It was just a casual, throwaway description. Last September, the New York Times reported on a series of daring operations by Ukrainian special forces to evacuate civilians from Afghanistan.
U.S. troops had left Kabul, and the Taliban had taken complete control. “Enter Ukraine,” the article read, “a small but battle-hardened nation.”
Even today, as Russian troops amass along Ukraine’s borders and threaten a dramatic escalation of their undeclared 8-year war, most Americans would pass over that word: small.
This is a big problem. Ukraine is the largest country by territory within the European continent. Its population is roughly the size of Spain’s. Take even a cursory look at any map — Ukraine is anything but small.
To contest the Kremlin’s cascading aggression, start by revising your mental map. Ukraine is a large country of persistent strategic and intellectual significance, and not only because of its human capital, abundant economic potential or pivotal position between Russia and the EU
Beyond the questions of what they have and where they are, Ukrainians are important for what they do and what they have done.
The truth is that Ukraine’s political and cultural agency has helped shape and reshape the map of Europe for generations. Indeed, Ukrainians have played an active part in the demise of not one […] but four different empires, including Austria-Hungary and the Soviet Union.
This role has not been incidental. It has been hard won, driven by a modern national identity primarily based not on ethnic or religious affiliation, but on an idea: universal democratic freedom.
This idea may strike some as saccharine or strange. After all, the image of Ukraine in the West is often one of rapacious oligarchs and corrupt, feuding politicians — and not without good reason.
But look beyond Ukraine’s recent history of government and elite intrigue, and you will see a vibrant, grassroots civil society that embodies the egalitarian agenda of Ukrainian civic nationalism.
So what do we see when we take modern Ukrainian nationhood seriously, on its own terms? We see a social and cultural movement with an anticolonial backbone and a suspicion of state institutions led by strongmen.
We discover that, in the realm of political values, Ukraine is not Russia’s cousin. It’s Russia’s competitor. politico.com/news/magazine/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Комісія палати представників США, що розслідує напад на Капітолій 6 січня, виявила пробіли в офіційних журналах дзвінків Білого Дому в день, коли відбувався напад.
Розслідувачі знають, що Трамп комусь телефонував в ті години, але самих журналів телефонних дзвінків десь нема.
Проблема в тому, що Трамп полюбляв дзвонити і з офіційного телефона, і з власного мобільного, і з телефонів помічників і охоронців, і комісія досі чекає всіх даних від всіх операторів, які вони мають надати.
Додатково, так виглядає, що Трамп порушив Акт Конгресу про Президентську Документацію і забрав 15 коробок документів Білого Дому до себе в Флориду, де намагався їх знищити, а також порвав і викинув багато документів в останні дні президентства.
Putin’s subsequent invasion of Crimea punished Ukrainians for trying to escape from the kleptocratic system that he wanted them to live in — and it showed Putin’s own subjects that they too would pay a high cost for democratic revolution. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
Following that “success,” Putin launched a much broader attack: a series of attempted coups d’état in Odessa, Kharkiv, and several other cities with a Russian-speaking majority.
This time, the strategy failed, not least because Putin profoundly misunderstood Ukraine, imagining that Russian-speaking Ukrainians would share his Soviet imperial nostalgia. They did not.
I keep reading about this “need for purely diplomatic solution for Ukraine-Russia crisis, there is no need for indiscriminate sanctions and lethal weapons”
First of all, there’s no “crisis”, there’s an 8 year long war with thousands dead, injured and displaced
Secondly, suggesting finding “purely diplomatic solution” shows lack of any expertise in Ukraine-Russia relationship during the last decade.
Thirdly, what other way is there except imposing sanctions and supplying Ukraine with weapons? Pleading? Begging?
Diplomacy never did and never will work, because Putin is a bad faith actor. He keeps lying about Western intentions, about not sending troops to Ukraine, about everything, really, so what kind of diplomacy are we taking about here?
Christoper Miller: an island of stability in the treacherous waters of information warfare.
Ukraine’s in the news? Threat of war? Pleading for international support?
Let’s find some “Nazis” and say they’re GROWING THEIR VIOLENT MOVEMENT
(Jesus Christ, this is getting old)
It’s funny how “Maus” is getting banned in American schools, and we’ve all seen some actual Nazis in the West, hell, the KKK still exists, but man, twenty people in Azov busy with military training sure are a threat to the democracy!
How are they going to influence anything? With what? Do they have a political rating? How many are there? Couple hundred people? How are they influential? Are they gonna stage a coup? Are they gonna take part in elections? What is this?