I feel that the Russian identity has been dealt a fatal blow.<p>The load-bearing pillar of the Russian identity is the idea that we are a nation of defenders, who fought off the biggest invasion in history. We defend, not intrude.<p>If you remember history, there was another guy who attacked a slavic country, in the morning, without declaring war, hoping for a blitzkrieg. We are that guy now.<p>I thought about renouncing my Russian nationality. I may have Russian origins, and I may speak Russian, and I may live in Russia – but my nationality would be blank. Null. Nothing. Empty string.<p>I decided against that. By renouncing my nationality I would also renounce Lomonosov, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Tchaikovsky, Vavilov, Surikov, Vrubel, Tarkovsky, Korolyev, and Gagarin. I refuse to let a single tyrant tarnish the Russian contribution to human civilization.
As native speaker of Russian language, large part of my Russian identity was the fact, that I was raised in household of WW2 veteran(I was born and lived in one of the ex-Soviet republics, not in Russia). I always viewed Russian army as liberators. In the light of current events, this part of me took a huge blow and I'm not sure, I will ever reconcile. Russian army that is in Ukraine are bunch of untrained, uncoordinated thugs that have zero regards to human life and lead by war criminals. I have nothing but contempt for Russian Army. What up with the new "Z" Swastika ?
not really in favor of this characterizing countries thing. it’s like how China calls Hongkong it’s child and it finally was returned to its mother in 1997. Nowadays same terminology is applied to Taiwan, I’m just disgusted by this figure of speech, saying China is a mother and hongkong and Taiwan are her children just signals that you don’t want to treat them with respect in the first place. Same thing with this story, saying Russia is husband signals the bias in author’s mind: Ukraine is the weaker and smaller one thus the wife.<p>sorry for my broken English, hopefully you understand what I’m trying to say…
I was thinking about writing something exactly from this perspective today. Based on what Putin said about Ukraine, how it use to be part of Russia. The fact that Ukraine has declared their independence from Russia is exactly like an abusive husband that won't let go of the relationship and he is willing to put everyone in jeopardy to get his selfish desire of grandiosity met. Everyone one around him sees that its over and nothing is going change that. No amount of violence is going to bring everything back to the glory days. Its over, move on.
Continuing the metaphor of the title: Russia is the abusive spouse that can't take no for an answer and is becoming a murderer, perhaps murder-suicide.<p>Central to Putanism specifically and even Russia now generally, there is a strong belief that Russia beat the Nazis, Russia can beat anyone, and Russia is superior. Limitless expansion of its borders is considered Russia's right, ergo anyone who doesn't want to be Russified is a Nazi, and Ukraine rejecting Russia means they are Nazis.<p>I think Western media has been too dismissive of the Russian belief Nazis are running rampant, portraying it mainly as divorced from reality. And not making the connection just how totally incompatible this worldview is in the post-WW2 and U.N. charter system to which Russia is a signatory. I seriously think we are witnessing the end of that post-WW2 era, back to "might makes right".
This is very cringe. To even imagine that the reason a country got invaded, knowing full well the repercussions that will follow, was because jealous old Putin got all shaky with impotent rage that his beautiful girlfriend called Ukraine with a blue dress and flaxen hair has left him.<p>The first reason Russia invaded Ukraine is because Ukraine joining NATO(in before "but Ukraine could never have joined NATO!!" - yes it would have and NATO was pursuing that, look it up) would be catastrophical for Russia's defense. At that point the only option for defense from any invasion would have been nuclear armageddon - if say in 20 years NATO comes back and decides to annex Crimea would it be an easy choice for whoever's responsible to press the big red button or would it be nicer to defend it through conventional means?<p>Secondly, Ukraine has found natural oil/gas reserves that would have competed with Russian exports.<p>Thirdly, Ukraine has turned off water supply going from Dniepr river to Crimea making it very difficult for Russia to supply water to that area.<p>I'm not saying that this justifies the invasion - war is a terrible thing and people on both sides are suffering, but would we also be surprised if USA invaded Mexico or Canada to stop it getting aligned with China? I wouldn't.