So, here comes my naval analyses :)
This is what I can say about cruiser Moskva - and its linkage to yellow skirts of Muhu island.
A thread:
In 1979, when Moskva was launched, it was called Slava - in honor of the Russian battleship that sunk in Moonsund battle on 17.10.1917.
Only in 1996 was its name changed into Moskva.
Slava sunk in shallow waters of Estonia’s West coast, in between Muhu and mainland Estonia. Its 800 of crew seem to have survived. Some in fact came from Muhu, so they just took a boat and went home. Some Russians are said to have settled in nearby Matsalu where they found wives.
Slava’s wreck, though, remained partly above water for a number of years, and became a source of iron and copper for local craftsmen.
But also picric acid. Apparently, this chemical was used to make explosives, but one could also use it to dye fabric, and that’s what the local Muhu women did. The famous yellow Muhu skirts became abundant after WWI, and this was all thanks to Slava.
When I was a child, older Muhu women would casually talk about ‘mine yellow’ (miinikollane) as a color. For a long time I assumed they meant a specific shade of yellow. The idea that they used the actual explosives to dye fabric was just too… fantastic. But that was the case.
So here it is: my Muhu skirt. Made by grandmother/great aunt in 1930s. Self-made from scratch: they grew sheep, cut wool, made fabric, dyed it with ‘mine yellow’, sewed and embroidered.
Small traces of Slava in my wardrobe.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So much harm done now by this rushed and premature proposal. None of it fatal, but all of it avoidable. Thread below: politico.eu/article/eu-uni…
1. Biden managed to change the tone of the US relationship with Russia, and this is good. The EU, however, cannot replicate the trick right now. The US had agenda with Russia where progress was possible. The EU, for the moment, does not, because...
2. the EU is a normative power. Everything it does, including what it aspires to do with Russia, includes a strong normative dimension, explicitly or implicitly. It cannot be avoided. But norms is the one thing where the West and Russia strongly disagree.
Sometimes it is not analysis but some details of everyday life that communicate it the best. I spent 18th of March - the Crimea annexation anniversary - in Moscow and below is my account of it (thread).
Visited someone in one of the villages off Rublevskoye highway - where Russia's mighty, wealthy and famous tend to live. Now many cottages are for sale. "People are emigrating," says my host. "Do not like living in this country."
His wife is relieved that the building boom seems to be coming to an end, so that they can keep a view of the fields - soft snowy white in March afternoon sunshine - at least to the East of them. At all other sides they are surrounded by walls and castles.
Ahh - here they go again on “sanctions do not work….” Below a thread outlining my disagreement. ft.com/content/c51ecf…
1. The 2014 sanctions were not meant to 'isolate' Russia, but to squeeze it in order to send a message. Had the intention been to isolate Russia and bring down its economy, one could have used harsher measures that were available.
2. Do not confuse the 2014 sanctions with the Trump-era US sanctions the aim of which is unclear and the effects of which are chaotic.