CLOSE
Tags Posts tagged with "Vladimir Putin"

Vladimir Putin

by -
0 5953
A year ago, Vladimir Putin waged an unprovoked war against Ukraine. Today, he leads an army that is poorly trained, ill-equipped and increasingly resentful of his command. Pixabay photo

The Russo-Ukrainian War has become the largest European conflict since World War II, which ended in 1945. 

A year after the Russian invasion, and with his nation fighting for its survival, Ukraine’s leader President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has told the world his forces would continue their efforts.

The year of bloodshed

At first, the international community believed the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv had no chance of holding out against a well-coordinated Russian assault. Yet the capital city remains in Ukrainian hands.

Some cities in Ukraine now resemble the World War II-ruined cities of Berlin, Dresden and Warsaw, buried in rubble.

At some points in the war, Zelenskyy has warned against the potential collapse of his lines as Russian assaults have been levied against his army. The president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, has relied on the costly strategy of attrition against the Ukrainians, even as his army has endured as many as 200,000 casualties. 

During this year of fighting, Ukraine, with a smaller army, has relied on Cold War-era planes, helicopters, guns and tanks yet has thwarted Russian movement.

With European allies like Germany deploying Leopard tanks, the key to Ukrainian survival has rested in the constant supply of weapons from the coalition that the United States has created. 

The war has demonstrated the might of American weaponry, which has stymied the Russians. Through the proximity of American bases in Poland and Germany, American forces have also trained Ukrainian noncommissioned officers to lead their soldiers better.

This expertise has also aided Ukrainian military officials, who have learned to mobilize Patriot air defense systems, Abrams tanks and artillery guns. Although the Biden administration has continually downplayed the deployment of fighter planes for the Ukrainians, reports indicate that training has already commenced for some of their pilots.  

A disconnected dictator

Putin, meanwhile, continually targets civilian populations of Ukraine’s major cities and towns, causing death and destruction with hypersonic missiles that are almost impossible to shoot down. 

On the world stage, the Russian army has no clear path to victory. Some of Putin’s soldiers have even sent videos to their families and the press, revealing how poorly equipped and trained they are to meet the Ukrainians on the battlefield.  

Some Russians have openly criticized the government for mishandling the invasion effort. Putin’s government has lost much credibility along the way. 

During the early days of the war, the Russian dictator said his goal was to rid Ukraine of its “Nazi” elements that influenced the government in Kyiv. During a recent G20 Summit in New Delhi, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov was met with laughter when he said, “The war, which we are trying to stop, which was launched against us using Ukrainian people.” 

These confused comments suggest an increasingly disconnected Putin regime, a Kremlin that has lost the global public relations battle to justify the war.

Resentment against the regime

Domestic instability has been a primary concern when looking at the Russian regime under Putin. The dictator is in constant fear over his own security, increasingly suspicious that he will be deposed.  

The Wagner Group, a Russian paramilitary organization that has spearheaded much of the fighting, has had several public differences in how this war was being carried out under Putin’s directives. Some believe that Putin views the Wagner Group as a threat to his own rule.  

It is estimated that the Wagner Group has lost over 30,000 mercenaries, with about 9,000 fighters killed in action, U.S. officials said last month. Putin’s forces quickly surpassed the 15,000 Russians killed during the Soviet War in Afghanistan from 1979-89.

There is rising distress within the Russian population over the many soldiers who will not return alive. It has not helped Putin’s cause that his armies receive little training before being shipped off to the Ukrainian front against a battle-hardened foe. 

Through the startling number of casualties, deficiencies in Russian hardware and a total lack of leadership, Putin has repeatedly stated that nuclear weapons remain on the table.

All signs point to a defeated and embarrassed former world power. At every turn, Putin has refused to believe the Ukrainians could mount a capable resistance. One year later, Ukraine continues to push for victory.

Rich Acritelli is a history teacher at Rocky Point High School and adjunct professor at Suffolk County Community College. Written in conjunction with members of the high school’s History Honor Society.

by -
0 135
Suffolk County Legislator Bridget Fleming (D-Noyac), left, is the Democratic nominee in the race. Nick LaLota, right, is the Republican Party nominee for NY-1. Photos by Rita J. Egan

The race to fill U.S. Rep. Lee Zeldin’s (R-NY1) congressional seat has highlighted some key issues confronting Suffolk County communities and the nation.

Zeldin announced last year he would vacate his seat to run for governor. Two major party candidates have emerged in his absence, both eager to fill the seat. In a debate with the TBR News Media staff spanning nearly two hours, the candidates covered myriad topics, tackling issues close to home and far away.

Introductions

Suffolk County Legislator Bridget Fleming (D-Noyac) is representing her party for the 1st District. She is a former criminal prosecutor, trying sex crimes and fraud cases. Over the last decade, Fleming has served in elective office, first on the Southampton Town Board and later in the county Legislature, where she is today.

Nick LaLota, of Amityville, carries the Republican Party nomination in this race. He served in the U.S. Navy for 11 years and deployed overseas three times. He worked in congressional and state Senate offices before being appointed as the Republican commissioner on the Suffolk County Board of Elections. Most recently, he was chief of staff for the county Legislature.

Outlining priorities

Through their time canvassing voters, the candidates identified their potential constituency’s core legislative priorities. LaLota said he had observed a mix of voter interest in the economy and public safety.

“A lot of folks with whom I speak are tremendously concerned about those two things,” he said. “People want the government to work for them. They expect to have a fair shot at the ability to earn and not have their money overtaxed … and they expect to go home at night and be safe.”

Fleming agreed that crime and economic concerns have piqued voter interest. However, she held that the overwhelming problem for those she has canvassed is declining faith in American democracy and the “protection of fundamental freedoms.”

“Protecting American democracy, that’s at the front of mind for lots and lots of people,” she said.

Abortion

‘ I would insist that government funds not be used for abortions, and I would also insist that … if a child is contemplating an abortion, that the parents get notified about that.’

—Nick LaLota

LaLota maintains the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, returned the matter of abortion to the states. While he does not view abortion as a federal policy concern, he nonetheless stated his position.

“I do not oppose abortion when it comes to rape, incest or the life of the mother, and I do not oppose abortion in the first trimester,” he said. “Conversely, I do oppose abortion in the second and third trimesters. I would insist that government funds not be used for abortions, and I would also insist that … if a child is contemplating an abortion, that the parents get notified about that.”

‘I believe firmly that it is not a state’s rights issue, that as a congressmember, I have to have a position on it, and that my position is that those protections [under Roe] need to be reinstated.’

—Bridget Fleming

Fleming described abortion as a “critical issue that defines a moment in time in American history.”

“It’s the first time in the history of the United States that a federally recognized human right has been reversed,” she said. “I believe firmly that it is not a state’s rights issue, that as a congressmember, I have to have a position on it, and that my position is that those protections [under Roe] need to be reinstated.”

Economic apprehension

Amid rising inflation, higher food and gas prices, and nationwide economic hardship, both candidates were asked about their favored approach to relieving these financial woes.

Fleming acknowledged that voters in the 1st District are further constrained by the high cost of living in the area. “It’s hard to make ends meet on Long Island,” she said. “Those costs are rising. … We need to look for specific ways to attack those costs.”

She added, “Certainly, taxes are one of them. I’ve been fighting against the cap on our state and local tax deductions … I think it’s critically important that a representative of this district fights the SALT tax cap.”

LaLota contributes much of the nation’s economic distress to unsustainable federal spending. “The federal government hasn’t balanced the budget in 20 years,” he said. “I think that can and should be done in the next Congress.”

Concerning petroleum prices, LaLota proposes establishing national energy independence by tapping into domestic oil reserves.

“We have 43.8 billion barrels of proven oil reserves [as of the end of 2018],” he said. “That’s a 20-year supply, so there’s absolutely no reason to beg OPEC, Russia, Venezuela or anybody else to export their oil to this country.”

Energy and the environment

LaLota views the 20-year supply of domestic oil reserves as both a blessing and a curse. While it offers the U.S. flexibility in the near term, it provides no long-term guarantee for energy independence. 

In the meantime, he supports an aggressive push toward renewable energy sources. “It is right for the private and public sectors to make investments in renewable, alternative energies — wind and solar, specifically — to ensure we are on a trajectory to be energy independent,” he said.

Establishing a clear point of difference, Fleming expressed vehement disagreement with LaLota’s position on drilling, calling it a “completely wrong direction to go.”

The county Legislator held up recent developments in the offshore wind industry, specifically at Smith Point Park, as a prototype for future energy development. She argued Long Island has an opportunity to be a leader in the cause for green energy.

“Not only will we be helping Long Island taxpayers, ratepayers and our natural environment, we’re also serving as a model for the region and for the United States on how we transition,” she said.

On the issue of nuclear energy, both nominees expressed a desire to keep nuclear power away from Long Island communities.

“I don’t think that the community would support it,” Fleming said. Referring to the decommissioned Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant, she added, “It’s been a huge detriment to any kind of progress.”

When questioned on nuclear energy, LaLota responded tersely, “Not on my Island.” For him, nuclear power is a matter of safety for Long Island residents. 

“For safety reasons, putting a power plant on Long Island just doesn’t make any sense,” he said. “It didn’t make any sense decades ago and doesn’t make sense now.”

LIRR electrification

‘If you could bring in funding for the electrification of the rail once and for all, assisting the Long Island Rail Road to get that accomplished, I think you’d do an awful lot for the community.’

—Bridget Fleming

Fleming and LaLota both supported electrifying the Port Jefferson Branch line of the Long Island Rail Road. For both, electrifying the rail is a matter of directing public funds into Long Island communities but working in close coordination with local officials.

“We definitely need to electrify the rest of the line,” Fleming said. “If you could bring in funding for the electrification of the rail once and for all, assisting the Long Island Rail Road to get that accomplished, I think you’d do an awful lot for the community.”

‘When these infrastructure dollars are received from Washington, given back to the district, it should absolutely be done in conjunction with what local stakeholders want and need.’

—Nick LaLota

LaLota concurred with this assessment while decrying the imbalance between the taxes New Yorkers give to the federal government and the infrastructure funds they get in return.

“We need to do a better job, working across party lines, to ensure that we get better infrastructure dollars back for projects like that,” he said, adding, “When these infrastructure dollars are received from Washington, given back to the district, it should absolutely be done in conjunction with what local stakeholders want and need.”

Foreign policy

On top of these domestic pressures, the congressional candidates identified critical instances of geopolitical turbulence in places around the globe.

Most notably, Russian president, Vladimir Putin, launched an invasion of Ukraine earlier this year, widely considered in violation of international human rights law. Fleming stressed her commitment to the Ukrainian war effort in response to Russian belligerence.

“I think it’s critically important for the rule of order and the international rule of law that the United States takes a strong stand, as we have, in conjunction with a united NATO, to condemn this unprovoked aggression, to offer military aid and to offer humanitarian aid,” she said.

On the whole, LaLota agreed with Fleming. He defined U.S. strategic interests in defending Ukraine. “We are the only superpower. We should promote stability throughout the world. We should protect American interests — we have many interests in Europe — and having stability in Europe … is good for America.”

‘I think we have lived in a moment in time for the last 10 years when China depends heavily upon U.S. dollars.’

—Nick LaLota

Along with the war in Ukraine, they also discussed the dangers of a rising China, a regime exerting greater influence politically and economically around the world.

LaLota advocates loosening the economic links that bind the two nations, something he said is unnecessary and counterproductive. 

“I think we have lived in a moment in time for the last 10 years when China depends heavily upon U.S. dollars,” he said. “We buy a lot of stuff — a lot of crappy, plastic stuff — that we shouldn’t have to buy from them.”

He added that American foreign policymakers must “ensure that [China] does not become a greater strategic enemy of ours.”

‘I think we have to keep a very close eye [on Xi].’

—Bridget Fleming

Fleming’s concerns regarding China relate primarily to Chinese president, Xi Jinping, whose unpredictable administration and questionable political associates cause her concern.

“I think we have to keep a very close eye [on Xi],” the county Legislator said. “I agree that we need to put ourselves in an economic position where we’re not beholden to the Chinese regime.”

Closer to home, the United States is observing heightened instability within its own hemisphere, with volatile regimes in Venezuela and Cuba, and growing concerns surrounding the U.S.-Mexico border. 

Both candidates were asked whether the United States must redefine its policy for Latin America.

For Fleming, much of the nation’s immigration crisis is attributed to government mismanagement of asylum seekers. “A lot of these folks are fleeing really dangerous circumstances,” she said. “One of the things we have to fix is a way to handle these asylum applications. We have huge backlogs in the court system, and a lot of it has to do with an unwillingness on the part of government to take seriously the granular issues involved in immigration.”

To remediate geopolitical unrest in the Western hemisphere, LaLota favors strengthening the military, diplomatic and economic bonds between the United States and its Latin American neighbors. 

“In Congress, I would support ensuring that Americans are involved in South America,” he said. “I think the benefit is less illegal folks coming across our border, and less dependence upon the U.S. in decades to come.”

Congressional reform

‘We have moved away from encouraging thoughtful approaches to government.’

—Bridget Fleming

We suggested the Founding Fathers envisioned Congress as the most powerful and important branch of the federal government. Over time, however, the national legislature has delegated much of its authority to the executive branch, particularly the hundreds of agencies comprising the federal bureaucracy.

At the same time, recent Gallup polling indicates that three in four Americans disapprove of how Congress is handling its job. The two nominees delivered varied responses when asked how they would restore the central role of Congress in U.S. policymaking.

‘If there’s going to be a tax, a fee, a rule or anything in between, it should come from the legislature.’

—Nick LaLota

“I think that this quasi-rulemaking by executive branch agencies has gone too far,” LaLota said. “If there’s going to be a tax, a fee, a rule or anything in between, it should come from the legislature.”

Expanding upon this stance, he criticized the existing culture of pork barreling and logrolling in Washington. He also advocated shorter, more straightforward, germane legislation narrowly tailored to the issues at hand.

“We shouldn’t be sticking all of this pork and these other ideas into [a bill] that has a different title,” he said, adding, “If we got back to that norm, I think we give power back to the people.”

Fleming’s frustrations with Congress stem from the breakdown of informed discourse and norms of civility. To reform the institution, she proposed the reinstatement of these practices.

“We have moved away from encouraging thoughtful approaches to government and are instead so prone to responding to, almost, performance art on the part of politicians and legislators,” she said.

To get the national legislature back on track, the county Legislator emphasized constituent services and a community-centric method of policymaking.

Referring to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, she said: 

“I think of Philadelphia when representatives came on horseback from their various places and asked that the government be shaped in a way that would respond to the concerns of folks in their communities,” adding, “That’s the model of government that I’ve always undertaken and that I think works best.”

The people of the 1st District will get the final say on these candidates on Tuesday, Nov. 8.

by -
0 889
Turning 70, Vladimir Putin has little to celebrate. Within months, he has tarnished his legacy permanently, encouraged domestic opposition to his authority, and isolated Russia from the rest of the world. Pixabay photo

Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, turned 70 on Oct. 7. He was showered with presents and praise as his soldiers continued to fight an ill-fated and illegal war in Ukraine. The Belarusian leader got him a new tractor. The ruler of Turkmenistan gave him celebratory watermelons. Countries such as Cuba, Turkey, South Africa and Kazakhstan called to wish him a happy birthday. 

Yet, as Putin celebrated this milestone year, the septuagenarian dictator received reports that a strategic bridge connecting Russia to Crimea was severely damaged. 

This bad news came amid a string of military and strategic blunders, the declining morale of his army and signs of growing internal unrest in Russia. Putin retaliated with missile strikes on Ukrainian civilian targets.

An invasion gone awry

Widely considered a poorly planned military operation, the once-vaunted Russian military has consistently demonstrated tactical weakness in supply, logistics and communications. Putin is deploying his army with massive shortages in weapons and food after his men chaotically abandoned much of their equipment on the battlefield. 

Reports suggest that Putin has asked North Korea and China for military hardware to recover its loss of tanks and trucks, which have been destroyed, deserted or captured. 

While President Joe Biden (D) has pledged to keep American ground forces out of Ukraine, the United States has continually aided the Ukrainian army. So much American weaponry has been sent to Eastern Europe that America is entering new multibillion-dollar contracts with defense companies to replenish its own national arsenal. 

The American military has mentored the Ukrainian officer corps with special warfare and tactical training. The U.S. Department of Defense has given the Ukrainians sensitive intelligence, helping them locate enemy forces and target them through conventional or guerrilla operations. 

Currently, the Russian military is bleeding out. Part-time soldiers want no part in this war. Making matters worse for Putin, his call-up of 300,000 reservists has met stark opposition from the Russian populace.  

Putin has even lowered standards for recruitment, allowing the homeless, criminals, wounded soldiers and the middle-aged to enlist. The Russian military has become merely a debasement of the once-fierce Red Army, slowly reduced to second and third-rate personnel. 

Outfoxed by the Ukrainian president

In the face of overwhelming Ukrainian resistance, many of Putin’s citizen-soldiers have surrendered. Meanwhile, Russian conscripts, with little training, have gone into battle with obsolete weapons and limited food against a motivated enemy gaining momentum.  

At every turn, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has outwitted and outmaneuvered his Russian counterpart. Zelenskyy has sent online messages to the Russian soldiers, declaring they will be treated well in defeat. Some Russians were even offered to be sent to another nation, where they could save their lives by sitting out the war. 

Whereas the Ukrainians have proven themselves capable of deterring the Russians, Putin has employed desperate means. Given his nuclear options, we are now hearing about a possible escalation in a conflict that could get much worse. 

Domestic unrest

On the home front, the invasion of Ukraine is unpopular; its effects felt the worst by Putin’s own people. Prominent Western businesses pulled out of Russia months ago, initiated by a global economic boycott designed to cripple the Russian economy.  

In the name of wrecking Ukraine, Putin has incited demonstrations against his authority. He has tried to suppress these demonstrations and censor news of the conflict. Still, the stories of many Russian losses on every front are too difficult to hide.  

Russian citizens have followed the fighting in Ukraine, the heavy losses incurred by their fellow countrymen and the lack of supplies for their soldiers. In Russia, mass border crossings have taken place. Cars, many carrying young men, have been seen deserting conscription to the Russian army. 

It is estimated that almost 200,000 reservists have fled Russia. Putin needs soldiers but has not yet resorted to calling upon his massive citizen population for a full-scale draft.  

There is much fighting left and additional sacrifices to be made. The Ukrainians, however, have proven that there is no safe place for the Russian military within their territory. 

While Putin plays with his new tractor and enjoys his watermelons, he has little else to celebrate on his birthday. He has waged an unjust war against a sovereign nation. His actions have greatly diminished Russia’s power and legitimacy worldwide. 

If any of this forecasts a difficult road ahead, Putin’s 70th year will surely be a bad one for him.

Rich Acritelli is a history teacher at Rocky Point High School and adjunct professor at Suffolk County Community College. Written in conjunction with members of the high school’s History Honor Society.

by -
0 166
The world watches as Vladimir Putin’s legacy and reputation unravel. Pixabay photo

By Rich Acritelli

“On the day of victory over Nazism, we are fighting for a new victory.” — Volodymyr Zelensky

These were the words of the Ukrainian president, who reflected recently upon the moment when the Allied forces defeated Hitler’s Third Reich, May 9, 1945.  

Since Feb. 24, Ukraine has engaged in a bitter struggle against the overwhelming strength of the Russian army, which has decimated the now-fallen city of Mariupol, and is widely suspected of targeting civilians in towns such as Bucha. 

The Ukrainian resistance has defended its homeland valiantly. Current estimates project that over 25% of the original invading forces have been either killed, wounded or captured. At the start of the invasion, many Russian soldiers were unaware that they would even fight their neighbor. Some fighters have notified their families that they were misled by upper command, that the true intent of the invasion was never disclosed to them. With rising casualties, the absence of a just cause and declining morale, it seems this invasion has become a disaster for Russia.

Since President Vladimir Putin took over in 2000, he has attempted to project a new brand of Russian power around the world. For some time, tensions have been brewing between Russia and the West as Putin has tried to exert greater authority and reestablish his country as a global superpower. However, Russian credibility has greatly diminished. 

The present occupation of Ukraine is now a public relations nightmare for Putin. The military campaign is humiliating, showcasing his ineptitude as a military commander. Despite its multitude of tactical advantages, Russia so far has been unable to defeat a clearly weaker nation.  

At the outset of the invasion, foreign policy experts estimated Kyiv would fall within a few days. Instead, the Ukrainian capital has become the epicenter of the resistance movement, a symbol of the triumph of freedom and democracy against tyranny and oppression. 

Zelensky has rallied nations around the world to send weapons and aid. He has persuaded friendly governments to impose sanctions that are crippling the Russian economy. The Ukrainians have the Russians in retreat as Putin pulls troops out of Kharkiv, with his major offensive in the Donbas region stalling as well.

Reports indicate some Russian soldiers have refused to fight. Witnessing the carnage to their own force, these soldiers see their probability of death increase the longer they stay in Ukraine. Between seven and 12 generals have already been killed in attempts to push their soldiers forward. 

Before the world, Putin and senior Russian officials have demonstrated a lack of military skill and an inability to command an army. If the Russians continue to be undisciplined, their casualty count will only rise even further. 

Putin’s leadership questioned

Over the last three months, one disaster after another has sent shockwaves through the Russian military. These blunders have shaken confidence in Putin’s leadership both at home and abroad. The world watched as Ukrainians assaulted the guided-missile cruiser Moskva. This flagship, an emblem of Russian naval might in the Black Sea, was destroyed by Ukrainian forces. On the ground, it is estimated Russia has lost more than 650 tanks and about 3,000 armored personnel carriers. American officers are now studying the glowing deficiencies in logistics, supplies and communications that have hampered Putin’s ability to continue the assault on Ukraine. For all of his past bluster and bravado, Putin and his forces have failed miserably at waging war in the face of growing resolve in Ukraine.

On the international front, Putin has proven unable to thwart American and allied supply lines into Ukraine. American Javelin and British anti-tank missiles have made it costly and dangerous for Russian armor to operate within Ukraine. Over 200 Russian aircraft have been destroyed by American weapons, according to some estimates. Western military support, coupled with the determination of Zelensky’s forces, have contributed to this great Russian quagmire. 

With growing evidence that Putin has no exit strategy and no foreseeable chance of success, the once-vaunted Russian army is on the brink of a possible historic and humiliating defeat. At home, his efforts to sell this conflict to the public have lacked success. Thousands have been arrested and jailed for protesting their government. Parents across Russia have received messages from this government that their loved ones have been killed in combat. All the while Putin has attempted to prevent foreign agencies from covering the conflict. 

Unlike during the Cold War between 1947 and 1991, people today are fully aware of the injustice of this invasion. Through his belligerence, Putin has strengthened the alliance of the Western democracies, and the NATO force is only getting stronger. Countries neighboring Russia are not waiting around for Russian aggression along their borders. Finland and Sweden, two nations that have always maintained a policy of neutrality, have just formally applied for NATO membership. 

Looking at this conflict from afar, China, which has for decades shown aggressive political and military actions toward Taiwan, must wonder if an attack against this island-nation neighbor will be worth the cost. Today, Russia is a pariah state within the global community, its economy is declining and the country is a target for American intelligence. China is an economic superpower which has yet to conduct any modern military operations of its own. Unlike the U.S., which took over and occupied Iraq and Afghanistan through fighting in the last two decades, China is a major power that has not fought any significant battles since the Korean War in 1950-53.  

It is very possible that history will repeat itself if China invades Taiwan. On a daily basis, Chinese officials should watch the military and political blunders taking place in Ukraine. The Russians are failing on all fronts, and its massive costs are only adding up. 

Rich Acritelli is a history teacher at Rocky Point High School and adjunct professor at Suffolk County Community College.

by -
0 504
Stony Brook University students and members of the media took part in the March 23 teach-in. Photo from SBU

During a teach-in at Stony Brook University March 23, a panel of professors gave their take on the invasion of Ukraine, including perspectives on the war, propaganda efforts and the impact on American public opinion.

Alexander Orlov 

Orlov is a professor of Materials Science and Chemical Engineering. He is an expert on the parliament of the European Union and the government of the United Kingdom. According to him, who has many relatives still in Ukraine, a dangerous propaganda campaign has been waged by the Kremlin.

“There is one very hurtful part of the propaganda,” Orlov said. “Russians call Ukrainians Nazis. This is so offensive to the memory of the 7 million Ukrainians who died during World War II.”

According to Orlov, this is not the first time in Ukrainian history that Russians have bombarded Ukrainian territory. He also said Ukrainians are a freedom-loving people.

We live in a highly partisan, polarized context.

— Leonie Huddy

“I talked to my mom yesterday and asked her about her biggest fear,” he said. “She told me that the biggest fear she has is to be forgotten by the West because, at some point, you might get tired of the images of human suffering and stop paying attention.” Orlov added, “Ukrainians are like you. They want freedom and free enterprise, and they want to dream. Many of the Ukrainians that are fighting right now are the age of Stony Brook students and they’ve never held a rifle before in their lives.”

Leonie Huddy

Huddy, distinguished professor and chair of the Department of Political Science, addressed the impact of the Ukrainian invasion on American public opinion. 

“There’s a very common effect in foreign policy attitudes when the U.S. engages in war, when it sends troops to other countries, and it’s called the rally effect,” Huddy said. “There hasn’t been any rally effect by any stretch of the imagination.”

According to her, Americans are so divided and the political culture is so partisan that Americans cannot even agree on the proper foreign policy approach to the war in Ukraine.

“We live in a highly partisan, polarized context,” she said. “I don’t think you can get much worse than this. Things are looking pretty bad in terms of just how divided we are.”

Huddy believes that the looming midterm elections will have a pronounced impact on how Americans address the war in Ukraine.

“One of the reasons for this is that we have congressional elections approaching,” she said. “I think the Republican Party is thinking there’s a potential for success so it’s very important not to give an inch to the Democrats right now. We have the heels dug in.”

John Frederick Bailyn

Bailyn is professor in the Linguistics Department and co-director of Virtual NYI Global Institute. According to him, the invasion of Ukraine prompted a massive effort by the Russian government to repress domestic opposition.

“February 24, 2022, was a day that has changed the course of Ukraine and also Russia forever,” Bailyn said. “Anything ‘fake’ about the war, which is entirely up to [the Kremlin], is punishable by up to 15 years in jail.”

According to Bailyn, there are plenty of Russians who support the invasion of Ukraine, but there is also a large exodus of people leaving the country.

“People have been leaving in droves,” he said. “People are all having to decide if they should leave everything they know — their entire lives. Many people are deciding to do that because this is just far beyond anything that they have seen before.”

Vladimir Putin grew up in postwar Leningrad, a city that had survived almost 900 days of siege.

— Jonathan Sanders

Jonathan Sanders

Sanders is associate professor in the School of Communication and Journalism and a former Moscow correspondent for CBS News. He has met the Russian president personally and described in vivid detail the psychology of the man coordinating the invasion effort.

“Vladimir Putin grew up in postwar Leningrad, a city that had survived almost 900 days of siege, a city in which his baby brother had died, a city in which rats were eating corpses and people were eating corpses,” Sanders said. “He was an individualist, an alienated, bad kid. He played with rats,” adding, “The rat is probably the best metaphor for him — not the nice little white rats that we see in the psychology labs, but really mean, vicious little rats, whose predecessors survived the second world war by eating people.”

Sanders said that the rebellious streak in Putin dates back to early childhood. According to the professor, it was highly unusual for Putin to reject the politics of his father but he did so as an act of individualism and revolt.

“Mr. Putin was an individualist,” Sanders said. “His father was a true believing Communist and young Vladimir did not join the Young Communist League, something extremely unusual.” Sanders added, “He was a hooligan, a street kid.” 

by -
0 77
Pixabay photo

By Daniel Dunaief

Daniel Dunaief

If I knew exactly when Russian president and peace shatterer Vladimir Putin were planning to attack Ukraine, I could be spectacularly rich.

Putin, however, knew exactly when he was going to give the order to start shooting, causing markets around the world to plunge.

No stranger to making a buck or two, Putin, whose wealth is estimated in the billions, may have seen the opportunity to create suffering for everyone else, while making himself even richer.

Have options markets around the world checked the trading just before the day he started killing people in Ukraine? Does anyone know whether he, through shell companies or, perhaps even more directly, through trades he holds in his own name, made a financial killing by destroying neighborhoods and shattering peace on a scale not seen since World War II?

Maybe he positioned his portfolio just as he was moving his military. He could have also dabbled in the commodities markets, where wheat, aluminum and gold prices have soared.

While the Russian president may not need the money personally, he could offset some of the effect of sanctions through the equivalent of his own “big short” on stock markets, betting in a game he helped control that the markets would fall.

Putin could have gone to stock markets outside of Russia, where he could have set up huge trades just a few days before a move the previous president of the United States described as “genius.”

Perhaps Donald Trump, who is also no stranger to capitalizing on financial opportunities, recognized the financial move Putin was making. Putin doesn’t appear to care much about the people he’s displacing or the Russian soldiers who may no longer return to their families to pursue a war against a neighbor whose biggest offense seems to be that they live in a democracy and want to join NATO, whose members consider an attack against one of them as an attack against all of them. As the “Between You and Me” column in these papers from last week made clear, Ukraine has abundant natural resources, which raise its appeal to Putin. At the same time, though, maybe he also saw this move as a chance to make money and to stay relevant.

It’s not every day that people write your name, even if it’s for nefarious actions, in papers throughout the world. Sitting on a stockpile of nuclear weapons that could easily turn Global Warming into a distant afterthought if he and his intended targets used them, Putin is dominating news coverage around the world, displacing COVID. Too bad there’s no vaccine for the world’s population against Putin.

By putting his nuclear forces on high alert after disrupting peace with his attack on Ukraine, he also gets to play bully and victim at the same time. He’s a bully for sending his armed forces into a neighboring country and killing men, women and children. Bullets don’t discriminate between innocent civilians and members of an opposition’s armed forces.

He is also a victim, claiming the heated rhetoric against his military’s unprovoked attack is enough of a threat to him that he needed to put his nuclear arsenal on high alert. His despotic desperation suggests maybe he needs a hug or some counseling.

He also defies logic by calling the Jewish president of Ukraine, Voldymyr Zelenskyy a “neo-Nazi,” when some of Zelenskyy’s own ancestors died in the Holocaust.

Putin may not make sense, but, at least in the first few days after his unjustified attack, he may be making tons of money.

TBR News Media is your local news and entertainment website.
We provide you with the latest breaking news and information for your community.
Contact us: [email protected]

Most Viewed

©