4 ms·
Putin clearly disagrees. Literally. All of this is based on the narrative that he and his government are successors to the legacy of the USSR and the "fall" was
by blamestross 5y ago
Putin clearly disagrees. Literally. All of this is based on the narrative that he and his government are successors to the legacy of the USSR and the "fall" was a mild inconvenience.
- zardo 5y agoHe roots Russia's claim to Ukraine in the Russian Empire, not the USSR.
- wahern 5y agoThere's very little distinction there. Stalin made the same claims: > An anecdote attributed to Molotov showed Stalin perusing a map of the Soviet Union saying: “Everything is all right to the north. Finland has offended us, so we moved the border to Leningrad. Baltic States ‑ that’s age-old Russian land! ‑ and they are ours again. All the Belorussians live together now, Ukrainians together, Moldovans together. It’s ok to the west.” https://drb.ie/articles/a-voracious-reader-2/ https://drb.ie/articles/a-voracious-reader-2/ The territorial claims have continued unabated. This is why Russia was so peeved (and remains peeved) about NATO intervention in Bosnia; why Russia supports the breakaway Moldovan province of Transnistria; why it props up the Belarusian dictatorship, and has tried to do the same in Ukraine, ultimately resorting to a full-scale invasion. There's continuity because there's alot of truth in Putin's claims regarding historical cultural affinity. The problem is, it's not the whole truth, and becomes less so every day, only accelerating since the breakup of the USSR.
- scyzoryk_xyz 5y agoFYI He has been recorded numerous times saying, something along te lines that it was the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century” not “mild inconvenience”. Though, I can think of another leader in the 20th century who’s country collapsed and made a comeback a few decades later under a different flag.