieces of Georgia in our times "cease fire" we're all going to find out that Vladimir Putin (whom columnist Michael Reagan dubbed "Vlad the Impaler") is much more like Alexander III than his wishy-washy son Nicholas II. (Adding to this, you have elements of the roughest Romanoff Czars along with the skills of the former KGB chief of St. Petersburg -- that doesn't exactly invite a lot of confidence, does it?
If all the diplomats and eggheads aren't willing to see this as Cold War II because we're not dealing with a Red evil empire, they'd better wake up to the older symbols of Imperial Russian Nationalism: The Double-headed Eagle of the Romanoffs (which they've restored) and of course, the very rogue Bear.
NY Post columnist Ralph Peters wrapped up his (8/14/08) column "A CZAR IS BORN: BAD VLAD WINS WAR, DUPES WEST & PROVES HE'S GENIUS:"
Really Long Link 3:43 am
One of the nicities of studying history is learning how the ironies can somehow work together to make a good read. Not necessarily a pleasant read, but a good one. Even if have to deal with an unpleasant topic, you don't have to give it and its author the scorched earth treatment you feel he or both deserve. But I'll get to that in a bit. Let's say that the events can do the job for them over time.
Here we have a situation in Georgia, a former "republic" of the Soviet Union, aka Evil Empire (and no, I'm NOT going to put quotation hooks on what was demonstrably evil) that has successfully divorced itself from the new and supposedly improved Russian (Bear) Empire, more legally known as the Commonwealth of Independent States. Try running that by the Balts whose computers are regularly hacked by Russians trying to re-seize their lands, the Ukrainians who want both civic and religious freedom from Moscow and the Patriarch (some old habits die hard, the Orthodoxy came back in full force when the Bolshie statues fell.) And nobody in the old Warsaw Pact nations that now belong to NATO still feel confident enough.
Russian Bear & Euro Clown
When you have "allies" like their new fellow European neighbors, particularly France, whose former President Chirac could never stop looking down his Gallic nose at them, only to be followed up by one of the most maleable weasels to lead that nation (and worse, yet, the EU when it comes to foreign policy matters) -- you have reason to be worried, esp. when they stand between you and your newest strong ally, albeit former potential enemy, the United States. In fairness to our new Eastern European allies, they were only "enemies" because the Bear told them to be our enemies.
Georgia's special because it's the birthplace of the real architect of modern Soviet/CIS/Russian Republic/Putin's Plutarchy: Josef Stalin. It's also where Russia's oil pipe line to the west passes through. Now, you'd think a newly redeveloping capitalist nation like Russia wouldn't want to risk this pipeline to more prosperity which in turn brings in more revenues to build a larger military for "future uses."
When you have a huge army that can move with impunity in remote, but strategic areas, lots of lackey reporters in the dwindling West, and beaucoup diplomats and worse, "leading statesmen" like Nicholas Sarkozy underminning everything your potential enemies are SUPPOSED to stand up for, you can pounce them with impunity like the proverbial playground bully because nobody's willing to stand up to you.
Perhaps much of this can be found in Solzynhisten's address to Harvard 30 years ago; much of this can be found in our fears of further economic losses, and much of this can be traced to some residual fears of what some of us still know all about: Russian Nationalism.
Excuse me; let's make that Imperial Russian Nationalism.
Now, thanks to Nicholas Sarkozy's sham pieces of Georgia in our times "cease fire" we're all going to find out that Vladimir Putin (whom columnist Michael Reagan dubbed "Vlad the Impaler") is much more like Alexander III than his wishy-washy son Nicholas II. (Adding to this, you have elements of the roughest Romanoff Czars along with the skills of the former KGB chief of St. Petersburg -- that doesn't exactly invite a lot of confidence, does it?
Czar Alexander III
If all the diplomats and eggheads aren't willing to see this as Cold War II because we're not dealing with a Red evil empire, they'd better wake up to the older symbols of Imperial Russian Nationalism: The Double-headed Eagle of the Romanoffs (which they've restored) and of course, the very rogue Bear.
Romanoff Seal
NY Post columnist Ralph Peters wrapped up his (8/14/08) column "A CZAR IS BORN: BAD VLAD WINS WAR, DUPES WEST & PROVES HE'S GENIUS:"
Want a straightforward indication of what the Russians intend? Putin's code-name for this operation is Chistoye Polye. Literally translated, that means "clean field." In military parlance, it means "scorched earth."
The empire of the czars hasn't produced such a frightening genius since Stalin.
The empire of the czars hasn't produced such a frightening genius since Stalin.
Really Long Link 3:43 am
| 39 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
If Russia gets away with this, none of the former Soviet Union countries will be safe. Since the UN (Useless Nitwits) isn't about to step in, NATO should take a stand and not back down. Otherwise NATO will place themselves in the same position that Georgia is in and not be able to talk their way out of it.
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
This whole thing was expertly timed. I haven't said much until now because, I hate to admit it, became quite cynical over the weekend about it because despite all the hot air from diplomats from Foggy Bottom to Whitehall to France and Moscow ... wherever ... Georgia's fate is doomed to at least a form of Russian style of what the Muslim's enforced on captive Christian states in the past, dhimmitude. Or another Vichy France. Hell, wouldn't that be a fitting monument to Sarkozy's "legacy"?