Correct. But it lacks the context. On the same day, June 30 the Donetsk People's Republic ruler Pushilin signed the order № 338 prohibiting the free entrance of humanitarian aid from Russia to the DPR. NB: Much (most?) of this aid was not really humanitarian, but army supplies🧵
DPR introduced the "accreditation" of humanitarian aid. Previously Russian citizens could purchase in Russia whatever and ship it to the DPR as "humanitarian aid". That was a legal way to supply the pro-Russian militias in Ukraine with arms/equipment by individual contributions
Now the DPR introduced the accreditation so shipping there anything gonna be harder. Besides, the order № 338 prohibits importing:
1. guns & ammo 2. lots of modern radio sets 3. quadcopter (technically)
to DPR from Russia as "humanitarian aid" for pro-Russian militias
The DPR restricted/prohibited much of the supplies for the pro-Russian militias in Donbass. Previously they were collected in Russia by various nationalist activist groups, pro-Z officials an oligarchs, etc. and shipped to Donbass. Now you can't do that
Why would they do that? Well, it perfectly illustrates the logic of the Russian state which may be counterintuitive for Westerners. The Russian government are total control freaks and are determined to extirpate *any* agency and activism. Including the pro-Kremlin activism
When the Donbass War only started, many pro-Russian militias there were not fully controlled by Kremlin. Some pro-Russian warlords in Donbass were genuine believers, some adventurers, some mix of both. Motorola used to wash cars in Russia, but left to Donbass and became a warlord
Whether they were adventurers or genuine Russian nationalists, most of these guys were upstarts, alien to the Russian political regime. Kremlin used them, but would never tolerate them
Every single pro-Russian warlord in Donbass was assassinated. Some in Donbass, some in Russia
Except for one. There's only one early Donbass warlord who's not only alive, but still in power. Khodakovsky. Why Kremlin didn't cleanse him like others?
Because he's different from them. Others used to wash cars. Khodakovsky used to serve in the Ukrainian state security - SBU
Every single of pro-Russian warlords in Donbass died under the mysterious circumstances, some in Donbass, others in Russia. Kremlin cleansed everyone. The only one they left alive and in power is the former Ukrainian intelligence officer. That makes perfect sense
First, he is tainted. He's a turn cloak and everyone knows that. So it's super easy to control him. Most probably Kremlin has Kompromat on him that would absolutely destroy his reputation. He knows that and will never trespass or object to Kremlin under any circumstances
Even more importantly, he is from pre-2014 SBU. Let's be honest, Ukraine did its dramatic breakup with the Soviet tradition and model of governance only in 2014. Before 2014, it was much like Russia and SBU was much like the FSB. They were not *that* different as many presume
The meaning of Maidan is *vastly* underrated. It was the 2014 when the USSR died for real. Before 2014 Ukrainian military, intelligence and even more importantly the military industrial complex kept the same ties with their Russian colleagues as before. That was Soviet continuity
Russia is FSB-run state and the FSB openly call themselves "the new nobility". This should be taken literally. They *are* the new nobility. So it makes total sense that during the conquest of Ukraine they'll rely on noblemen like Khodakovsky rather than on peasants like Motorola
Kremlin is genuinely and sincerely horrified of where Ukraine is drifting after 2014. Before 2014, they perceived the Ukrainian elite as similar to them, may be somewhat inferior. Soviet community and Soviet continuity didn't finish in 1991. It finished in 2014
Maidan, Crimea and the Donbass War - that's what killed the USSR. How? Before 2014 Ukrainian security apparatus was largely Soviet. After 2014 they had quick and massive cadre change. It seems that in the state security it was especially massive and profound. It was a revolution
When we are discussing the popular support of revolutions, we typically miss the elephant in the room. Namely, the cadre change. Almost every revolution decreases the general quality of life for years. But they still generate tons of staunch supporters through the cadre change
Yes, social collapse makes the life worse. But it allows *tons* of ambitious upstarts to rise. Would a simple Cossack NCO, Semyon Budyonnyy have any chance to be the Commander of Cavalry under the old regime? No. But Soviets cleansed the upper ranks and opened him the way
The White propaganda depicted the revolution as "Jewish". In reality though, with most of nobility and officer corpse cleansed, it were mostly young Great Russian peasants who were quickly trained to take their places. They were absolutely happy and would fight for the new regime
Revolutions almost always decrease the general quality of life for years to come. Also the purges may be very cruel. But with the old elites purged, you need to recruit someone else on their places. You must do a cadre change. Accelerated social mobility generates a mass support
French or even more so Russian revolutions are extreme cases, which I chose because they are so well-known and illustrative. What is important here is the causal link:
Regime change -> Purges -> Cadre change -> Tons of new upstarts -> Tons of staunch supporters for the new order
Maidan was not as radical as 1789 or 1914. But Russia was so much appalled with it that it escalated the armed conflict. And the armed conflict led to the cadre change. Much of the old army establishment was not that reliable. And much of state security absolutely wasn't
War with Russia brought the cadre change in the state security and intelligence. First, it expanded. Second, it was cleansed from the old cadres creating a social elevator. Yesterday you'd catch fish and cook it in a bucket on open fire. Tomorrow you'd be a Special Forces officer
It's quite typical for Ukrainian intelligence officers to be much younger than their Western colleagues they meet with. Why? Well, largely because the old Soviet cadres were cleansed. That's what changed the face of regime and that's what generated mass of staunch supporters
2014 killed the Soviet Union. Cadre change in Ukraine broke the former community between the Russian and Ukrainian state security. Old Soviet cadres were gradually cleansed, breaking the continuity. And those that came to their places would not like the old order to return
Honestly, I think that if Putin did a massive invasion in 2014, he would succeed. First of all, many East Ukrainians still thought of themselves as Soviet/Russian. But by 2022 many of them just died or turned too old to make any real effect. History moves one death at a time
Second, he absolutely would be able to make a horse trade with much of the Ukrainian military and state security. Yes, many would refuse. But there would be enough of collaborators to secure a quick victory. "People's revolt" in Donbass were largely local Siloviki changing colors
Putin's decision to keep a small scale war for 8 years and then do a mass invasion was insane. First, identity of East Ukraine changed over these years. Many of those who held old Soviet identity were just too old now. Second, security apparatus went through a cadre change, too
In 2014 Putin could realistically expect that many powerful interest groups in Ukraine would assist in his invasion. But then he for some reason took a pause of 8 years. By February 2022 most of them were fired, dead on under arrest. Medvedchuk is the best known example of course
So let's return to the initial question. Why would Kremlin restrict supply of the "humanitarian aid" making supplies of its own militias in Ukraine harder? Because even Russian imperialist activism is still activism. And the Kremlin never ever allows any type of activism. Ever
If nationalist and imperialist circles in Russia continue shipping the valuable aid to the Russian/Donbass troops ad they did before, they may establish too many valuable horizontal connections. Fighters on the frontline may like those guys and even start depending upon them
That's exactly what many Russian imperialists hoped for. Consider Chadayev. He writes that collecting and shipping the valuable equipment to Donbass, we build our own, patriotic, civil society
What he didn't said is that we establish direct connections with guys on the frontline
Kremlin would never allow it. Any genuine believer, even Russian imperialist, is suspicious. Now you may stand for the Tsar, because of your views. But that implies that tomorrow you may stand against the Tsar, because of your views. Strong personal opinions are problematic
Russian imperialists who thought they would be allowed to build a "real civil society" by organising the supply the Russian troops in Ukraine were naive. That's 1) personal initiative 2) collective action. And Kremlin is strongly determined to uproot your capacity for either
Irrespectively of Putin, Russian political system depends upon uprooting the ability for personal initiative and collective action. Any ruler in Kremlin will be forced to uproot them to save the empire. Dismantling the empire is the only way to enfranchise its people. End of🧵
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There is hardly any other genre of literature more factual, and more realistic than the sci-fi. It is exactly its non-serious, seemingly abstract character that allows it to escape censorship and ostracism to a far greater degree than it is normally possible for a work of art.
Sci-fi allows you to to present the most painful, insulting, insufferable, obnoxious, criminal and traitorous arguments in a non-serious way, as a fun, as a joke. In this regard, it is far superior to any other genre. Compare three ways to sell a heresy:
By its very nature, sci-fi is inseparable from the social commentary. For this reason, quality sci-fi should be always read as a self-reflection and self-criticism of the society it is written in.
If the "Gulliver’s Travels" is a reflection on Britain…
Tatarstan is a large and wealthy ethnic republic located, in the very middle of Russia. While being culturally and institutionally distinctive, it is not really peripheral. It sits in a few kilometres from the population centre of Russia🧵
While Tatarstan does not sit in the centre of Russia geography-wise, it does so demography-wise. The Russian centre of population (red star), located somewhere in southwest Udmurtia, is literally in a walking distance from the Tatarstani border.
It is the very middle of Russia.
If you look at the Russian administrative map, you will see that most ethnic republics (colored) occupy a peripheral position. The main exception are republics of the Volga-Ural region (green), located in the middle of Russia & surrounded by the Slavic sea.
Wagner march was incredible, unprecedented to the extent most foreigners simply do not understand. Like, yes, Russia had its military coups in the 18th c. But those were the palace coups, all done by the Guards. Purely praetorian business with zero participation of the army.
Yes, there was a Kornilov affair in 1917, but that happened after the coup in capital. In March they overthrew the Tsar, then there was infighting in the capital, including a Bolshevik revolt in July, and only in September part of the army marches to St Petersburg.
Half a year after the coup. Not the same thing
I think the last time anything like that happened was in 1698, when the Musketeers marched on Moscow from the Western border. And then, next time, only in 2023.
(Army leaves the border/battlefield and marches on the capital without a previous praetorian coup in the capital)
As a person from a post-Soviet country, I could not but find the institutions of People’s Republic of China oddly familiar. For every major institution of the Communist Russia, I could find a direct equivalent in Communist China.
With one major exception:
China had no KGB
For a post-Soviet person, that was a shocking realisation. For us, a gigantic, centralised, all-permeating and all powerful state security system appears to be almost a natural phenomenon. The earth. The sky. Force of gravity. KGB
All basic properties of reality we live in
It was hard to come up with any explanation for why the PRC that evolved in a close cooperation with the USSR, that used to be its client state, that emulated its major institutions, failed to copy this seemingly prerequisite (?) institution of state power
Soviet output of armaments was absolutely gargantuan, massive, unbeatable. “Extraordinary by any standard” , it was impossible for any other country to compete with.
From 1975 to 1988, the Soviets produced four times as many ICBMs and SLBMs, twice as many nuclear submarines, five times as many bombers, six times as many SAMs, three times as many tanks and six times as many artillery pieces as the United States.
Impossible to compete with.
Which raises a question:
How could the USSR produce so much?
It is not only that the USSR invested every dime into the military production. It is also that the Soviet industry was designed for the very large volumes of output, and worked the best under these very large volumes
We are releasing our investigation on Roscosmos, covering a nearly exhaustive sample of Russian ICBM producing plants. We have investigated both primary ICBM/SLBM producers in Russia, a major producer of launchers, manufacturers of parts and components.
Each material includes an eclectic collection of sources, ranging from the TV propaganda to public tenders, and from the HR listings to academic dissertations. Combined altogether, they provide a holistic picture of Russian ICBM production base that no single type of source can.