Why, if NATO is an alliance Defense treaty, would any other country, i.e. Russia, be concerned that an adjacent country joined NATO, unless they were planning an invasion/annexation of that or another country?
As Ukrainians have accepted democracy, and as they seek to strengthen it, what if everyday Russian’s decide they are tired of Putin, his oligarchs, state TV, murdered journalists, jailed leaders for only suggesting ways to make Russia better, and kleptocracy in general?
American and European leaders’ profound lack of imagination has brought the world to the brink of war.
Anne Applebaum uses these words to introduce her latest article on Ukraine, which dropped yesterday evening on the Atlantic magazine website. She, too, decries simplistic, one-dimensional thinking still rooted in old Cold War paradigms. She warns that democracies must learn how to defend their values-based systems against the nihilistic will to power that Russia represents. Prof. Snyder and Ms. Applebaum have given their readers--and our leaders--much to think about. The US and NATO must stand strong for Ukraine's freedom and sovereignty. No more Munichs!
The link in your article explains (very well) how to hit a baseball, Professor Snyder. From your book, Bloodlands, I’ve learned that the Soviet Union/Russia has always been a bully and acted murderously toward Ukraine…starvation, psyops, gore, blood, gore, psyops, blood, and misery. And why? Paranoia? Fear of losing control? And through the maltreatment by it’s neighbor, Ukraine never concedes; Ukrainians picked themselves up from the blood-soaked land and endured. They choose self governance and democracy, not to be crushed under a dictator’s boot heel. Putin fears what he can’t control. And he’s vengeful. He’s making the western democracies pay for the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Death by a thousand cuts to democracy and the rule of law. Long live Ukraine.
How does framing the solution around human rights help or not in your opinion? UN member states have pledged to respect, protect, and promote human rights. The core values of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are a commitment to empathy for (Article 1) and responsibility to (Article 29) the human beings of member states. Empathy is the soul of democracy and the abhorance of autocracies. Shouldn't we be talking about pro-empathy diplomacy versus undefined diplomacy, since it's a democracy's core value? And what would that look like?
I'm just checking in to see if you have had any more thoughts on this. I do have some thoughts based on the work of cognitive scientist and linguist Dr. George Lakoff, and would be happy to share them. He's the author of the bestseller in its 2nd edition Don't Think of an Elephant.
Interesting postulation about empathy being the soul of democracy. I have understood democracy to be a system of government, devoid, in definition, of emotion. It is based on a principle of governance of, by, for the people because all people are created equal, without right of one to assert dominion over another. As Lincoln wrote, “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Sorry to take so long in responding. We, like our founders have brains. However, unlike our founders, we now know how brains work. And according to the latest insights of the brain, reasoning is impossible without emotion. Empathy is hardwired at birth and part of the mirror neuron system. Empathy is not the same as sympathy, because it has a responsibility component, both of which can be inhibited and weakened through the use of language and experience. Democracy requires empathy. Autocracy eliminates empathy. For more on this subject see https://bit.ly/PEDtool
One of the things I'm truly struggling with is dealing with people whose otherwise impeccable anti-imperialist credentials crumble into dust as soon as it's anyone other than America or Britain doing the imperialism. Suddenly they become redoubtable stalwart defenders of realpolitk, such as Mearsheimer in the article below. What then, to say to people who seem to agree with Putin rape threat to Ukraine, "Like it or not, my beauty, you have to put up with it."?
I am so grateful for your writing about Ukraine. Your thinking has helped me more than anything else to gain some understanding of all the factors involved.
Thank you, Professor Snyder, for framing the big picture, born of a vast knowledge of this region. I read part of Bloodlands, it's hard to take, but important because we need to have a fuller knowledge of what is at stake and understand the courage of the Ukrainians. I read that troops were building up in Belarus, and there was a possibility Putin might have his eye on that country but your article takes that possibility in another direction, that that is, perhaps, Putin's objective. Although I don't wish it on the Belarusian people, Luckashenko should have thought twice when he asked Putin for help last year.
There's something I've been thinking about over the past few days as I've watched videos provided by Ukrainian journalists, of long lines of Russian military trucks on roads taking weapons and other matériel to their various destinations: It must be terribly expensive to get all of that organized. Just think: All of those weapons/missiles have to be loaded onto those trucks before they're sent on their way. Would it be worth it to do all of that for nothing? To answer that question it would be helpful to know their storage locations.
It's such a good way to think through many types of issues/problems. When a person is not straight-forward, you have to make other assumptions. thank you!
Belarus and Ukraine were both constituent republics of the USSR. What accounts for the fact that the first has remained slavishly loyal to Putin while the second hasn't?
I just meant to be referring to my book Bloodlands, which is the major piece of work I have done concerning Ukraine. I will try to write a historical essay. Did fix the link on the online version.
Why, if NATO is an alliance Defense treaty, would any other country, i.e. Russia, be concerned that an adjacent country joined NATO, unless they were planning an invasion/annexation of that or another country?
As Ukrainians have accepted democracy, and as they seek to strengthen it, what if everyday Russian’s decide they are tired of Putin, his oligarchs, state TV, murdered journalists, jailed leaders for only suggesting ways to make Russia better, and kleptocracy in general?
American and European leaders’ profound lack of imagination has brought the world to the brink of war.
Anne Applebaum uses these words to introduce her latest article on Ukraine, which dropped yesterday evening on the Atlantic magazine website. She, too, decries simplistic, one-dimensional thinking still rooted in old Cold War paradigms. She warns that democracies must learn how to defend their values-based systems against the nihilistic will to power that Russia represents. Prof. Snyder and Ms. Applebaum have given their readers--and our leaders--much to think about. The US and NATO must stand strong for Ukraine's freedom and sovereignty. No more Munichs!
The link in your article explains (very well) how to hit a baseball, Professor Snyder. From your book, Bloodlands, I’ve learned that the Soviet Union/Russia has always been a bully and acted murderously toward Ukraine…starvation, psyops, gore, blood, gore, psyops, blood, and misery. And why? Paranoia? Fear of losing control? And through the maltreatment by it’s neighbor, Ukraine never concedes; Ukrainians picked themselves up from the blood-soaked land and endured. They choose self governance and democracy, not to be crushed under a dictator’s boot heel. Putin fears what he can’t control. And he’s vengeful. He’s making the western democracies pay for the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Death by a thousand cuts to democracy and the rule of law. Long live Ukraine.
Softball. My daughter was watching a training video. I meant to link to Bloodlands, which you no doubt know.
How does framing the solution around human rights help or not in your opinion? UN member states have pledged to respect, protect, and promote human rights. The core values of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are a commitment to empathy for (Article 1) and responsibility to (Article 29) the human beings of member states. Empathy is the soul of democracy and the abhorance of autocracies. Shouldn't we be talking about pro-empathy diplomacy versus undefined diplomacy, since it's a democracy's core value? And what would that look like?
I'll think about that. Helsinki and OSCE as well. See also earlier essay about Memorial.
I'm just checking in to see if you have had any more thoughts on this. I do have some thoughts based on the work of cognitive scientist and linguist Dr. George Lakoff, and would be happy to share them. He's the author of the bestseller in its 2nd edition Don't Think of an Elephant.
Interesting postulation about empathy being the soul of democracy. I have understood democracy to be a system of government, devoid, in definition, of emotion. It is based on a principle of governance of, by, for the people because all people are created equal, without right of one to assert dominion over another. As Lincoln wrote, “that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Sorry to take so long in responding. We, like our founders have brains. However, unlike our founders, we now know how brains work. And according to the latest insights of the brain, reasoning is impossible without emotion. Empathy is hardwired at birth and part of the mirror neuron system. Empathy is not the same as sympathy, because it has a responsibility component, both of which can be inhibited and weakened through the use of language and experience. Democracy requires empathy. Autocracy eliminates empathy. For more on this subject see https://bit.ly/PEDtool
One of the things I'm truly struggling with is dealing with people whose otherwise impeccable anti-imperialist credentials crumble into dust as soon as it's anyone other than America or Britain doing the imperialism. Suddenly they become redoubtable stalwart defenders of realpolitk, such as Mearsheimer in the article below. What then, to say to people who seem to agree with Putin rape threat to Ukraine, "Like it or not, my beauty, you have to put up with it."?
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-18/why-ukraine-crisis-west-s-fault
I am so grateful for your writing about Ukraine. Your thinking has helped me more than anything else to gain some understanding of all the factors involved.
Thank you, Professor Snyder, for framing the big picture, born of a vast knowledge of this region. I read part of Bloodlands, it's hard to take, but important because we need to have a fuller knowledge of what is at stake and understand the courage of the Ukrainians. I read that troops were building up in Belarus, and there was a possibility Putin might have his eye on that country but your article takes that possibility in another direction, that that is, perhaps, Putin's objective. Although I don't wish it on the Belarusian people, Luckashenko should have thought twice when he asked Putin for help last year.
Super helpful, incisive reflection, today Tim Snyder. Thank you
There's something I've been thinking about over the past few days as I've watched videos provided by Ukrainian journalists, of long lines of Russian military trucks on roads taking weapons and other matériel to their various destinations: It must be terribly expensive to get all of that organized. Just think: All of those weapons/missiles have to be loaded onto those trucks before they're sent on their way. Would it be worth it to do all of that for nothing? To answer that question it would be helpful to know their storage locations.
It's such a good way to think through many types of issues/problems. When a person is not straight-forward, you have to make other assumptions. thank you!
Thank you Professor Snyder for your analysis and writing to us. I learn from everything you post.
Belarus and Ukraine were both constituent republics of the USSR. What accounts for the fact that the first has remained slavishly loyal to Putin while the second hasn't?
I’d really like to know what you wanted to say about the larger historical context. Please fix the link.
I just meant to be referring to my book Bloodlands, which is the major piece of work I have done concerning Ukraine. I will try to write a historical essay. Did fix the link on the online version.
Yes, of course! I have read Bloodlands. Although I think a historical essay would be useful for sharing with people who might not have read your book.
Thanks -- I corrected -- my daughter was practicing softball and that tab was up. Meant to link to Bloodlands, https://www.timothysnyder.org/books/bloodlands