kravietz 🦇 @kravietz@social.privacytools.io

And it wants to join NATO in the very same way as the whole of Eastern Europe promptly jumped into it after seeing what was going on in Russia in early 90's, with at least three further military interventions, KGB coup and numerous calls to "restore USSR in its previous borders". Readiness to join NATO (which is otherwise quite costly) is proportional to the perceived threat from your neighbour...

Does the current Kremlin policy have any future?

Clearly not. The view that Russia has some kind of invisible "zones of influence" that must be respected is only present in Kremlin, and in some European capitals and I guess it's mostly out of kindness. I haven't met anyone in Russian province who would actually care if Ukraine or Georgia joins EU - if anything, they'd welcome it as EU would be then closer to them.

And now, as result of Russian intervention, Ukraine wants to join NATO.

The only thing it did hurt were the feelings of the Russian elites who believed that their Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was an actual alternative to EU. And as usual, instead of just proving that simply by being economically successful and viable alternative, they chose to force the potential breakaway country into submission.

What followed was only a logical chain of consequences, with sanctions and counter-sanctions, and GRU operations in Sofia, Vrbetice, and sanctions for these.

Leaving aside the fact that Ukraine is a sovereign country whose independence is recognised by Russia, and it has the right to join whatever alliances it likes, back in 2014 Ukraine was not interested in joining NATO. It was merely interested in economic cooperation with EU - if you don't understand why, once again just look at the GDP per capita chart.

Did it hurt Russia? Quite the opposite, as economic growth in Ukraine would only increase its trade with Russia.

So what did USSR do? Of course, it interfered, and suppressed the reforms - in 1953, 1968, 1981, and then on much smaller scale in each country separately, as protests broke out literally every 5-10 years.

Not because that would somehow hurt its economy or "road to socialism", but out of the obsession of control, and "teach them a lesson".

Exactly the same thing happened again in Ukraine in 2014...

Back in 80's, on the ground in countries like Poland, everyone understood we are kind of part of Eastern Bloc.

But the economic situation was so dire that reforms were required - and they were not at all directed at the "road to socialism" directed by USSR (and nobody really believed in it anywhere), although they were formally in violation of the die-hard Marxist-Leninist dogmas.

The expectation was that USSR will at least not interfere, because then you'd have to face an actual revolution.

What was the point of these interventions? None, apart from obsession of control and "teach them lesson", in spite of all evidence clearly witnessing to the inefficiency of Soviet economy, which led to stagnation and then ultimately to a tragic collapse in late 80's.

Back in 2000's Ukraine wasn't at all obsessed on joining NATO - mass protests (Orange revolution, then Euromaidan) had primarily economical background, which is understandable if you look at this:

Now, if you think about the foreign policy of modern Kremlin it's just walking exactly the same steps.

Back in 1953 the East Berlin uprising was not about politics - it was about working conditions and Soviet-imposed work quotas. Same repeated in 1956 in Hungary, 1968 Czechoslovakia and 1981 in Poland.

All of these were suppressed by military interventions - just note, uprisings started not because they wanted to leave Eastern Bloc, but merely because they wanted better living conditions.

And while many countries (US, but also France, UK or even Poland) took part in similarly stupid dick contests in 20th century, most of them simply could afford it in terms of their economic performance. They came out of these adventures bruised, at huge human and financial cost (Vietnam) but recovered.

Now, what was the point of 1979 Soviet invasion in Afghanistan? It was utterly pointless and stupid operation, that ultimately got USSR stuck there for 10 years and hundreds of thousands killed.

And while some of the Russian military interventions were clearly a desperate struggle for a few more gas sales (like in Syria, whose sole purpose was to prevent building a pipeline from Quatar to EU), most of them did not make any sense from Russian interest's point of view - the war in Ukraine or Georgia makes absolutely no sense from business point of view, it's just about turning some areas into military-controlled blackholes.

Because the second problem it has is that its economy is still largely based on exports of hydrocarbons. And because Kremlin couldn't resist from controlling and then weaponizing the exporters (as it did many times in 2000's), everyone started considering it to be a cheap but unreliable partner.

And this is not sustainable. This unsustainability results in lack of safety, which in turn results in obsession of control, both internal and external.

And it also shows how Kremlin is making exactly the same mistakes it was making back in 20th century, which ultimately took it to a collapse of the whole country. Its power relies entirely on military force, which it mastered. But military is expensive and is developed at the cost of other branches of economy. The US suffers from the same problem, but the difference is US can afford it (if barely) while Russia cannot.

Russian gov has quietly informed US embassy in Moscow it will remove the ban on employing Russian staff it announced with a lot of media coverage as a "reprisal" for expulsions of Russian diplomats in response to GRU activity on the ground and the Internet.

When US embassy said it will then only offer services to US citizens and suspends issuing visas to Russians, Kremlin quietly stepped back. Which kind of shows that Russian bargain is quite weak in such international sabre rattling.

🇩🇪 "Der Mann, der freiwillig ins KZ ging"

https://www.blick.ch/ausland/polen-ehrt-seinen-nationalhelden-witold-pilecki-1901-1948-der-mann-der-freiwillig-ins-kz-ging-id16522036.html

@dump_stack So the actual rules are quite a mess - to be honest, I don't know whether they are deporting the people coming for interviews rightly or not. In any case, the best piece of advice is to always say you're coming for tourism. In theory, even when you're coming in for tourism, and happen to open your LinkedIn while in UK, you're engaging in job-seeking activity and that's illegal 🤦‍♂️

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules

@dump_stack you once praised UK's new post-Brexit "clear points based system" 😂

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/13/eu-citizens-arriving-in-uk-being-locked-up-and-expelled

This tombstone is source of endless (sorry...) joy for Poles. I don't think KURWA DUPA requires translation for anyone speaking Slavic languages - or living in UK. These are... bad words.

The legend is that a Polish mercenary in Africa was dying in pain and whispered "kurwa, dupa", but the nurse was asking about his name. So his name for carved in stone forever.

Then, nerds from odkrywca.pl found out it's actually a name in Suahili, and this grave is in Kenia 🇰🇪

https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/2809422/%20KURWA%20DUPA/

That actually works pretty cool, I've just tested with my U2F. As explained above, I wouldn't use it on a random website with no registration, but CAPTCHA is rarely used on anonymous pages.