When in Western European and American publications and atlases periodically appear that map of Ukraine without the Crimea, then, on the contrary, the map of Russia with the Crimea, or a map with the Crimean peninsula, designated as a "disputed territory". In most cases, it's not about malicious tricks or about political preferences of persons involved in this case, but about ordinary sloppiness and incompetence, "writes Sergei Grabovsky in a column on" Crimea. Realities ".
In the end, there have happened several times purely anecdotal situations when not only journalists but also politicians confused the state of Georgia in the United States with the country of Georgia, since in English in both cases it is Georgia, and to have a deeper understanding these characters did not bother.
It is also understandable that one of the founders of the Pink Floyd group, Roger Waters, said: "I know that Sevastopol is very important for Russia and the Russians. There are many contracts and papers that Russia has all rights to this city. The change of power in Ukraine, planned by Washington, simply provoked Moscow's further actions ".
After all, a musician has the right to be gullible ("lots of contracts and papers") and be a leftist radical, genuinely hate "reactionary" Washington and love "progressive" Moscow (although in fact people of leftist views should do the opposite, social protection and well-being of the broad masses in both states, but for this it is necessary to think independently and not to operate with dogmas).
The position of the singer Laima Vaikule is also understandable, which some media outlets of Ukraine brought to the podium as a principled opponent of the annexation of Crimea by Russia. In fact, Vaikule did not condemn the Russian occupation at all, she simply behaved like a law-abiding citizen of Latvia, saying: "We are forbidden to visit the Crimea". But at the same time the singer noted that she would come to the territory of the annexed peninsula, as soon as Latvia would allow her citizens: "I love my audience. Is it possible to be against someone? I'm always pro's, and do not involve me in politics. I want to sing for my favorite audience ". Well, this is a common installation among people of art in the world - in the past, and today: politics are somewhere far away, and my audience is here, and there is no difference who makes it, most importantly, that these people love art and (about this not it is said, but implied) pay for it.
But when the other day the Polish online edition of Przeglad Sportowy published on its website a map depicting the clubs participating in the Champions League in football and the countries they represent, and the annexed Crimea is painted in the same color as the territory of Russia, this is already incomprehensible. Since this is not a British musician or a Latvian singer, but a well-known Polish (Polish!) Edition.
Well, among the leftist radicals of the West there have always been many supporters of the "great leaders" of Stalin and Putin; Well, the Latvian singer the Russian audience provides the majority of its incomes; but in Poland journalism has always been highly professional, and the Moscow-oriented audience has traditionally been (even in the days of "friendship with the Soviet Union") and is now on marginense. What happened, what exactly does this case say, it is a question of someone's personal blunder or a certain "bell"?.
They will say: but after the intervention of the Ukrainian Embassy in Poland, the editorial office of the Internet edition of Przeglad Sportowy removed a scandalous card from its site, and the journalists apologized for having made the "unintentional graphic error". Yes, but, in my opinion, even someone's personal lapsus in this case is a "bell".
After all, I repeat, it's Poland, which for a hundred years was first a colony of the Russian Empire and then a satellite of the Soviet Union (is it necessary to prove that after World War II the USSR became the "second edition" of the Russian Empire?), Where at the subconscious level there should be a block from such errors - both for journalists and readers, because not only embassy workers and members of the Ukrainian community in this country read Przeglad Sportowy. But other readers, it seems, caught sight of the map and decided that nothing terrible, they say, did not happen.
In fact, it happened. And this species is called addictive.
With Western apologists of Putin from left radical and right-wing radical camps, the matter is simple: those who want a new Hitler or Stalin (two boots of steam, only one, as always, on the left foot, the other on the right leg) can not be altered. With political cynics (Realpolitik!) Telling that "Nord Stream-2" is actually a commercial project, and the state Russian "Gazprom" is not a political tool, it's also simple: one must understand that these on occasion will sell you smiling. With ideologically invertebrate cultural figures, in the end, it's also easy. But with those who are not eager to recognize Crimea as Russian, who condemn the aggressive policy of the Kremlin, who sympathize with Ukraine (to a greater or lesser extent, but sympathize) and at the same time slowly, at the level of subconscious associations, get used to the formula: "The Crimea is a de- facto Russia "... After all, many things are pushing towards this: the weak Ukrainian policy for the liberation of the Crimean peninsula (usually everything is limited to loud words), and the readiness of a quarter of Ukrainians to recognize Crimea as Russian, and also the established formula:" the Russian okku Crimea tion "or" Russian-occupied Crimea ". Let's think: in such a formula, the membership of Crimea according to the norms of international law to Ukraine is not indicated, and this at the subconscious level takes the last, so to speak, "beyond the brackets", leaving only Russia in them.
Examples of such habituation are literally before the eyes. Transnistria has been occupied by de facto for more than a quarter of a century by Russia, and yet nobody imposed any sanctions on this and does not intend to impose it, everyone is used to the fact that there is a "Transnistrian conflict" that needs to be settled, it is Moldova, enclave of Russian influence, political and military. Meanwhile, the so-called "Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika" and the "conflict" were created by the decision of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, documents about it were published by Izvestia in Moscow in 1991, then the democratic edition, and then Russia as the heiress of the USSR continued to fan this conflict, while putting on the toga of the "peacemaker" - and nothing, everyone is used to.
And South Ossetia and Abkhazia, created by scenarios written back then, are still occupied by Russian troops? Everyone is used to it, moreover, the international community seems to have forgotten about 300,000 refugees from these territories, even without official refugee status. And if we talk not only about the post-Soviet territories, it is a sin not to remember the fate of Western Sahara and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.
The territory of Western Sahara from 1884 to 1975 was a Spanish possession. In 1973, an independence movement arose in this desolate country, but with the departure of the Spanish administration, the Western Sahara was divided by Morocco and Mauritania, although the United Nations did not recognize this division. Proponents of independence next year proclaimed the Saharan Arab Democratic Republic, which launched an armed struggle for sovereignty. In 1979, after the attack by the combat groups of the SADR supporters of the capital of Mauritania, the latter withdrew its troops from Western Sahara and relinquished claims to these lands, but instead they included Moroccan soldiers. As a result, Morocco protected coastal and mountainous territories of Western Sahara from desert; the former are under its control, others are under SADR control. The last recognized 84 states of the world, it is a member of the African Union, where at the same time the country of Morocco.
And one more detail, very eloquent: in 1975 in this territory lived more than 20 thousand Christians from among the aborigines - ethnic Arabs and Berbers; today they were left several dozen people, the rest were forced to go to different countries, escaping pressure and persecution. To this fact the world community somehow also got used to.
What should be the conclusion of all this? Quite simple and at the same time very difficult to implement. Ukraine as a state and all its citizens who are interested in the Ukrainian nationality of the Crimea should work out ways to prevent the accustomedness of all the world's sane people to the fact of the Russian occupation of the Crimean peninsula, to the banality of geopolitical evil. Is it possible? At least, it's worth trying.
Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty Join also the TSN group. Blogs on facebook and follow the updates of the section!.