Friday, March 21, 2014

Crimea, Russia, Putin and Why Should I Care?

Mr.Vladimir  Lenin














Doesn't he LOOK Russian?









A bayonet is a weapon with a worker at either end.
--Soviet aphorism

Mad Dog is the first to admit ignorance when it comes to Russia, Russian history and the current events in Crimea.  His self education has begun with the entertainment, semi true history series, "Reilly, Ace of Spies," and is now augmented with Wikipedia, which was not available when "Reilly" first aired in the early 1980's.  But, from this, admittedly, pop history version of the background, Mad Dog has to ask:  What business is it of his, or of America or of Britain or Germany if Russia bear hugs Crimea or even all of Ukraine?  
In fact, Mr. Putin has remarked, with unusual candor, "Ukraine isn't really a country, you know."  That remark might be applied to Iraq and a variety of other countries whose boundaries were drawn by men in drawing rooms in London, Paris and elsewhere who then retired for cigars and brandy to their men's clubs. 
Reilly playing in Russia
 Taking the cynical point of view, which one absorbs from "Reilly" this is not about the people living in these places but more likely about resources, like oil, gas, pipelines and things that spell "Money." Even before, but certainly during the Russian revolution, Britain, the United States, France and Germany all sent agents to Russia to gain control there, but were defeated by the sheer size and complexity  of Russia and the impossibility of influencing events and behavior of that large grizzly bear by sending in fleas and mosquitoes. 

Having learned from Napoleon, the Western powers were timid and chastened by prior experience. They didn't want to risk sending armies, but they were happy to send in assassins, spies, agents provocateur which was low cost, lower risk and eminently deniable and would never appear in children's history books, which, after all, constitute the sanitized fantasy which nations teach their children.  So, the "great powers"  plotted low risk plots to depose or assassinate Lenin, once it became clear Lenin was not going to allow Russia to continue in the World War One carnage. 

Lenin accepted Germany's dismantling of large parts of the Russian empire to preserve his own revolution and his grip on power in Russia. The Allies wanted him out and wanted someone (Reilly) in to get Russian troops to open up an Eastern Front. 
The real Reilly shot dead in Russia
So, there is a long history of America and Britain and Germany trying to manipulate Russians, happy to expend Russian lives for British profit.

And if you are going to talk about past behavior of Britain, France and Germany--well, don't get Mad Dog started. Do the word "Empire" ring a bell?

There is also a long history of America dominating its own neighbors, even annexing territory. America trumpeted its "Manifest Destiny," provoked wars of "liberation" to bring freedom and American industry to island peoples, and to use them for profit. 

  But now America condemns Russia for behavior which is not essentially different from what America has always done.  America, after all, annexed part of Mexico and that is now called "Texas."  From Mad Dog's perspective, we are still suffering the consequences of that. Mad Dog would gladly give Texas back to Mexico, and Mad Dog would sweeten the deal by throwing in South Carolina and a high draft choice, maybe Arizona, although, it must be admitted Mexico may not regard South Carolina as sweetening the deal. 

  If Mr. Putin looks to America's experience with Texas, he might think again about Crimea.

Did the United States not invade Panama in the later part of the 20th century, dig a canal through it in the early part of that century, invade Grenada, take Cuba away from Spain, (and the Philippines, too), and mess around in Nicaragua and any other Caribbean island we coveted?  

So Mad Dog says: Render unto Russia that which is Russia's. Heaven help them. Sure as shooting, nobody else will.

Now, Mad Dog anticipates Secretary of State Kerry will reply (perhaps not on this particular blog, but elsewhere) that while America has been a bad boy in the past, we now have found religion and we are for "self determination" for all the world's people--the way we valued self determination for the Vietnamese. When we value self determination for a people, that has, in the dark past, often involved dropping bombs on them, and agent orange and Coca Cola and Big Macs.  We, as George Carlin noted, whip a little American industry on them, and pollute their water and air.  Lucky them.

Mad Dog is no Russian o phile. Russia is a riddle within a riddle, (Churchill) but it has as long and nasty history as any nation on earth, with a particularly rancid history of antisemitism  not to mention the Stalin years where whole populations were starved and thousands, maybe millions deported, shot, and otherwise treated unkindly.

On the other hand, their history looked pretty wonderful in the opening ceremonies at the Olympic games. And they can be remarkably funny, in a dark sort of way.

At any rate, if they want the home of Chernobyl, the lovely port city on the Black Sea and a few gas lines, Mad Dog would say, let 'em have it. None of it is worth disrupting a single American military family in deployment. 

  

6 comments:

  1. Mad Dog,
    Well I'm with you and it appears we who are not wringing our hands over Crimea joining Russia are clearly in the minority. I realize there's the big worry over Putin's broader intentions, that "give him an inch, he'll take a mile-or Poland" theory. Wasn't the fact that the West was looking for the Ukraine to align itself with them what got Putin worked up in the first place? I've read a couple different articles that mentioned he was feeling like Russia was being marginalized and isolated. So how does Obama's announcement, from The Hague today, that the Group of 8 forum this summer will no longer be held in Sochi, but in Brussels and it is now a Group of 7 since Russia is no longer invited -help the situation? My knowledge of Russian politics is very limited as well, but I can also add the insight of Reilly Ace of Spies to my understanding of the situation. I have to thank you again for suggesting a show that works so well on several different levels. The Reilly character is endlessly fascinating, as is the peek at the early days of espionage-it's far more interesting, to me anyway, than any Bond movie. As for the historical and political perspective it provides food for thought regarding that historical period and, as you pointed out,what is going on internationally now. I liked Reilly's line to the Chinese inspector that what country rules isn't determined in heaven but "in the boardrooms of banks." Isn't that the truth, as is "a bayonet is a weapon with a worker at either end"- can you think of an instance when that wasn't true? I can't. All the more reason military intervention should be an absolute last resort. I agree with you that this holier than thou routine we trot out with our foreign policy is a sham- yes we like to support democracies, but we also wanted the Ukraine and it's resources in our column as much as Russia wanted it in their's....
    Maud

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maud,

    Ye gads! I think you have actually slid to the left of Mad Dog.
    I'm amazed you found Reilly. I had to buy the DVD set--but I'm glad I did.
    I do not believe it was Reilly who radicalized you--you must have been ripe for the picking. That you fastened on the remarks about the world being run by banks and the worker at either end of the bayonet is telling.
    Too bad my Russian/ communist grandfather (or was he communist/Russian?) is not around to read you. He would have drunk toasts to you nightly.

    Mad Dog

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mad Dog,
    Left of you..hmm..well no cause for worry unless I start to greet you as Comrade rather than Mad Dog....No, I didn't acquire my lefty views from watching Reilly Ace of Spies, however the show doesn't do much to dispel those views does it. I had to order the DVD set as well-I was able to watch the first five episodes on You Tube, but can't find the 6th or further anywhere. Even sites that say they have it, have nothing to watch once you get there. Hopefully it doesn't take to long to arrive since I was really looking forward to seeing what happens next. For a 30 year old series, it's really not dated-Reilly is a much more complex and complicated character than what I recall from that time. With many of his choices so morally ambiguous, he's more like one of the conflicted TV "heroes" on today don't you think. It seems the show also enjoyed a substantial production budget judging from the sets, wardrobes etc.--more like that of a feature film. Although the story is a lot more interesting than Downton, they both share that fine attention to period detail which is nice. I've always been a fan of Sam Neill and he's great as Reilly, a man under no pretense as to who's calling the shots....

    Ninotchka, oops,I mean Maud...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Comrade,

    For you, I like Tatiana.
    For me, I fancy Yevgeny.

    I'm surprised you could appreciate the production virtues on youtube.
    I've been so taken with my DVD's of Reilly, I watched Doctor Zhivago the other night, all 200 minutes of Omar Sharif gazing soulfully at snowscapes and at Julie Christie, who is always shot with a blaze of light across her crystal blue eyes, the rest of her face in shadows. Not recommended.

    The best wardrobe ever, except maybe for Downton.
    Leading men should look good in tuxedos and in white tie.
    As for the women, in Reilly, they are always angular, dangerous and libidinous. Hard to keep them all straight.

    Are there really women like this in real life?

    Mad Dog

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yevgeny,
    Actually I didn't mind watching Reilly on my computer-although I would have preferred the large screen TV-because I was so engrossed in the story. I guess it's testament to just how good the production details were that they were evident even via You Tube. It's probably a good thing I couldn't watch any more on You Tube since it allows me to see the rest in a much better format..... Are you saying you wouldn't recommend Dr. Zhivago on the computer or Dr. Zhivago period? I haven't seen it for a long time, but I was a big fan when I originally saw it, some aspects-like the musical score and the final scene-I loved. You didn't?

    Back to Reilly, I agree with you that it does have the best wardrobe short of Downton and Reilly himself, is the most amazingly turned out. That's unusual, it's not typically a man who would get the nod for best dressed, but he is always the most eye catching person in the room. He looked a lot better on his wedding day than Margaret, the bride. ...It's so funny you would say that about the women-I was thinking the same thing-that they all had the same look-as if the casting director was obsessed with a particular type of woman. I also kept thinking that Reilly had remarkably bad taste in females. From Margaret, one you couldn't trust as far as you could throw her, to poor crazy sister Anna-well sister, enough said-to Nadia, who on occasion has the look of someone who could rip your heart out and have it for lunch. How did you like her ability to remain calm and talk on the phone after the dinner guest offed himself-now that's poise,scarily so. They're troubling women-with them Reilly should be sleeping with one eye open... Are there women like that in real life-probably-but I don't know any...
    Tatiana

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tatiana,

    Yes, I loved Zhivago, when I first saw it as an adolescent, but it didn't age well for me. Even the score, and we had the LP, seems repetitive.
    The Countess (Nadia) shows up later, and she is actually a very likable woman--she knows what she wants and what bores her and when she finds Reilly does not serve her needs, she moves on, but she clearly has lost no affection for him; he just isn't what she needs. She is a woman who can function under duress--something I've always admired. His seduction of her, taking her off to dab the blood off her breasts, is wonderful.
    But this is not a work about romance. You want intense romance, watch Last of the Mohicans, with Daniel Day Lewis. THAT is the most intensely romantic film I have ever seen. Reilly is more Chinatown.
    His last wife, whom he meets in Berlin, in the bathtub in his hotel room, is another woman who is open about her needs and appetites, but, again, she clearly does not need marriage to seal the deal.
    I'm halfway through the last disc. Will finish it this weekend. I'm not sure how well it will hold up on repeated viewing--The Wire just gets better every time you watch another episode. Band of Brothers bears up under repeat viewing, but not as well. Reilly? I'll find out.

    Yevgeny

    ReplyDelete