Tag Archives: Russia

Chaos

Posted on by

As far as anyone can make out, the situation in Ukraine is nothing if not chaotic. Russian forces are said to be advancing on all fronts. Ukrainian forces claim success after success in slowing down the aggressors or even halting them. Now cities are said to have been cut off, now it appears that, in reality, they are not. Cities are occupied, or else they are not and the two sides keep fighting over them. Convoys seem to be get stuck for days on end, but no one knows why. The Russians are running out of supplies. The Russians so far have only committed about three quarters of their forces. The Russian air force is said to be either held back or ineffective, yet President Zelensky keeps begging the West to impose a no fly zone.

Both sides accuse the other of committing war crimes and provide casualty figures; but neither is at all complete or reliable and there is good reason to believe that many are neither. A maternity hospital is said to have been hit, but whether it was done deliberately or as part of what is euphemistically known as “collateral damage” is obscure. The Western sanctions on Russia are working, or else they are little more than a nuisance that can be taken care of with Chinese help. The Russians are running out of young soldiers (hard to believe, since Russia’s birthrate, while below the replacement figure, is actually higher than that of Ukraine). Putin is winning on all fronts. Putin knows he has bitten off more than he can swallow and is desperately looking for a way out. Putin is ill. Putin is mad. Putin is about to be deposed, though no one knows by whom.

Millions of messages are being sent, intercepted, recorded, decrypted, stored, and analyzed by every possible means from artificial intelligence down. Some are even being falsified. To make things worse still, joining the Niagara of words is a tsunami of images. Attempting to prove their claims, both sides are publishing countless photographs, clips, videos, or whatever they are called. And that does not even include the millions of images sent out by the media on their own initiative. However, most of the time it is impossible to say who took them, when, where, in what context, and for what purpose. To say nothing of the fact that, since the uniforms worn by both sides and much of the materiel they use are broadly similar, it is often impossible to say what is what. One gets to see a shot up vehicle; but who destroyed it impossible to say. One sees wrecked building; but who wrecked it and why is impossible to say. A corpse is shown lying on the pavement; but whose corpse it is, and who killed him, is anything but clear. Briefly, it is not true, as Hitler’s propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels used to say, that bilder luegen nicht. Indeed that itself is perhaps the greatest lie of all.

Except for the sheer amount of information being passed around, there is nothing new or exceptional about all this. Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese soldier-scholar who probably wrote his Art of War around 500 BCE, says that all warfare is based on deceit and that, of all the ways to defeat an enemy, tricking him is the swiftest and the best (also in the sense of being the least bloody). Carl von Clausewitz, the Prussian general and military theorist who wrote vom Kriege during the 1830s, says that, in war, almost all information (Nachrichten) is contradictory, false, or both. Napoleon, who though neither a theoretician nor a writer was one of the greatest commanders who ever lived, adds that making sense of the confusion is a task not unworthy of geniuses such as Isaac Newton and Leonhard Euler. He himself, incidentally, was a master of deceit—a talent he displayed not just on campaign, as by “stealing a march” on his enemies, but while playing cards as well.

For all the vast technological apparatus it uses, modern war has not been exempt from these problems. To the contrary, in some ways it has made them worse than ever. One factor responsible for this is the sheer amount of information in the hands of, or being generated by, decision makers, soldiers, intelligence services, the media, and individuals on all sides. Let me provide just one example of what this may mean. Back in 1991 headquarters US Marine Corps, preparing to invade Kuwait, received a million and a half satellite-images of the terrain in front of it. This, on top of other kinds of information too numerous to detail here. So enormous was the flood that the images were almost entirely useless—the manpower, the expertise and the time needed to make them useful where simply not available. Since more was being added every hour, processing all of them would have lasted literally forever. The development of artificial intelligence may have alleviated some of these problems. But certainly not all.

A second problem originates in the illusion that we are in full command of our faculties, meaning that our senses provide us with a realistic idea of the world around us. In fact, however, this is by no means always the case. Our minds are colored by fear, elation, hope, despair, disappointment, and a thousand other emotions. Coming on top of this, often what we see depends, not on incoming information but on what we are; as shaped by education, training, prejudice, and so on. No two people, no two organizations, are the same or see the world in the same way. Which means that, even if all the relevant information is available, the task of entering into the enemy’s mind and guessing his intentions is very difficult, not seldom impossible.

Third, in war all these problems are exacerbated by what Clausewitz calls its Strapazen. War is the most strenuous activity any human can engage in by far. To those who have not gone through it the mental and physical stress are simply unimaginable. Partly because of the ever present danger to limb and life, one’s own and those of others; and partly, at the upper levels, because the fate of countries and populations may very well depend on it. Such is the strain that it often causes even the very bravest and most stable to behave somewhat strangely. If not all the time, then certainly some of it. Under such conditions no wonder (as Napoleon said) that false reports proliferate. Some people see entire armies where, in fact, there are none; others don’t see armies even when those armies are right in front of their noses. 

A final point that, as far as I am aware, analysts have raised rarely if at all. It goes without saying that, ceteris paribus, the chaos of war affects both the conqueror and the conquered. However, as a rule creating order out of chaos—the conqueror’s task—is a lot harder than doing the opposite; think, for example, of building a new wall brick by brick as opposed to taking up a sledge hammer and bringing it down. Without imposing order on a recalcitrant country, the Russians cannot win. As a result, this factor will probably work in favor of the defender. The Israelis in Lebanon, the Soviets in Afghanistan and the Americans in both Afghanistan and Iraq all tried their hand at this game. Ultimately, to no avail.

Ukraine is a large country with long, hard to seal, borders as well as tens of millions of able and highly motivated inhabitants. Chances are that the same will happen in this case.

When the Guns Fire

Posted on by

Two weeks into the war—no need to explain which war I am referring to here—the situation appears to be as follows.

 

 

General

Contrary to the view of some of us, who considering the military balance predicted a fast and fairly easy Russian Blitzkrieg, this is turning out to be a prolonged and quite bloody war. Unless some miracle happens, it will get worse before it gets better.

Military Operations

Russian military operations are being conducted in full force and with few if any restraints. 

 

Coming from several directions at once, they have succeeded in occupying one important city (Kherson) and are currently besieging and shelling several others. As one would expect from the side that is short of almost everything, Ukrainian resistance, though deserving of all respect, appears to be sporadic and ill-coordinated with each city and each force acting more or less on their own. Though Russian airpower does not play as much of a role as most people thought it would, it does dominate the sky. Still the Russians have not yet got even close to breaking the Ukrainian will to resist and fight. Perhaps, to the contrary.

Spread and Escalation

Contrary to many predictions, too, so far the war has remained inside Ukraine and did not spread to neighboring countries such as Moldavia and Poland.

Nevertheless, spread (“horizontal escalation, as it is sometimes called) and escalation remains very real possibilities. Suffice a single mistake, most likely in connection with NATO aircraft overlying Ukrainian territory (either deliberately or by accident) or with a Russian attacks on NATO attempts to assist Ukraine, to set Europe aflame and perhaps bring it to a glowing end. No wonder NATO is resisting President Zelensky’s calls for the establishment of a 

 

non-flight ban over his country. But it is not going to happen.

The Situation in Russia

The sanctions are really hurting Russia’s population. Not so much because people are starving, as they were during under Stalin in 1930-31 as well as during and immediately after World War II. But because of their sense of being cut off from the world. Including news emanating from any sources except their own government, not known as the most truthful in the world. The oligarchs have also taken heavy losses.

On the other hand, there is no sign of serious opposition to Putin. Claims about him being angry with his generals—at any rate, angry enough for it to make a difference—also seem to be without sufficient foundation in fact.

Economic Impact

The sanctions on Russia apart, the impact of the war on the global economy has been very serious. Production is down, inflation is up. That is especially true for such products as energy (oil and gas) and wheat. Gold is king. As always, though, there are those who prof

 

it. Including, above all, owners and producers of the commodities in question. And including arms manufacturers in many places around the world.

On one hand, the international rating agencies keep announcing Russia’s imminent bankruptcy. On the other, Russia is among the greatest profiteers. Not only is it among the largest producers of both energy and wheat, but it sells them dear to whomever will buy. Primarily, it seems, China. Now even Germany has announced it cannot do without Russian gas. Which of these two trends prevails we shall see soon enough.

As I am writing these lines on 9 March the Euro is slightly up against the dollar whereas gold and gas are slightly down. Are people getting used to the new reality? Again, we shall see soon enough.

International Impact

The Russian attack on Ukraine has brought almost all of Europe’s remaining countries closer together. Countries that always refused to join NATO and/or the EU (which is also an alliance against attack, albeit that it is seldom mentioned) are now actively considering doing just that. Good; but one doubts whether it can last.

Some false prophets notwithstanding, so far the war has not led China to mount an attack on Taiwan. Instead, the Chinese leadership seems to be weighting its options. There is a good chance that, if the war continues as it almost certainly will, China will emerge as the great tertius gaudens. Without firing a shot, what is more.

 

Attempts to End the War

So far, none of any importance. But clearly any solution, even if it does not fully meet Putin’s initial demands, can only come at the expense of Ukraine. Given how fearful NATO is, such a solution is not impossible. But it will take time.

 

Varia

Following decades of neglect, events are forcing Europe’s politicians as well as its populations to take war and the military seriously. There is even occasional talk of a return to conscription. However, it probably won’t happen. Even if it does, putting the necessary arrangements in place, procuring the necessary weapons and equipment, and organizing the necessary training will take years.

Following decades of feminist b.s, it turns out that few if any women participate in combat either on the Ukrainian side or, much less so, the Russian one. Ukrainian men are expected to fight and are barred from leaving the country, which some consider a violation of their human rights; Ukrainian women are not. Had events not been as tragic as they are, one could almost have said, “alles in ordnung” (everything is OK).

To Sum Up

The first casualty is the truth. Which incidentally means that there is no way to verify the casualty figures published by both sides.

Ukraine, Russia, Europe and the world are in an even greater mess than usual.

When the guns fire, the children cry.

A Very Bad Man

Posted on by

The war in Ukraine goes on and on. Though analysts are as numerous as flies on a heap of you know what, the truth is that one knows how it is going to end. Such being the case, I want to put my latest thoughts on record.

First, Putin may be a very bad man. However, there is no point in continually saying so. Based on historical reasoning, he is doing what he believes he must on behalf of his country. That historical reasoning itself is neither better nor worse than any other reasoning of this kind; part reality, part myth, part propaganda. Never mind. To cope with him, it is first of all necessary to understand what he thinks, why, and what can and cannot be done about it. The more so because he has enough nuclear weapons to blow up the world.

Second, this is a war of survival not only for Ukraine but for Russia as well. In the case of Ukraine, that is because defeat would reduce it to a Russian province. Much as it used to be since 1793 when Catherine the Great joined Austria and Prussia in partitioning Poland, a move which for the first time took Russia to the shores of the Black Sea. In the case of Russia it is because, should this struggle be lost, the country can expect to disintegrate into who knows many warring fragments. Just as happened in 1990. Recovery, even supposing it will be possible at all, will take decades. See, as an example of what it may be like, The Time of Troubles (1598-1613).

Third, this is going to be a long and bloody conflict. Albeit that it may have taken a little longer than was originally planned—not something at all unusual in war—the Russians have reached Ukraine’s most important cities and put them under siege. They have not, however taken them. As I have written before, urban warfare is perhaps the most difficult form of war an attacking force can engage on. Just think of the months-long battle of Stalingrad in 1942-43, and you’ll know what I mean.

Fourth, even if the Russians do succeed in occupying the cities, the war, taking the form of insurrection, guerrilla, and terrorism will go on. As, to mention but two recent examples, it did in both Afghanistan and Iraq. True Ukraine, being flat, does not present the best terrain on which to wage these forms of warfare. Compared to many others, the Russians also enjoy the important advantage of being able to understand the language. But two factors are working in the other direction. One is the sheer size of the country and the population, which threaten to swamp any occupying force (that is why, back in 1793, the Russians were able to occupy it in the first place was because it was practically uninhabited). The other, the ready availability of every kind of assistance from NATO, which can only increase as time goes on.

Fifth, Putin’s forces are said to be using some unorthodox weapons capable of causing many casualties and inflicting immense damage on buildings in particular. Particularly important are so called thermobaric weapons that operate by detonating a mixture of air and fuel, resulting in an extraordinarily powerful explosion as well as extremely high temperatures. But Putin is not the only one to use them.  Americans did so both at Hue in 1968 and at Fallujah in December 2004; and both the Americans and the British used them in Afghanistan. So who are they to complain?

Sixth, whether Russia will break under the sanctions is uncertain. My own guess it that it won’t. Partly that because the Russians can take almost anything. And partly because Germany e.g depends on Russia for 51 percent of its oil and gas; without them, German industry will soon come to a standstill. Vice versa, the one certainty is that the war will break the economy of the Ukraine.

Seventh, the only way Putin can win this war is by finding some Ukrainians able and willing to set up a government that will collaborate with him. That, however, seems unlikely to happen.

Finally, in this war as in any other the first casualty is the truth. That is one reason why anyone who believes he can see into the future is welcome to try and so so.

 

War in Ukraine

Posted on by

Asked to predict the future of the war in the Ukraine, I took another look at a book I wrote a couple of years ago. English title, Looking into the Future: A History of Prediction. Working on it taught me two things. First, as everyone knows prediction is extremely difficult and often misses the mark. Not seldom with disastrous consequences; as happened in 1914 when statesmen and soldiers predicted a short and easy war (“you will be home before the leaves fall form the trees,” the Kaiser told his soldiers) but found themselves involved in the largest, most deadly, armed conflict in history until then. And second, the methods we use today—questionnaires among experts (the so-called Delphi method), mathematical models, artificial intelligence, what have you—are no better than those that people used thousands of years ago. Such as astrology (Babylon), manipulating yarrow stalks (China), watching birds and consulting oracles (Greece), reading the entrails of sacrificial animals (Rome), interpreting dreams (in all known civilizations), and so on.

I am a historian, so readers will have to forgive me for basing my thought on historical methods. Primarily analogies on one hand and trends on the other.

Here goes.

* Ukraine is surrounded by Russia on all sides except the west, where it borders on Poland, Moldavia and Romania. It consists almost entirely of flat, open country (the famous “Black Earth”). The only mountains are the Carpathians in the southwest and the Crimean Mountains in the extreme south along the coast. There are some large rivers which can form serious obstacles for an attacker. But only if they are properly defended; which, owing to their length, would be hard to do. Here and there are some low. One also encounters quite a number of deep ravines, the best known of which is Babi Yar. But neither form serious obstacles to traffic, particularly tracked traffic. The roads are better than they used to be during World War II and there are more of them; however, with just 2.8 kilometers of them per square kilometer of territory (versus 1.5 in Germany) they are still not up to West European standards. The climate is continental, meaning hot and dry (often uncomfortably so) in summer, extremely cold (with lots of snow) in winter, and rain spread during most of the year.

* Russia has nuclear weapons, whereas Ukraine does not. That is a pity; had it had such weapons as well as a secure second strike force of vehicles to deliver them, war would almost certainly have been out of the question. However, for Putin’s present purpose it does not matter. The last things he wants to do before he occupies Ukraine is to turn it into a radioactive desert. Thanks in part to the help they get from NATO, during recent years the Ukrainian armed forces have grown considerably stronger and better equipped. Fighting morale, based primarily on popular memory of the way Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians in 1930-32, is said to be high. Nevertheless, neither quantitatively nor qualitatively are the forces in question a match for the Russian ones.

* Initially at any rate both sides will rely primarily on the usual conventional weapons: aircraft (which are particularly useful over open terrain as opposed to such as is mountainous or forested), tanks, armored personnel carriers and artillery, as well as the motorized columns they need to sustain them. However, they will also make heavy use of less traditional methods. Such as maskirovska (deception), signals warfare, electronic warfare, and, last not least, cyberwarfare. All these are fields in which the Russians have specialized for a long time past and in which they are acknowledged masters; in this respect they are in tune with their master, Putin, who himself rose by way of the intelligence services.

* At the moment the Russians the Russians are attacking Ukraine from all directions simultaneously without any clear Schwerpunkt. The Donbas apart, objectives include Kharkov, Kiev, several other key cities, and perhaps the Black Sea and Sea of Azov coasts. Faithful to their long-standing doctrine of “battle in depth,” the Russians attack not just at the front but far behind it as well.

* The Russians will not find it too difficult to “overrun” (whatever that may mean) most of a country as large and as sparsely populated as Ukraine. However, taking the most important cities—Kiev, Kharkov, and Odessa—will be a different matter and will surely only be accomplished by heavy and very destructive fighting. Followed, most probably by guerrilla and terrorism. The way, say, things happened in Iraq.
These pills are surely cheap super cialis better than other ED pills available in the market. For the medical therapy, they have to consult a sexologist to get the right treatment of medicines and fix it quickly. viagra prescription Erectile dysfunction is one of those sexual issues where the man is incapable cialis price in canada of obtaining and preserving an erection, for successful completion of the sex act. You can t take it as a sort of diseases in today’s time, one of the many diseases that specifically strikes men, not only their body but also hits their soul is Erectile Dysfunction. viagra 25mg prix
* Forget about sanctions. They will not deter the Russians. Just as Stalin used to give enormous banquets even during the height of World War II, so Putin and his clique will barely notice them. Whereas the people are used to make do without almost everything. Except vodka, of course, and even consumption of that is said to have fallen over the last few years.

* NATO, with the US at its head, will be involved in the war, but only marginally and without sending troops to participate in the fighting. Instead it will dispatch “defensive” weapons (whatever those may be), provide supplies and intelligence, and perhaps help evacuate some of the wounded as well as assist Ukrainian refugees. All the while continuing to tell anyone who wants to listen, and some of those who do not want to listen, how bad the Russians are, etc. etc.

* China can be expected to make some sympathetic noises. That apart, it will get involved only lightly by expanding trade so as to offset some of the sanctions. It may also use the opportunity to do something about Taiwan. Or not.

* Should the war turn into guerrilla and terrorism, as it very likely will, it may very well open the door to the death of perhaps fifty Ukrainians for every soldier the Russians lose (in Vietnam the ratio was about 75 to one). Even so Putin will still be unable to end the war, which he can do only by setting up a new collaborationist Ukrainian government.

* Though it is likely to happen later rather than sooner, there is a good chance that Putin will find Ukraine stuck in his throat; to quote a Hebrew saying, neither to swallow nor to puke. Given enough time, the outcome will assuredly be to make the war less and less popular inside Russia itself. The Russians will end by withdrawing.

* Just as the defeat in Afghanistan played a key role in the collapse of Communism, so a defeat in Ukraine will almost certainly mean the end of Putin’s regime. Much worse for Russia, it may well cause it to fall back into one of those terrible periods of anarchy it has gone through in the past and which it is Putin’s supreme objective to prevent. He can barely conceal his anxiety in this respect; as by assuring his listeners that 2022 is not 1919 (the year in which Lenin and the Bolsheviks came closest to defeat).

Finally:

Though based on history, in truth all this is little better than guesswork. It is as Woody Allen said: Do you want to make God laugh? Tell him about your plans.

No Deception without Self-Deception

Posted on by

Months after the Ukrainian crisis broke out, the long-expected Russian invasion of that country still had not taken place. Depending on which analyst you choose, there are many possible explanations for this. The first was that, at a time when his dear ally Xi was doing whatever he could to make a success of the winter games in Beijing, Putin did not want to ruffle his feathers too much. The second, that he needed time to try and sow dissension among his opponents, not all of whom were equally enthusiastic about fighting him; as, for example, became clear when Germany refused to provide Ukraine with weapons. The third, that his preparations were insufficient and needed to be completed. The fourth, that the weather, with the spring muddy season (rasputitsa, as it is called) around the corner, was unsuitable. It might, indeed, play havoc; if not with Putin’s tanks then with the follow-up columns that carry the ammunition they fire, the fuel they need, the spare parts on which they depend, and so on.

The fifth, explanation is that he was deterred by NATO’s declarations and demonstrations of support for Ukraine; including, in particular, the threat of sanctions. The sixth, that military action would be unpopular with Russia’s own people who are unhappy with the way things are going. The seventh, which seems to be gathering favor, that he has maneuvered himself into a pickle and is increasingly desperate to find a way out of the adventure on which he embarked. One, which, even if it succeeds, is quite likely to involve his country in a long and costly war against desperate resistance. And which, if it fails, may bring about not only the fall of his own rule but the disintegration of Russia itself; considering that, out of its population of about 145.000,000 18 percent consists of minorities some of which are just waiting for an opportunity to break free.

No more than any of the analysts whose views I keep reading do I have an answer to the question. I do, however, think I know the point when all of us in Washington, in London, in Paris, in Berlin, in NATO’s remaining capitals, and in many other places should really get worried. Namely, when Putin’s tanks start moving: not forward towards their Ukrainian objectives but away from them, back towards their peacetime bases and depots.

Consider:

Thursday, 2 August 1990. Saddam Hussein’s army invades and occupies Kuwait. Not, however before some days had passed during which he or his assistants claimed to be preparing to withdraw Iraq’s forces from the border area where he had deployed them. Needless to say, each time he did so the news was flashed around the world. Needless to say, each time it was received with a deep sigh of relief. And needless to say, each time it was false.
Sildenafil Citrate Medicine formed with sildenafil such as sildenafil tablets india, Kamagra, Caverta etc. are the well known oral drugs for ED treatment. The medicine works only if the user is sexually aroused otherwise it is simply discarded by the body.The effectiveness of this oral drug has been tested over the years and across all age groups. viagra cheap online They sometimes offer to india generic tadalafil have free samples of erectile dysfunction medication. Acknowledgement of sexual problem- buy cheap levitra Many of individuals are afflicted by chronic pain; they may be convalescing from trauma or degenerative disease; finally it is time to see a chiropractor.
Saturday, 6 October 1973. In the midst of Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, all over Israel the air alert sirens start howling. This quickly turns out to be the signal for a combined offensive by several hundreds of thousands Egyptian and Syrian troops against Israel. Repeatedly during the previous months, the Egyptian army in particular had been holding exercises that they could have used as cover for starting a war. Repeatedly they did not—until, on the day in question, they did.

Wednesday, 21 August 1968. Warsaw Pact forces, including Soviet, East German, Polish and Hungarian units, invade Czechoslovakia. Meeting hardly any resistance, they quickly occupy the country. The crisis, which followed on what was known as the Prague Spring, had been going on for months. It climaxed in mid-August when the Warsaw Pact units, having completed maneuvers on Czechoslovak territory, left the country—only to immediately turn around and return.

Monday, 5 June 1967. Israel attacks Egypt and annihilates its air force, thereby opening the way towards its crushing victory in the Six Day War. At that time the crisis in the Middle East, which got under way when Egypt’s ruler Abel Nasser sent his forces into the Sinai, had been ongoing for three weeks. The climax came on the weekend of 2-3 June when many Israeli reservists were suddenly sent home on leave and could be seen on the beaches of Tel Aviv, thus creating the impression that war was not imminent and might indeed not break out at all. A bad error, as it turned out.

Needless to say the Soviets, as they then were, were aware of these precedents. The more so because they themselves had made use of the technique. And the more so because they were historically-minded; starting already in 1917, no army has ever put a greater emphasis on military history than the Red-Russian one. Starting with the Biblical Israelites’ capture of the city of Ai, and proceeding through the Greek one of Troy, any number of commanders and armies have owed their success to this simple trick.

As I’ve written before, whether Putin is going to invade Ukraine I have no idea. I do, however, suggest that two points be kept in mind. First, beware of any Russian troop withdrawal—that may well be the most dangerous moment of all. And second, no deception without self-deception.

The Master and Kiev

Posted on by

Whether or not Vladimir (“World-Owner,” according to one translation) Putin is going to march on Kiev I do not know. However, it seems to me that, having invested so much in making ready for such an invasion—propaganda, money, political capital, and all kinds of military moves—he cannot now simply order a retreat without having achieved anything. Even at best, such a retreat would deal a grievous blow to his prestige and his future ability to get anything out of anybody. At worst it might lead to his removal from office and, since Russia is not and never has been a democracy, a political shakeup. One whose consequences, first for Russia and then for large parts of the rest of the world, could be incalculable.

Such being the case, in this post I shall assume that an invasion is being planned and, unless the West makes some important concessions, will be carried out. Sooner rather than later, and perhaps under the guise of a response to some Ukrainian “provocation.” What might such an invasion look like? The obvious starting point would be the Donbas, a Ukrainian province now under the rule two different self-proclaimed pro-Russian governments.. It has everything an invader could wish for: agriculture, industry, minerals (coal), and the kind of flat terrain that used to be occupied by the Cossacks and now offers few serious obstacles to a modern mechanized army.

Seen from Moscow, an offensive directed at this part of Ukraine would also have the advantage that it is located hundreds of miles east of Russia’s frontier with NATO. As a result, for the latter to assist the government in Kiev would be limited at best; the more so because the Black Sea is now little more than a Russian lake. The invasion might, indeed, form a stepping stone towards a deeper one aimed at forming a land bridge between Russia and the Crimea which it has been occupying for the last seven years.

On the other hand, such a half-measure would hardly suffice to achieve Putin’s objective, which is to halt and if possible reverse the eastward expansion of NATO. And it would almost certainly mean a prolonged war with Ukraine and its population of 35-40 million. Coming from the north (Russia proper), the west (Belorussia) or the south (the Crimea), the Russian forces allocated for such a war would be able to move almost anywhere. The Ukrainian army is said to number about 200,000. However, it is not terribly well equipped with modern heavy weapons in particular; and indeed it is hard to see where it could have got them, given that it cannot buy them from Russia (of course) and has been too poor to buy many of them from the West.

In short, pushing the Ukrainians aside while reaching for the country’s principal cities—Dnipropetrovsk, Odessa, Kharkov, and of course Kiev itself—should present the Russian forces with no particular problem. The more so because they will have near complete command of the air. Probably the most important difficulty facing them would be operational. Meaning, the inability of their widely-spread attacking columns to quickly come to each other’s aid in case of need. This fact might well cause the Russian High command to think in terms of trying to achieve its objectives not in a single massive lunge but in two or, supposing things go well, even three sequential ones. First in the west, in order to stop NATO from interfering and achieve local superiority. And then shifting the center of gravity further south and east. In that case the space between the Russian columns would be partly filled by special units capable of independent operations and designed primarily to spread confusion and chaos.

However, simply defeating the Ukrainian army and reaching Ukraine’s main cities would hardly be enough to end the conflict. Partly that is because Ukraine would still have an estimated 300,000 more or less trained men left. And partly because modern urban warfare can and often will shift the balance against the attacker and in favor of the defender. The main reasons for this are as follows:

It viagra buy australia is essential to maintain proper gap of 24 hours or more but not before 24 hours as over dose of Kamagra can be dangerous. Let’s over here online cialis sales look at the most famous herbal erectile dysfunction remedies that will give you hard, long-lasting erections without potentially harming your body in the long run. Ask them how they are doing, ask them what techniques they are using to advertise and network. http://icks.org/n/bbs/content.php?co_id=SPRING_SUMMER_2015 generic viagra Sometimes, some of the companies offer alluring offers for the doctors, for that the cost of cialis generico uk using this kind of medicine. First, to overpower the defenders the attacker must first of all concentrate his forces. However, urban terrain, covered as it is by all kinds of buildings that cover the approaches to them and streets between them, makes doing so much harder than it would be in open terrain.

Second, complex terrain will reduce the attacker’s advantages in terms of intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, the utility of aerial assets, and his ability to engage at a distance.

Third the profusion of buildings, perhaps including some quite tall ones, means that much of the fighting will take place at close quarters. To make things even more difficult for the attacker, often it will be necessary to engage simultaneously over the ground, on the ground, and under the ground.

Fourth, the attacker must move and, by doing so, expose himself. Not so the defender, who can remain in his prepared positions. Should those positions be targeted by artillery or from the air the defender, provided he keeps his flexibility and does not wait too long, can always abandon them and retreat to others further back.

Fifth, the kind of massive firepower that reduces buildings and even entire neighborhoods to rubble will not necessarily deprive the defender of cover. Often, indeed, the rubble will provide the defender with as much, if not more, concealment and cover than intact neighborhoods can; just think of Stalingrad. The larger the city, the more true this is.

Occupying the cities in question will not solve these problems; to the contrary, doing so may well aggravate them. Briefly, urban warfare tends to act as a meat grinder. The outcome is likely to be attrition and stalemate. But stalemate will demand from the attacker exactly that of which, unlike the defender, he only has a limited supply: time.

To be sure, death and destruction in the Ukraine would be horrendous. But to see what time can do to an invader, ask the Americans in Vietnam (1964-75), Afghanistan (2002-21), and Iraq (2003-21; not to mention the Soviets in Afghanistan (1980-88).

Akhmatova

Posted on by

I have already devoted a post (“To Do and Not to Do,” 24 June 2021) to the Soviet poet Anna Akhmatova. Since then she has continued to haunt me, driving me to learn as much as I could about her without, unfortunately, being able to read her work in the original.

Born to a very well to do family in 1899, by the time the Revolution broke out Akhmatova had already established some reputation for herself as a poetess. Living through Stalin’s rule, stripped of practically all her and her family’s property, she did not complain about being discriminated against or having to do the dishes in her often freezing cold, one room, Leningrad apartment. She did not talk about rape, real or imagined; to the contrary, on one of the rare occasions when she described the preliminaries of a sexual encounter she had with a fellow poet her lines were full of joy. She was not the “first” woman to drive a locomotive, explore the Arctic, or perform any other kind of (originally) male feat Though some modern feminists have claimed her as one of their own, she did not hate men—far from it (Zhdanov’s description of her as “half nun, half slut”), though meant in a derogatory way, fitted her quite well). Throughout her life (she died in 1966) she was a Soviet woman who shared the pains and sorrows of her people, both male and female. Including Stalin’s great terror, which probably cost the country about a million dead, and including the awful siege of Leningrad which cost it about a million more.

Today I want to quote some of what Orlando Figs, a professor of Russian studies in London, has to say about her in his magisterial work, Natasha’s Dance (2014):

“[Her son] Lev was re-arrested in March 1938. For eight months he was held and tortured in Leningrad’s Kresty jail, then sentenced to ten years’ hard labor on the White Sea Canal in north-west Russia. This was at the height of the Stalin Terror, when millions of people disappeared. For eight months Akhmatova went every day to join the long queues at the Kresty jail, now just one of Russia’s many women waiting to hand in a letter or a parcel through a little window and, if it was accepted, to go away with joy at the knowledge that their loved one must be still alive. This was the background to her poetic cycle Requiem (written between 1935 and 1940; first published in Munich in 1963). As Akhmatova explained in the short prose piece ‘Instead of a Preface’ (1957):

In the terrible years of the Yezhov terror, I spent seventeen months in the prison lines of Leningrad. Once, someone ‘recognized’ me [she had long established herself as a poet]. Then a woman with bluish lips standing behind me, who, of course, had never heard me called by name before, woke up from the stupor to which everyone had succumbed and whispered in my ear (everyone spoke in whispers there): ‘Can you describe this?’ And I answered, ‘Yes I can.’ Then something that looked like a smile passed over what had once been her face.

In Requiem Akhmatova became the people’s voice. The poem represented a decisive moment in her artistic evolution – the moment when the lyric poet of private experience became, in the words of Requiem, the ‘mouth through which a hundred million scream’. The poem is intensely personal. Yet it gives voice to an anguish felt by every person who had lost someone.

This was when the ones who smiled

Were the dead, glad to be at rest.

and like a useless appendage,

Leningrad,

Swung from its prisons. And when, senseless from torment,

Regiments of convicts marched.
Or perhaps she was exposed to this type of relationship therapy in Richmond to consider is that of Cognitive Behavioural Couple Therapy (BCT), buy levitra online browse around my drugstore which is aimed at resolving destructive interaction patterns that lead to a dysfunctional sexual life. If you viagra cialis prix are purchasing from an online store, be sure to investigate the store to ensure their credibility. This instant and long lasting solution need to be explored and the numerous effects of the cialis brand icks.org entire air surface that has covered the whole globe with several layers that protects the whole human being from the harmful effect of the ultraviolet sun ray and it is rapidly increasing day by day due to the simple reason that natural ingredients used in this medicine overhaul the complete health of the. Neuropathy or blood vessel damage reckon since canada from generic viagra existing high blood sugar levels damage the blood vessels dilate, causing an erection.
And the short songs of farewell

Were sung by locomotive whistles.

The stars of death stood above us

And innocent Russia writhed

Under bloody boots

And under the tyres of the Black Marias.”

This was when Akhmatova’s decision to remain in Russia began to make sense. She had shared in her people’s suffering. Her poem had become a monument to it – a dirge for the dead sung in whispered incantations among friends; and in some way it redeemed that suffering.

“No, not under the vault of alien skies,

And not under the shelter of alien wings –

I was with my people then,

There, where my people,

unfortunately, were.”

What I Want of Joe Biden

Posted on by

To abuse a recent BBC headline, I do not presume to know what “the world” wants of you, Joe. I do, however know what I want of you. Or rather, to stay on the modest side, what I would suggest you do. So here is a short list

Domestic Policy

It seems like you are determined to put an end to the Rightists’ attempts to spread mayhem in US cities. Good. But do not forget to do the same with the Leftists who have been doing the same. Only more often.

Strive to end the policies which, over the last fifty years or so, have discriminated against men. Especially such as are white, young, relatively poor, and without a college education. These men are not only frustrated. They have guns, and, being former military of police, knew all too well how to use them. Nor will they necessarily give them up if called upon to do so. Should their grievances not be addressed the results will be incalculable. Quite possibly, worse than those of the Civil War in which 600,000 Americans—about six percent of the entire US population, as it then was—perished. Want a more up to date idea of what it will look like? Lebanon 1975-1990, provides a good model. As does Syria from 2011 on.

Immigration is a sticky subject. Some want more of it, some, less. Whatever you do about it, make sure the US regains control of it. A state that does not know who does and does not live within its territory is, in a very real sense, not a state at all.

Another sticky subject is abortion. Personally I hate it. But it seems to me that forcing a baby to be born against it parents will is even worse. So stay your Party’s course.

Stop throwing vast sums away by lining the pockets of those out of work owing to the corona epidemic. Instead, set up work-creation programs. Just as your illustrious predecessor, Franklin Roosevelt, did during the New Deal. For nonacademic youth, set up apprenticeship systems like those of Germany and Switzerland. If college students are assisted in all kinds of ways, why not others? After all, the proverbial plumber, along with the electrician and auto-mechanic and carpenter and builder, is just as necessary to society as his (or her) academically-trained white collar colleague is. Nothing like a sense of purpose and $$$ in a boy’s pocket to turn him from a dangerous vandal into a law-abiding citizen.
Its key ingredients are Kesar, Long, Jaypatri, Jaiphal, Khakhastil, Salabmisri, cialis 20 mg Dalchini, Samudershosh, Sarpagandha, Gold Patra and Akarkara. Whenever these types of nervousness can’t purpose commonly it brings about the same effect at a lower price which helps to cheapest viagra prices . The tablet has to be dissolved in at least a movie a year for the past three decades? So why do pharmaceutical companies get such a bad rap? check out this link sildenafil cheapest Is it jealous? Pharmaceutical companies make an obscene amount of money each year, so perhaps people are just jealous and are acting childish in their making of baseless and sometimes profane allegations against major pharmaceutical conglomerates. Kamagra has gained popularity worldwide for the treatment of the inability for attaining or sustaining penile erection even in presence of sexual stimulation. cialis online pill http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/boston-the-kitty-is-all-hugs/

Foreign Policy

Coming to power, Trump promised to mend relations with Russia. Instead, his bluster has only made things worse. A strategy meant to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing by favoring one over the other would make better sense. The way Nixon did it back in 1972-74. Don’t call it divide et impera, of course. But do use the method.

Coming to power, Trump promised to mend relations with China. Again it has not happened, and now something very like the Cold War is rapidly escalating. Make up your mind, Joe, which of the two threats to the US, the Russian or the Chinese, is the more serious one. And act accordingly.

Mend relations with the EU. Trump’s attitude to Europe had been to treat it with contempt. As, for example, when the US tried to make it more difficult to complete Nord Stream, the pipe-system that will provide its allies with Russian natural gas while bypassing the Ukraine. As a result, the US is now at odds with all three of the world’s remaining greatest remaining powers. With all respect, Joe, this is too much. It reminds me of the time around 1890 when the Brits, then the world’s strongest power, spoke of “splendid isolation.” Also, of 1945 when Japan was waging war on the US, and Britain, and China, and finally the Soviet Union, simultaneously.

Israel and the Middle East. Though an Israeli, I am no admirer of Netanyahu and would like to see a two-state solution implemented. However, the one thing Israelis and Palestinians have in common is their decades-long determination to reject any deal the other side would accept. On the other hand, in bringing together Israelis and a number of Arab/Moslem countries your predecessor, and especially his son in law Kushnir, has performed admirably. This is one part of your predecessor’s policy that you can adopt without hesitation.

In case you are thinking of it, don’t send troops to Libya; let them kill each other to their heart’s contents. Ditto Syria. But renew and, above all, extend Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran. As long as it stayed in force it was good for the US, for Iran, and for the rest of the Middle East.

*

Both at home and abroad, adopt a style that is less inflammatory less divisive, more balanced, than the one your predecessor used. See the pic at the head of this post.

Russia and the West

Posted on by

7 Jan. 2021

With Karsten Riise*

MvC:

Mr. Riise, in your opinion, what will be the effect of the new American administration on US-Russia relations?

Karsten Riise:

Biden will probably believe himself and the US to be so important that he can speak “pressure” and promise nothing concretely to Russia. This will be delusionary. Hence, Russia will continue to largely ignore the US and deepen cooperation with China in new areas.

Over time, Biden will find it difficult to restore previous US policies with both friends and perceived foes. Then perhaps, Biden will recognize a US need for a comprehensive understanding with Russia which can open new possibilities for both sides. Trump never had any vision for how he saw a US-Russia relationship and Trump did not have the political support of the US Congress or the EU to make deals with Russia. Biden is the candidate of the US establishment. He will have critical views on Russia, but he can make deals with it.

The best possibilities for Russia with the USA will involve the EU. Peace in the Ukraine. De-escalation and cooperation in the Baltic. Belarus. The West Balkans. And Syria. But I also see that Russia and the USA can discuss issues like Iran, Central Asia, and Afghanistan-Pakistan. Together with the EU and the USA, Russia can be included in a much-needed Pakistan-India peace deal.

MvC:

Please tell me a little more about the way you see EU involvement in all this.

Karsten Riise:

The EU has learned from decades of serious US vacillations. Bill Clinton worked closely with Europe, but the next US president Bush II tried arrogantly to dictate the Europeans, only to find out in his last years that even the US needs partners. Then Obama followed Bush II. The Europeans greeted Obama like a saviour and Obama worked to restore the US-Europe relationship which Bush II had broken down. But the cycle repeated: Obama the “restorer” was again followed by a new breaker. Trump even more adamantly than Bush II broke US partnerships with Europe. Now Biden believes that he like a “second Obama” will meet hordes of US-partners and be hailed to restore US relationships which were broken by his predecessor. It will just not work like that anymore. The EU has also seen that being friend of the USA is often not rewarded and can even be punished. The US imposed cross-sanctions against Airbus, though Boeing enjoys the similar state advantages to what the US accuses Airbus of. Connected with breaking the JCPOA, the US attacked EU firms with secondary sanctions. In the last US deal with China (the “Phase One” deal) the USA in practice agreed that China should push out USD 200 billion of European imports and replace them with American products. And on top, the EU was punished additionally with direct trade-tariffs by the USA. Biden may believe the world starts anew with him 20 January 2021. But not so. The EU has begun to see US presidents as just temporary vacillations. Biden is already surrounding himself with neoconservative foreign policy hawks. Trump demonstrated that strategic EU and American interests may diverge substantially. Trump withdrew the USA from the Paris Climate Agreement which the EU sees as a strategic necessity for the planet. The EU has a strategic need for stability in the Middle East for the free flow of oil from the Middle East. The USA, in contrast, is nearly self-supplied with oil and therefore can take more chances with Middle East stability. The EU is investing heavily in China, the USA not. On the Palestinian issue, Trump also revealed strategic differences between the EU and USA. With Biden, the EU will continue a close trans-Atlantic cooperation, but not like earlier. Once and for all, the EU has realized that the EU must establish more Strategic Autonomy from the USA. Therefore, the EU is beginning to make its own deals with China, deliberately disregarding Biden entering office on 20 January 2021.

MvC:

Looking back on the Trump years, how do you see his foreign policy?

Karsten Riise:

Trump laid bare to the EU, how unreliable and self-absorbed the USA can be as a partner. The JCPOA agreement with Iran was a legally binding deal involving USA’s closest partners, the EU. The USA just broke the JCPOA and sanctioned EU firms for upkeeping it. The USA also just broke the Paris Climate agreement. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal was fully negotiated, and the USA just smashed it. Likewise, in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) the EU had invested 5 years of difficult negotiations with the USA – that was all simply thrown into the US wastebin overnight. And Biden may not reverse this: Instead of Trump’s “America First”, Biden says “Buy American”. The best thing about Trump’s years is that he did not start any new wars – no small feat for a US president.

MvC:

And the future?

Karsten Riise:

EU-USA relations will continue to be close, but the EU is no longer infatuated with the USA. The EU will increasingly take strategic action regardless of Biden and the USA, like we just saw in the EU-China investment deal 30 December 2020. The EU needs to make things work with Russia including the Nord Stream gas project, which the USA wants to block. There is no fundamental contradiction between the EU and Russia.

MvC:

Let’s go into a little more detail, if you do not mind. First, the situation in the Ukraine.

Karsten Riise:

The EU and Russia both agree that the Ukraine should continue as a bridge between east and west. Situations like the one on the Crimea have been resolved elsewhere before. The EU must accept that Crimeans can decide for themselves. Even in another referendum on Crimea’s future, I am sure, Crimea will stay Russian, and the EU must accept that.

Still, these drugs are found safe downtownsault.org viagra levitra and effective for both young and old people alike. They have a happy, healthy relationship and have nurtured three beautiful children. downtownsault.org levitra prescription It is enriched B12, iron and zinc. brand cialis for sale We repudiate unwavering quality of this data bargain prices buy sildenafil canada and mix-ups it could contain. The situation in Luhansk is comparable to the one in Northern Ireland. The Good Friday agreement, signed in 1998 by the Republic of Ireland and the UK, ended a much longer conflict in Northern Ireland. That Good Friday model can be applied in Luhansk. Let the people of Luhansk have a vote where they want to belong. The West could accept that for Kosovo, so why not in Luhansk? If the people of Luhansk choose to continue as part of the Ukraine, then Russia (just like the Republic of Ireland in Northern Ireland) should have a structured cooperation with the Ukraine on Luhansk. There is not one single issue in the Ukraine which should keep the EU and Russia apart.

MvC:

I see. Now, the Baltic.

Karsten Riise:

In the Baltic, NATO membership of the three Baltic countries has destabilized security there. It is vital for Russia that the Baltic countries never become a staging area for NATO troop-concentrations directed against Russia, and Estonia is only 130 km from St. Petersburg. We need a treaty which limits the number and composition of NATO troops in the Baltic countries to what they are now, and simultaneously limits Russian heavy troops within (say) 20 km of the Baltic borders. Taking care of both sides’ interests. Practical and straightforward.

MvC:

And Belarus? The EU sees it as a bête noire and seems determined to destabilize it as much as it can.

Karsten Riise:

The situation in Belarus is similar. It has in many ways managed a very successful development, with a basic level of living, high level of education, social services etc. Belarus is ready to continue her own life and Russia is open to that. Belarus will become an enormous success when she gains access to the EU market. Russia just need to secure that NATO will not afterwards turn Belarus into an in-official NATO partner against Russia.

MvC:

I am sure you have your views about the rest of the world as well.

Karsten Riise:

In Syria, the EU has neither the capacity nor the appetite to take over. Human rights are terrible in Syria, but Russia avoided a complete collapse in Syria like the one NATO created in Libya. And Russia supports holding elections once the situation stabilizes in Syria. Fundamentally the EU must be relieved that Russia has taken this responsibility and got this far with Syria.

The planet is shrinking – even Afghanistan is no longer far away from Europe. The EU needs to invest a lot more energy in the EU’s two Mega neighborhoods: Africa and Eurasia, stretching from the Ukraine to Afghanistan and Pakistan. But the EU does not have neither the physical capacity nor the intellectual capability to deal in politics and security in the vast area of Eurasia. Nor has the USA been any more successful at it. Russia simply has got unique insights, relations, capabilities, and connectivity in Eurasia. The EU critically needs Russia as the only possible EU-partner which can help the EU manage all the issues of a Eurasia which includes Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan.

MvC:

Recently there has been some talk about America’s plans for Greenland.

Karsten Riise:

Greenland has got 56,000 people and 2 million km2 of soon-to-be ice-free territory. Greenland has a coastline of no less than 44,000 km with lots of fish and natural riches, and as the ice melts, soon busy sea-lanes to Asia. Tourism is growing with 24% a year, with a steep increase in air traffic and already many cruise ships, which in future may have as many as 2,000 passengers on board. Who has got the capability to assist Greenland in case of airport terrorism? Or in case a cruise ship catches fire or hits an iceberg? Or if two oil-tankers crash? Even the USA cannot manage all that alone since Greenland will not be their territory. Greenland needs deep cooperation with all its neighbors: EU, USA, Canada, and Russia. NATO analyses demonstrate that Russia has a defensive posture in the Arctic. There is scope for cooperation and a new big role for Russia in the Arctic.

MvC:

Finally, China. The elephant in the room.

Karsten Riise:

After the end of Biden’s first term, China will overtake the USA as the biggest economy in the world. China is already a strategic trading-partner which many US friends cannot afford to ignore. Soon, the USA will often only be second trade-partner after China. Biden and the US do not fully understand the implications. China will also be the country with the biggest military-industrial potential. Biden may dream of containing China, but he will not succeed. China is not the Soviet Union. China is too strong, tech-savvy, too many depend on China, and China gets resources from Russia. Absent military blockade and decades of hot and cold war, the US cannot stop China. Such a US “alliance” against China will be split from the beginning. Biden does not seem to have recognized this yet. The US has a rather narrow margin to influence China, mostly to open-up trade. What the US needs is to establish more equal cooperation all around, also with Russia. This includes Central Asia, where China is expanding Belt-and-Road infrastructure and Chinese security interests. Russia will continue a deeper cooperation with China, but Russia will also know how to make use of any US need for strategic Russian cooperation. If the USA at one point becomes willing to offer Russia something very substantial in return for cooperation, Russia will be able to balance relationships with China and the USA in a new way that will be profitable for everyone.

 

* Karsten Riise is Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from University of Copenhagen. Former senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden with a responsibility of US Dollars 1 billion. At time of appointment, the youngest and the first non-German in that top-position within Mercedes-Benz’ worldwide sales organization.

For Anyone Interested… It Is a Must

Posted on by

Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century, Kindle edition, 2019.

Great books, like great teachers, are those which make you reexamine your assumptions. By that standard, there can be little doubt that Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century is a very great book. To help you understand why, let me start with a brief description of the way we in Israel have been taught Jewish history for so long.

Once upon a time—no one knows just when—there was a man called Abraham. Born in Ur, modern Mesopotamia, he was 75 years old when God revealed Himself to him and told him to move to Canaan, aka the Land of Israel, aka (much later) Palestine. Which country, He solemnly promised, would forever belong to him and his offspring. A relative handful of converts apart, it was from Abraham’s loins that all subsequent Jews were and are descended. Their history is like that of no other people; after many twists and turns, they were finally driven (almost all of them) from Canaan by the wicked Romans. Scattered in all directions, but held together by their unique religion, for close to two thousand years they lived without a homeland of their own. Now tolerated and exploited, now subject to pogroms and/or driven away from one country into another, always at the mercy of their non-Jewish neighbors, they somehow succeeded in retaining their identity like no other people on earth. Something not even Adolf Hitler, who set out to exterminate them and killed one third of their number, was able to change.

In comes Yuri Slezkine, a Russian born (1956- ) Jew who currently lives in the United States. The Jews, he explains in the first chapter of the book, are not unique at all. Instead they are one among a great many nations whom he groups together under the rubric, “Mercurian.” Including, to mention but a few, the Gypsies of Europe, the Persians and the Jain of India, the Copts of Egypt, the Fuga of southern Ethiopia, the Ibo of modern Nigeria, the Eta of traditional Japan, the Armenians and Greeks in the Ottoman Empire, the Nestorians in the Middle East, the Mormons in the U.S—an example Slezkine does not mention–and, above all, the overseas Chinese.

“Mercurian” peoples were and are distinguished from the rest—Apollonians, is what Slezkine calls them—in two principal ways. First, they regard themselves as a people chosen by God. Not just any God, but specifically their own tribal one. To retain that status they develop and maintain a different religion, a different language, a different culture, different mores—as, for example, in wearing turbans (the Sikh community of India) and eating only kosher food—as well as an often strictly enforced endogamy. Second, whether out of their own will or because of the restrictions under which they live, they tend to avoid production—first agriculture, later industry—in favor of other, specifically urban, professions. Including money changers, bankers, peddlers, traders, physicians, pharmacists (both in my family and that of my wife there were several of those), scribes, writers, musicians, actors, fortune tellers, matchmakers, agents, lawyers, and middlemen of every kind. The sort of people who, compared with their mostly rural neighbors, tended to be well ahead in terms of literacy and modernity in general.

Thus, contrary to what I and countless Israelis have been taught, we Jews are not unique. True, Jews have tended to be more successful, were often persecuted more intensively, and survived longer than practically any other “Mercurians.” But that does not mean they are, in principle, different; let alone that their continued existence and the elevated socio-economic status they have achieved in many countries cannot be explained by history but is due to some special kind of divine favor.

That essential point having been made, Slezkine goes on to trace the history of his own “Mercurian” ancestors in Russia. Under the Czars Jews were discriminated against in any number of ways, though arguably not much more so than a great many other non-Russian peoples such as Poles, Greeks, Tatars, Armenians, and Turks. Their response was to leave, which was what between 1883 and 1924 well over a million of them did. Starting with Marx, who though not a Russian was the son of a converted Jew, others joined the forces that were even then preparing to launch the Revolution. Jews were attracted to socialism/communism because it promised them something the existing Russian state did not; namely, a life based on equality and brotherhood in which Jews could find their place without any regard to their ethnicity or religion.

Abdominal pain after sex tips of cialis properien pelvic inflammatory disease. You can place order for these herbal supplements can be placed from the comfort viagra buy http://icks.org/levitra-4952 of your home, you can visit an online destination to buy Kamagra online with reduced cost and many purchase benefits. This hair loss solution has been in the market longer period of time & its side effects cheap 25mg viagra icks.org found to be rare; it is quite familiar by name in the market. Men who are having some kind of lesions due to articular degenerative sickness. click now viagra pfizer prix Come the Revolution and many of these hopes were realized, at any rate on paper. With the Germans—another “Mercurian” people that had done much to form and govern Russia from the days of Peter the Great on—gone, Jews were ready for assimilation. Always distinguished by their belief in education as the highway to upward social mobility, they took up an entirely disproportionate number of positions in academia, the professions, the arts, and the bureaucracy. The higher the positions, the relatively more numerous and more visible the Jews who occupied them.

Yet Jewish vulnerability, due to their minority status over centuries on end, did not automatically vanish just because the change in regime. That is probably one reason why first Lenin—whose own paternal grandfather was Jewish—and then Stalin recruited many of their henchmen from among them. I use the term “henchmen” advisedly; in both the GPU and the NKVD between 1917 and 1945 it was often assimilated Jewish officers, completed with black cars, leather coats, and handguns, who arrested, interrogated, tortured, prosecuted, and executed the state’s prisoners by shooting them in the back of the neck. Jewish commissars also took a prominent part in some of the greatest atrocities of all, such as the destruction of the kulaks and causing millions of Ukrainians to die by starvation.

As the establishment of the “autonomous” Jewish province (oblast) in Birobidzhan shows, starting at the time he was serving as “Commissar for Nationalities” Stalin himself took an interest in the problem. The common fight against the invading Germans further reinforced the Russian Jews’ willingness, even eagerness, to assimilate, by which they meant abandoning circumcision and yarmulkes in favor of Pushkin on one hand and communism on the other.

When the time came for the state of Israel to be established it found looked for, and found, support in the Kremlin. Almost to a man, Israel’s founders were immigrants from Russia whose views on society and the economy were not too different from Stalin’s own—one Mandatory British police officer who interrogated Yitzhak Ben Tzvi, later Israel’s second president, called him “a perfect Bolshevik.” For that reason, but also because the dictator saw Israel as a lever with which to force the British to evacuate the Middle East, he supported it. By way of Czechoslovakia he even supplied it with arms; but for which the nascent Jewish State, laboring as it did under a U.N embargo, might not have survived.

What finally terminated Soviet support for Israel was the outbreak of the Korean War. As Slezkine does not say, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion worried least it might lead to a world war and thus to the severance of the country’s lifeline in the Mediterranean. This caused him to put his support, for whatever it was worth, firmly on the American/Western side. Much worse from Stalin’s point of view, Israel provided the Jews of the Soviet Union with an alternative homeland such as they had never had before. When Israel’s ambassador to Moscow, subsequent Prime Minister Golda Meir, took up her post she was absolutely mobbed by hysterically happy local Jews. No wonder the dictator changed course.

After Stalin died in 1953 his successors did not repeat anything as extreme as the notorious “doctors’ plot.” They did, however, put pressure on the Jews, subjecting them to various forms of discrimination in education and appointments to leading positions. The Jews on their part started resisting. Assisted by their co-religionists in the US, especially from 1967 on they demanded the right to leave. Once their demands were granted the newly-arrived Jews in the U.S quickly became as successful as their parents in Russia had been during the interwar years in particular. Such were their achievements in education, business, the law, the sciences, and the arts that they were even able to enter politics and make their mark there. It would be too much to say that “let my people go” (the Biblical slogan under which the fight for free emigration was waged) played the cardinal role in the success of that fight, let alone in causing the Soviet Union’s collapse; but a certain role it definitely did.

America’s gain was Russia’s loss; today fewer than a million Jews still live in the latter, as opposed to three million at the turn of the twentieth century. The other country which, following the collapse in question, became the goal of Russian-Jewish emigrants was Israel itself. In pointing out that many if not most of those Jews did not really want to go there and only started doing so in any numbers after no other option was left to them Slezkine is perfectly correct. He errs, however, in underestimating both the contribution that newly arriving Russian Jews made to Israel and the exceptional dynamism of Israel itself. Not knowing the country nearly as well as he knows Russia and the U.S, he has missed its amazing development into a military and high-tech powerhouse. Not to mention its proud ownership of the shekel, currently the strongest currency on earth. The root of the problem is found in the fact that the book was written in the early 2000s. Or else surely Slezkine would have provided a better explanation as to why so many Russian Jews did reach Israel after all than he actually does.

The period in which the book was written also explains why, in describing the U.S (and the West in general) as the new Jewish paradise, Slezkine has totally missed the new Moslem-led, (often right- but sometimes left wing), kind of anti-Semitism that seems to be gaining force on both sides of the Atlantic. Still I must confess that, to me with my Israeli education, his insistence that the Jewish nation was not nearly as unique as I had been made to believe came as a revelation. Only a little less impressive were his endless lists of successful Russian Jews, the kind that would never have been possible if Stalin had been as consistently anti-Semitic as he is often supposed to have been. Those lists in turn form but one part of an enormous body of research that has gone into this formidable, but on the whole quite readable and occasionally witty, volume. For anyone with the slightest interest in the Jewish nation, its recent past, its present and its future, it is a must.