Soviet Union – UAOC http://uaoc.net/ Tue, 21 Jun 2022 21:14:00 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://uaoc.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/icon-1-150x150.png Soviet Union – UAOC http://uaoc.net/ 32 32 Estonia protests to Russia over airspace violation as Baltic tensions rise https://uaoc.net/estonia-protests-to-russia-over-airspace-violation-as-baltic-tensions-rise/ Tue, 21 Jun 2022 21:14:00 +0000 https://uaoc.net/estonia-protests-to-russia-over-airspace-violation-as-baltic-tensions-rise/ June 21 (Reuters) – Estonia summoned the Russian ambassador on Tuesday to protest an “extremely serious” violation of its airspace by a Russian helicopter, the second time in less than two weeks that Tallinn has reprimanded the envoy of Moscow. He also expressed solidarity with the Baltic nation Lithuania, which Moscow says will be punished […]]]>

June 21 (Reuters) – Estonia summoned the Russian ambassador on Tuesday to protest an “extremely serious” violation of its airspace by a Russian helicopter, the second time in less than two weeks that Tallinn has reprimanded the envoy of Moscow.

He also expressed solidarity with the Baltic nation Lithuania, which Moscow says will be punished for banning the transit of certain goods to the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. Read more

The Estonian Foreign Ministry said the helicopter flew over a southeast point without permission on June 18.

Join now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

“Estonia considers this to be an extremely serious and regrettable incident which undoubtedly causes further tension and is completely unacceptable,” it said in a statement, reiterating calls for Russian troops to they leave Ukraine.

“Russia must stop threatening its neighbors and understand that the price of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is indeed high,” he added.

A top ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin has told Lithuania it would be pained to ban European Union-sanctioned transit of goods through its territory to and from Kaliningrad.

Estonia also complained to the envoy on June 10 about Putin’s praise for an 18th-century Russian leader who captured a town that is now Estonian. Read more

Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia belonged to the Russian Empire before gaining independence after the First World War. In 1940, the Soviet Union annexed the trio, which only regained its independence in 1991.

Join now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by David Ljunggren; Editing by Leslie Adler and David Gregorio

Our standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

]]>
Gennady Burbulis, senior Yeltsin adviser and official, dies at 76 https://uaoc.net/gennady-burbulis-senior-yeltsin-adviser-and-official-dies-at-76/ Sun, 19 Jun 2022 20:47:05 +0000 https://uaoc.net/gennady-burbulis-senior-yeltsin-adviser-and-official-dies-at-76/ MOSCOW — Gennady Burbulis, a top aide to Russian President Boris Yeltsin who helped prepare and sign the 1991 pact that led to the formal breakup of the Soviet Union, has died. He was 76 years old. As Secretary of State and First Deputy Prime Minister from 1991 to 1992, Burbulis was instrumental in leading […]]]>

MOSCOW — Gennady Burbulis, a top aide to Russian President Boris Yeltsin who helped prepare and sign the 1991 pact that led to the formal breakup of the Soviet Union, has died. He was 76 years old.

As Secretary of State and First Deputy Prime Minister from 1991 to 1992, Burbulis was instrumental in leading the new post-Soviet Russian state.

With Yeltsin, he was a signatory for Russia of the agreement concluded on December 8, 1991 with the leaders of Ukraine and Belarus to dissolve the Soviet Union. The pact was signed in the Belovezha Forest, in present-day Belarus.

Burbulis is the third key player in the deal who has died in recent weeks. Former Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk and former Belarusian President Stanislav Shushkevich both died in May.

Hopes of peaceful coexistence between the three former Soviet republics have been dashed since the start of the Russian military operation in Ukraine in February. Russian President Vladimir Putin then said in a televised speech that the Soviet collapse followed “historical and strategic mistakes” by Communist leaders.

Burbulis died in Baku, where he flew to a conference.

“He was not sick, he felt well and he just participated in the IX World Forum in Baku, which discussed the issue of ‘threat to world order,'” said his press officer, Andrey Markov, to the Interfax news agency. .

Burbulis was born on August 4, 1945 in Pervouralsk. He helped Yeltsin during his rise to the head of Soviet Russia in 1990, then of independent Russia in 1991, as its first president.

From 1993 to 1999, Burbulis was a deputy, then deputy governor of the Novgorod region.

“Another key figure in European transformation has left us. Burbulis was influential like few others in breaking with the Soviet past and trying to build a new, democratic Russia,” Swedish diplomat Carl Bildt tweeted on Sunday.

]]>
How Europe became so dependent on Putin for its gas https://uaoc.net/how-europe-became-so-dependent-on-putin-for-its-gas/ Fri, 17 Jun 2022 20:52:00 +0000 https://uaoc.net/how-europe-became-so-dependent-on-putin-for-its-gas/ Placeholder while loading article actions Russian gas attracted Europe because it was easy to transport and almost always available. Its role has increased in recent years as some European countries have decided to end coal and nuclear power generation and their domestic gas production has declined. The Russian state-controlled company Gazprom supplied about a third […]]]>
Placeholder while loading article actions

Russian gas attracted Europe because it was easy to transport and almost always available. Its role has increased in recent years as some European countries have decided to end coal and nuclear power generation and their domestic gas production has declined. The Russian state-controlled company Gazprom supplied about a third of all the gas consumed in Europe, until the war in Ukraine prompted the region to rethink its energy security strategy.

1. What changed as a result of the war?

After Russia invaded Ukraine, the European Union drew up a plan to cut Russian gas imports by two-thirds by the end of 2022. Russia, after suffering punitive sanctions, has fired back, with President Vladimir Putin signing a decree requiring all buyers from “hostile” countries to pay in rubles from April. They should open special accounts with the Russian Gazprombank JSC, in foreign currencies and rubles, to manage their payments. Buyers in Poland, Bulgaria, Denmark, Finland and the Netherlands refused to comply with the new terms and saw their gas cut off. Later, Russia also cut supplies through its largest pipeline to the mainland, cutting shipments even to those who found workarounds to the new payment order. As a result, customers in Germany, Italy, France and Austria did not receive all the gas they requested.

2. How did Russia become so important?

With its vast Siberian deposits, Russia has the largest natural gas reserves in the world. It began exporting to Poland in the 1940s and laid pipelines in the 1960s to deliver fuel to and through satellite states of what was then the Soviet Union. Even at the height of the Cold War, deliveries were steady. But since the breakup of the Soviet Union, Moscow and Kyiv have argued over pipelines crossing Ukrainian territory, prompting Russian authorities to find alternative routes.

3. How vulnerable is Europe?

A supply crisis in 2021 provided a glimpse of Europe’s reliance on Russian gas, with benchmark prices more than tripling. Stocks in the EU fell to a record low, with heavy maintenance underway at North Sea fields and supplies of liquefied natural gas redirected to meet growing demand in Asia. In 2022, with Russian supplies under threat, European LNG imports were pushed into full gear, domestic producers vowed to keep production as high as possible and EU buyers tapped new supplies from Africa to Central Asia and used more renewable energy. Yet Russian volumes were still too large to be fully replaced in the short term. In mid-June, flows through the Nord Stream gas pipeline – the biggest link between Russia and the EU – fell by around 60%, forcing utilities to tap reserves normally used during the peak winter season.

4. How vulnerable is Germany?

Germany, the EU’s powerhouse, has reduced its use of coal and nuclear power and depends on Russian gas for just over a third of its needs. The country, which lacks LNG facilities, is now rushing to build them and secure super-chilled fuel supplies, and aims to wean itself off Russian gas by mid-2024. It also sends gas to Poland, which Gazprom says is of Russian origin, meaning a possible standoff between Moscow and Berlin would harm several countries at once.

5. Which other countries are exposed?

Landlocked countries in Eastern and Central Europe are more vulnerable to disruptions from Russian gas because they have fewer alternative options than countries in Western and Southern Europe. Russian supplies accounted for around 40% of Italian demand in 2021, but that country is scouring the world for replacements and has struck new deals with suppliers, especially in North Africa. Some small gas buyers like Finland, also deprived of Russian gas, are considering using floating LNG terminals. Poland, which generates most of its electricity from coal, has invested in a new gas pipeline from Norway, which should start flowing in October, while Bulgaria plans to increase imports of Azeri gas in 2022 with the opening of a branch line from Greece, a country which can also supply LNG.

6. What role does Ukraine play?

About a third of Russian gas sent to Europe normally passes through Ukraine. Supplies through the country have been curtailed since May 11 after a transit point was decommissioned amid fighting in the east of the country. Before the cuts, Ukraine expected to earn at least $7 billion from transit fees under a five-year transit deal in December 2019.

7. How has Russia disrupted the market before?

In 2006 and 2009, disputes with Ukraine over gas pricing and siphoning led to cuts in Russian supplies passing through the country. The second shutdown lasted almost two weeks in the middle of winter. Slovakia and some Balkan countries have had to ration gas, close factories and cut power. Since then, the most vulnerable countries have rushed to lay pipelines, connect networks and build terminals to import LNG shipped from as far away as Qatar and the United States.

8. What are the supply networks?

External supplies, mainly from Russia, Norway and Algeria, account for around 80% of the gas the EU consumes. Germany imports much of its gas via a pipeline under the Baltic Sea called Nord Stream, which has been fully operational since 2012. (Another pipeline, Nord Stream 2, was completed in late 2021 but became entangled in politics and is now firmly on ice.) Belgium, Spain and Portugal are facing the problem of low storage capacity, as is the UK, which is no longer part of the bloc and has closed its only major site gas storage. The continent has a mass of pipelines, but many cross multiple borders, creating many possible choke points, while some countries still lack connections.

More stories like this are available at bloomberg.com

]]>
Working hard to complete a gun bill, two sides split from its scope https://uaoc.net/working-hard-to-complete-a-gun-bill-two-sides-split-from-its-scope/ Wed, 15 Jun 2022 21:54:36 +0000 https://uaoc.net/working-hard-to-complete-a-gun-bill-two-sides-split-from-its-scope/ WASHINGTON — As the first bipartisan agreement on gun safety measures takes shape on Capitol Hill in years, Republicans and Democrats are scrambling to keep their compromise on track by sending disparate messages about its scope and its implications. Democrats, who wanted far more sweeping gun control measures, noted that if passed, it would be […]]]>

WASHINGTON — As the first bipartisan agreement on gun safety measures takes shape on Capitol Hill in years, Republicans and Democrats are scrambling to keep their compromise on track by sending disparate messages about its scope and its implications.

Democrats, who wanted far more sweeping gun control measures, noted that if passed, it would be the most significant legislation on the issue in decades. Republicans, fearful of crossing their anti-gun control base, are instead focusing on proposals they kept out of the deal, including banning weapons or ammunition and raising the gun buying age.

The contrast between how Democratic and Republican supporters describe the proposal – large and monumental versus focused and limited – reflects the delicate politics surrounding the issue and the fragility of the coalition that has come together to try to break a stalemate of several years.

“This will undoubtedly save lives and would be the most significant anti-gun action the Senate has taken in nearly three decades,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and Majority Leader, said on Tuesday. while acknowledging that the framework is far from everything Democrats want to achieve.

Shortly before, Senator John Cornyn, the Republican from Texas who played a crucial role in the talks, posted an oversized chart on the Senate floor titled “Ideas Rejected in Negotiations,” as he carefully explained what what his party had agreed to and – just as importantly – what he didn’t. He noted that Democratic proposals rejected by Republicans included universal background checks, a ban on high-capacity magazines and a ban on assault weapons for 18 to 21-year-olds.

Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Minority Leader, said Tuesday he was “comfortable” with the bipartisan framework that had emerged and would support a final bill that would follow its parameters, another indication that the Republicans aim to hold together the coalition behind the deal and demonstrate to their colleagues that it would be politically safe to support it.

The effort is coming to a critical juncture, as negotiators from both sides scramble to translate a tentative agreement into legislative language that can draw 60 votes in the Senate. The measure under discussion would require enhanced background checks on potential gun buyers under the age of 21, make it harder for domestic abusers to obtain firearms, and provide federal grants to states to enact so-called red flag to keep weapons out of the hands of dangerous people, among other measures.

Democrats entered negotiations two weeks ago with modest hopes, simply wanting to demonstrate that it was possible to break the impasse and pass some kind of gun safety legislation in the wake of a mass shooting, and conceding that it would have to be limited in order to attract enough Republican support to pass.

The political stakes were high, even if the expectations of a major breakthrough were not. As President Biden’s polls plummet as he struggles to advance most of his agenda, he and Democrats are desperate for a legislative victory to bolster his presidency and their prospects for the midterm congressional elections. .

At the same time, after the shooting of 19 children and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, Republicans recognized that they had to catch up with their own political reality: that the vast majority of voters, including including their own, support at least some gun safety measures, including enhanced background checks.

Yet they resisted a backlash on their right flank trying to play down the idea that they gave Democrats ground on the gun issue.

Appearing on Fox News this week, Mr Cornyn assured viewers that “states that do not have red flag laws will not be forced to pass them” and that the proposal did not include “any new restrictions for law-abiding gun owners”.

“Part of the problem we’ve had is that people are reading things into the bill that aren’t there, so it’s a process of explaining what’s in it and what isn’t. is not,” Mr. Cornyn said in a brief interview on Tuesday. .

It’s a matter of political necessity for Republicans as the right rallies against compromise. Rep. Lauren Boebert, a Republican from Colorado, called the senators who signed up “spongy RINOs” — Republicans in name only — while the American Firearms Association, a gun rights group that collects funds against outrage over a potential deal, called the Republicans involved “treasonous bastards” who want to “disarm this whole country.”

A spokeswoman for former President Donald J. Trump said he was furious with Republicans who embraced the framework. “We need to stop these RINOs from joining the Democrats,” spokeswoman Liz Harrington said in an interview with conservative media, saying the red flag laws would turn the United States into “the Soviet Union.” .

(After back-to-back mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas, in 2019, Mr. Trump called for red flag laws.)

“I think we’re more interested in the red wave than the red flags, quite honestly,” Sen. Kevin Cramer, a Republican from North Dakota, said Tuesday after Cornyn previewed the emerging bill. in a closed meeting. door GOP Senate lunch.

Democrats have their own challenges staying united behind the proposal, as progressives have raised concerns about its limited scope and approach.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, said she was concerned the proposal, which for the first time would allow law enforcement to review the mental and juvenile health records of gun buyers in fire under 21, does not lead to “criminalization”. children.

Mr Schumer tried to talk about everything the bill would do, noting the importance of improved background checks for people under 21 and closing the so-called boyfriend loophole, a long-standing priority for gun safety activists.

Yet critical points remain unresolved.

Mr. Cornyn told reporters on Wednesday that he was concerned that states without red flag laws would not be eligible to receive funds for crisis intervention programs. Democrats and Republicans have also hinted at disagreements over who specifically would be covered by closing the boyfriends loophole, which aims to include dating partners in a ban on domestic abusers getting guns. . The prohibition currently applies to spouses.

“At some point, if we can’t get to 60, we’ll have to cut some of it,” Mr Cornyn said, warning that the bill’s drafting stage could stretch into next week.

Sen. Christopher S. Murphy of Connecticut, the top Democratic negotiator, said he didn’t expect anything in the framework to fall out of the final bill and was confident it would. adopted.

As they push differing messages about what the gun deal would and wouldn’t do, Democrats and Republicans have a legitimate point to make.

Because the bar for a historic breakthrough on guns in Congress is low — there hasn’t been significant federal gun legislation passed since 1993 — a small gesture still counts as a major moment.

This dynamic may be unsatisfying for Democrats frustrated with having to accept incremental progress and enacting only a fraction of the policies they believe would save lives, but it could be a political win-win for them, the leaders said. strategists.

“They have a major achievement to tell, and they still have plenty of ground for a very fertile debate about what else needs to be done to address gun violence and mass shootings,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster. “The reality of Senator Cornyn’s position is that the provisions that Republicans have kept out of the bill are very popular with the vast majority of voters. These are the policies that are going to be contested in the midterm elections.

And while the difference in emphasis may reflect how divided the country is over guns, some said it was also a sign of progress.

“The way Republicans and Democrats are communicating this message tells me that they are really committed to doing something,” said James P. Manley, former senior adviser to former Majority Leader Sen. Harry. Reid.

]]>
Understand the political consequences of the Russian-Ukrainian war https://uaoc.net/understand-the-political-consequences-of-the-russian-ukrainian-war/ Sun, 12 Jun 2022 14:10:00 +0000 https://uaoc.net/understand-the-political-consequences-of-the-russian-ukrainian-war/ The new feature of Fair Observer FO° Insights gives meaning to current issues. We pose a series of quick questions to the best of our more than 2,500 contributors from over 90 countries who share their insights, insights and perspectives on an important issue. Experts are arguing over what awaits Russia after a so far […]]]>

The new feature of Fair Observer FO° Insights gives meaning to current issues. We pose a series of quick questions to the best of our more than 2,500 contributors from over 90 countries who share their insights, insights and perspectives on an important issue.

Experts are arguing over what awaits Russia after a so far disastrous war. In Western capitals like London and Washington, many believe Vladimir Putin’s regime could fall. They believe that Russia could disintegrate. In places like India and China, many believe that most war information is Western propaganda that should be taken with a handful of salt, not a pinch of salt. They believe that Russia will overcome its initial setbacks, take control of the Ukrainian coast and leave Ukraine as a landlocked rump state.

Atul Singh on the political consequences of the Russian-Ukrainian war

In this episode of FO° Insights, Atul Singh makes sense of what is happening. You can watch the video above and/or read what he has to say below. Transcript lightly edited for clarity.

Is this the second round of the 1991 Soviet collapse?

Atoul Singh: Zhou Enlai once said of the influence of the French Revolution – he said it for 1968 but it was interpreted as 1789 – that it was too early to tell. I think it’s too early to tell.

The Russian Empire was a hastily constructed contraption. Russia expanded east to the Pacific, just as America moved west to reach the same ocean. But the American empire was built on more solid foundations, while the Russian empire was a messy and disorganized affair.

The Soviet Union that emerged in 1917 collapsed in 1991. Now you might see places like Dagestan, Chechnya and other regions secede. If and it is the big if if the military defeat is catastrophic. If the losses are too high, which they have been so far, but they are not yet too high, and if people start losing their shirts and suffering for food and basic services, then Russia could collapse.

Moreover, Russia is governed by a kleptocratic regime. It’s not built on an ideology. Unlike Joseph Stalin, Vladimir Putin does not generate tremendous economic growth or industrialization. In fact, Russian factories depend on spare parts from all over the world. The Russians don’t make silicon chips, so they can’t do a lot of advanced stuff without help from others. So yes, Russia could collapse, but the jury is still out on whether it will.

Is Vladimir Putin running out of rope?

Atoul Singh: My personal feeling is that Vladimir Putin will eventually leave because most dictators lose touch and dictators who end up in wars that end badly don’t seem to stay in the saddle for too long. This war is not going very well for Putin, so he may be running out of rope, and the reason for that is not necessarily the war. The reason may well be that he presided over a regime that indulged in mass thefts. And there is no real moral or ideological basis for his regime.

Putin’s regime is a fake tsarism, it’s a tsarism without a tsar with its private properties, with its fanciful castles, with oligarchs and an absolute concentration of power. In the end, Putin’s regime is not like the Soviet regime which had true believers. Everything is built around a nostalgia for past greatness and which can end in a defeat in Ukraine, or let’s say a Pyrrhic victory, which is often not much better.

Can Russia still export its military equipment?

Russia has made a name for itself as a powerful military power, exporting its T-90 tanks, S-400 missiles, Sukhoi Su-30s and so on to many countries around the world, including China and the United States. India. Now Russian factories will have to work overtime to supply their own army. In addition, many engines for Russian military equipment came from Ukraine. In fact, that’s what the Indians are discovering, and Russia will find it very difficult to increase production and supply other countries.

Russia’s strength as a defense exporter will weaken. The country is definitely going to be on its back, if not on its knees, and if things go horribly wrong. Of course, Russian kit now has a bad reputation, given the mutilation it has suffered, but if the war turned even worse, Russia’s days as a leading arms exporter could be in doubt. . The Chinese might look at Russia, or the Russian disaster, a little more cheerfully than the West. They could step in to fill the void.

Will Russia fall under the thumb of China?

Well, that’s the nightmare of many of my Pentagon friends. I’ve heard so many arguments that the real enemy is China and Russia is a distraction. Some of these ladies and gentlemen believe that China is backing Russia through back channels and shady deals are backing Vladimir Putin.

Little by little, a giant pipeline is being built to meet Chinese energy needs. This will provide Russia with much of the liquidity needed to continue over a period of time. Russia is increasingly beholden to China. If Beijing emerges triumphant or triumphant, we could achieve something like an alliance between Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire before World War I.

It could then take the West. In fact, this Eurasian alliance could emerge as a challenger to Washington and European capitals. Of course, Russia and China have thorny border issues. They have a long border. They also have a geopolitical rivalry in Central Asia. They had quarrels even under communism when they were supposed to be under the same ideology. But pressure from the West could push them together, certainly at this time. The Russians need the Chinese more than the Chinese need the Russians. Russia will therefore certainly be under the thumb of China.

What future for Russia?

A gloomy winter, I suppose, after a difficult summer. Russia is not in its best shape. Yes, its ruble no longer drops to the same degree – they backed it with gold. Yes, Russia has a fortress economy. Yes, it can grow wheat. Yes, there is bread and oil. But at the end of the day, the Russians haven’t really invested in their own country and made stuff. A country’s ability to fight a war and win a war depends on its ability to do things, and that’s what Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union was good at despite all its catastrophic loss of life and murder of millions of people.

Under Vladimir Putin, the Russian oligarchs bought yachts, properties in London and beautiful villas in Monaco and elsewhere. And the Russians don’t do anything anymore. They export goods. So Russia can certainly cause a giant crash in the world economy. It can cause inflation to ricochet around the world. This can bring about the collapse of regimes like in Egypt and even in countries like Lebanon.

However, Russia is no longer doing anything advanced and no longer producing silicon chips, which is important for the next generation of manufacturing. So the future for Russia is bleak, and there is sure to be a massive upheaval in the way Russia is run and perhaps even the way Russian borders are drawn when the dust settles.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Fair Observer.

]]>
Everything that happened between seasons 2 and 3 of For All Mankind https://uaoc.net/everything-that-happened-between-seasons-2-and-3-of-for-all-mankind/ Fri, 10 Jun 2022 22:10:00 +0000 https://uaoc.net/everything-that-happened-between-seasons-2-and-3-of-for-all-mankind/ For all mankind Season 3 is set in 1992, about a decade after the Apollo-Soyuz mission in Season 2, and a lot has happened since then. The show’s decades-spanning plot stems from a different outcome of the 1969 moon landing, in which the Soviet Union set foot on the lunar surface in front of a […]]]>

For all mankind Season 3 is set in 1992, about a decade after the Apollo-Soyuz mission in Season 2, and a lot has happened since then. The show’s decades-spanning plot stems from a different outcome of the 1969 moon landing, in which the Soviet Union set foot on the lunar surface in front of a single American, triggering a long and deadly competition between nations in space. Over its first two seasons, the series has developed a gripping narrative defined by a keen balance of heart-pounding action and heartbreaking drama. The series’ previous character work and ambitious overarching plot For all mankind Season 3’s story is the most compelling series yet.

VIDEO OF THE DAY

Humanity now has Mars in sight as its next extraterrestrial conquest, and NASA and the Soviet Union are joined in this new space race by a private company known as Helios. Following the sacrificial deaths of Gordo and Tracy at the end of Season 2, For all mankindThe remaining characters bear the brunt of grief at the start of Season 3 as they navigate through Earth’s most technologically advanced era. As the pursuit of the Red Planet intensifies, veteran astronauts Ed Baldwin (Joel Kinnaman) and Danielle Poole (Krys Marshall) prepare to re-enter the cosmos, while new For all mankind characters Danny Stevens (Casey Johnson) and Kelly Baldwin (Cynthy Wu) seek to prove themselves outside of Earth’s orbit. For all mankind Season 3 also focuses on the high-profile career developments of Ellen Wilson (Jodi Balfour), Karen Baldwin (Shantel VanSanten), and Margo Madison (Wrenn Schmidt), which follows a colossal series of historic events over the preceding years. .


Related: Did Stanley Kubrick Fake the Moon Landing? This Bizarre Conspiracy Theory Explained

Like the Season 2 premiere, For all mankind season 3, episode 1, “Polaris,” opens with a montage of historical events that occurred between seasons 2 and 3. Additionally, the season 3 premiere highlights the character evolution that occurred off screen during time jump. As an alternate history, For all mankind has always strayed from real-world accuracy, but the start of Season 3 proves just how detailed the series edits are.

What the main characters of All Mankind did between seasons 2 and 3


Jodi Balfour as Ellen Wilson in For All Mankind season 3

The majority of For all mankindThe characters of have taken on bigger roles in their careers, regardless of age. Between seasons 2 and 3, Ed and Karen divorced. Ed remarried and started working as a teacher, while Karen became an entrepreneur and started the Polaris space hotel with Sam Cleveland (Jeff Hephner). Ellen ran a successful U.S. Senate campaign in Texas and later launched a presidential campaign to take on eventual winner Bill Clinton.


For all mankind Season 3 Episode 1 also reveals that the Baldwins’ adopted daughter, Kelly, has traveled to a research base in Antarctica, and Danny is now a fully competent astronaut. Aleida Rosales (Coral Peña) works full-time at NASA under Margo, who served as the agency’s chief administrator. While Ed and Danielle still reside on NASA’s astronaut roster, Molly Cobb (Sonya Walger) has lost her sight and serves as NASA’s Astronaut Office Chief when For all mankind season 3 begins.

What historical events happened between seasons 2 and 3 of For All Mankind


for-all-mankind-season-3-episode-1-story-montage-moon-trafficking

In the nine years that have elapsed since the events described at the end of For all mankind season 2, many real historical events were impacted by the show’s altered timeline. As a result, the show’s space race narrative has the most impact on technology and politics. For all mankind The Season 3 opening sequence reveals that NASA has extended construction into Earth orbit. Entrepreneurs Dev Ayesa (Edi Gathegi) and Richard Hilliard have made a breakthrough in nuclear fusion. Ayesa, the founder of Helios, then obtained a lunar exploitation contract from NASA. International affairs have seen China prepare to open a moon base and North Korea abandon its ballistic missile program in favor of space exploration.


Related: First Man True Story: What The Movie Changed About Neil Armstrong And The Moon Landing

The most revolutionary developments during For all mankindThe time gap revolves around NASA’s plan to land humans on Mars by 1996 and the discovery that clean nuclear energy has slowed global warming. Major political developments of the time include the assassination of British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher as well as the signing by US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet Premier Yuri Andropov of a lunar peace treaty dividing territory on the moon in two. . The next decade or so For all mankind season 2 also included the election of Gary Hart to two terms as President of the United States and the rise of Mikhail Gorbachev to Soviet power.


In sports, Michael Jordan was selected first overall by the Portland Trail Blazers in the 1984 NBA draft. Diego Maradona’s infamous “Hand of God” goal was disallowed, sending England to the 1986 World Cup final in place of Argentina. Surprisingly, For all mankindThe cosmic story of has also had an impact on the entertainment industry. Actors Dennis Quaid and Meg Ryan played Gordo and Tracy Stevens in a movie called “love in the skies.” Houston’s Outpost Restaurant, which For all mankind‘s main characters frequent regularly, has now expanded globally. Elsewhere in popular culture, Alex Trebek has taken to hosting Danger and The Beatles have embarked on a reunion tour of the United States. Obviously, For all mankindThe story of is influenced by events that are still very different from events in the real world, which remains essential to the identity of the series.

How For All Mankind Season 2 Changed History (And What It Means For Season 3)


Astronauts on Mars in For All Mankind season 3

The achievements on the Moon described in For all mankind seasons 1 and 2 advanced technology and set humanity on the path to a more prosperous future than in real life. Slowing global warming indicates that Earth can push environmental disasters further into the future. While space tourism has proven its dangers, the technical achievement of the Polaris Hotel ignites a flame of ambition for humans in space and likely contributed to the world’s desire to settle on Mars.

Additionally, many real-life people and events alluded to in For all mankind The Season 3 opening sequence is slightly changed in the Apple TV+ series. For example, in real-world history, Michael Jordan was drafted by the Chicago Bulls instead of the Trail Blazers, Diego Maradona’s goal allowed Argentina to defeat England, and Margaret Thatcher was never murdered by the Irish Republican Army. The fantasy of the Beatles getting back together obviously stems from the absence of the murder of John Lennon in 1980, which was noted in For all mankindThe premiere of season 2.

Related: What Happened To Each Beatle After They Breakup

This myriad of modified events proves that For all mankind is a genuine alternate history beyond its central focus. Contextualizing the time period is always key to telling a story based on history to any degree, but it’s a nice touch of detail to see how in the For all mankind, other sectors of culture and society that apparently have nothing to do with the space race may also change. Therefore, For all mankind season 3 uniquely establishes itself as its own narrative existing separately from the true history of the world, but still defined by the same themes.


Next: Every Apple TV Original Show Ranked From Worst To Best

New episodes of For all mankind stream Fridays on Apple TV+.

Snowspeeder

Star Wars: Why Rebels Use Snowspeeders


About the Author

]]>
Nazarbayev University experts discuss shifting political narratives in the wake of the January events https://uaoc.net/nazarbayev-university-experts-discuss-shifting-political-narratives-in-the-wake-of-the-january-events/ Thu, 09 Jun 2022 05:16:31 +0000 https://uaoc.net/nazarbayev-university-experts-discuss-shifting-political-narratives-in-the-wake-of-the-january-events/ NUR-SULTAN – The Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Public Policy (NU GSPP) hosted a panel discussion on political instability in Central Asia on June 7, unpacking how society and government discourse have changed in the context of the January events and exploring the policy implications of these changes are. Aziz Burkhanov leading the round table. […]]]>

NUR-SULTAN – The Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Public Policy (NU GSPP) hosted a panel discussion on political instability in Central Asia on June 7, unpacking how society and government discourse have changed in the context of the January events and exploring the policy implications of these changes are.

Aziz Burkhanov leading the round table. Photo credit: astanatimes.com

Aziz Burkhanov, Associate Professor of NU GSPP, opened the discussion on the topic of identity and how the identity narrative has changed in terms of priorities and focus, particularly with respect to different ethnic groups and the story.

To deliver his message, Burkhanov focused on the famine of the 1920s and 1930s in the territory of Kazakhstan, the result of poor governance by the Soviet Union, and how its history was discussed between society and the Kazakh government.

“What we are seeing now is that there is more societal demand for this question to be explored. We have seen that several documentaries have been made about the famine. This, in general, shows that the societal narrative has The narrative seeks to take a closer look and investigate asharshylyk (famine),” Burkhanov said.

Changes in national narratives about identity and history are a sign of broader shifts not just in government but also in society, Burkhanov said. “Society wants more answers about historical events that have not been discussed properly. This coincides with opening up the system to broader societal discussions,” he concluded.

Dina Sharipova, assistant professor at NU GSPP, joined the panel on the topic of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev’s rhetoric during his speeches from early January until his address to the nation on March 16.

Its aim was to examine the relationship between presidential rhetoric and people’s opinions.

For example, Sharipova said that “in her address to the nation, the inclusive pronoun ‘we’ was mentioned 54 times, while the exclusive pronoun ‘I’ was used 24 times, or half as many”, which was done to demonstrate the unity of the people with the government.

She also highlighted the strategic use of proverbs to show that people have a common history.

Serik Orazgaliyev, Assistant Professor at NU GSPP, presented his paper on the effect of social media on the fragmentation of society. Orazgaliyev challenged the assumption that the media facilitates freedom of expression in countries where the government controls the media.

According to him, there is a side to media that people ignore, namely that digital media can have a polarizing effect on society, creating social fragmentation and increasing the risk of conflict.

“The nature of polarization has to do with people’s tendency to move into like-minded groups and digital media allows us to do that,” he added.

He also drew attention to the challenges created by fake news and how it can be used for dangerous propaganda and cyberattacks.

“The policy challenge is to regulate digital media without undermining freedom of expression and to respect diversity by mitigating extreme polarization that can lead to violence and radicalization,” Orazgaliyev concluded.

]]>
Diplomatic war over Ukrainian grain escalates https://uaoc.net/diplomatic-war-over-ukrainian-grain-escalates/ Tue, 07 Jun 2022 05:33:51 +0000 https://uaoc.net/diplomatic-war-over-ukrainian-grain-escalates/ Placeholder while loading article actions You are reading an excerpt from Today’s WorldView newsletter. Sign up to get the rest for freefeaturing news from around the world, interesting ideas and opinions you need to know, delivered to your inbox every day of the week. Think of it as war beyond war. Russia’s February 24 invasion […]]]>
Placeholder while loading article actions

You are reading an excerpt from Today’s WorldView newsletter. Sign up to get the rest for freefeaturing news from around the world, interesting ideas and opinions you need to know, delivered to your inbox every day of the week.

Think of it as war beyond war. Russia’s February 24 invasion of Ukraine and ongoing military offensives to seize more of its neighbor’s territory have caused much destruction alone – tens of thousands of civilians are dead, millions more are displaced and there have been billions of dollars in damage to Ukraine’s cities and critical infrastructure.

But the crisis has also had dramatic repercussions around the world. The cumulative effect of Russian attacks on Ukraine and the blockade of its Black Sea ports, along with Western sanctions on Russian exports, has caused prices to spike in places far from the conflict zone. In the poorest countries of Asia and Africa, the cost of staples like wheat and cooking oil has skyrocketed and created new strains on societies that can least afford them. In the Horn of Africa alone, up to 20 million people could go hungry this year amid food shortages and prolonged drought.

Today, foreign governments are scrambling to find options to unleash Ukraine’s huge supply of agricultural products, especially wheat. Ukrainian officials say some 20 million tonnes of grain are trapped in the country, with Russia blockading both ports that remain in Ukrainian hands and allegedly bombed Ukrainian installations that store grain.

Through various diplomatic channels, Ukrainian officials are exploring the possibility of moving grain shipments by rail to distant ports on the Baltic Sea, as well as to neighboring Romania. But significant logistical issues remain, including whether these ports have the capacity to handle the increased loads efficiently. Cold War-era construction can also present an obstacle.

“Ukraine, Russia, Lithuania and other former members of the Soviet Union use the Russian railway gauge standard”, explained the Wall Street Journal. “Poland, Romania and most of the rest of Europe use a narrower gauge. To transport grain across these borders, either the running gear of the cars must be changed or the cargo must be moved to new trains.

Turkey’s Delicate Role in the Russo-Ukrainian War

On Monday, reports in Russian state media pointed out a nascent Russian-Turkish plan to ease the blockade of the large port of Odessa on the Black Sea. Turkish ships would help clear the waters off the city’s coast and ensure safe passage for Ukrainian cargo ships carrying the grain across the Bosphorus and to Mediterranean ports. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is expected in Ankara on Wednesday for talks with his Turkish counterparts.

However, Ukrainian officials have expressed serious reservations about the plan. “By commenting in advance on the conclusion of the agreement, Russia seeks to shift the responsibility to Ukraine” for having disrupted the supply, Taras Kachka, Ukrainian Deputy Minister of Economy, told Bloomberg News. “But the fact remains that the food crisis was artificially created by Russia and Russia alone.”

On Twitter, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba warned of the Kremlin using this opening to force an invasion of Odessa. In recent weeks, politicians and diplomats from the Baltic states and Poland – the countries most suspicious of Russia’s designs – have also warned against dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin on easing the blockade.

Russian officials have sought to emphasize their own thwarted food and fertilizer exports, thanks to sweeping Western sanctions imposed on the country’s economy since its invasion of Ukraine. US and Ukrainian officials accuse Moscow of using its blockade as a form of blackmail to secure some sanctions relief.

US officials also cited apparent evidence of Russian ships carrying “stolen” Ukrainian grain from ports under their control, including from the Crimean peninsula, annexed by Moscow in 2014. “It is difficult to consider Russian offers of good faith given how they are actively and intentionally destroying food in Ukraine and exacerbating global food insecurity,” a US official told Politico.

Outside the West, Putin is less isolated than you might think

But elsewhere, governments are more receptive to the Russian position. On Friday, Senegalese President Macky Sall, also chairman of the African Union, met Putin in the Black Sea city of Sochi. There, Sall lamented how African countries, “although they are far from the theater, are victims of this crisis economically.”

Between 2018 and 2020, Africa imported some 44% of its wheat from Russia and Ukraine. Since the recent disruptions, wheat prices have risen by about 45 percent, according to the African Development Bank.

With a Putin at his side, Sall urged relief for Ukraine and the country that chose to attack him. “The fact that this crisis led to the cessation of exports from Ukraine, but also from Russia because of the sanctions, we found ourselves in between,” Sall told reporters. “It is absolutely necessary that [governments in the West] help to facilitate the export of Ukrainian cereals, but also that Russia is able to export fertilizers, food products, but especially cereals.

A majority of African nations in the UN General Assembly voted to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But in a time of growing economic crisis, it matters less to countries far from conflict how they get their food and who sends it.

“Africans don’t care where they get their food from, and if anyone is going to moralize about it, they are wrong,” said Hassan Khannenje, director of the HORN International Institute for Strategic Studies, based in Kenya. told the New York Timesreferring to reports of Ukrainian grain shipments being stolen by Russia.

“The need for food is so bad that there is no need to debate it,” he said.

]]>
Western ‘unity’ escalates war in Ukraine https://uaoc.net/western-unity-escalates-war-in-ukraine/ Sun, 05 Jun 2022 14:13:28 +0000 https://uaoc.net/western-unity-escalates-war-in-ukraine/ Placeholder while loading article actions More than 100 days of war in Ukraine not only triggered multiple political, economic and environmental crises; Vladimir Putin’s invasion has also revived dangerous delusions in the West. A few months ago, acute divisions plagued the United States, the European Union and the ties between them. Germany, the first European […]]]>
Placeholder while loading article actions

More than 100 days of war in Ukraine not only triggered multiple political, economic and environmental crises; Vladimir Putin’s invasion has also revived dangerous delusions in the West.

A few months ago, acute divisions plagued the United States, the European Union and the ties between them. Germany, the first European nation, had developed a mutually beneficial relationship with Russia. Poland, a frontline state now aligned against Russia, was sinking deeper into autocracy, calling on its EU partners to take punitive action. A lying Conservative Prime Minister ruled the UK. The United States, damaged by Trumpism, a mishandled pandemic and a military debacle in Afghanistan, was debating the likelihood of civil war. French President Emmanuel Macron had declared that NATO was “brain dead”.

As soon as Russian President Vladimir Putin launched his assault, Western politicians and journalists rushed to report that those cracks had miraculously dissolved. Praising “Western unity” and the rejuvenation of the “free world”, they seemed to spend as much time trying to renovate the West’s self-image as they did offering an effective response to Putin’s invasion.

Of course, untargeted actions fueled largely by self-esteem were always doomed to failure. Take, for example, the sanctions, widely hailed as projecting Western resolve against Putinism. Ineffective even against toothless regimes like Cuba, the sanctions have predictably failed to deter the Russian leader while exposing billions of people around the world to high inflation and hunger.

Additional punitive measures have been imposed very selectively, with more emphasis on maintaining unity than on the political, economic and social repercussions for a world that has barely recovered from two radically destructive years of the pandemic. It should come as no surprise that most nations, including close Western allies such as India and Turkey, continue to do business with Russia, or that Putin retaliated by blockading the ports that supply the world with wheat and fertilizer.

Now convinced of their own rhetoric about the strength of the Western coalition, American politicians and commentators have called for regime change in Moscow and a fatal weakening of Russia, without any reference to how such fantasies of supreme power have worked in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. Meanwhile, three months into the war, those same numbers seem no closer to defining realistic Western goals in Ukraine.

In fact, the options before the United States and Europe have always been blindingly clear.

They could give their full support to Ukraine’s resistance to Russia, make sanctions watertight and cut off all financial support for Putin’s war machine. Or they could put forward the inevitable obligation to talk to their enemies and offer incentives to both Ukraine and Russia to reach a negotiated solution.

The first option is hardly ideal. Nations that depend on Russia for their energy and food needs won’t end their relationship with the country overnight – even Germany won’t. Furthermore, an increasingly direct military confrontation with a nuclear-weapon state is unwise.

Yet the second option is hardly pursued vigorously at the moment. Thus, Ukraine receives from the West neither the weapons it seeks for a more successful war effort nor sufficient motivation to pursue peace through diplomacy.

What we get, to a large extent, is a psychodrama – from a tiny but powerful minority of politicians and journalists who have tried to solve the West’s identity crisis by rhetorically exaggerating its will and resources. against Putin.

In his four years in office, US President Donald Trump has destroyed the Cold War idea of ​​a free, democratic and rational West. In Europe, far-right movements and figures who openly admired Putin further clouded a Western self-image forged during the long confrontation with totalitarian Soviet communism.

A brazenly imperialist Russia has now emerged to cleanse and invigorate that identity just as the Soviet Union once did. Statements that “the West must keep its cool” even as death and destruction stalk Ukraine fuel suspicion that achieving a kumbaya moment of synchronized purpose and identity has become more vital for the West than to avert a global humanitarian catastrophe.

Needless to say, the old assumptions – of a singular West with colossal power, prestige or sass – cannot be supported today by a deeply fragile coalition of internally divided Western countries, with angry populations pursuing very different socio-political destinies.

It is true that many members of Western political and media elites, mostly middle-aged, white and male, have basically experienced the world as its hegemons. Too many disorienting things have happened since their youth – among them the rise of China, a country harboring its sense of humiliation by Western powers, and the re-emergence of a defeated rival Russia as an energy superpower.

Faced with such resentful and implacable challengers, they naturally took refuge in the easy certainties and slogans of their youth. But world peace and stability will depend on the ability of today’s fragmented West to find less treacherous ways of dealing with the rest.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Editorial Board or of Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Pankaj Mishra is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is the author, most recently, of “Run and Hide”.

More stories like this are available at bloomberg.com/opinion

]]>
Putin’s alleged girlfriend sanctioned by EU https://uaoc.net/putins-alleged-girlfriend-sanctioned-by-eu/ Fri, 03 Jun 2022 21:59:24 +0000 https://uaoc.net/putins-alleged-girlfriend-sanctioned-by-eu/ New sanctions were imposed on Russia on Friday by the European Union (EU) for its war in Ukraine. Among the sanctions was Alina Kabaeva, the alleged mistress of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Official Journal of the European Union listed Kabaeva in a report on the new round of sanctions. The EU website noted that […]]]>

New sanctions were imposed on Russia on Friday by the European Union (EU) for its war in Ukraine. Among the sanctions was Alina Kabaeva, the alleged mistress of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The Official Journal of the European Union listed Kabaeva in a report on the new round of sanctions. The EU website noted that people on the sanctions list cannot enter EU countries and that “all their assets in the EU are frozen”.

The EU announced on Thursday that the sixth round of sanctions had been approved and came into force on Friday, coinciding with the 100-day mark of Putin’s war in Ukraine. The new package includes a complete ban on Russian oil imports, specifying that EU member countries have six months to phase out Russian crude oil delivered by sea and eight months for oil imports refined.

“Alina Kabaeva is the chairman of the board of the National Media Group (NMG), a holding company that has significant stakes in almost all major Russian federal media outlets that reproduce Russian government propaganda,” writes the EU newspaper. . “She is a former Russian gymnast and a former member of the State Duma. She is closely associated with President Vladimir Putin.”

Alina Kabaeva, the supposed girlfriend of Russian President Vladimir Putin, has been included in the new round of EU sanctions. In this photo, Kabaeva is seen during a reception at Bocharov Ruchey’s state residence on February 8, 2014 in Sochi, Russia.
Photo by Sasha Mordovets/Getty Images

The EU message on Kabaeva added that “[s]it is therefore responsible for supporting actions and policies that undermine the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, as well as stability and security in Ukraine. Furthermore, it is associated with a listed individual responsible for and actively supporting actions undermining the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine, as well as the stability and security. in Ukraine.”

Kabaeva had already been sanctioned by Canada earlier this week after the UK had already taken similar action against her on May 13.

The sanctions also came after reports emerged of a gymnastics festival held in honor of Kabaeva.

The “Alina Festival”, broadcast by the pro-Kremlin Russia-1 TV channel, is described as an event with hundreds of young children and gymnasts performing choreographies to patriotic songs from the Soviet Union. A similar event for Kabaeva also reportedly took place in April.

Putin, divorced since 2013, has previously denied having a romantic relationship with Kabaeva. She also never confirmed a relationship with the Russian leader, and the Kremlin reportedly prevented reports linking the two from surfacing in the press.

While Putin remains cautious about his private life, much is known about Kabaeva, who is one of the most honored rhythmic gymnasts in Russian history. Before retiring from competition, she won two Olympic medals, including rhythmic gymnastics individual all-around gold at the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens. She also received 14 World Championship medals and 21 European Championship medals.

After her competitive gymnastics career ended, Kabaeva served for several years as a member of Putin’s United Russia party in the State Duma, the lower house of Russia’s parliament. While in government, she also posed for the cover of Vogue Russia in 2011.

She resigned from the Duma in 2014 and took up the post of chairman of the board of the National Media Group, a large media conglomerate. Earlier reports in Western media, citing unnamed sources, claimed that Kabaeva shared two young sons with Putin, as well as twin girls born in 2015. However, these claims could not be independently verified by Newsweek.

Newsweek contacted the Russian Foreign Ministry for comments.

]]>