+You don’t need a massive grasp of history to know that twice (at least) in the last two hundred years or so Russia (aka the Soviet Union) has been invaded from the west. Both events are seen as seminal in the history of Europe. On the last occasion, the possibility of Hitler defeating Bolshevism was cheered to the rafters by many Tories who clearly adhered to the ‘better dead than red’ line, and who even before Hitler’s invasion were privately seeking avenues to side with Hitler. This is all well documented. Is it possible that Putin takes a long view of history? Is there a chance that he has developed a sense that ’the West’ is full of schemers who cannot be trusted? (In that frame of mind following in the footsteps of Stalin.) It is to my knowledge an uncommented on feature of the current impasse, but might Putin not have looked at the West’s invasion of Iraq (commonly described as a war for oil) and wondered whether his own resource rich country could fall foul of a similar pursuit? It shouldn’t really be too difficult to penetrate Putin’s thinking whatever the case, but what is clear is that ‘the West’ still sees itself as triumphant, and that is the tone which determines our side’s response to Putin’s manoeuvres. I imagine that this might just get up his back a little bit.
+If diplomacy brings forth language which is difficult to understand, art language is not left far behind. I am indebted to a press release on eflux for this introduction to an exhibition:
'Andreja Kulunčić’s research project, You Betrayed the Party Just When You Should Have Helped It is a rhizomatic approach that aims to ponder the transformation of the body subjected to self-colonization in order to survive in a traumatic environment, and to present methods of activating a symbolic location deprived of modern forms of public acknowledgement.'
Couldn’t be clearer.