The fact that Putin is adept at judo is well known and admired. I got a taste of this admiration a few years ago when I stopped into a Moscow photo shop across from INION to get picture for my library card. Hanging on the wall were two pictures of Putin. One looking all stately and serious; the other in full judo garb with arms steady for a throw.
Little did I know that Putin and a few of his fellow judo enthusiasts penned a manual of their best throws, tumbles, and dodges called Judo: History, Theory, Practice. That is until I happened upon Daniel Soar’s “Short Cuts” in new issue of the London Review of Books. Soar wonders whether Putin’s judo mastery influenced his recent diplomatic jousting with President Bush. The careful observer can see that it indeed does.
As Soar explains:
The excellent thing about judo – in theory – is that you don’t have to be stronger than your opponent to beat him. The idea is that you use the momentum of his attack to keep him moving in the same direction, and then, with a little twist, you send him flying onto the mat. The bigger they are the harder they fall. This should be useful to Putin, since Russia is so heavily outgunned and outspent by the US military machine that it can’t win the arms race the old-fashioned way. Putin provides a striking metaphor to demonstrate the judo master’s technique. He calls it ‘give way in order to conquer’. Imagine you are a locked door. Your opponent wants to break you open with his shoulder. If he is ‘big and strong enough and rams through the door (that is, you) from a running start, he will achieve his aim’. But here’s the neat bit. If instead of ‘digging in your heels and resisting your opponent’s onslaught’, you unlock it at the last minute, then, ‘not meeting any resistance and unable to stop, your opponent bursts through the wide-open door, losing balance and falling.’ If you’re even more cunning, you can stop being a door and stick out a leg, causing him to trip as he sails through. ‘Minimum effort, maximum effect’, as Russia’s effortlessly effective president says.
The evident ingenuity of this technique made me wonder why Putin didn’t deploy it in the run-up to the G8 dojo. It was puzzling. On his way to Germany, Bush went on the offensive. He visited Poland and the Czech Republic to publicise his plan to install ‘exoatmospheric kill vehicles’ – little missiles designed to hit bigger missiles – on sites close to the Russian border. Putin’s counter-attack was very bold. He said that if America was going to play silly buggers with its Raytheon EKVs, then he would point his biggest ICBMs at Western European cities. ‘A new Cold War!’ the papers screamed. The leaders of the free world were righteously outraged, whereas Putin had merely closed the door. Any moment now he would flip the latch and stick out a leg.
But the analogy was troubling. When would the door open, and where was his leg? At first I wondered whether Putin was readying himself for the long game, hunkering down, raising the stakes to force the US to spend more and more money on more and more weapons until it bankrupted itself and went pop. Except, of course, that this would be playing into Bush’s hands, since American military spending is what the US economy depends on. The need for more weaponry would mean an even mightier America. So Putin wasn’t so clever after all: he’d forgotten all his old teaching and had taken up gunslinging in a fight he could only lose. Or so I thought.
On 7 June the full genius of Putin’s strategy was revealed. Earlier, Bush had said: ‘Vladimir – I call him Vladimir – you should not fear the missile defence system . . . Why don’t you co-operate with us on the missile defence?’ Ingeniously, Putin now called his bluff, and unbolted the new Iron Curtain. He quietly suggested that the US base its missile interception system on a Russian military installation in Azerbaijan, an unanswerable solution if – as the Americans claim – the EKVs really are intended to counter an Iranian nuclear threat. Bush’s people, wrong-footed, could only say that his proposal was ‘interesting’ and that the presidents would discuss it further in Kennebunkport, Maine at the beginning of July. But this is likely to be the end of the missile defence plan for Poland and the Czech Republic. Ippon!
Ippon indeed.
Fred: oIo
“As far as I can make out, the case for an independent Kosovo as advocated by sensible people in the west runs as follows.
An ethnic or religious minority in any given country does not have a right to secede simply because they are a minority. However, the ruling majority have an obligation to protect the lives and general wellbeing of the minority. If the majority fail in this obligation, or embarkm on a campaign of violent persecution or genocide, then the minority has a right to secede for its own protection and survival.
In the case of Kosovo, few in the west supported the right of Kosovo to secede from Serbia simply because it is made up mostly of ethnic Albanians, as this would set a disturbing precedent. However, once the Serb government embarked on a program of violent persecution against the entire minority population which was headed towards a campaign of ethnic cleansing (which can never, ever be justified), many in the west recognised that Serbia has by its own actions lost the right to govern the ethnic minorities in Kosovo and for their own protection and survival they need to become an independent entity.
Or course it is all very complicated, and I think it is appalling that the Serb population of Kosovo is being kicked out of Kosovo and are not offered the protection of the NATO force on the ground. But Serbia has no grounds whatsoever for complaint that it has lost control of Kosovo when it proved itself incapable or unwilling to carry out its obligation to protect its ethnic minorities when it was in control.
It is this line of thinking which causes a lot of people in the west to oppose Serbian control of Kosovo, even if they don’t necessarily agree that Kosovo has any historical grounds for independence.”
****
“Sensible people” is open to question given the background of leading Kosovo Albanian politicians, coupled with the existing on the ground realities in the south Serb province.
The violence in Kosovo escalated when Tito gave that province autonomy which lasted from 1974-89. The violence came from the Albanian nationalist side. At the time, this was correctly reported in western mass media. You can reference all this at http://www.fair.org By 1988, all of the then Yug republics including a number of key Albanian leaders agreed that Kosovo’s governance had to change.
Fighting ethnic violence is tough. The Serbs were considerably less brutal than what the Turks did to the Kurds over the last quarter of the last century. For that matter, Israel hasn’t always been squeaky clean against the Palestinians.
Unlike Russia (nukes), Turks (NATO membership), Israel (Captial Hill lobbying clout), the Serbs were left open for a hypocritically warped aggression.
Present day Serbia minus Kosovo is multi-etnic and at peace. The repackaged KLA occupied Kosovo isn’t. Allowing Kosovo to be independent is a kowtowing to terrorism and decades of illegal immigration (from Albania into Serbia) and ethnic cleansing campaigns against non-Albanians.
Lurking in all of this is an existing Greater Albania movement which has claims on additional Serb territory as well as land in Montenegro, Greece and Macedonia.
Janusz Bugajski didn’t face these points during a UT panel on the subject which was promoted by JRL. Bugajski has served as a lobbyist for an Albanian nationalist org. The mentioned panel typifies the kind of bias that nurtures the large scale ignorance about the involved subject matter.
That’s Capital Hill and Yugo (misspells).
Once again, some nice sarcasm on the subject in the Sic letters section of http://www.exile.ru
Averko, all you have done is repeat the same arguments you always do, which does nothing to refute the key point of my post that:
[T]he ruling majority have an obligation to protect the lives and general wellbeing of the minority. If the majority fail in this obligation, or embark on a campaign of violent persecution or genocide, then the minority has a right to secede for its own protection and survival.
Newman, all you do is babble bullshit after having your not so knowledgeable views get successfully debunked.
I addressed your repeat autistic line. Terrorism is hard to fight. Reference the Turks with the PKK. The record shows your ducking that and other points.
Turkey wasn’t bombed by NATO for suppressing the Kurds. Turkey wasn’t made to surrender its Kurd inhabited territory.
In retrospect, the Serbs should’ve been supported in their just war against a vile terror wave.
Mainstream Russians familiar with the topic are aware of all this.
You show your ignorance yet again.
Newman, all you do is babble bullshit after having your not so knowledgeable views get successfully debunked.
Yes, this is a typical Averko response: throw insults around and claim victory.
This is why I took issue with your claim that:
you can’t come close to hanging with me on any number of FSU related history, foreign policy, sports and political issues.
On the issue of Kosovo, to name just one, the statement is clearly false.
“Fred: oIo“
Mike or anyone could you please explain to me what this means, I seriously have no clue? Is it an insult or a praise or maybe a neutral and nuanced comment, I’m not that well versed in blog/Internet language, so I really don’t know.
@Tim
that is a very good, brief and accurate account of the West’s reasoning, whether or not one agrees is a different matter. I personally tend to agree. A big problem is that in Serbia, Kosovo is firmly anchored in History and Myth, not in reality, and Serbia has consistently for the last 18 years if not ever since 1912 as this article argues (and be warned it’s from the Bosnian institutes homepage not the most unbiased of sources, but still the article is well argued) failed to come up with a reasonable reality based policy for the majority population that as a matter of unavoidable fact lives in Kosovo (all though in fairness the Serb authorities did try to change that fact).
And one might argue that leading Kosovo Albanian politicians sadly also refuse to seriously confront or even recognize the grave problems facing the remaining Serbs. And if that was not troubling enough, Belgrade also refuse to seriously confront or solve those same problems. The Kosovo Serbs is truly caught up in a very dirty game of politics and myth.
“I think it is appalling that the Serb population of Kosovo is being kicked out of Kosovo and are not offered the protection of the NATO force on the ground” very true, but in fairness, the Serb population is being offered protection of the NATO forces on the ground, that is actually their main occupation these days. That it’s not successful all the time, is another and very tragic matter. And the fact that NATO completely failed to protect the Serbs and Roma population immediately after the bombings is a scandal, and even more so is the fact that the UN did not prosecute or even arrest any Kosovo Albaniens for these atrocities.
@Mike
I have to run run run out the door, but I’ll be back later with a couple of questions for your very interesting(if not original) take on Kosovo and historic “facts”.
Ivanov, I am sorry, could you restate the question about drama and tragedy. You lost me there. The only purpose for the comment about differences betwen drama and tragedy was to note that Putin used “drama” not “tragedy”.
The two words differ in connotation that dictionaries almost never can account for.
Kosovo has been part of Serbia since 1912 and was never an indpendent entity or a part of Albania. Kosovo was also part of ancient Serbia. The demographic shift of Kosovo’s population is the result of decades of anti-Serb ethnic cleansing campigns, illegal immigration from Albania into Kosovo and the high birth rate of Albanians when compared to Serbs.
Some key resent day Kosovo Albanian leaders easily qualify as war criminals as that term has been applied to others. Key present day Serb political leaders don’t qualify as war criminals. Unlike contemporary Serbia minus Kosovo, the former is free of ethnic extreme ethnic tensions.
The ethnic tensions in Kosovo were the result of Albanian nationalist inspirted terror attacks. This was previously communicated and totally ignored by the pious folks second guessing these comments.
Pridnestrovie has by far a better case for independence than Kosovo.
When looked at in its entirety, UN Security Council resolution 1244 isn’t a directive for Kosovo becoming independent.
- It specifically states that Kosovo is a part of Yugoslavia. Serbia is internationally recognized as the successor state to Yugoslavia. In Communist and post Communist Yugoslavia – Kosovo was part of the Serb republic.
- 1244 calls for a return of refugees, as well as of Serb military and government bodies to Kosovo. This has yet to happen.
- In legalese, the 1244 clause about taking into “full consideration” the unsigned Rambouillet diktat isn’t a green light for independence. It simply means that aspects of Rambouillet can perhaps be considered. Prior to the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, the Clinton Administration and Kosovo Albanian nationalists wrote a clause in Rambouillet which would’ve (if signed) permitted Kosovo to vote on independence after three years from the accord’s signing. I specifically recall noted American University law professor Paul Williams bragging about his having written that segment on Geraldo Rivera’s MSNBC cable news show. No one questioned Williams’ objectivity as a then adviser to the Kosovo Albanian nationalist leaders. Madeleine Albright was quoted as having said that Rambouillet was written in a way that was unacceptable to the Serbs. An obvious pretext for starting the war that was to be.
- The “final outcome” status for Kosovo is stated towards the end of 1244. It relates to how Kosovo should be governed as a part of Serbia. What other logical way can be otherwise suggested when the very same document recognizes Kosovo as part of Serbia, while stating that refugees, Serb government and military bodies should all return to that province?
Bill Clinton’s UN Ambassador Richard Holbrooke leads a pack of Democratic Party affiliated foreign policy politicos advocating Kosovo independence (in turn, the neocon wing of the Republican Party has taken the same stance). They argue how Kosovo will become more violent if independence isn’t granted. Is this rational not a blueprint for encouraging violence elsewhere by effectively saying that peaceful means will not get the same consideration? Why should independence be granted to a group threatening violence? Isn’t such an acquiesce a support for law of the jungle principles?
and I’m back – with brand new shoes with fancy red laces, so Mike
“The repackaged KLA occupied Kosovo isn’t (at peace).“
I guess this is a question of how you define peace. When I was there in September peace, albeit not the best of such, seemed to be dominant. Yes some empty cars were blown up(UN or Kosovo Albanian cars, not Serb) and yes the small kids threw stones at our small bus when we left the Decani monastery after a meeting with father Sava, and yes that same monastery was not that long ago hit by some explosive device and lets not forget the hand grenade thrown at that Serbian cafe in Mitrovica. But in a Balkan context this is pretty damn close to peace – after all Dejan Anastasijevic had his bedroom in Belgrade blown up last month, and you said yourself Serbia is an image of peace. So what do you mean by peace?
And even if we agree that Kosovo is not at peace, which way does that lead the argument, what are we supposed to conclude from that? Does it follow from “peace in Serbia – not peace in Kosovo”, that Kosovo should be reintegrated into Serbia, because that would bring peace to Kosovo?
And what in the name of god do you mean by KLA occupied? NATO or UN occupied would at least make some sense.
“The violence in Kosovo escalated when Tito gave that province autonomy which lasted from 1974-89. The violence came from the Albanian nationalist side. At the time, this was correctly reported in western mass media.“
Usually the claim is that violence escalated from around 1981. And still the amount of that violence is disputed, SANU (surprise surprise) made a very sinister report, and a report by the so called Independent Commission, created by the authorities (i think) concluded that incidents of inter-ethnic violence was very rare, that in fact the level of violent crime as such was far lower in Kosovo than any other region. Off course all numbers are difficult and disputed, and there seem little reason to doubt that is was not nearly as much fun being a Serb in Kosovo after 1974 and especially after 1981 as it had been before. And yes it’s clear that Serbs in Kosovo had legitimate concerns in the 1980ies. But again was Slobo’s reaction reasonable or constructive, was there any chance that it would make that part of the world better of or in the long run ease the tensions in the province? Was a puppet administration in Kosovo, a virtual military occupation, and the violent persecution and harassment, blackmail and blatant robbery of Albanians by security forces and police really the way to go? Was firing all Albanians from positions of responsibility including a lot of teachers and doctors, the random firing of Albanian workers as such and the closing of all Albanian language media really a reasonable and constructive response?
“and decades of illegal immigration (from Albania into Serbia)” could you please give a reference for that.
Most people seem to believe that the rapid growth in the Kosovo-Albanian population was caused by a very high birth rate, but maybe you’re talking about the 1389 – 1912 illegal immigration?
“By 1988, all of the then Yug republics including a number of key Albanian leaders agreed that Kosovo’s governance had to change.” Please, a reference for that claim would be very nice indeed. I actually think, that if you can prove or just make it plausible that your claim is true, your journalistic or maybe even academic career would get a boost, because that is quite the sensation.
Usually the claim is somewhere along the lines of the conservative hardcores in the Serb communist party under the leadership of Slobo would very much like a change in the Kosovo leadership – and in Vojvodina and Montenegro basically giving Slobo half the votes in the federal council. Here the stage managed nationalist rallies under the banner of the “anti bureaucratic movement” and the “national happenings” or whatever it was called played a central role. And all that scared the rest of the republics – Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia – shitless, and in that way contributed to the break up of Yugoslavia.
And now I did it again, spammed this nice russia blog with endless talk about the Balkans, but it’s just because I wan’t to be in on the writing fun too, and clearly I can’t contribute anything when the subject is Russia(but I do learn a lot), so when Mike begins with his Balkan stuff I just can’t help myself.
Serbs can’t peacefully live in much of Kosovo. In Kosovo, it’s unwise to speak Serb as a slain Bulgarian tragically found out. The Great Albania issue is at play as well.
I don’t believe in rewarding vile nationalist movements with independence for the goal of pacifying them. Such advocacy can only serve to encourage such behavior elsewhere.
Fred is omitting key factors that go against his pro-Kosovo separatist agenda. Contrary to what he states, the violence during the autonomy years was greater than before that status was granted. I once again cite the section detailing this at http://www.fair.org
Once gain, let’s compare Serb actions in Kosovo to what the NATO member Turkey did to the Kurds of eastern Turkey. The hypocrisy on this reeks big time.
In point of fact the Kosovo-Albania border has been frequently violated over the decades with many illegal migrants leaving Albania for better opportunities in Kosovo. During WW II and after, Albanian nationalist violence against non-Albanians is a reality as well. BTW, many Albanians live in non-Kosovo areas of Serbia. They do so in relative peace with the Serb majority.
Albanian language schools weren’t closed during the Milosevic years. ITN or either the BBC (forget which offhand) did a feature showing how in the late 19 nineties state funded Kosovo schools had a bilingual makeup, with the involved Serb and Albanian teachers periodically meeting to work on coordinating matters. Albanians en masse took their kids out of the state funded schools because those institutions weren’t teaching dubious (put mildly) things like Aristotle being Albanian. Many Kosovo Albanians were intimidated by their nationalist brethren to not work in the government structures.
It’s absurd to suggest that Serbia primarily influenced the Yugo breakup in the manner that Fred suggests. Tudjman, Izetbegovic and Kucan had clearly stated separatist agendas prior to Fred’s subjective interpretation of what Serbia did during the time of the breakup. Izetbegovic with his Islamic declaration and Tudjman with his professorial writings glorifying the Ustashe regime. Tito gave Voyvodina and Kosovo the kind of “autonomy” status he didn’t do for Serb inhabited Krajina in Croatia’s Communist drawn boundaries. The Slovenes started their war against Yugoslavia which was an attack on others besides Serbia (Macedonian soldiers in the JNA were killed in that war). None other than the not so Serb friendly Warren Zimmerman acknowledges this in his book. In Bosnia and Croatia, the nationalist regimes in those republics provoked conflict as well.
damn you cross posting,
but clearly the pious folks(is that really me, how cool, I never was pious before in my life) were not ignoring it, just being painfully slow.
“When looked at in its entirety, UN Security Council resolution 1244 isn’t a directive for Kosovo becoming independent. Not even when looked at in small bits and pieces, did anyone claim that it was? But stop bitching about 1244, if UNSC can make 1244 they can make 1245(if you understand) as well. The point is that we need a solution, we need to move on, the situation in Kosovo now is not durable.
“Key present day Serb political leaders don’t qualify as war criminals” Well that depends, isn’t Vojislav Šešelj still the head of SRS? And it must count for something that the biggest party in Serbia had ethnic cleansing of Kosovo as official party policy through the 90ies?
“Prior to the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, the Clinton Administration and Kosovo Albanian nationalists wrote a clause in Rambouillet” you don’t say so, prior to the bombings, let me get this straight, stuff were written into the Rambouillet prior to the bombings now that is news to me.
“Why should independence be granted to a group threatening violence?” Now which group are you referring to here, the text above seem to imply that it would be Richard Holbrooke and the pack of Democratic Party affiliated foreign policy politicos and the neocon wing of the Republican Party, since they are the only group you mention that argues that Kosovo will become more violent if independence isn’t granted.
“Isn’t such an acquiesce a support for law of the jungle principles?” One could say that it is a support for a conflict resolution based in reality. We’re talking 2 million armed people that with good reason really really does not like or trust the Serb authorities. And please donøt forget, the Serb authorities does not like or trust these 2 million people either, you know they did try to make them leave for 10 years.
Please tell, would Serbia like a block of 2 million dedicated Albanian voters in their next election? Considering voter turnout in Serbia they could get quite the impact. 6,652,105 were eligible to vote and 4,033,586 did actually vote and SRS got around 1,1 mill. in the last parliamentary election, and Tadic was elected president with ca 1,5 mill. votes, 2 mill young albanians could really shake things up. Would Serbs like the very numerous Albanian youth in their Serbian army? In the police? In government?
And please remember, that if you post now and I don’t answer, my humble pious self is not ignoring you, it’s just sleeping.
UNSC 1245 contradicting 1244 doesn’t exist and the right way to move on isn’t by rewarding a vile nationalist movement based on ethnic cleansing. This sets a bad precedent. I see there’s no denying that Pridnestrovie has a much better case for independence.
Seselj is at the Hague. In a fair world, Thaci, Ceku and Haridinaj should be there as well. Quote what you claim of the Radical Party in the early 19 nineties as official policy. What about all those Greater Albania maps?
The Rambouillet “agreement,” or clause, or however one wants to term it was written with the Clinton Admin and Kosovo Albanian leadership going over it before the Serbs arrived at Rambouillet to negotiate. Instead of having talks, the Serbs were essentially told to sign a pro-Albanian nationalist diktat or be bombed. On that point, Albright was quoted as saying that the bar had been intentionally lifted against the Serbs. The earlier mentioned Paul Williams openly acknowledged his working for the Kosvo Albania leadership and writing the Rambouillet agreement clause that would’ve given Kosovo independence.
Sorry some people have problems with comprehension. For reasons stated, Holbrooke seeks to reward the vile acts of the Kosovo Albanian nationalists, while hypocritically denying Pridnestriovie’s greater case to independence.
The wording that Albanians were made to leave Kosovo by the Serbs is subjectively wrong. Many stayed during the conflict, which created the leaving. The conflict having been started becuase a bunch of vile separatists resorted to terrorism as a political weapon. Some Albanians were bullied into going along with the nationalists. Others were killed as “collaborators”. Again, you duck the matter of the NATO member Turkish actions against the Kurds. Serbia over time would’ve likely ended the Albanian nationalist terror wave in the same manner that the Turks eventually neutralized the PKK. Turkey bombed PKK strongholds in western Iraq. Imagine the world community allowing then Yugoslavia (Serbia the successor state) to bomb Albanian nationalist terror bases in northern Albania. It’s not too late for the world community to rally on doing the right thing. Of recent note, the EU has advised the Kosovo Albanians to not declare independence without UN support. Kudos to Russia and others for staying firm on a sane Kosovo policy.
Serbia has reasonably offered their south province great autonomy. The matter of which address your last points.
I didn’t know that Judo was so popular among Albanians
))
About translation issue.
Cyrril. You should well know that direct traslation is most stupid way to translate anything. And even the best translation converts one language to another not in full.
So I think, Putin also kept this in mind and avoided the word ????????. Instead he used more “neutral” ?????. But together with ?????????? such drama can be translated as tragedy.
Before you start looking into dictionaries – read this.
1. Many people saw the collapse of CCCP as comedy and/or victory.
2. The 9/11 catastrophy and collapse of two towers are drama or tragedy?
3. ????????? is not sandwich. Or is it?
My point is that Michael (who doesn’t know Russian) was not that wrong by saying “tragedy” …
About NATO, Germany and the West.
What the h…is this “WEST”?
In 1812 Russia saved East (germany) from West (france).
In 20th centure Russia was crashing East (germany) to help save West (france).
And in both cases Russia struggle with someone in the West … ((
And what about Japan – is it East or West?
As to NATO “peace” treaty and Germany. As I recall both Germany and Japan were prohibited to have armed forces after WWII. So idea that NATO purpose was to keep Germany “down” looks strange to me.
)
And yes, NATO was the threat to Soviet block. You can call it as shield if you wish, but it doesn’t change anything. Friends don’t need shields, do they?
And you should not have any objection when some one sharpen his sword a little in responce to another one enlarging his (he-he not penis) shield, right? Simply shield and sword all always come together.
You want shield interseptors – don’t complain that few Stillets will be reserved for you
It’s politics whether someone likes it or not. He can argue and accuse rain with same effect.
Sorry to be responding to things after a couple of days, but I guess I just can’t hang with the fast pace of debate here at SRB.
Owen:
I did, starting from my first day of arrival. I was trying to find an apartment, and I asked some kids which entrance it was in. Their answer, in Romanian, “you’re in Moldova, speak Romanian.” I have a wide range of friends in Moldova, from NGO workers to villagers, and the language issue is still very much alive. If a person didn’t know me and assumed I was Russian, I was sometimes treated rudely. If they knew my background, people would often rather speak English with me than Russian. That said, there are villages in Moldova where Romanian is not spoken, and schools are conducted in Russian and local languages (Gagauz, Bulgarian, Ukrainian, etc.) However, everyday life in Moldova is easier for a Russian speaker, than in Transnistria for a Moldovan speaker.
Fair enough, one’s mileage may vary. My longest time spent there was way back in ’99, and I’m basing my statements mostly on time spent in cities (principally Chisinau & Balti, but also Comrat, Soroca and others). The people I interacted with most closely were non-English-speakers who knew I was American, so maybe that’s why they were happy to speak Russian with me. But in general, speaking Russian in cities, even in stores, marshrutki, restaurants (and especially in taxis, which in Chisinau seem to be nearly monopolized by Russophones who, at least a few years ago, would still refer to street-names like “Soviet Army Boulevard”), etc., I encountered no hostility – yes, sometimes a pause before the person answered in Russian, but nothing like what one gets when one uses Russian in Tbilisi or in Tallinn.
I’ve certainly encountered Romania-oriented Moldovans in the US and in Chisinau who know English and prefer to use it over Russian, but my experience is that regular people in Moldova don’t politicize the use of Russian as much as in some other post-Soviet countries, and some educated Moldovans recognize the value of knowing Russian as well as Romanian and English. Perhaps things have changed in Moldova over the years, though, and the younger generation is now less receptive to strangers addressing them in Russian. I’ve been back there every year since ’99, but mostly for brief visits, and in recent years I generally try to speak Romanian with people. And as long as you make an effort to do that, people certainly don’t mind if you forget a word and lapse into Russian.
the language issue is still very much alive.
Without a doubt, just as it is in any bilingual country, especially where there’s a post-colonial element to the language situation.
Aren’t there Moldovan parliamentary deputies who still address the parliament in Russian? If I recall correctly, it was only in the last year or so that some of the more nationalist members of parliament demanded that they either use a translator or learn Romanian, but I’m basing this on a couple of clips I saw on youtube, so it may not be a comprehensive account.
Mike:
As an aside, did you notice that Russia Blog no longer links to your “Lying about Russia” page? I guess you should be even more grateful to me, since my blog still has a link to your little page of musings.
Also, by way of promoting your analysis, here’s a proper link to the piece you keep talking up about Galicia. And here’s another example of your analysis which I think regular readers of Sean’s blog will appreciate.
And if you’ll humor me, Mike, can I ask you a random question? What does Kino mean to you?
The language situation in the PMR is far better than Estonia and Latvia. As for prior restrictions, I’m not excusing it. It probably had something to do with many favoring that script taking an extreme line which played a great role in the war of the early 19 nineties when nationalists from Moldova entered into the PMR.
What’s funny is that they had a war to protect their right to use Russian, but Russians in non-PMR Moldova continue to use Russian and live just fine without learning Moldovan. So it’s pretty clear that the hysteria about “Romanian fascists” which fueled the Transnistrian secession attempt was overblown. I have no doubt that someone in Chisinau said to some Russian “chemodan, vokzal, rossiia” (if you even know what that means, Mike), and perhaps it was even chanted on a mass level, but get over it – that was 15 years ago.
Offhand…your border point issue doesn’t seem too specific. How great the disagreement and what’s at specific issue?
The dispute involved farmers who live in a Moldovan-controlled village called Dorotcaia (Dorotskaia) near the “border” with the PMR and farm lands which the PMR considers to be on its territory. Here is the most comprehensive account I was able to find online, including a photo of one of the confrontational moments. Ethnic cleansing it’s not, to be sure, and it may be economically motivated (I guess privatizing several major assets within Transnistria didn’t provide the Tiraspol “government” with enough money – Owen is absolutely right that the dispute has dragged on because at least some elites on all sides manage to profit from it), but simple people are suffering and protesting.
The absurd articles to which you provided links prove nothing, except that people are some quite adept at writing humorous fiction based on one unsubstantiated quote from a local official about “99.5% of high-level officials” (what that means exactly is unspecified) and then elaborating on it for dramatic effect. I’m happy to give your friends at the Tiraspol Times traffic to those particular articles, because they are so ridiculous as to speak for themselves.
Valeri Klimenko, a Chisinau council man, has had no luck with getting this published in the Moldovan press or even in English.
Very hard for me to believe that he can’t get published in the local press, given that much of it is published in Russian (for example, the Chisinau version of Komsomolskaia Pravda, which has plenty of space for local stories).
Then there’s the just elected Mayor of Chisinau Dorin Chirtoaca who made a career out of Russia-bashing. A professional Russophobe, he used the anti-Russia card to get ahead in politics and reach the mayoralty at the tender age of just 29.
He began campaigning for anti-Russian groups in 2001 (age 23) and entered politics in 2005. He is best known for a very loud, very public campaign aiming at suppressing the use of the Russian language in local media.
I don’t know much about the Chisinau mayor, but as far as I recall (and things may have changed) Russian is at least equal to Romanian and perhaps surpasses it in prominence on radio and TV in Moldova. Asking for there to be programming in the local language is hardly “suppression.”
Dmitry Babich reminded me of something I didn’t raise:
[n.b., here's a link to the Babich article Mike is quoting]
“The governments of Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and the Baltic states refused to give Russian the status of a second state language or even of a so-called official language, which can be used in the public sphere. In these countries, Russian is taught as one of several foreign languages, and schools tend to encourage students to study English instead of Russian.”
I doubt Babich has researched this in Moldova, or else he’d know that there are Russian-language schools there. I believe Russian has the status of the “language of interethnic communication” in Moldova, but beyond legal status, just look for example at the Moldovan government’s website – rendered completely in Russian. Doesn’t that tell you that Russophones are accepted there?
Chris:
You’re kidding, right?
I have never seen more panhandlers in my life than in Riga. I was amazed.
I guess it’s the price they pay for having freedom of movement and freedom to beg (for lack of a better term). What would really amaze you is the amount of panhandling that would take place in downtown Moscow if it wasn’t all tightly controlled by organized crime and the city government. I’m sure you know that Luzhkov engaged in a coordinated campaign to “cleanse” the downtown streets of bomzhi (not to mention stray dogs and streetwalkers).
Come to think of it, wasn’t one of the reasons for the foundation of NATO to “keep the Germans down”?
You are on point with that one (as is frederik’s follow-up). Here’s a source for the classic quote about it:
At the start of the Cold War, the standard short answer to the question “Why NATO?” was: “To keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down.”
Didn’t the Soviets offer to let the Germanies be united a long time ago, provided they be neutral?
Are you kidding? I don’t believe that for a second (though perhaps I am ignorant of some major event in German history, I don’t exclude that possibility). How would “neutrality” have been guaranteed during the cold war? You’re going to believe the memoirs of Beria’s son on this point (instructive, I’m sure, about many things, but since taking credit for achievements that happened later is a classic flaw of memoirs, I wouldn’t put too much stock in the “we would have reunified them” thing).
However Russians are a lot more tolerant of Islam.
Are you kidding (again)? I had a good friend who is a Muslim tell me about he and his friends being harrassed and called “churki” (a rather offensive term, as you probably know) by Moscow’s finest (by which I sarcastically mean the mentura), who detained them until they produced a hefty bribe, even thought their “papers” were in order. I know that mosques have been built on the outskirts of Moscow recently, but I’m not convinced (and I do understand that it’s complicated in the same way that America’s dealing with immigrants from its south is complicated).
Gee … this certainly has all the makings of an endless, rambling debate.
Perhaps you boys would like to ?????? ????? … settle this like real men?
“??????” tactics also might work
)
Leave it to Lyndon to come up with the mischievous asshole remarks in an obvious effort to drive attention away from the issues being discussed.
Moldova, Latvia and Estonia are more restrictive on language rights than Pridnestrovie. Lyndon doesn’t seem to deny that Moldovan is the only official language in Moldova whereas the PMR has three.
On the subject of the non-discussion related issue he raised: I see that Russia Blog took down Lavelle’s blog and some others as well. That has nothing to do with the points raised here. But that’s Lyndon for you. The GUT International Lying About Russia thread he mentions recently busted someone for making a bogus claim about a Russian law. GUT forums aren’t as popular as they once were. Despite a $4 million a year budget, Russia Profiles’s two attempts at forums were duds.
I’m sure Lyndon can’t be too happy about what a leading Romanian bishop said about how Pridnestroive should be considered separate from Moldova
http://tiraspoltimes.com
Wally, I sense that I’d do quite well in a ring with this lot.
Ivanov, I think you are confusing two different issues.
“Cyrril. You should well know that direct traslation is most stupid way to translate anything.”
There is no such thing as direct translation. There are however words that have very similar meanings and similar connotations. In case of drama and tragedy, both words in both languages exhibit respectively very similar sets of meanings and connotations, that also distinguish these two words from each other. In my professional opinion substituting one for another is not appropriate. Your mileage might vary depending on many factors. Some of them are probably not language related at all.
If you read the beginning of this particular conversation, the claim Mike was making that Putin had only referred to the fall of the USSR as being tragic in the way it happened. My contention based on the language he used was to the contrary – he actually said both: that it was a geopolitical catastrophe (Kremlin’s official translation as disaster is quite acceptable as well)and then he proceeded to refer to the drama it turned into for Russian nation/people.
I really could care less whether he used drama or tragedy. I personally would not use drama because of extra connotations the word has. To me using tragedy would be more neutral and would carry more weight, that the Kremlin official translation seems to agree with.
You have lost me again with the sandwich question. ????????? does not have a meaning of bread and butter, but regardless, it is not a sandwich. If you want to convey the meaning of a traditional Russian ?????????, using “open face sandwich” would be an appropriate translation.
Cyrill, for clarity sake, I was referring to other comments Putin made on the subject in conjunction with that one.
You might be interested in seeing what Putin has recently said about the Soviet past. It’s in the headlines segment to the right of Sean’s blog.
With obvious intent, the worst botched up translation of a world leaders comments might be Milosevic’s 1989 Kosovo Polje speach. English language mass media at large stated or suggested that he supported ethnic division in a violent way.
In point of fact, he lauded Yugoslavia’s ideal of multi-ethnic tolerance while warning of the nationalist elements threatening it. There was reference in his address about the need to combat such ethnic intolerance.
“I didn’t know that Judo was so popular among Albanians
))” Well yes, it’s a little know fact about Albanians, actually Albanian historians has shown that Judo was invented by an Albanian;) No seriously you’re comment is noted, and I promise, this is my last long rambling on this subject in this thread with a very different subject indeed – so I’ll make it extra long just for the heck of it, feel free to ignore it.
And so we meet again Mike
“Contrary to what he states, the violence during the autonomy years was greater than before that status was granted“
Yes off course you’re right, most of the time before 1974 was the wonderful years of Rankovic rule in Kosovo, the shangrila of ethnic majorities. And that’s why I never stated anything contrary to that, what I stated was:”Usually the claim is that violence escalated from around 1981” and after some nitpicking about the difficulties of “historical facts” I said “there seem little reason to doubt that is was not nearly as much fun being a Serb in Kosovo after 1974 and especially after 1981 as it had been before. And yes it’s clear that Serbs in Kosovo had legitimate concerns in the 1980ies.“
“It’s absurd to suggest that Serbia primarily influenced the Yugo breakup in the manner that Fred suggest” I’m not sure I suggested it was primarily in that manner. My point about this was, that NO the other republic leaderships did not want a change in the Kosovo leadership as stated by you(and definitely not the Slobo puppet regime that was the result). The way I think it influenced the break up, was to push moderates and mild yugoslavist in Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia and in part in Bosnia, into the arms of men like Tudjman – not Itzebegovic, please read his islamic declaration again, anyway it’s irrelevant. There is nothing in the sources suggesting that Bosnia wanted out of Yugoslavia before the very last moment, when it was clear that Yugo would be made up of a Greater Serbia and whatever leftovers that didn’t manage to get away. And with god reason, the ethnic and political makeup of Bosnia made Yugo a very attractive arrangement for Bosnia.
“The Slovenes started their war against Yugoslavia” oooh please…
“Seselj is at the Hague.” Indeed he is, and he’s still the leader of SRS, doesn’t that say something about that party?
“ In a fair world, Thaci, Ceku and Haridinaj should be there as well.” Funny you should say that, Ramush Haradinaj is indeed in Hague, read all about it here, did the world become just a little bit more fair in this second?
“Quote what you claim of the Radical Party in the early 19 nineties as official policy” Well okay then, here goes
“PROGRAMME DECLARATION OF THE SERB RADICAL PARTY
The suppression of the Albanian separatist insurgence in Kosovo and Metohija by all available means, and in order to the relapse of that insurgence impossible, we are pledged to an immediate implementation of the following measures
- to expel without delay all 360 thousand Albanian emigrants and their descendants,(what exactly is meant by this is not quite sure)
- to prevent any state financial subsidies of the Albanian national minority, and to divert the funds formerly allotted for the purpose, to the exclusive financing of the Serb return to Kosovo and Metohija,
- to proclaim the state of war in Kosovo and Metohija and institute military government for not less than ten years,
- to immediately disband the local agencies of civilian authority and institutions financed from the state budget, which operate in the Albanian language, such as the University, The Academy of Sciences and Arts, book and newspaper publishers and the like,
-all Shiptars, who hold Serbian citizenship and reside abroad, acting from separatist positions there, must be immediately deprived of the Serbian citizenship and forbidden to return,
- all Shiptar social benefits, notably those stimulating an excessive birth rate, must be abolished immediately,“
It’s a heavely edited highlight, read more here (and yes that IS a biased homepage with an agenda, but I’m pretty sure this text is the real thing), clicking the link will give you the additional pleasure of reading the SRS take on what constitutes Serbia proper.
“What about all those Greater Albania maps? What about them, I don’t like them either.
Regarding Rambouillet(damn that’s difficult to spell), we just don’t have the same view on that process. I’ll see if i can access an online article about it, and honestly(no sarcasm this time) I would be very interested if you could provide me a good source for your view, since I’m sure we can both agree that it’s a hotly contested subject. In very short and rough terms my view is that Slobo’s delegation did not go in good faith, and that Slobo tried to call NATO’s bluff and failed, because NATO wasn’t bluffing anymore, but I’m truly ready to be convinced otherwise.
“In point of fact, he lauded Yugoslavia’s ideal of multi-ethnic tolerance while warning of the nationalist elements threatening it. There was reference in his address about the need to combat such ethnic intolerance.” oooh Mike I really don’t know what to say, other than I guess the SANU Memorandum also was describing multi-ethnic paradise, because parts of it, without context, can actually be read that way.
All in all, I cannot for the life of me, understand why you try to defend men like Slobo and Sesjel, men that truly fucked the Serbs in a cynical game of politics, it leads me to believe that you don’t really care about the actual Serbs.
“Serbia has reasonably offered their south province great autonomy. The matter of which address your last points.” I agree – a bit – but the thing is, that the Kosovo Albanians has absolutely no reason to trust the good intentions of the Serb authorities, one thing is history, another thing is that SRS, with the above quoted policy(they might have changed it though, I’m not sure about that) is the biggest party in Serbia.
I don’t think I have any separatist agenda, I dont like nationalism, since it my view it leads to politics based on the past, and not on the present and the future. But true, I just don’t see “less than independence” as a viable solution, and that goes for the Kosovo Serbs as well. I truly believe that their best chance of a peaceful life in Kosovo is in an independent Kosovo, under heavy heavy international supervision and with a radical and more serious change in minority policy from Kosovo-Albanian politicians and authorities. Because yes you are very right when stating, that “Serbs can’t peacefully live in much of Kosovo. In Kosovo, it’s unwise to speak Serb” and that truly is tragic, I just don’t see Serb politicians seriously trying to solve that problem either. Kosovo is Myth, History and “domestic” policy to those people, not a problem to be solved, but a problem to be utilized.
And now get back to talking judo and Russia.
All the best
Frederik
Some reading material for Fred:
Moscow Belgrade, Call US Bluff
http://www.antiwar.com
Excerpt (the rest of the article is a spot on read as well):
“But it wasn’t Slobodan Milosevic who went to war with NATO – it was the other way around! As for the ‘atrocities,’ the Empire has not managed to produce a single shred of evidence that any of them actually took place, even after eight years of NATO occupation. Meanwhile, Albanian atrocities against Serbs, Roma, Turks and other Albanians have taken place under the very noses of NATO peacekeepers’ and are documented in detail.
The UPI report quoting Fried’s drivel framed the possibility of ‘ethnic violence’ in Kosovo as an expected result of Serb desires for Kosovo to remain a part of greater Serbia’ (sic!) or attempt partition. In fact, it is the Albanian separatists threatening violence against both Serbs and the UN/NATO occupiers, if they do not get their way. ‘Violence is not acceptable and KFOR will deal with it,’ UPI quotes Fried as saying.
Just as they ‘dealt with it’ in 2004?
One has to commend the Department of State for efficiency, however, for putting such arrogance and stupidity in the same package.”
No Fred, in ’88, there was a consensus to have the situation in Kosovo changed because of the violence caused by Albanian nationalists.
Putting aside your TOL Steady State sarcasm like tactics, you offer nothing to substantively contradict how the Slovenes started the mentioned war.
Thaci and Ceku still roam and the other fellow was allowed a leave that no indicted Serbs to my knowledge have had.
Thank you, I read Izetbegovic’s Islamic Declaration which is extreme religious chauvinism and a blueprint for ethnic cleansing. His excuse for leaving Yugo was based on the Slovene and Croat nationalists getting out of it. That’s not Serbia’s fault. If you truly believe in a nation, you stay in it. Izetbegovic’s 1970 Islamic Declaration called for a Muslim statre. He NEVER recanted that work.
As for that radical party bit you cited, how does it differ from say Buchanan’s views on illegal immigration in the US? How would he and many other Americans reply to the kind of terrorism perpetuated in their nation by folks from Albania or anywhere outside the US like Thaci?
My comments about Rambouillet as a diktat is a plain matter of fact.
Understand something Fred (I can just imagine who employs you), I was never fond of Milosevic or Seselj. Serbs en masse protested against the former when Holbrooke briefly made nice with him. Meantime, in the comparative sense, there was noticeably little Croat opposition to Tudjman. Fikrat Abdic, a secular Bosnian Muslim leader actually out polled the Muslim fundamentalist Handzjar (WW II SS vet) Izetbegovic for the Bosnian Muslim presidency. Because of the constitutional makeup (having to do with each parties existing parliamentary representation), Abdic didn’t become president. Muslims like him opposed Izetbegovic. While not being a supporter of Milosevic or Sesselj, I nevertheless believe in being fair in assessing what they did and didn’t do.
Your stated views are Sorosian. You shun nationalism, while being soft on the Albanian nationalist brand because you (reading your mind which is perhaps wrong of me) see it as an offset to a greater national consciousness. One which you clearly show no respect or sympathy for. You see this as reasoned, while others don’t. I know for sure that you don’t speak as a lone voice.
Serbia minus Kosovo is a pretty multi-ethnic place that’s relatively (especially by former Yugo standards) tolerant. The same can’t be said of Kosovo and G-d forbid if that province suddenly became independent with a withdrawal of foreign forces from it (not that the existing force has done a great job at creating a more stable situation there).
I note how you don’t want to go near the references to the two faced hypocrisy regarding what Turkey did to the Kurds. Far worse than what the Serbs could ever be legitimately accused of doing to the Albanians. But then again, Turkey is the portrayed NATO member “Muslim democracy”. As Kirill Pankratov recently noted, Slavic Orthodox Christian backgrounded folks don’t get the same preferential treatment at some key Western venues. Are you away of the bigoted remarks Holbrooke made on the subject? As for what the Serbs did: they were fighting a vile nationalist movement. With international support, they would’ve no doubt eventually won out. Turkey stabilized their Kurdish issue and the Russians have done likewise in Chechnya.
Another related comparative politics reference which you haven’t touched has to do with Pridnestrovie’s greater claim to independence. This is the hypocrisy not being busted on: if you’re Russocentric and have a great case for independence, you will be shunned unlike some other non-Russocentric areas having a weaker independence claim.
Like I said, it’s not too late for the international community to do the right thing, which isn’t grant Kosovo independence. I can see a possible partition which of course would create problems as well. The idea behind that being to give something more agreeable enough to both parties as opposed top one side being completely against.
I know I promised to stay away from Balkan matters, and I really think I’m not breaking that promise here, since there really isn’t any matter left in this “discussion”, it’s pure selfish fun now.
“I can just imagine who employs you” Are you really sure that you want to bring up the whole employment thing? But please, i’m curious, what do you imagine?
“Your stated views are Sorosian hihihi is it an -ism yet?
“reading your mind which is perhaps wrong of me” no no please continue, I get a wonderful tinkling sensation when you do.
“My comments about Rambouillet as a diktat is a plain matter of fact.” Yes I know that your comment is a matter of fact, it can be read in an earlier comment, but it was the Rambouillet process itself that I meant was a contested topic, and please don’t do antiwar.org references when I ask for good sources. It does not need to be online, give me a title of a book or an article supporting you’re view and i’ll find it myself, because I am truly and sincerely interested in knowing more about Rambouillet.
“ greater national consciousness. One which you clearly show no respect or sympathy for.” amazing, you’re actually spot on, I’m not happy about greater national consciousness’s as such, I guess that, along with my piousness, is a cross I have to bear.
“I note how you don’t want to go near the references to the two faced hypocrisy regarding what Turkey did to the Kurds.” So true, one, I don’t know much about it, and second I fail to see the relevance and third and most important in my opinion comparisons if not done very carefully tend to obscure rather than clarify matters. Yes comparative approaches can be very enlightening if done right, but I still need to see an Internet discussion where it clarified anything(ok that’s pushing it, but honestly it’s usually not very helpful)
“Another related comparative politics reference which you haven’t touched has to do with Pridnestrovie’s greater claim to independence.” a very good case in point, didn’t you start by talking about this? And I must admit, I know next to nothing about that subject(and live a happy life that way), that is why I don’t comment on it, I prefer reading and learning when I don’t know anything, a strategy you might consider trying once in the future.
“Turkey is the portrayed NATO member “Muslim democracy”… Slavic Orthodox Christian backgrounded folks don’t get the same preferential treatment at some key Western venues.” So true, in Europe we really have a problem with prejudices, discrimination and even outright racism against Slavic Orthodox Christian backgrounded folks, I think we all remember Pim Fortuyn, Jean Marie Le Pen and Haiders anti-Slavic Orthodox Christian backgrounded folks rethoric, and in Denmark it’s really at hot topic as well, the success of the third biggest party in the Danish parliament is mainly built on a right-wing populist anti-Slavic Orthodox Christian backgrounded folks platform;-)
“I can see a possible partition which of course would create problems as well.” True and true, among many other the main problems being Kosovo Serbs south of the Ibar and “Albanians” in the Presovo Vally, and how in hell it’s going to be achieved.
All the best
Frederik
No Fred, you should come clean. Do you deny having Soros like views?
Antiwar.com is an excellent source. Do you believe the likes of Noel Malcolm and Stephen Schwartz to be better? Ron Hatchett, Paul Williams, Srdja Trifkovic, Ben Works, James Bissette (pardon any misspelling) among others will confirm what I’ve said about Rambouillet.
I’m starting to take back my somewhat compliment of you at the opening. That you aren’t aware of Rambouillet and what the Turks did to the Kurds show that you aren’t knowledgeable enough to fully understand my position. On the other hand, I fully understand yours.
“Are you kidding (again)? I had a good friend who is a Muslim tell me about he and his friends being harrassed and called “churki” (a rather offensive term, as you probably know) by Moscow’s finest (by which I sarcastically mean the mentura), who detained them until they produced a hefty bribe, even thought their “papers” were in order. I know that mosques have been built on the outskirts of Moscow recently, but I’m not convinced (and I do understand that it’s complicated in the same way that America’s dealing with immigrants from its south is complicated).”
Definitely it’s more toleratent of Islam. Not a whole lot of people in Russia are talking about “Islamofascism” and calling to nuke Mecca. Not to mention all the mixed Muslim/non-Muslim marriages. E.g. my ex-girlfriend’s mom is Russian Orthodox and her dad is Muslim. The bar I used to hang out with in Lyublino has a Muslim hostess and Muslim head waitress (one Tatar and one Uzbek/Tatar), both wearing their midriff shirts and acting identically to their non-Muslim coworkers, with whom they get on famously.
Go to Tatarstan and see.
”Definitely it’s more toleratent of Islam.”
Its absolutely true, and I’d go even further – Russians take no notice of them at all really, and the racist graffiti one sometimes sees on the metro like ‘cherniye zhopi iz Moskvyu’ is aimed at Georgians and southerners in general, rather than Muslims. That said, Muslims do not discommode the Russians; you dont see them on Russian tv complaining continuously about everything like you do on British tv – I think they know if they became troublesome, the Russians wouldnt be very PC in dealing with it. In fact, the only intolerant grumbling I hear really is against Ukrainians, whom most Russians seem to consider a pain in the arse, and to a lesser extent Americans, which is the old superpower divide.
I would say the relationship between the RO Church and Russian Islam is a bit like that between the Protestant and Catholic churches in the US — there is a little tension, but they see eye to eye 90% of the time.
Did you know that Tatarstan produces a brand of vodka? In deference to the republic’s titular nationality, the lable is green. Or so I’ve been told.
@ frederik
“Fred: oIo” Mike or anyone could you please explain to me what this means, I seriously have no clue?
Here
“No Fred, you should come clean. Do you deny having Soros like views?“ Hihihi your obsession with Soros is fascinating, alas I do not share it, so I really can’t say for sure. But true, I think there are worse and more evil people in the great world conspiracy than him.
“Antiwar.com is an excellent source. Do you believe the likes of Noel Malcolm and Stephen Schwartz to be better?” Don’t really know Stephen Schwartz, but yes damn right I think the likes of Noel Malcolm is better than antiwar, but please note I don’t find Malcom fantastic or anything, that is not at all necessary to be better than antiwar.com on the Balkans.
“I’m starting to take back my somewhat compliment of you at the opening.” So sorry where was that, I’m a sucker for compliments, even if they are only somewhat such, so I’m very sorry if I missed one.
“That you aren’t aware of Rambouillet and what the Turks did to the Kurds show that you aren’t knowledgeable enough to fully understand my position.” The thing is, I am aware of Rambouillet, the historical account I find most convincing just differ from yours(and yes I’m also aware of your run of the mill Slobo apologist narrative, and no it’s not convincing).
And just for the record, I am off course aware of what the Turks did to the Kurds, as I guess most people with the ability to read is, but I don’t think I have the necessary knowledge (or maybe even the intellectual capabilities) to drag that complex issue into this allready very complex issue in a fruitful manner(as I said earlier, be aware of comparisons). And I also already said I prefer not to shout about stuff when I really don’t have the necessary knowledge, I have no need to claim being an expert on Gods know what, especially not in a public forum where my stupidity would be open for the world to see.
“you aren’t knowledgeable enough to fully understand my position. On the other hand, I fully understand yours.” I just looooooove that quote, and must say it truly makes me happy, it’s so very nice for a young man like me to finally find someone that fully understands me.
But yes it seems meaningless to keep this up, since we not only differ in our intepretations of “historical fact”, we even differ on the “facts”. And while that could be the basis for an exciting academic discussion, some other blokes very nice blog about Russia hardly seem an appropriate venue for that.
All the best
Frederik
Definitely it’s more toleratent of Islam. Not a whole lot of people in Russia are talking about “Islamofascism” and calling to nuke Mecca. Not to mention all the mixed Muslim/non-Muslim marriages. E.g. my ex-girlfriend’s mom is Russian Orthodox and her dad is Muslim. The bar I used to hang out with in Lyublino has a Muslim hostess and Muslim head waitress (one Tatar and one Uzbek/Tatar), both wearing their midriff shirts and acting identically to their non-Muslim coworkers, with whom they get on famously.
Go to Tatarstan and see.
Quite misleading. I don’t think you can compare Russia’s largely secular Muslim population … with the Muslim faith as it exists and is practiced in many parts of the middle east, far east, and Europe. Tatars that I have known don’t subscribe to the Hijab dress code, don’t pray towards Mecca 5 times a day, and so on. Further you seem to be completely forgetting the Russian attitude towards Chechens, for example.
The vast majority of Muslims within the US are also quite middle-class, secular, and well integrated in their communities. Numerous studies have pointed out that it is ironic that Muslims in the US are more accepted, better educated, and have a higher standard of living … than in Europe.
“Islamofascism” is a infrequently used term invented by the far right to describe something they don’t understand or are trying to simplify into a single term. You are unlikely to hear it outside of a Rush Limbaugh radio show or an Ann Coulter book. I’ve never once heard it used in a conversation, for example. Let’s not pretend for even an instant that Russian (or English) doesn’t have some much uglier words for Muslims, Arabs, or any other group of people they wish to disparage.
I strongly suspect that if an Islamic terrorist group blew up some major group of buildings in Moscow (let’s face it, nothing in Moscow is comparable to the WTC complex) … Russians would be far less restrained than Americans have been. For comparison, see Russian response to September 4, 1999. Multiply it by 50 and imagine what might have been.
@db
thank you, and so I did have an idea after all, but then again I would never have thought…but it is really very imaginative, grown men making small smiley penis’s. The net truly is an amzing place.
But still what does it mean? Is it a compliment or what? After all it seems very errect to me?
“Quite misleading. I don’t think you can compare Russia’s largely secular Muslim population … with the Muslim faith as it exists and is practiced in many parts of the middle east, far east, and Europe. Tatars that I have known don’t subscribe to the Hijab dress code, don’t pray towards Mecca 5 times a day, and so on. Further you seem to be completely forgetting the Russian attitude towards Chechens, for example.”
Islam is a religion. Chechens are an ethnicity. Apples. Oranges.
I had a date a few years ago (which didn’t go anywhere) with a Tatar woman who said she was starting to feel ashamed of being Muslim because of the crazy vakhkhabity down south.
“Numerous studies have pointed out that it is ironic that Muslims in the US are more accepted, better educated, and have a higher standard of living … than in Europe.”
Nothing ironic about that. Muslims in France and elsewhere in Europe come largely from poorer, less-educated social strata in the Middle East; Muslims in the US do not.
“Let’s not pretend for even an instant that Russian (or English) doesn’t have some much uglier words for Muslims, Arabs, or any other group of people they wish to disparage.”
One may exist, but I have never heard a Russian word that is a slur on Muslims, unlike, say, “zhid.”
“I strongly suspect that if an Islamic terrorist group blew up some major group of buildings in Moscow (let’s face it, nothing in Moscow is comparable to the WTC complex)”
Do apartment buildings count?
Fred:
You will never prove my account of Rambouillet to be wrong since it’s a matter of fact.
Try catching the CSPAN tape of yesterday’s Russian Duma-US Congress gathering in DC.
This is from my mailing:
Re: Wednesday, June 21, Washington DC gathering
After having just seen the full exchange on CSPAN, I can legitimately say that the below article is a gross misrepresentation of what occurred.
Natalia Narochnitskaya firmly debunked the Tom Lantos-Eliot Engel portrayal of innocent Albanians suffering for decades against evil Serbs. She succeeded in showing that if anything, the opposite occurred. Narochnitskaya also brought up the reality of Greater Albanian nationalism which threatens the territorial integrity of Serbia, Montenegro, FYR Macedonia and Greece. Lantos and Engel had no reply to that.
Also not mentioned in the article is the bogus claim Engel made about former Communist bloc countries having had the right to independence. Konstantin Kosachev correctly noted that Kosovo was a province in the Serb republic, whereas others like Croatia and Slovenia were republics and not regions within republics. The moderator Lantos (who like Engel is financially backed by pro-Kosovo Albanian-American interests) couldn’t resist noting that the American colonies rose up against King George III. Doesn’t that point reflect reactionary thinking? A mindset which some wrongly accuse Russia of.
Narochnitskaya is from a political party other than United Russia. It was informatively entertaining to watch a Russian political figure speak her mind in a firm manner, minus the stuffy politically correct delivery evident with some others.
MMA
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2007-06-21T203209Z_01_N21406232_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-RUSSIA-KOSOVO.xml
U.S., Russian lawmakers feud over status of Kosovo
Thu Jun 21, 2007 4:34 PM ET
By Susan Cornwell
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A historic first public session of U.S. and Russian
lawmakers turned into a bitter clash over the status of Kosovo on Thursday,
with accusations flying of slander and rewriting history.
Amid a rocky period in U.S.-Russian relations, House of Representatives
Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Lantos organized the
get-together to try to set the stage for President George W. Bush’s meeting
with Russian President Vladimir Putin early next month.
Lantos insisted after the 2-1/2 hour open session that there was more common
ground than disagreement between the two sides — six from the Russian
parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee and a similar number of Americans
from Lantos’ panel.
“We do not sweep our differences under the rug,” the California Democrat
said.
But one Russian, Natalia Narochnitskaya, irked the Americans by questioning
Lantos’ statement that there had been ethnic cleansing in the 1990s in
Kosovo, a Serbian province of 2 million people dominated by ethnic
Albanians.
There had been cases where corpses of people who died in various
circumstances in the province were gathered together to make it look like
mass killings, Narochnitskaya said, noting for the record that she was a
history professor.
“You have to doubt that there were mass cleansings,” she declared through a
translator. “Of course, some Serbs shot at Albanians.”
“Nobody in their right mind would deny that ethnic cleansing happened in
Kosovo,” said Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat. “She may be a professor of
history but she doesn’t have the right to rewrite history.”
Kosovo says 12,000 Albanian civilians were killed in ethnic warfare between
Serbs and Albanians in the province. Serbia puts the toll of civilians and
combatants at 9,000, of which 6,500 were Albanian.
Independent tallies range from 7,500 to 12,000 victims, mostly Albanian
civilians who were murdered.
The province has been under U.N. administration for almost eight years, but
Europeans and the United States are pushing for Kosovo’s independence from
Serbia.
Russia, an ally of Serbia which has veto power on the 15-nation U.N.
Security Council, opposes independence for Kosovo.
Narochnitskaya said the Kosovo Albanians were Muslims and warned: “You are
creating a militant Islamic state … in the center of Europe.”
“It’s slander,” Engel shot back, saying that the Albanian population were
secular Muslims and not militants.
Before the talk turned to Kosovo, discussions had politely covered other
areas of dispute, from Russia’s human rights record under Putin to missile
defense, where the two sides disagree over Bush’s plan to put a missile
shield in Eastern Europe.
Like a mini-superpower summit from the Cold War era, the two sides exchanged
gifts and professions of admiration for one another’s peoples. Large Russian
and American flags decorated the meeting room.
The Russians’ chairman, Konstantin Kosachev, said he was open to a
suggestion from Lantos that Russian and U.S. lawmakers try to visit Iran
together for meetings with the Tehran government.
Lantos has tried in vain to get a visa to Iran and he appealed to Kosachev
for help.
**************
Fred:
As much as I like Natalia’s spunk and the fact that Saudi money is building mosques in Kosovo, I agree that most Albanians are secular. However, there’s still an ugly nationalist stench in that community which isn’t more progressive than the Serb community at large.
Alexander Dragnich is better than Noel Malcolm and Antiwar.com rocks.
Islam is a religion. Chechens are an ethnicity. Apples. Oranges.
I had a date a few years ago (which didn’t go anywhere) with a Tatar woman who said she was starting to feel ashamed of being Muslim because of the crazy vakhkhabity down south.
You make my point for me, and I would say that you are actually mixing your fruit. Tatar is an ethnicity, not a religion. Don’t cite secular Tatars as examples of Russians good relations with Islamic believers.
Nothing ironic about that. Muslims in France and elsewhere in Europe come largely from poorer, less-educated social strata in the Middle East; Muslims in the US do not.
Unlikely, and you’ll have to dig hard to find some research to prove that (largely invented by you) point. From my experience of living in Germany for 6 years, it is the laws and culture within Europe that keep immigrants poor and less educated.
One may exist, but I have never heard a Russian word that is a slur on Muslims, unlike, say, “zhid.”
Chernozhopyi does come to mind. But then again, I suppose it is designed to insult ethnicity or skin-color, rather than religion. It’s just a coincidence of geography and history that those people tend to be Muslim.
I could make the same conclusion regarding insults in English .. none are specific to the Muslim faith (unless you care to consider the political term “Islamofascist” a faith specific insult … dubious, as it a political term).
Do apartment buildings count? 62 dead vs. near 3000 dead. So, no .. they don’t count, except as a point of comparison. I specifically pointed out the quite large difference in scale, and pointed to the strong Russian reaction to a comparably much small act of terrorism.
Anyway, I grow tired of this technique of individuals attempting to point out any holes in any other individuals points of discussion. It is just a lazy technique that resolves no topics and fuels endless squabbles.
My original point in selecting your comments is .. that it is very misleading to compare Russian relations with Tatars and others, and say it is indicative of very good relations with Muslims. Conversely, taking the term “Islamofascist” as evidence of some American or Western European bigotry towards Muslims is very misleading as well.
US, European, and Russian leaders and citizens are generally united as being opposed to Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist acts performed by such groups. The differences are in generally identifying which groups fall into that category, and which do not. Outside of the debacle that is Iraq, differences in recent years have generally been with groups such as Hamas and government of Iran, with the Russia side taking a decidedly friendlier view than US and Western European counterparts. However, I have to say the Russian side smacks of political and defense industry opportunism, while the US/European side appears intransigent.
“Anyway, I grow tired of this technique of individuals attempting to point out any holes in any other individuals points of discussion. It is just a lazy technique that resolves no topics and fuels endless squabbles.”
I actually agree with this!
“My original point in selecting your comments is .. that it is very misleading to compare Russian relations with Tatars and others, and say it is indicative of very good relations with Muslims. Conversely, taking the term “Islamofascist” as evidence of some American or Western European bigotry towards Muslims is very misleading as well.”
Well Tatars and others are the Muslims Russians actually come across in their daily lives, and the people they think of when they think of “Islam.” I haven’t spent any real time in the States in years, but going by stuff I see on the web (I know, I know), hatred and venom directed at Muslims seems to be a growth industry, and “Muslim” often seems to be a synonym for “Arab terrorist.”
If I’m not mistaken, Stephen Schwartz is credited for the term “Islamofascist”.
Schwartz is anti-Serb and anti-Russian in a way showing a lack of sympathy for the Orthodox Church.
Compared to others in the West, it’s a safe general comment to say that Russia’s relations with Islam at large have been good.
Putin attended a World Islamic Conference gathering and indicated a Russian willingness to formally join that organization.
BTW, RTTV has an all Arab language broadcast unit.