danni naeil

Tag: Ukraine

  • The American Wolf Warriors

    During the reign of Xi Jinping Chinese diplomacy, the dominant approach to other countries, with the exception of Russia, has been to call forth the Wolf Warriors. In just a matter of a few years, China went from a rather respected cooperative partner in countries like Sweden, for instance in creating Confucius Institutes and exchange programmes in the Academy, to being an enemy. Not an opponent or adversary, but a foe.

    As in France, the Chinese ambassador to Sweden, was seen as rude and unreasonable. Calls for his expulsion came from the right, the center and the left. In the Czech Republic, Chinese merchants were exposed exporting face masks and other medical equipment during the early phases of Covid pandemic, to selling (or was it donating?) them to the Czech Republic, calling it aid.

    In Southeast Asia, China has turned all other states into enemies, with their frequent harassment of fishers, border patrols and building military bases on reefs near or in other states. States turned to the United States of America to shield them. President Joe Biden iterated and reiterated his military protection of Taiwan. He talked to, and with, other states, let them front important political decisions.

    But now, the Trump administration has become the new Wolf Warriors, demeaning, slandering and threatening states: Ukraine, Russia, Denmark, Germany, Panama, Palestine. And the European Union. Trump and his lackey Ass Vance seem not to have learned anything from the Chinese way of diplomacy: you gain virtually no friends or allies. States shun you and realise they must cooperate more without you. How can you expect to gain friends by bullying, threatening and belittling people? Even the Russian regime understands this.

  • Restricted aid to Ukraine

    Restricted aid to Ukraine

    I planned to write this text regarding USA, Ukraine, Russia, Israel, Iran, North Korea, China and Trump a month ago, but didn’t have the time.

    Between the US presidential election and the inauguration of Donald Trump, many pundits and military analysts had hopeful discussions on how Trump could help Ukraine more than the Biden administration. I really couldn’t see this. I know the Biden administration has done wonder for Ukraine, and faltered, stammered and didn’t do enough for Ukraine “to win” (whatever that actually means). One of the main reasons, from my perspective, is ammunition constraints.

    Israel attacked Gaza and was on the verge of attacking Libanon and Iran after the 7th of October 2023. The Biden administration did all they could to restrain the Israeli government from a regional war. Simultaneously Biden warned China that the US would fight a war for Taiwan, with an ever-present Chinese military in the Taiwan Straight, while North Korea and Iran helped Russia against Ukraine.

    I believe Biden was afraid of regional wars in Europa, the Middle East and Asia, first and foremost because wars are bad. He had realized how bad they were before becoming president and was, thus, cautious. Secondly, the US can’t support its own military against China, Israel against Iran and its allies, and Ukraine against Russia. It simply doesn’t have the ammunition to do so. The war between Russia and Ukraine proved to the Americans how quickly ammunition is depleted. Javelins and Stingers were used in numbers they US couldn’t rebuild in many years, and that was a “small” war. Fighting one to three regional wars at the same time would have forced the US to choose which war to actually fight.

    There might’ve been several, to me unbeknownst, reasons for the Biden administration to restrain its support of Ukraine, but this is the most obvious one I can think of.

    Regarding Trump I didn’t for a second believe he was going to support Ukraine as much as Biden. The man has no comprehension of geopolitics whatsoever. He doesn’t understand politics, political power and power relations at all. He believes strong men should haggle, not negotiate. Biden stood back and let allies and his own secretaries and directors take place during his years as president. Trump has yes-sayers shouting and haggling as if they’re on some sort of parody of a Medieval market.

    Trump will pivot in any way he sees fit, because he can’t focus on any issue too long. One minute he’ll affront Russia, the next the European Union, and after that Ukraine. He’ll treat Ukraine like some American granary, attempting to haggle, while not understanding what haggling territory means for Ukraine and Russia.

    He has already ruined relations in the Middle East with the preposterous idea on Gaza, his relations with Canada and Mexico. Now he’ll ruin the relations ever further with the EU (he doesn’t understand how the EU works, therefore despising it) as well as with Ukraine. The result might be what Emanuel Macron has wanted for eight years: a stronger Europe (and a weaker US). At the same time, Russia and China will grow stronger, as will India and Brazil. Meanwhile, the Trump administration will continue to erode its power and power relations globally.

  • Democracies in time

    Democracies in time

    The Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation (abbreviated SVR) seems busy spreading a narrative of Russian invincibility and inevitable Ukrainian defeat. Recently it was visible in one of Sweden’s largest newspapers, where American “experts” asserted Ukraine needs to negotiate immediately. In August CNN claimed The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (abbreviated FSB) was attempting influencing Westerners “through layers of ostensibly independent actors.” A known Swedish blogger accused Svenska Dagbladet for actively spreading this narrative by interviewing an “independent” American “expert”. Anders Åslund disproves the obvious faulty arguments put forward by these kinds of “experts”. Josh Rogin from the Washington Post also wrote a good opinion piece on this very issue. Finish authorities have revealed that Russian intelligence services have been active in foiling Sweden joining NATO. Who could’ve thought?

    In an interview with The Kyiv Independent, Serhii Plokhy argues that we need to brace and prepare for a long war. The coming year might be pivotal and he argues, correctly I think, that short-term memory is dangerous, tending to dominate among political elites. Personally I believe regular people oftentimes see life through a short-term memeory version too. The latest inflation rate or cost of cucumber in the store seems more damaging to the world, and the self, than a long, brutal war.

    Francis Farrelly of the same newspaper wrote an op-ed on the possibility of Ukrainian defeat. It is, to say the least, very critical of the West, and its willingness to really support Ukraine in terms of weapons, ammunition and weapon systems. Overall, I agree, although I think the Biden administration has done a marvelous job all-in-all and definitely compared to if Trump had been president, and compared to the European Union. Without the Biden administration, for all its’ faults, Ukraine would’ve fought a partisan war. The countries supporting Ukraine have the most resources on the planet. Russia has survived this far into the war because of the Soviet stockpiles, because economically, and we hear lots about how Russia has withstood economic pressure better then expected and how much stronger Russia is compared to Ukraine (from certain Western “experts” for instance), Russia has a GDP in comparison to New York state or Canada. So, approximately 150 million Russians produce as much as 20 million New Yorkers or 37 million Canadians. What do we have to fear?

    It makes me wonder if the authoritarians have a better perspective on time than democrats and inhabitants in democratic societies? Of course Putler embarrassed himself so much he couldn’t even show up riding that three-wheeled motorbike (he can’t ride an ordinary motorbike) when he realized his troops were initially pulverized by the Ukrainians. But he also knows how to gamble in the casino of International Politics and Suchlike Affairs. So, he and his men tried all they could to prolong the war in order to outweigh the losses and eventually defeat the West by beating Ukraine on the battlefield or by waiting for the short-term-memory-people in the West to think, and shrug as if it didn’t matter: “nah, not worth it anymore”.

    Johann Hari, among others, has written about our Stolen Focus, our inability to think properly because our attention span is so splintered and the gratification system is constantly set to “On”. For instance, the Swedish economy isn’t feeling too well, but the smallest evidence of a turn, like lessened increase of inflation, means that things are already turning. But an economic crisis isn’t averted by one small improvement, since the crisis itself is built up during decades. If Ukraine can’t “win” on the battlefield once, everything’s lost and we’re prepared to back our bags and go home.

    If democracies and their inhabitants can’t see over the next hill, democracy as a concept is dead. The war between Ukraine and Russia is costly in many ways – that’s war. After all the promises of support for Ukraine, all the “Slava Ukraini” uttered by prime ministers and presidents, we simply can’t surrender for an enemy which seems stronger than initially thought or because a war continues longer than people anticipated. Why wouldn’t it last for years? Swift victories seem fictitious or cineastic. Victories require time, willingess, sacrifice, logistics, money and people.

    Franz-Stefan Gady wrote about the movie Napoleon in Foreign Policy. Firstly, he mentioned the Western thought of “one major, decisive battle” which will lead to absolute and definite victory. Secondly, he writes (and has written before) about teh belief in a game-changing weapon, or a weapon system so strong it’ll lead to victory. None of these two things exist. Nuclear weapons, you say? Yes, they have delayed Western support for Ukraine, but have definitely not lead to some magical victory for the Russian forces.

    An ex-commander in the US military claimed that the People’s Liberation Army (the military of the Chinese Communist Party, not the military of the state) is preparing to invade Taiwan in 2027 at the latest. Even if this is his words, the Chinese and American leaderships are well aware of the risk of war over Taiwan, attempting to defuse the tension. It might not, hopefully, come to pass, although it’s a reminder of the tangible risk of a confrontation between two superpowers, one democratic, one authoritarian, both wanting to shape the world.

    According to a report from a German think-thank, Russia could rather quickly rearm and reconstitute in order to continue aggressions. The current Russian leadership, and many rightwing extremists perceives several states (like the three Baltic states) surrounding Russia as rightfully belonging to the Russian Federation, as former parts of the Russian Empire. The claim of renewed/expanded aggression has been made by the Swedish military and military analysts since the fullscale war on Ukraine.

    Russia has also transformed itself, again, into a full-fledged dictatorship, bent on territorial and influential expansion. Belarus is already virtually annexed. Russia won’t bend because Ukraine negotiates. They won’t bend because NATO or the EU withdraws or abandons Ukraine.

    We can’t be as naïve as Neville Chamberlain and his cohorts and accept dictators and authoritarian states to remain calm and peaceful. Unfortunately, Theodore Roosevelt was right when he wrote you should speak softly and carry a big stick, and that a good navy (here military) is not a provocation to war, it is the surest guaranty of peace. Russia must loose on the battlefield. No one should even consided abandoning Ukraine. You stand by your promise, by your friends.

  • Book review: The Russo-Ukrainian War

    Book review: The Russo-Ukrainian War

    I’ve reviewed The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine before – a completely outstanding book about Ukraine, author being historian Serhii Plokhy. This is the second book of him I review, a very contemporary, and initially, personal account of The Russo-Ukrainian War, beginning a few days prior to the full-scale invasion and war.

    I truly appreciate Plokhy introducing the reader to a very brief and coherent history of Ukraine, before continuing to the actual war itself. Initially, Plokhy gives us a personal account of the very beginning of the full-scale war initiated by Russia on the 24th of Februari 2022. As a reader, I can feel his anxiety and connection to the nation assaulted by a larger, dangerous and ruthless neighbour.

    Plokhy provides us with Ukrainian and Russian sources, and therefore accounts of what Vladimir Putin actually did say, or might have said, on certain occasions, which puts things into perspective. The infamous televised meetings, publications, and public speeches and debates are briefly mentioned here, giving us a precious insight into the Russian debate on which nations are perceived to belong to the Russian nation (or empire, if you will): Belarus, Kazakstan, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Georgia, Moldavia. Perhaps Armenia and Azerbaijan. This facilitates, for instance, the comprehension of recent Russian threats and discourse on armed nuclear attacks on European capitals.

    The book provides historical insights, and retrospect accounts of Ukraine’s position in the Soviet Union, the aftermath of the Cold War and the beginning of the 2000’s, with the Orange Revolution, EuroMaidan and first invasion of 2014-2015 at its focus. All this, puts the war into a context and provides the reader with a coherent comprehension of what has happened prior to the war beginning last war and why Ukraine is attacked by Russia.
    In between, Plokhy depicts the invasion, the initial Ukrainian reaction, the responses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and president Volodomyr Zelensky, and the population. Then, the Russian onslaught on Kiev, Butja, Charkiv and Mariupol take centrepiece.

    The relationship between China and USA are later discussed, and this is one of the best parts of the book. I’ve spent an entire semester studying China and have read a lot about US history, presidents and political system, and might claim I’ve got a fairly good perception of what’s happening in the Pacific Ocean, as well as between the countries. Plokhy’s account of the tension, but also dynamo, between these two titans is very relevant to this war, China being able to use Russia for its own purposes, while being an uncomfortably ally, and the US taking a fierce stance against Russia, while not wanting to completely antagonising its perceived and dedicated main rival.

    Plokhy can, in other words, really put things into perspective, and for this I’m grateful. Considering the stress and time-pressure this book was written, it’s impressive.

    Three downsides of the book from a needy reader

    There’s several maps in the introduction to the book. The absence of maps in the chapters is one downside, since a lack of visual, detailed maps next to the text turns the reading experience into a constant page-turning event, if one is prone to check the whereabouts of an event. This becomes almost a confusing experience during the chapter explaining the Ukrainian offensives towards Cherson and near Charkiv. Is the town of Izium in Cherson oblast, or in or close to Charkiv oblast? Is Mykolaiv close to Cherson or Charkiv? If you’re familiar with the maps from the Institute for the Study of War you might know, but if not, you’re usually lost.

    Another downside is the assertive focus on the Ukrainian side. Don’t get me wrong, I strongly support Ukraine and want them with borders restored to pre-2014 and the dignity of the nation-state of Ukraine restored. I want the civilians to be able to live their lives without Russian interference. And I want peace for Ukraine, on their own terms.
    However, that doesn’t mean the book should focus so much on Russia’s losses and troubles on the front. I’ve listened to, and read texts, Ukrainian troops describing how they loose people in trenches and foxholes, for instance last summer during heavy and intense Russian artillery fire, or soldiers entering a forest and losing approximately 75 % of the soldiers in a very short time. Reading the book you wrongly get the picture of only Russia suffering heavy losses, which has been far from the case. Unfortunately.

    Thirdly, I’d include the lack of gender perspective, but this is only because I’m a very needy reader. Plokhy is a very (I need to stress very) competent writer and historian. But during this war I really feel the absence of gender perspective. This winter Lisa Bjurwald released Slava Ukraini! Womens resistance to Russia’s War. It deals with women’s resistance against Russia, the systemic repression, rapes and violations against women perpetrated by Russia’s armed forces, the Ukrainian women’s part of the armed forces, civilian and volunteer forces and importance for the nation of Ukraine. It’s bleak and very dark on the one hand, but also positive, good and hopeful. This recognition of specifically women is hard to come by in wars, although I also lack, generally, the real understanding and insights of men being sacrificed by superiors on the fron.
    All in all
    So far, this might be the only book that compresses the first year of the war in a reliable and proper way.

  • The emperor is all but draped in paper

    The emperor is all but draped in paper

    When Russia invaded Ukraine, approximately 95 % of its regular army was there. Only 5 % remained inside Russia. To this day, approximately 200.000 Russians have been killed or wounded in the war. That’s almost the same number as Russian attacked Ukraine with. Now, private military companies are not obliged to reveal their losses, and the Russian military always downplays its losses, meaning even more losses could be the fact.

    When Prigozhin’s Wagner troops began their sprint towards Moscow on Friday/Saturday, they were 25.000, 5.000 of them being a vanguard. The regular forces suffered casaulties against the 5.000 Wagnerites and it’s said that Wagner tried to reach former veterans inside Moscow in order to recruit them. So, could Putin have resisted?

    Vladimir Putin is said to have a security apparatus of hundreds of thousands of men. But yesterday, we witnessed boys with weapons and police officers in Moscow. Not security forces. Perhaps they were unseen. Perhaps they were not, because it’s a sham, a paper machier construction.

    That GRU, the Russian military intelligence, suffered losses in Ukraina was known before the intelligence leak this spring, but not how big. Washington Post analyzed papers and it seems (if I comprehend the scope correctly) GRU sent five brigades (5 * 900 soldiers) to Ukraine. Three of them have been virtually annihilated, one has been placed in the catastrophic fight for Vuhledar and suffered losses this year and, one has been slightly damaged by the war. These soldiers require at least four years of training and apparently they died like flies inside Ukraine. So much for their training.

    The “Chechen warriors” under Kadyrov raced to intercept Wagner. They live by their rumour, although they are deeply divided into Kadyrovites and Chechens who oppose Russia. Apparently the Kadyrovites use the rumour of being ferocious fighters, but are really not true. They have suffered losses in Ukraine, as they appear not to be more than boastful and erratic.

    In Sweden, there’s a diaspora waiting to return to Chechnya to fight Kadyrov and Russia, and other Chechens have joined the Ukrainian side so far, fighting what they deem are the traitors of Kadyrov.

    The Russian army has suffered staggering losses in Ukraine, with Wagner forces and airborne forces being the veterans, among the best survivors of the Russian forces so far. Could the paper tiger from Chechnya been able to do much against these veterans?

    Let’s not forget the Ukrainian attacks on Moscow, Belgorod and other places, revealing the leack of preparedness and competence in the Russian ranks.

    Prigozhin and Wagner sailed through Rostov-on-Don and Voronezh, in hours taking military headquarters with almost no resistance (that we know of). They were greeted by civilians, being given water, food and respect for being true to Russia. Putin must’ve panicked if he heard and saw that regular people in the vicinity of the war considers the war Putin wages as going completely wrong.

    My very basic, simple and amateurish guess is that Putin panicked. Prigozhin wasn’t going to hand over his only real possession, Wagner, after the new law, and he wasn’t going to end up in the infamous Lefortovo prison, being tortured and possibly executed by the FSB. So, he gambled. And the snake bit Putin’s hand.

    The Chechens weren’t able to intercept the Wagner forces, and it would’ve resulted in battles between them in many regions, with the Russian army inside Ukraine suffering from broken logistical lines and rotation. In Moscow, there’s no spetznaz forces to speak of, and my argument is that the veterans of Wagner would’ve decimated the “elite” forces, just like the Ukrainians decimated them. They’re also a paper tiger construction. Wagner would’ve conquered parts of Moscow, and Putin, not a brave man, would’ve fled before that, not being in control any longer in his train or his jet plane. The snake showed us that the emperor is all but draped in paper, nothing more.

    Putin had to aquiesce, revealing yet again that he is rather powerless, unable to win in Ukraine, unable to control a private military company opposing him. Even if Prigozhin were to suffer sooner or later, perhaps some of his soldiers are fiercely loyal and will take revenge? I fear the board is being set, inadvertenly, by many players, many more right extreme than Putin himself. He wanted to restore Russian glory, but will see Russia ripped to pieces if he doesn’t understand how to revert course now.

  • Sustainable war or Pandora’s Box in Russia?

    Sustainable war or Pandora’s Box in Russia?

    In recent weeks there’s been reports of several anti-Russian and/or Ukrainian units attacking villages around Belgorod, inside Russia, and last week Moscow was attacked by drones. The daughter of Alexander Dugin, Darya, was killed by a car bomb earlier this year, just like the military blogger Vladlen Tatarsky was killed in St Petersburg. Crimea has been attacked repeatedly, like Belgorod and other parts of Russia. There’s suspicions that Ukrainians blew up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline in the Baltic sea. Several Russian leaders in occupied parts of Ukraine have been bombed or shot to death by partisans. And now the Kachovka dam.

    The dam has been under Russian control, and it seems plausible Russian neglect or stupidity blew up the dam, causing severe damage to large swaths of land. But many of the latter attacks seem to be directed by Ukrainians and in some cases, as in attacks on Crimea, officially directed by the Ukrainian government and/or military. Is this a sign of a sustainable war entering Russia?

    Sustainable war is a concept from the anime Ghost in the Shell: SAC_2045, where the powerful countries of the world launch a sustainable war to boost the global economy. Humans are primarily not attacked by warring states, but rather structures and equipment, by machines and mercenaries. I will alter the concept so as to incorporate the sustainability of a war, but a war that could be dangerous to humans as well.

    Ukraine has proved to be a very tough opponent for Russia. The Ukrainians have been able to kill and injure hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers. They’ve also proved to be adept at using the Russian propaganda toolkit against the Russians themselves. First and foremost by gathering support of the most powerful country on the planet and the two strongest economic powers on the planet, as well as gaining support from South Korea and Japan. Finland and Sweden have abandoned neutrality. Again and again the Ukrainians have taunted and ridiculed the Russians in social media, interviews and press conferences. And now we’ve entered new territory in two ways.

    Firstly, the Ukrainians are using the Russian toolkit to spread fear and anxiety in parts of Russian society. They neither confirm nor deny attacks or events about to happen. No one is to be fully sure as to what’s really happening. Not even the Western countries, who in lack of evidence (and with evidence) will claim no damage is done and the Ukrainians have the right to defend themselves. This is the Russian playbook, turned against themselves repeatedly.

    Second, people are killed far from the border and the “special military operation”, Moscow itself is attacked and people with common sense will notice how the Russian military and leadership is unable to defend even the Kremlin, while their leader is hiding in a secret train. The New York Times reported on the city of Shebekino, a city in the vicinity of Belgorod with 40.000 inhabitants, that the Ukrainians has attacked and shelled. Virtually all people have fled and large parts of the city center have been destroyed by Ukraine. The Russians are incapable of defending the bordering regions.

    This is a very potent and dangerous combination: attack your enemy inside his own country, while claiming you didn’t do it. Or maybe you did. Use the enemies own propaganda toolkit and spread mistrust, anxiety and fear, again and again. Eventually, who are people to trust? Are they to trust anyone? Of course, the Russian people has lived under dictatorship, hardship and insecurity before. Propaganda and lies create apathy. Still, has the Russian leadership anything to live for if it cannot guarantee security? Even Stalin remained in Moscow when the Germans came and some citizens felt relief that he actually stayed, although he was feared and hated. But a leader who can’t even protect Moscow from stealthy, skilled Ukrainians, who is he?

    It might be that Vladimir Putin opened the Pandora’s Box with this war: a sustainable war he cannot end and cannot limit. How is he supposed to prevent the Ukrainians from fomenting rebellion in regions of Russia? How is he supposed to prevent Ukrainian attacks in such a large country, that even now cannot protect itself? The absolute majority of the Russian army was positioned inside Ukraine in March of 2022. The absolute majority of that army/military force is either dead or wounded now. Even with another round of mobilization, Putin cannot achieve security inside Russia, the Ukrainians will see to that. And using propaganda against the Russian population, who will they turn to? If this war continues for another year or couple of years, it might be that there’s a sustainable war raging inside Russia, with Ukrainian, Chechen, Georgian, Dagestan (to name a few) units in many more parts of Russia than now. Then, Putin can neither stop nor limit the war. It will continue, with bombings, assassinations, damage to infrastructure, levelled cities and villages, and no one knows when it will stop or when.

  • More on the history of Ukraine

    More on the history of Ukraine

    Lately I discovered that Yale University has released the entire series of lectures from a history class in the autumn of 2022 with Timothy Snyder: The Making of Modern Ukraine. 23 lectures on the history of Ukraine for free, with an entertaining Snyder! If you don’t wish to watch the episodes, you can listen to them as podcast episodes instead.

    In case you’re curious about the course reading, it’s all there as well. Give it a chance!

  • Book review: How to lose the information war

    Book review: How to lose the information war

    I first noticed Nina Jankowicz while reading the report Malign Creativity: How Gender, Sex, and Lies are Weaponized against Women Online. However, I didn’t know Nina was specialized in Central and Eastern Europe, that she has been stationed in Ukraina and knows Russian (thus also being able to understand Polish, Czech and Slovak). Her second book is focused on that same geographical region and, as the title implies, information warfare, directed by Russia. But she weaves the information war of the Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Poland and Ukraine with that of the US, and concentrates on the way to loose information war, but also how to try and tackle it.

    “With the advent of the internet and social media, individual citizens are now ‘news’ outlets themselves.” This fact countries like Russia uses against democracies in order to spread false narratives. In the introduction Nina gives us a more thorough dive into The Mueller Report about Russia’s interference prior under during to the presidental election of 2016. It was far more insidious and elaborate than arranging one protest and counterprotest at the same time and location. The Internet Research Agency (IRA) managed to run popular Facebook pages like Blacktivist and Being Patriot, as well as arrange unseemlingly fun and popular protests in Washington D.C.

    Nina takes us to five countries that in different ways have tried, and are trying, to fight against Russian information warfare: the Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Poland and Ukraine. In discussions with government officials, politicians and alternative media, she paints a picture of the different ways these countries try to combat Russian interference and pressure. These could provie the US with lessons on how to lose the information war.

    The lesson of lessons

    When it’s in front of you, it’s completely obvious. You ask yourself why you never saw it or verbally was able to say it out loud. Nina does just this. In the chapter of Estonia, she delves into the issue of the Russian minority, how it’s discriminated against and can’t be part of the Estonian society. This Russia uses to its advantage, to cast doubt on the Estonian government and majority. How to solve?

    Whenever we discuss issues related to technology, we tend to see technical solutions. Probably because the tech industry wants it no other way. Probably because we are entranced by technology, living in a technoreligious society, believing in technology as a good force in itself. So, why not simply throw in a tech solution to a tech problem? Like she writes: “How can any administration that intends to protect free speech censor the authentic opinions of its own citizens?”

    Why not solve this societal issue with a societal solution instead? Simply put: restore trust in government, give the minority chances to become part of the society as a whole. Try not to evoke bad feelings and animosity between people, heal the rifts. Two important pillars of media literacy (that Taiwan has tried) are schools, as in Finland, and public libraries and the powerful information and searchability librarians hold to guide citizens in the endless stream of information and literature. Thus Russia can no longer use this issue to splinter relations between people and create even bigger rifts. Because one thing Russia does is never to invent new issues, but use the old societal problems to sow discord and splinter society and the nation.

    Downsides

    Four downsides with the book:

    It was published just after Joe Biden was installed as president of the Unites States, thus missing the Biden administration’s take on cyber warfare, dual-use technologies, spyware and transnational repression. It differs from previous administrations.

    It was published one year before the Russian war against Ukraina in 2022, which renders some of the politics described obsolete. For instance, Estonia has once more turned more suspicious of the Russian minority, meaning that, for instance, the chapter on Estonia is not up to date, although it’s still relevant as a historical lesson. Settings for information warfare have changed rather drastically in one year.

    Somehow, I really dislike fictional writings “capturing” a technology and its implication in the present or future. Carissa Véliz does it in Privacy is power. Nina does it, and it’s erroneous, partly because it’s written before Biden’s presidency, partly because it’s the usual bleak, dry, predictable onset to an issue now, set in 2028.

    In the chapter about Ukrainian efforts to provide positive aspects of Ukraine in the Dutch election about EU-legislation should have been problematized more. Even though the Russians seemed to have played a part in negative campaigning, the Ukrainian part could also be considered foreign interference in an election. Julia Slupska’s piece on election interference is well-worth a read.

    Summary

    The book is true to its’ title. Information warfare pervades the book, and it doesn’t confuse information warfare with espionage or cyber warfare. Terms here are very important and so are the differences between them. Although Russia is the focal point, which narrows the scope of information warfare, that’s an advantage here. To write about information warfare in general or include Chinese, Iranian, American or any other country, would water it down. One can’t cover everything to make a topic or an issue interesting.

    Lessons from the book are important and relevant. Countries must learn from one another, can’t hide from information warfare, and develop a battery of counter measures. And those counter measures are seldom technological, but rather societal, economical and political. That’s the most important things I learned reading this book.

  • Ukraine: The Gates of Europe and Bloodlands

    Ukraine: The Gates of Europe and Bloodlands

    Despite my interest in history I’ve never read about the history of Ukraine. Through the years I’ve read some about the Czech Republic and the Soviet Union, but that’s basically all regarding what’s considered Eastern Europe. To overlook the eastern parts of Europe is a common trait in westerners (just like our tendency to count the Czech Republic to the “East” when it’s right in the middle of Europe (if you exclude parts of Russia)).

    The Gates of Europe

    Due to the war between Russia and Ukraine one book especially popped up as an excellent recommendation and choice for learning more about Ukraine as a part of the world: The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine by Serhii Plokhy, professor of Ukrainian history at Harvard University.

    The story begins a very long time ago and stops right after a certain comedian had become president of a beleagured nation pressed by the most powerful president of the world in a notorious telephone conversation.

    Throughout the centuries, Ukraine has been divided into the Left bank and the Right bank of the Dniepr river. Look at a map and think you are sailing downstreams towards the Black Sea: The Left is to the east of that river, whereas the Right is to the west. Lviv, once a city in Poland, in thus on the right side of the Dniepr (west then), whereas Charkiv is on the left (east then). This is a very important fact about this complex land.

    Plokhy takes you back to the Scythians, the Slavs, the Greeks, the Khazars, and the Byzantines, the founding and the special relations of the Orthodox church here, the Vikings, the Tatars, the Mongols, the Muscovites, the Swedes, the Poles, the Latvians, the Austrians, the Germans… the list of people coming here seems endless. It’s obvious and apparent how often Ukraine has been ravaged by other countries, the people there threatened by other people. Millions upon millions killed by invaders mostly. And just recently have they received a complicated independence, once again threatened by Russia. The latest version of the book was revised just after the impeachment of Donald Trump for blackmailing Vladimir Zelensky about evidence against Joe Biden’s son. It really puts into perspective what’s it like being in Sweden: on the outskirts of the world.

    Two very crucial facts he gives the reader is i) the discourse on the Rus (once a Scandinavian word probably meaning men who row), the Ruthenianand the derivation of “the Little Russians”; and ii) how Russia came to be more autocratic, more nationalist, more traditionally Orthodox, whereas Ukraine more leans towards Europe, has a more pro-democratic legacy and has had a special church, the Uniate church.

    If you’re interested to learn more about the most talked about nation on the planet and willing to learn more about people like Putin’s thoughts, feelings and ambitions – read this book.

    Bloodlands

    Roughly ten years ago another book was published, mainly focused on the fight over Ukraine, Belarus and Poland between 1933-1945: Bloodlands by Timothy Snyder, professor of history at Yale University and specialized on Ukraine. Josef Stalin had managed to remove competitors and ruled the USSR with an iron fist, implementing cruel policy after cruel policy. Then came Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany which didn’t even bother to abduct and murder people in the cover of darkness.

    This is a very tough book to read. Not linguistically, not due to uninteresting content. Contentwise, it’s extremely bleak, it reaks of blood, murder, genocide, and a complete and utter negligence of and contempt for human life. I’ve read about plenty of genocides before, but reading this book made me almost depressed and sick. Page after page is filled with death.

    Neither Stalin nor Hitler had any qualms whatsoever about letting millions of people die theoretically, through plans, and later physically through agents. They could simply not be wrong or wronged, so people had to die to prove these leaders right every single time.

    The story is set in the so called bloodlands, fertile, productive and beautiful, of Poland, Belarus and Ukraine, a very special place for the Russians and Slavs (as mentioned earlier) and to the Nazis. This is where dreams converged.

    Snyder lets people speak through (mainly) their letters and notes, many which were written in desperation and in very bad situations. It’s difficult to remain untouched by many of them, especially written by children awaiting death.

    To me, it’s obvious the Germans for many decades deluded themselves when claiming that Wehrmacht (the regular army) were never really involved in mass murder or killings. Not even a blind or deaf German soldier could have missed being a part of a war machine so systematically killing millions of civilians, prisoners of war and soldiers. Even asserting that Wehrmacht was somehow “clean” and not to blame seems, in hindsight, completely crazy. Naturally parts of Wehrmacht knew exactly what they were doing in Eastern Europe for years.

    Somehow impressively frightening (I do not find any better combination of words) is the NKVD’s ability to adjust to the circumstances and continue to kill anyone who seemed like a collaborator or traitor when the Nazis seized lands. NKVD remained organized in many places and managed to kill Nazis and civilians on all sides, no matter how hard the Nazis tried to uproot and kill them. That’s how deeply entrenched and vital NKVD were to the Soviet system.

    The craziness gets even deeper and worse when allegiances shift weekly or monthly. A hamlet did away with Jews under German occupation. One month later the Communists returned and cleansed the village from people who helped the Germans. One year later the Germans returned and annihilated all those who seemed linked to the NKVD. Another example is how some of the most oppressive and murderous guards in German concentration and extermination camps were Ukrainians, and some of the (unwilling) collaborators inside the camps were Jews. Religious roots, ethnic roots, family roots all matter in such a complicated way that it makes the civil war in former Yugoslavia seem like a walk in the park in comparison.

    The lands were flooded with human blood.

    However bleak the book may be, despite all the death and blood, at least parts of this book are necessary to understand important history is to people, how history affects people long after certain events have happened.

    It’s also a reminder of how wonderful democracy can be, no matter how flawed it can be and how utterly horrid the alternatives are.

  • Dead soldiers in Clearview AI (Revised June 15th)

    Dead soldiers in Clearview AI (Revised June 15th)

    The war between Russia and Ukraine rages on. One method for the Ukrainian resistance to raise awareness of the number of dead Russian (and Ukrainian) soldiers is to use Clearview AI, the facial network services company, which can detect faces and connect them to, for instance, social media profiles. It’s also a method for the Ukrainian Ministry for Digital Transformation and five other Ukrainian agencies to detect dead soldiers scattered on and around battlefields.

    On January 6th 2021, two weeks before the inauguration of Joe Biden as president, we could witness the attack on the Capitol Hill in Washington D.C. Afterwards, authorities could tap into the network services of Clearview AI and, quite easily, detect hundreds of participants in these illegal activities. Many of them have been prosecuted and some sentenced to jail. Clearview AI has amassed billions of photos on the public Internet for years, rendering them extremely able to pinpoint human beings if you have a Clearview AI account. The image I have of you will be matched against this gigantic image database and probably tell me it is you, even if we haven’t met for years (or ever).

    The podcast Click Here has a good episode on this and how it’s used in Ukraine. On the one hand employees of the Ministry of Digital Transformation use proper Clearview AI accounts, thus being able to match most images of dead soldiers with real people, even if years have passed, the deceased have no eyes and parts of the faces are distorted. They inform both Ukrainian and Russian relatives and tell them where to retrieve the body.

    More problematic is the fact that groups affiliated with the Ukrainian IT Army appear to use an account too, also informing Russian relatives, though in a(n) (even) more condescending and hostile way. Russian relatives are probably feeling neither gratitude, nor appreciation for suddenly receiving images of dead bodies, especially with gloating or condescending messages.

    Even if I remain a skeptic, there are some reasons for using this kind of technology.

    1. War is gruesome and disgusting. People die and preferably they should be identified. Computers and programs can help here and make this much easier and faster than humans.
    2. War crimes are committed and should be investigated. Technology can help here too.
    3. Russian authorities are not the ones to inform relatives that sons have died in accidents, wars or “special military operations”. They can lie and this is where technology can help tell otherwise.
    4. Identification of people is not dependant on favourable relations with another nation’s authorities. Identification can be made without another nation’s consent, because their citizens are in databases elsewhere anyway.

    There are more cons, however, some really strong.

    1. These databases will be targeted by states, state-sponsored organizations, rogue organizations and individuals.
    2. States will strive to acquire similar databases in order to identify anyone anytime anywhere.
    3. To presume that Russian relatives will feel anger at their government and/or gratitude towards Ukrainians for sending images of their dead ones is really bad. Rather, it can galvanize public support for Russian authorities.
    4. The hope for grieving mothers’ movements to direct their anger at the Russian regime is likewise bad. Why should they, especially if there’s anonymous messages from foreigners telling them they are blind to facts and supporting an evil leader?
    5. Disinformation warfare 1 – whom to believe? A random person from another country claiming my relative is dead or the national authorities?
    6. Disinformation warfare 2 – I can assert you to be a traitor and use this tool to prove it.
    7. Disinformation warfare 3 – can “photoshopped” images be run in Clearview AI?
    8. Disinformation warfare 4 – this kind of technology can trigger an even worse response and method of war, spiralling further down.
    9. Misidentification of individuals happen in every other computer system, so why shouldn’t it happen with Clearview AI.
    10. Gathering of images is done without consent or information and for how long will they be kept?

    Similar systems in use today are the combination of Sky Net and Integrated Joint Operations Platform in China. They are very creepy and should probably be banned altogether, because the more of this technology there is, the more it will be used. Based on a decision in May, Clearview AI is no longer allowed to sell its database to private businesses in the US and to Illinois state agaencies (for five years in the latter case). At this point, the database comprises 20 billion facial photos.

    But. After all, it’s rather easy to stay emotionally detached if you’re not in Ukraine, living your life, albeit with inflation and a shaky economy. Still, the war is far away and it’s easy to say this use, weaponized use, of images is wrong. But in a different situation, with war, death, fear and suffering around me, I’d probably be doing it myself.