Ukraine. The war and the history.

This is from my column written at the end of 2013, when the events were rolling up and eventually lead to the curent crisiss. 

[Ukrainian President] Viktor Yanukovych's refusal [2013] to sign an association with the EU under the Eastern Partnership programme is spoken of as a "victory" for Russia. Of course, it was a victory. Only a victory with an unpleasant aftertaste. Because the “victory” of one is the defeat of the other.

Here in Europe, both French and English commentators agree: Ukraine's retreat is a Moscow's victory. True, they also talk about “strategic patience”. As they say, 'the process is still going on'.

Why is the Eastern Partnership, proposed by the Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski, causing such rejection in Moscow? In addition to today's considerations, there is also an old, deep-seated one.

"Poland" and "Lithuania" — Польша, Литва — in the Russian mass consciousness, have long acquired a mythical meaning, the image of the enemy on the western borders. But where is this from? 

Well, yes, for Mayakovsky, in 1920s, Poland was “geographical news”. There was also the Livonian War, Gogol's Taras Bulba fighting with the Poles, then the partitions of Poland and the “Polish question” that remained after all that. The older, statist Pushkin wrote a poem 'To the Slanderers of Russia' about the suppression of the uprising of the Poles against the Russian empire. To the critics in France he said: do not interfere, this is our internal, Slavic family business.

At home, we are accustomed to one reading of our history — the Moscow reading, without even noticing it. There was a Kievan Rus, then the feudal fragmentation, then the Moscow principality began to “collect lands” and so on up to the empire and the USSR. 

One long Summer evening I was talking about modern politics with an old school friend, who by that time had gone into big politics. The chatter turned to history. 

My friend suddenly asked: Where did Ukraine and Belarus come from? There's nothing in our history?We had Kievan Rus, then the feudal fragmentation, the principalities... Then, suddenly, in a leap, Moscow “gathers” Russian lands, fights with Lithuania and Poland. And between that, what? 

Where were Ukraine and Belarus?

But it was not only Moscow that 'collected' Russian lands. And the 'Russian lands' in question didn’t always want to “get collected”. 

“Lithuania”, for example, was not the one state that is now [2013] holding the summit. The old 'Litva', or Lithuania was multinational, multi-confessional, with Orthodox, Catholics, Muslims left over from the Tartar-Mongol “yoke”, and Jews, who fled to Lithuania from persecution in Western Europe, engulfed in religious wars. The state was fully called the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Rusian (with one s) and Zhomoytsky. 

The state stretched from the Baltic to the Black Sea. In addition to Lithuania, it included modern Belarus, part of modern Ukraine, Russia and Moldova. The state (administrative) language in the principality was Russian, more precisely Western Russian (or Old Belarusian). All office work was carried out in it, all legal documents were written in Russian and the early printer Francis Skoryna (Francysk Skaryna) put this on the cover of the Bible he printed — "Библия руска" - “The Russian Bible”. 

Later on Lithuania united with Poland in what was to be called the Confederation or the Commonwealth. The name is a reverse translation into the languages ​​of the state of the time of the expression 'res publica' — a common cause, a republic. Later, in our time, historians agreed to call that polity the Commonwealth. However, in the Russian mythological consciousness, the enemy remained as "Poland".

From Muscovite Russia, which built the state on the principles of the 'vertical of power', the Western Russian Commonwealth was different in that it had an elected head of state (the king was elected), a parliament, an autonomy of city self-government and a religious tolerance. The Commonwealth ceased to exist only in 1795, with the 'third partition of Poland'.

You say, it was a long time ago! And a lot of things happened since, and now we have completely different interests at work. But no, isn't a commonwealth, an alliance of friends, more attractive than an empire? 

The drift of Eastern European countries towards the commonwealth, even if it is now the European Union, is also a drift away from the empires. The ghost of “Lithuania” wanders around Europe, it still attracts.

It is difficult to part with an empire, especially the one in our mind. This one battle with Kiev can be won, but will the European drift stop there?

Vladimir Putin once remarked that England would never part with her Empire. And the recent “non-statement” by Dmitry Peskov about England as a “small island” completely stung the British. The Prime Minister delivered a fiery speech in defence of the English heritage, including even the fact that all sports were invented by the British. The country laughed, people compared it with the speech of Prime Minister Hugh Grant in the film 'Love, Actually', also about heritage, from Shakespeare to Harry Potter and Beckham's left foot.

So the empire was not just dismantled, but moved on to the Commonwealth of Nations, now even without the "British". Fifty-three states, both large and small. Moreover, even some of those who were not colonies of the British Empire had asked to join and were included, eg the former Portuguese Mozambique and the former Belgian Rwanda. One can underestimate the influence of this community, one can overestimate iIn Russia, hardly anyone follows it closely. But there is an influence, and a membership in the "family of peoples" is valued. 

The attraction remains. Apartheid in South Africa collapsed not least because the country was put outside the Commonwealth. In Pakistan, democratic change was stimulated by the fact that the Commonwealth expelled the country for a military coup. Thatcher fell out with Reagan when the Imperial US invaded the little Grenada in 1983 because it suddenly decide to have a communist government. After the event, Thatcher refused to talk to Reagan at all for a long time. They almost ruined the Russian perestroika! And take India, the former "pearl in the British crown", it remains the biggest democracy in the world.

In terms of economics, it has been estimated that, on average, one Commonwealth member trades with another 50 percent more than with a non-member country. Yes, and in Britain itself there is a movement to develop and strengthen the Commonwealth instead of EU membership.

The Soviet Commonwealth, the CIS, has stayed as a leftover of the Soviet empire. Perhaps, it it were less of an empire and more of a commonwealth, there would be no need to win “battles”. Talk, don't fight.

This column was also published in my blog "Like in Europe" on the BFM.ru portal. Texts may vary. 

When two generals meet

Gen Mark Milley and Gen Valery Gerasimov, 
Helsinki, 22 September 2021,
Photo: Master Sergeant Chuck Burden,
DoD USA

As the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States Gen. Mark Milley and Chief of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces Gen. Valery Gerasimov held lengthy negotiations in Helsinki on Wednesday 22 September all eyes were on their tunics.

It is believed that the main agenda was the likely resumption of the US military presence in the countries of Central Asia, the former Soviet republics.

But of course, the generals had more to talk about.

Gerasimov in the West is considered to be the author of the doctrine of hybrid war, and the meeting itself coincided with the British authorities' announcement of identifying "the third man", an employee of the GRU of the General Staff of the Russian Federation, who allegedly led the operation at the Salisbury spire. (GRU — Main Intelligence Department, the Russian military intelligence)

And note: the American general showed up in a single-breasted tunic! As opposed to the proper double-breasted tunic of Gen.Gerasimov. 

In the West, you may not be aware of the reference. Yet, as every Russian knows, you don't fight a war in a single-breasted suit, not in our days. It follows from the film 'That Very Munchausen' ("Тот самый Мюнхаузен", 1979), a witty paraphrase on the stories of the great Baron, written by Gregory Gorin and produced and directed by Mark Zakharov.

In this scene the actor Leonid Bronevoy gets all excited by the prospect of a war with England that the Baron declared in support of the American colonies. 

However, the chief is more worried about the uniforms than the logistics. Shall we fight it in single-breasted or double-breasted uniforms? What an affront! Nobody fights a war in a single-breasted tunic, not in our time! 

Haji Qassem and War in the Middle East

In Baghdad, early this morning, Iranian General Qassem Soleimani was killed by an American drone strike. The attack was sanctioned by US President Trump. According to the White House, a "decisive defensive action" was carried out. Soleimani was a major general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and commander of its Quds Force, the elite division for operations outside Iran. Some say he was the second most powerful man in Iran. Soleimani's convoy was hit by an American drone.

Qassem Soleimani
photo credit

This event can be considered as a "declaration of war" by the USA against Iran. It is one thing to pursue terrorists on the run, it is aomething completely different when a foreign high official is assassinated on foreign soil with official blessing by the President. In any case, this is an extremely dangerous escalation of the conflict in the Middle East, directly affecting Russia as well. What is even more dangerous, is that is that it is not clear what American strategy is for the near future, what are the next steps. 

Reaction in France and Britain shows there was not enough consultation, if any, before the attack. Experts there expect an "asymmetrical" counter-attack from Iran. They also say that the attack has thrown in disarray a strategy of careful, step-by-step strategy of engaging with Iran, of drawing it away from radical actions throughout the region.

Soleimani (among his supporters he was knwon by the respectful nickname Hajj Qassem, like Tolstoy's Haji-Murat) was heading to Baghdad in connection with the prolonged siege of the American embassy by pro-Iranian groups. It is not clear why, was it in order to continue to act against the American military presence in Iraq, or the opposite, in order to restrain the further escalation of the conflict. 

From the outside it is not always clear, but after the fall of the regime of Saddam and especially as a result of a long war with Daesh (ISIS), Iraq turned out to be a field of direct rivalry between the United States and Iran. And the further events unfolded, the more the situation developed unfavourably for the United States. The government of Iraq is now insisting on the withdrawal of all remaining US troops from the country.

Soleimani is considered the chief architect of Iran’s military-political expansion in the region, including an alliance with Russia. As a result, the country has become a regional superpower. This suits some, while others are extremely worried, in particular those in the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel. In the US, Soleimani is on the official list of terrorists. He is also on the sanctions list of the European Union.

Soleimani was the commander of the Iranian special forces Quds with an estimated number of 10 to 20 thousand elite fighters. Quds supported the armed opposition in Afghanistan against the pro-Soviet government in the 80s, then groups that fought against the Taliban regime, and still later supported the Taliban who fought against the pro-American government.

In Iraq, the Iranian Quds supported the Kurds in the fight against the Saddam regime, and later in the fight against Daesh (ISIS). According to some reports, the Quds militants fought in Bosnia on the side of the Muslims there against the Serbs. In the war against Daesh, Soleimani fighters played a key role in a number of important battles. He himself was reportedly seriously injured. In Iran, these reports were denied.

General Soleimani was a confidant of the Russian military. According to reports, it was "Haji Kassem" who brought Russia to Syria. He convinced Moscow of the possibility of a successful military operation there in order to support the Assad regime and defeat Daesh (ISIS). And he began  pressuring Russians as early as 2013, even before the Ukrainian crisis. During 2015-2016 he visited Moscow four times for negotiations.

With Russian already in Syria, it was Soleimani who led the operation of the special forces that saved the Russian SU-24 pilot Konstantin Murakhtin, shot down by the Turkish F-16 near the Syrian-Turkish border in November 2015. Soleimani contacted Russian commanders and suggested using special forces under the Iranian command to rescue Murakhtin. The rescue group included 8 Hezbollah fighters and 18 Syrians from a pro-Iranian group. With satellite and air support from the Russian forces, the group penetrated 6 km “beyond the enemy’s lines” (that is, apparently into Turkey) and liberated the pilot, who later returned to the Russian base in Syria (according to reports by the AFP, The Times of Israel, Iran’s Fars Agency and the Persian-lnaguage service of Sputnik).

So far, the US conflict with Iran had remained within the framework of the proxy war. Even despite the fact that over the past two months in Iraq there have been 11 serious attacks on US military and civilians. On the eve of the New Year America began moving additional strike force to the region. Now there are up to 14 thousand US troops there, the army, marines, navy and aviation.

It is unclear how much Washington took into account the role of Soleimani in the Russia-Iran-Turkey triangle. It is clear that this blow to Iran is also a blow to Russia. Further escalation of the conflict will put Russia in a dangerous proximity to the military confrontation with the United States.

Though cowards sneer and traitors flinch...

Language of Brexit

It takes one communist (me) in the history of this great island to point out that the PM, the Surrender Boris, and other brekkers (formerly known as brexiters, or, to the admirers, as brexiteers) get their language mostly from communist sources.  

Here is a short list of the common words and expressions thrown by brekkers at anyone who supports the core democratic principle of fighting for your views, that is that Britain should stay in the EU. 

Surrender — 

[Surrender Bill = the Benn Bill = democratically adopted Parliament Act forbidding a no-deal Brexit] 

It may sound like it’s evoking Churchill’s famous ‘We shall never surrender’ speech, but in fact it has  other, sinister overtones. 

It hails back to Lenin’s ‘defeatism’, the idea that socialists should help the defeat of their own country in an ‘imperialist’ war in order to facilitate a revolution. Lenin, it is claimed, was paid by the German General Staff in the hope that his ideas would help defeat the Russian Empire in the first world war. 

The point of this reference is in accusing your opponent of being a surrenderer/defeatist, and on top of this being an agent of a foreign power or an agent of its influence.  

Traitors — 

The ‘Red Flag’, anthem of Labour, both British and Irish (and also of the Japanese Communist party and the North Korean Army), goes as follows

Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer We'll keep the red flag flying here 

The original tune is the German ‘O, Tannenbaum’ made famous in the form of ‘Oh, Christmas Tree’ by Disney’s ‘Swiss Family Robinson’ (1960). 

However, note the word ‘traitors’ in the text. The violent hatred of ‘traitors of the cause' goes back to the roots of socialist-communist movement, and has become a curse word since long ago, and a killing curse since Stalin’s great purges of 1930s, when ‘traitors of the Motherland’ were summarily executed. 

A communist source again.

Entryism —

It is an invention of Trotsky. In 1930s he suggested that radical left-wing groups should dissolve and join larger, main-stream socialist and social-democratic parties to work inside them and shift their agenda to radicalism, hence ‘entryism.’

Enemies of the people —

Next, and most obvious. It is another Stalinist term. This is not a Soviet invention, but the term was widely applied during Stalin's rule, became known throughout the world, and is associated with the infamous Show Trials of the Great Purge under Stalin in 1930s when often innocent people were accused of being 'traitors of the Motherland' and ‘enemies of the people’ on trumped up accusations and killed or sent to Gulag. Some were rehabilitated twenty years later. 

Non-aggression pact —

Farage promises a majority of a hundred or more for brekkers if tories agree to a ‘non-aggression pact’ with his Brexit Party. 

But what is this ‘non-aggression pact’? The term comes from the agreement between Stalin and Hitler in 1939 that helped to unleash the second world war with the attack on Poland, and to dragg England and France into war. 

On the ashes of that war, the European Union was founded to prevent such catastrophe happening ever again. 

Now Farage is offering it to us again. Thank you, Nigel.

People’s will —

What is this ‘people’s will’? It is one of the oldest populist cliches of all. Roman Emperors ruled dictatorially in the 'name of the people.' Bolsheviks suppressed the people in the ‘name of the people’. 

While our own John Stuart Mill fiercely argued against the ‘tyranny of the majority.’

Democracy —

What about democracy? 

Defending democracy, i.e. the people’s will, a democratic choice, expressed in the 2016 Brexit referendum, has become the main line of attack by brekkers on all those who want a reasonable European deal for Britain. That leaving the EU means losing Britain’s independence in the face of such superpowers as the USA, China and, yes, the European Union itself, is another story. 

What is important for the purposes of this argument, the debunking of the brekkers’ language, is to point out that this ‘democratic’ point is taken straight out of the Communist Party Charter. There, it is called ‘democratic centralism’ and demands ‘absolute submission of the minority to the majority’. 

It was the guiding principle of the Soviet Communist Party since Lenin, and then of the whole of the Soviet Union as a state. It is still in use in China and North Korea. 

Needless to say that true democracy demands respect for minority rights and opinions.

So, be careful, when you talk of democracy. Ask for definitions and their sources. 

PS: Here, we look at it from the left point of view. Tetradki will look at how the right views the language at a late stage. 

In this clip Winston Churchill (played by Gary Oldman aka George Smiley in 'Tinker, Tailor') makes his famous speech 'We shall never surrender'. At the end, one of his tory rivals says, 'Winston mobilised the English language and sent it into battle.' In fact, this phrase was made famous much later by President John Kennedy, who in turn borrowed it from an American broadcaster, the great CBS anchor Ed Murrow. — 

And here is the Red Flag sung by Billy Bragg —

Will of the People

Will of the people, will of the people, will of the people, they say.

If Moses had listened to the will of the people, the Israelites would still have remained Pharaohs' slaves. (Exodus, 16:2)

Taking a sickle to the balls

(Lord Sumption on Boris's 'hammer and sickle' attitude)

In the UK, on the eve of the Supreme Court hearings on two challenges to Boris Johnson's decision to prorogate (suspend) the Parliament, a prominent lawyer Jonathan Sumption QC used a loaded metaphor to describe the situation. 

On BBC television's Newsnight programme he said: 

"If you behave outrageously and defy the political culture on which our constitution depends, a lot of judges are going to be tempted to push the limits out.

"Boris Johnson has taken a hammer and sickle to our political culture in a way that is highly provocative to people who believe that there ought to be solutions consistent with our traditions."

Now, hammer and sickle, of course is a well-known communist emblem. It originated early in the Russian Revolution, roughly at the same time as swastika was being adopted by the nazis in Germany. Today, it is still in wide circulation in Russia and remains in use in the remaining communist countries but banned in many others as the symbol of brutal totalitarian oppression.

Which makes Lord Sumption's application beautifully apposite. He says, in effect, that Johnson is disregarding the delicate constitutional setup of Britain. Disregarding it to the point of destruction in a bolshevist manner, applying the 'hammer and sickle'.

While this meaning is widely known in the West, few would know, I think, another Russian idiomatic expression with the sickle — пройтись серпом по яйцам, take a sickle to the balls. It may not be for a polite company, but basically means the same as in the above quotation by the Right Honourable Lord Sumption, to harm someone, to damage, to assault brutally, literally — to castrate.

Which, to finish this, may be added to the notebooks of those who see the hammer and sickle as a Dan Brownesque sexual symbol, hammer for man, sickle for woman.

Here is a clip from Newsnight's Twitter with Lord Sumption's quote. (Watch a longer, more detailed 2 min video of the interview is on The New European site) 

“If you... defy the political culture on which our constitution depends, a lot of judges are going to be tempted to push the limits out."

Lord Sumption says “Boris Johnson is taking a hammer and sickle to our political culture in a way that is highly provocative.”#Newsnight pic.twitter.com/96ac9vA3Cy

— BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) September 16, 2019

Will the People.

(Limerick)

Mr. Will the People

There was good prime minister May,
Who tried very hard, they all say.
    She cobbled a deal
    For a Brexit piecemeal.
Will the People accept it? No way!

Yulia Scripal's statement in full.

Reuter's video of Yulia Scripal's statement on 23 May 2018 —

Fishing, Putin style.

The press and social networks are awash with images of topless Vladimir Putin fishing in Siberia with his Minister of Defence Sergei Shoigu, a native of Tywa, the republic where they went on a holiday trip.

But why do Putin's image-makers persist with this particular bit, the fishing? This time, including the underwater chase after a pike? One explanation could be that they have in mind the macho man James Bond fighting the baddies underwater in the 1965 'Thunderball' with Sean Connery. (wiki on the film)

To the giggling Russians, the idea of going on a fishing trip inevitably evokes the cult 1960s comedy 'The Diamond Hand' with a staged fishing episode, when one crook is scuba-diving with a net full of live fish that he puts on the hook and the second is on shore supposedly ready to knock out the 'target.' It all backfires. (wiki on the film)

The phrase, that every Russian knows, 'клёв будет такой, что он забудет обо всём на светe' — 'the fish will be biting so often that he will forget about everything' is also from  that film.

Here is the episode —



And here is the 'Thunderball' sequence —

Normandy 1944-2014.

(just a photo)

Utah Beach, an old German bunker with shell marks that make it look like a stranded crocodile. 

For more photos of Normandy related to D-Day and subsequent battle for Normandy have a look at my  photoblog.

As Obama cancels the summit with Putin... (a comic.)

One of my many hats is graphic design. Here's a recent exercise in #Apple's #iWork with additional help from #ComicLife.

Contact the editor (me) if you want to commission similar. For description of techniques used and tutorials read the blog I Work in Pages.

You can read more in my new book 'iWork for Mac OSX Cookbook' (2012), follow me on Twitter at iworkinpages, like my page I Work in Pages on Facebook and add me to your circles on Google+.

Intelligentsia and Creative Class. (New Russian).

The term ‘creative class’ as applied to Russia means intelligentsia. And little more.

This post is simply to vent my irritation with the phrase ‘creative class’ (креативный класс) as applied to describe the educated, mobile, urban, high-earning, mostly liberal-minded and certainly independent-thinking professional Russians who formed the core of the opposition to the ruling ‘Putin.03’ group since September 2012, when the Putin-Medvedev ‘castling’ (рокировка) was announced. 

Since then the opposition has developed from spontaneous street protests bordering on riots to a more or less organised civic movement comprising several distinct groupings, including the traditional left (Udaltsov), anti-corruption fighters (Navalny), Russian nationalists, traditional anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists, and a respectable but not represented in the Duma social-democratic/liberal party Yabloko (Yavlinsky, Mitrokhin) together with a number of other radical groups, including Solidarity movement (Солидарность, Garry Kasparov) and Parnas (Party of People’s Liberty - Партия народной свободы, Nemtsov). 

A number of more established and less radical political figures have either joined or supported opposition groups, notably the billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov (himself a presidential candidate), the long-serving former finance minister Alexei Kudrin and the former Duma deputy and KGB colonel Gennady Gudkov. 

The governing establishment desperately sought to find catchy terms to discredit the opposition in the run-up to the elections of the President and the Duma. Somewhere inside the Kremlin think-tubs a range of terms was developed and circulated. Prominent among them were the 'Orangists' (оранжисты, referring to the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine), the 'non-system opposition' (несистемная or внесистемная оппозиция, referring to non-system, i.e. officially unrepresented opposition) and, the sneakiest of them all, ‘the creative class’. 

The implication of the term is that its members are too high-earning, too ‘well-fed’ (зажравшиеся), too urban, too West-orientated to understand and appreciate the enormous work that the Putin government has done to ‘raise Russia from her knees’ since the beginning of the 21st Century. And with this to drive a wedge between the protesting citizens of Moscow, Petersburg and other major cities and the less politically savvy and certainly poorer people of the rest of the country.

Whether it works or not, remains to be seen. What is striking is how similar the idea is to the treatment of intelligentsia under the Soviet regime. It had been defined as a ‘social stratum’ devoid of its own class consciousness, and as such not to be trusted. Intelligentsia was recognised as one of the three important social groups in the Soviet society, but it came third after after the working class and the ‘collectivised peasantry’ (колхозное крестьянство.) In fact, in agenda-setting Central Committee slogans, issued by the party twice a year, for May Day and for the October Revolution anniversary, the working class was described as ‘heroic’, the kolkhoz peasantry as ‘glorious’, but the intelligentsia only had the attributive epithet of ‘Soviet people’s’. (see an example here, slogans 10, 11 and 12.) 

One can argue with Richard Florida’s  idea of the creative class as the new driving force of the post-industrial world is right or wrong. It is difficult, though, to argue that ‘creative class’ is hardly different from the old and respected Russian notion of ‘intelligentsia’. We may have to take the moral steadfastness out. And the inherent liberal-mindedness too. But we can’t take out Florida’s own key distinctive feature of the creative class as the group of professional people who are more interested in ‘horizontal’ mobility, i.e. in the pursuit of satisfying work, rather than ‘vertical’ mobility, i.e. the advancement in administrative or managerial positions with a corresponding rise in remuneration.  

At any rate it is fascinating to see that over the past year some Russians have swallowed the self-identification of being one of ‘creative class’ without actually challenging the concept. The old self-identification of ‘intelligentsia’ having been denigrated and belittled in both ideological and economical ways under the Soviet regime for so long, it comes as little surprise.

Still others have seen through the risks of accepting the new definition. The Moscow News (“Московские новости”) newspaper runs a language column called Word and Anti-Word (“Слово и антислово”), where prominent personalities are asked to give their observations on the modern language. One recent interviewee was Marat Guelman (Марат Гельман, wiki), a modern art gallery owner and festival organiser. (Note another new Russian word: галерист - gallerist.)

Asked if there were any recent words or phrases that he thought of as alien to him, Guelman said

'I don’t use the words ‘creative class’. I think it’s a bit poshlo (vulgar). The phrase makes you feel as though people are just uncomfortable with saying ‘intellectual’ or ‘intellighent’. Among my friends there was only one, Edik Boyakov*, who had used the phrase ‘creative class’ without irony. And then only once — he said it and then understood how incongruous it was.'

Русская версия этой заметки здесь.

*Edouard Boyakov, Russian theatre and cinema producer and director. 

Видеорегистратор - Dashboard Camera. (New Russian)

Hidden in this detailed report about the Russian meteorite is a language gem: dashboard camera. In Russian it's called видеорегистратор, pronounced vEE-dee-oh-reh-ghee-strAH-tohr. It is, for many practical purposes, a video registrar, as this passage from the AP report explains:

Social media was flooded with video from the many dashboard cameras that Russians mount in their cars, in case of pressure from corrupt traffic police or a dispute after an accident.

While Tetradki couldn't find statistics on how many Russian cars are equipped with videoregistrators, reports suggest that they are installed en-masse and widely used. They should be really hailed as a tool of democracy and an evidence of a civic society emerging in Russia. Militant activists from the Blue Buckets movement ("Синие ведерки", wikipedia, in English, and lurkmore, in Russian, about them) have used footage from videoregistrators to prove abuse and arrogance of the high and mighty as they drive through red light, on the opposite lane and do spectacular u-turns in the middle of busy roads endangering the lives of ordinary citizens.

This is not the kind of word you'd quickly find in a Russian-English dictionary.

Here is a blood-curling video from the Blue Bucket repertoire, 2011. The chauffeur of a government Mercedes threatens to shoot a driver in front of him, if he doesn't let him pass. 'Do you want me to shoot you through the head, punk?' he shouts over the tanoy before speeding off. The scene, captured on videoregistrator, went viral on the Russian internet:



Update: In this article on Wired.com Damon Lavrinc goes into more details about videoregistrators and the meteor. The article includes a number of videos of the meteor and of Russian road accidents.
And Languagehat discusses the expletives that Russians use when cars crash or meteors fall from the sky. Languagehat's post contains more exciting links.

WhiR


ead more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/02/14/5192622/meteorite-falls-in-russian-urals.html#storylink=cpy

bluebuckets

'Virgin Mary Won't Allow This'

Yurodiviy

Russian cultural references

In connection with the Pussy Riot case, the phrase 'Bogoroditsa ne velit' has often been quoted.

The feminist punk band used as a refrain in their performance the words 'Virgin Mother, get rid of Putin'. While it has been widely quoted in Western press, the link, which is obvious to any Russian, may have been lost on the Western reader.

In fact it comes from Alexander Pushkin's epic historical drama 'Boris Godunov' (1831).

Boris was Ivan the Terrible's lieutenant. When Ivan died in 1584 leaving a weak son, Feodor, on the throne, Godunov became a de-facto ruler. And after Feodor died in 1598 Godunov was crowned as the new tsar.

He was an efficient administrator and reformer, but persistent rumours of his involvement in the alleged murder of Ivan's other son from his seventh marriage, tsarevitch Dimitriy. The rumours were, apparently, stirred by Godunov's enemies. Soon after Godunov died in 1605 his young son and widow were murdered. This marked the advent of 'the Time of Troubles', when effective rule was non-existent, the Poles invaded Russia and put their stooge, the False Dimitriy on the throne of Moscow. A popular uprising ensued and eventually the first of the Romanov's, Mikhail was selected as tsar.

Russia had to wait another hundred years for a successful reformer, Peter the Great.

Godunov's personality and the Time of Troubles have long fascinated Russian writers. To Russia, Godunov and tsarevitch Dimitriy in historical and literary terms is what Richard and the Princes in the Tower is to England.

The clip below is from Mussorgsky's classic opera 'Boris Godunov' (1868-73), based on Pushkin's poem. Tsar Boris is challenged by the city's Simpleton (Yurodiviy), here sung by Ivan Kozlovsky, to have the street boys, who had stolen a kopeck from him, to be slaughtered 'like you slaughtered tsarevitch Dimitriy.'

The tsar recoils and his aides want to arrest the Simpleton. Boris stops them and asks the Simpleton to pray for him. But the Simpletion says 'No, I can't, Virgin Mary, Mother of God (Bogoroditsa) does not allow this'.

The 'aaa-aaa' note in the Simpleton's aria is one of the most beautiful in Russian opera.



Illustration: detail of the painting by Vassily Surikov 'The Boyarinya Morozova', 1887, o/c, Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow.

Tolstoy's verdict on Pussy Riot.

Please read the Russian version of this post, including the quote, on "Тетрадки" here.

'No one present seemed conscious that all that was going on here was the greatest blasphemy and a supreme mockery of that same Christ in whose name it was being done.'

This passage is from Chapter XL of The Resurrection, or the Awakening, translation is by Louise Maude. (The full text of the Chapter is here.) This chapter and many other passages deemed harmful to the prestige of the Russian government and the Orhtodox Church were banned by the tsar's censors and were not published until 1917. 

From the passage below, you can see how relevant Tolstoy's train of thought is to what's happening today around the feminist punk group Pussy Riot condemned to two years in a colony for 'hooliganism', i.e. doing a few jumps and hand-waves while dressed in brightly colored balaklavas, dresses and leggings. They were filmed and the footage was made into a YouTube hit 'punk-prayer' with the title 'Virgin Mary, rid us of Putin.'  

Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, Mariya Alekhina and Ekaterina Samutsevitch, two of them with small children, had already spent nearly half a year in pre-trial detention. They were denied bail. 

This is the quote:

'And none of those present, from the inspector down to Maslova, seemed conscious of the fact that this Jesus, whose name the priest repeated such a great number of times, and whom he praised with all these curious expressions, had forbidden the very things that were being done there; that He had prohibited not only this meaningless much-speaking and the blasphemous incantation over the bread and wine, but had also, in the clearest words, forbidden men to call other men their master, and to pray in temples; and had ordered that every one should pray in solitude, had forbidden to erect temples, saying that He had come to destroy them, and that one should worship, not in a temple, but in spirit and in truth; and, above all, that He had forbidden not only to judge, to imprison, to torment, to execute men, as was being done here, but had prohibited any kind of violence, saying that He had come to give freedom to the captives.

No one present seemed conscious that all that was going on here was the greatest blasphemy and a supreme mockery of that same Christ in whose name it was being done. No one seemed to realise that the gilt cross with the enamel medallions at the ends, which the priest held out to the people to be kissed, was nothing but the emblem of that gallows on which Christ had been executed for denouncing just what was going on here. That these priests, who imagined they were eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ in the form of bread and wine, did in reality eat and drink His flesh and His blood, but not as wine and bits of bread, but by ensnaring "these little ones" with whom He identified Himself, by depriving them of the greatest blessings and submitting them to most cruel torments, and by hiding from men the tidings of great joy which He had brought. That thought did not enter into the mind of any one present.'

The painting by Ilya Repin 'Tolstoy Barefoot' was painted in Pussy Riot colours by Tetradki/©Anichkin.

Pussy Riot Verdict. Shameful.

Shameful. 

Three young women of the Pussy Riot punk rock group were sentenced to two years in prison in Moscow today. They've already spent more than five months in detention, two of them have young children.

This is a quote from the Russian GQ editor Michael Idov's article in the Guardian, the best so far:

When you trim away everything else, three young women will spend two years in jail for dancing in a church.

Queen's Jubilee. Why Monarchies Are Safer Than Republics.

After extensive research, I have found irrefutable proof that it is safer to live in a monarchy than in a republic. Here, on the occasion of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, I present some of my striking findings.

A version of this article in Russian is on "Тетрадки" side of this blog.

Princess Lilibet, 1929.

Outside of the countries with constitutional monarchies the value of the royals to society is rarely debated, but in Britain monarchists and republicans continue sharpening their arguments even though the monarchy enjoys solid support with over 70 percent of the people in favour of retaining it.

A British royal writer Robert Hardman pointed out that seven out of the ten top countries in the UN Human Development Index are monarchies. The United Nations compiles the index as a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education and standards of living for countries worldwide. Seven monarchies in the list of nations with 'very high human development'! 

In the 2010 Human Development report they are Norway, Australia, New Zealand, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Canada and Sweden (UK is 26th). Even in the adjusted index, which factors in inequalities in the three basic dimensions of human development (income, life expectancy, and education) five monarchies are in the top ten: Norway, Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada and Denmark (UK is 21st).

"a monarchical state encourages anarchist, self-motivated compliance with rules, rather than republican anarchist rejection of them."

What does it say? Or, does it say anything at all? Now, this may not be an argument in favour of re-establishing monarchies in the countries that had rejected them. But it certainly looks like a solid proof that where there is a monarchy, it does not necessarrily go with backwardness. 
  

My professional and family life has taken me to live for extended periods in three republics and three monarchies. I was born and raised in Soviet Russia, a republic, lived in England, Australia and the USA as a kid with my parents, and then, as an adult, worked and lived in England and Japan, both monarchies, and in Russia and France, the two republics where monarchs had suffered the ultimate ignominy of being executed and where the monarchy itself was abolished. I can’t say I’ve always thought of this life-long experience in terms of monarchy vs republic, but, looking back, what strikes me is that in monarchies people are, if not happier, seem to be more at ease with themselves. It feels as though they are less frustrated with the state and its demands on citizens. I’d also say they are more prepared to challenge the state, including the monarchy. Having respect for the institutions of the state, they nevertheless lack deference that I’ve seen so often in France and Russia.

Of course, in the 21st Century all the trappings of a monarchy – the pageantry, the curtsying and the titles seem absurd. But the majority still supports it by a wide margin, while elected heads of state, especially where they are also heads of the executive, rarely ever garner more than 50 percent of the popular vote and rarely enjoy the support of more than half the population, at least in established democracies. 

So, is it not more absurd to give them, the elected servants of the people, similar trappings – salutations, palaces and parades, not to speak of enormous power over the destinies of their nations?

As labour MP Denis MacShane, who has studied France’s political system in depth, says, ‘Britain is the parliamentary republic that just has common sense to have a nice lady as head of state. France is a real monarchy. They elect the monarch, and then, by goodness, Sarkozy, Mitterand, de Gaulle – they have power no other head of state in any other country has.’

Yes, elected posts are not hereditary, but inheriting an aristocratic title doesn’t always mean that you are going to be rich and happy.

And why so many Brits who settle in France complain about French bureaucracy, cumbersome, oppressive and unbelievably arrogant? Shouldn’t it be the other way round in a republic where civil servants are supposed to be the servants of the people, not the crown? Maybe the royal prerogative does indeed provide a counter-balance to authoritarian tendencies inherent in the machine of the state?

There seems to be, under a monacrhy, more willingness to play by the rules, rather than to ignore them. Take for instance the comparative size of ‘black economy’. European studies show that in the UK undeclared work amounts to about half of what it is in republican France and Germany. 

There may be a multitude of explanations of why that is so – taxation, social charges, labour and business rigidity in European republics as opposed to social and economic liberalism in monarchic Britain, the subject often spoken of by my French friends. But maybe there is something in the structure of a monarchical state, that encourages a kind of anarchist, self-motivated compliance with rules, rather than republican anarchist rejection of them. In the USA black economy is much smaller than in Europe, including Britain. But Americans have a strong, much stronger than in Europe, historical tradition of demanding ‘representation for taxation’ and of opposition to a high-spending ‘big government’.

Well, ‘black economy’ is difficult to quantify, but perhaps there is a different, hard-core measure?   

Another common complaint among Brits in France is driving. But how can you compare ‘republican’ and ‘royalist’ driving? 

I’ve looked at the statistics of deaths in road accidents per 100 thousand population per year. In the UK the figure is approximately half of that for France – 3.59 to 6.9. USA, a republic, and Canada, a monarchy, seem very similar from this side of the pond, but again the difference in road fatalities is striking: 12.3 to 9.2.  I remember Japan, a constitutional ‘empire’, for disciplined, even courteous behaviour on the roads. Compare their road fatalities to the neighbouring republic, South Korea: 3.85 to 12.7. In the kingdom of Sweden it is less than half of republican Finland, 2.9 to 6.5.  And Russia is far-far behind with 25.2. 

The pattern holds everywhere!

Illustration from Time Magazine, April 1929.

The Noughties. A Russian wrap-up.

Mikhail Yefremov in Citizen Poet.

The Noughties ("Нулевые") is a 70-minute documentary about Russia in the 2000s that is quickly becoming a hit on the internet. It was made by Vadim Vostrov for Krasnoyarsk, East Siberia, regional television company TVK-6 (producer Xenia Cherepanova).

It paints a bleak picture of modern Russia controlled by corrupt bureaucracy who act with complete impunity knowing that Putin will never let them down.

Vostrov follows the rise of the opposition protests since September last year. The collection of politicians, historians, activists, journalists (including The New Yorker's Moscow writer Julia Ioffe), writers and actors who are interviewed in the film seems haphazard at first but towards the end grows into a multi-dimensional picture of vibrant  Russian debate.

Bykov

The film includes extensive interview with one of the top modern writers Zakhar Prilepin and footage of Boris Akunin speaking at protest rallies in Moscow.

One subplot in the film describes the extraordinary success of a Moscow theatre production called Citizen Poet ("Гражданин поэт"). It is, essentially, a reading of poetry, or rather paraphrases of well-known poems by Russian classics written by Dmitry Bykov, a popular journalist and TV presenter. They are all blistering satirical takes on Putin and Medvedev and their publicity stunts. Packed hall bursts out laughing at each new joke, and the performer, Mikhail Yefremov, can't help cracking up himself at times. The production has been seen in theatre by more than 300 thousand people. Citizen Poet was released as series on Echo Moskvy  radio and Dozhd TV channel. YouTube clips of Citizen Poet have been viewed more than 15 million times.

The phrase 'When poets rocked the stadiums' has long become commonplace to describe the phenomenal renaissance of Russian poetry during Khrushchyov's thaw in the late 50s - early 60s. Could it be that now, 50 years later, we may see a new wave?

(The film is in Russian, the subplot about Citizen Poet starts at 1:07:45 into the film, Prilepin's interview is split into short takes throughout the film. Read more about Citizen Poet in this Russian Wikipedia article. Photo of Bykov by Rodrigo Fernandez).

Swan Lake and NTV.

In the early 90s NTV was one of the most creative independent television stations. In the late 90s Vladimir Putin suppressed the company. It was taken over by those loyal to him. Now its specialty are exposés of anti-Putin opposition. The smear campaign is so underhanded that NTV staff, according to reports from Moscow and chat on Facebook, have become 'unhandshakeable' (нерукопожатными).  


Last Sunday hundreds went to NTV headquarters to protest against the latest programme, The Anatomy of Protest, which claimed that protesters were in the pay of foreign manipulators.


The Washington Post reporter Will Englund was there:  

Occasionally, they would turn to face the TV building and chant, “Shame on NTV.” Then, at a still moment, someone shouted, “Swan Lake!” The Tchaikovsky ballet is indelibly associated by Russians — even those who were mere children at the time — with the failed hard-line Communist coup of 1991, when Soviet television played it over and over as a way of suppressing the news. For many, “Swan Lake” stands for cowardly television and the ultimate failure of those politicians who believe that only they can dictate events.

WP's report links to my article last year on how Swan Lake was the wrong choice to play on TV during the anti-Gorbachev coup (click on the link in the quote above). 

The Real Svetlana's Breath

The original Svetlana

Svetlana Alliluyeva, Stalin's daughter, died on 22 November 2011. She had a long and, at times, troubled life. A Kremlin princess until Stalin's death in 1953, in 1967 she defected to the USA, an event that was a big propaganda coup for the West. (see video below, wiki about her here).

There is a persistent myth linked with her name. At least I think it's a myth. The myth that there was a Soviet perfume named after her.

It was probably started by an American journalist's mention in the 1950s feature and found its way into other publications, including serious studies of Russia, and in a bounce-flash, is now mentioned, as fact, in Russian press. (See this article, which also includes videos about Alliluyeva.)

One blogger's obituary says: 'Growing up, she was a beloved celebrity in her home country. Thousands of girls were named after her. So was a bestselling perfume.'

The obituary links to an article from Russia by the AP Women's Editor Dorothy Roe. It is dated December 1957 and says: 'Just recently Russia started manufacturing perfume, the most expensive and prized of which is called 'Svetlana's Breath' – Svetlana is Stalin's daughter, you know'.

The American article is uncomplimentary about conditions of life for Russian women. But the correspondent obviously did an honest job walking around, observing and interviewing people. The year 1957 was an exciting time in Russia. Khrushchev has just denounced Stalin's crimes, Sputnik was launched and the International Youth Festival created an atmosphere of incredible openness and optimistic outlook. Khrushchev and Eisenhower were looking for a way to end the cold war.

The Moscow perfume factory, 'Novaya Zarya' – New Dawn, founded 1884, (link to their official web-site, small wiki article in Russian here), did indeed make a perfume called 'Svetlana', not 'Svetlana's Breath'. It is mentioned, for example, in this overview of the factory's products as one of its top quality brands. Either the correspondent misunderstood the name of the brand, or the interviewee made a joke about Stalin's personality cult that was lost in translation.

The trap here, for a translator – and a journalist, is in the word дух – spirit, ghost, which also means smell, scent. In fact, Pushkin played on the word in the introduction to the poem Ruslan and Lyudmila: "Там русский дух, там Русью пахнет" – "there is the Russian spirit, it smells of Russia there". Dahl's dictionary (словарь Даля), the biggest collection of Russian words, gives the whole range of meanings in an article on дух (link to Vasmer's etymological dictionary on dukh, which in turn links to major Russian dictionaries, click on Dahl). Дух is cognate with душа (soul) and дыхание (breath) but духи in plural with the stress on the last syllable has only one meaning – perfume.
 
The name of the perfume, after Khrushchev's 1956 denunciation of Stalin, is unlikely to have been linked to Svetlana Alliluyeva, but, I am almost sure, is a reference to 'Lullaby for Svetlana', a hit number from the musical "Давным-давно" – 'Long Time Ago' (play by Alexander Gladkov, music by Tikhon Khrennikov). In 1962 Eldar Ryazanov made a film version, "Гусарская баллада" ('The Hussar Ballad). Svetlana is the name of the doll belonging to the main character Alexandra (Shurochka). She sings the lullaby 'Sleep, my Svetlana' before running away from home to join, disguised as a hussar, the Russian army fighting Napoleon in 1812.

The play was written in 1941, just before Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union, and staged for the first time in 1942 in Sverdlovsk (now Yekaterinburg), where many Moscow organizations were evacuated. Scenes and musical numbers from the play were broadcast over the national radio. It has remained a signature production for the Central Army Theatre in Moscow ever since. Its patriotic theme was apt for the time and the catchy tunes are still, seventy years on, popular.

My grandmother and mother, a little girl then, were also evacuated to Sverdlovsk – and my mother had a doll there called Svetlana. That's where my sister later got her name from. I didn't know about the doll, mother only told me the other day when I mentioned the death of Svetlana Alliluyeva. My mother doesn't remember the perfume, nor the play from those times, but she and my grandmother may have seen it then.

The name Svetlana in the play might have been 'inspired' by Stalin's daughter, but would have been linked to the poet Vasily Zhukovsky's 1808-1812 romantic ballad 'Svetlana' based on Gottfried Burger's Lenore (wiki on Lenore). Zhukovsky did another version of Lenore titled 'Lyudmila'. Both Svetlana (meaning the Light One) and Lyudmila (Beloved by the People) remain two of the most popular pre-Christian Russian women's names. It is possible that Stalin's daughter was named after Zhukovsky's heroine. While 'thousands of girls named after Stalin's daughter' is obviously what was happening at the height of his cult, the name had its own life, separate from Stalin.


Stalin's daughter or not, the lines from Zhukovsky's ballad "О, не знай сих страшных снов, Светлана" – 'Oh, never shall you know those terrible dreams, Svetlana' are widely known, and during the Stalin period would have had certain reverberations – abduction, having a dead man for a groom, trying to figure out your fate and then waking up from a bad dream.

Novaya Zarya has a long tradition of giving their perfumes women names with romantic connotations. In the 70s one of the popular brands – which I remember buying myself – was called 'Natasha', possibly after Tolstoy's Natasha Rostova. One of their current brands is 'Yelena'. My theory about 'Svetlana' perfume could only be confirmed by evidence from the Novaya Zarya archives or by someone who remembers how the name was assigned. For now, I simply offer this as a theory.

The Hussar's Ballad can be seen on YouTube in full. The lullaby scene begins at 22 min. (Embedding is disabled, copyright is owned by Mosfilm). RuTube has a clip with the lullaby:



Here Svetlana Alliluyeva speaks at the press-conference after her defection in 1967:



Picture, an illustration to Zhukovsky's poem: Karl Brullov, Svetlana's Magic Fortunetelling, 1836, o/c, 94 x 81 cm, Art Museum of Nizhny Novgorod.

Special thanks to Languagehat for the prompt to make this post.