Happy Easter!
Happy Easter, everyone! It seems much of the US is freezing; we are warmer than much of the US.
This recent New York Times article about the Ukrainian political situation serves as a prime example of how the western media oversimplifies Ukrainian politics, a kind of political pigeonholing. The article is quite, generally accurate and balanced. But again, the president is seen as the voice of the west and the prime minister with the support of Russia. Why does this need to be said every single time Americans write about Ukrainian politics? The Cold War is over, people. Geopolitics is much more complicated that good versus bad so we all better get used to it. I would suggest than anytime a political situation is reduced to only two sides or options then someone is ignoring or not reporting the whole truth. Yes, the prime minister does receive diplomatic support from Russia, but more importantly the prime minister's party is supported by several UKRAINIAN billionaires (all on Forbes list) who are from the same region as the prime minister and have an enormous amount at stake in this political struggle. They, of course, want the government to favor their businesses, they don't want the government to reconsider any of the shady privatizations of the 1990s (as Tymoshenko did when she was prime minister). Of course, the president has his financial backers (which aren't nearly as wealthy as the prime ministers) and Tymoshenko has her own wealth and the backing of several very wealthy people.
The New York Times article also pulled the language card--that the problem is the Russian-speaking east versus the Ukrainian-speaking west. And yes, it's a problem. It will continue to be a problem. But what about central Ukraine, and most importantly what about the capital? Central Ukraine has much more wealth than western Ukraine and of course is the seat of power. But it is not divided by this language problem. People speak Russian and Ukrainian. Slowly more are speaking Ukrainian. But no one seems to get too upset about what language anyone speaks. So central Ukraine serves as a kind of buffer and central Ukraine is a stronghold for pro-western, pro-market, anti-corruption parties. Yet again, the situation is more complicated than how the media presents it.
What further concerns me about all this is what about when I read the news about France, Guatemala, or Iraq. What isn't being said? What is being left out? And why is it being left out? Why aren't the stories being told?
Thankfully, the Internet is breaking the stranglehold of traditional media and then information is out there, it just takes some interest to find it.
Here is the recipe for the carrot cake we made yesterday. It's very rich and I liked it a lot. I made the cream cheese icing with sirkova massa (since cream cheese is incredibly expensive here), sakharnaya pudra, butter, vanilla, and a little cream. Seemed to work well. At least it was close to something like cream cheese icing. I made way too much though. Any suggestions for what to do with left over icing? I guess make another cake.
This recent New York Times article about the Ukrainian political situation serves as a prime example of how the western media oversimplifies Ukrainian politics, a kind of political pigeonholing. The article is quite, generally accurate and balanced. But again, the president is seen as the voice of the west and the prime minister with the support of Russia. Why does this need to be said every single time Americans write about Ukrainian politics? The Cold War is over, people. Geopolitics is much more complicated that good versus bad so we all better get used to it. I would suggest than anytime a political situation is reduced to only two sides or options then someone is ignoring or not reporting the whole truth. Yes, the prime minister does receive diplomatic support from Russia, but more importantly the prime minister's party is supported by several UKRAINIAN billionaires (all on Forbes list) who are from the same region as the prime minister and have an enormous amount at stake in this political struggle. They, of course, want the government to favor their businesses, they don't want the government to reconsider any of the shady privatizations of the 1990s (as Tymoshenko did when she was prime minister). Of course, the president has his financial backers (which aren't nearly as wealthy as the prime ministers) and Tymoshenko has her own wealth and the backing of several very wealthy people.
The New York Times article also pulled the language card--that the problem is the Russian-speaking east versus the Ukrainian-speaking west. And yes, it's a problem. It will continue to be a problem. But what about central Ukraine, and most importantly what about the capital? Central Ukraine has much more wealth than western Ukraine and of course is the seat of power. But it is not divided by this language problem. People speak Russian and Ukrainian. Slowly more are speaking Ukrainian. But no one seems to get too upset about what language anyone speaks. So central Ukraine serves as a kind of buffer and central Ukraine is a stronghold for pro-western, pro-market, anti-corruption parties. Yet again, the situation is more complicated than how the media presents it.
What further concerns me about all this is what about when I read the news about France, Guatemala, or Iraq. What isn't being said? What is being left out? And why is it being left out? Why aren't the stories being told?
Thankfully, the Internet is breaking the stranglehold of traditional media and then information is out there, it just takes some interest to find it.
Here is the recipe for the carrot cake we made yesterday. It's very rich and I liked it a lot. I made the cream cheese icing with sirkova massa (since cream cheese is incredibly expensive here), sakharnaya pudra, butter, vanilla, and a little cream. Seemed to work well. At least it was close to something like cream cheese icing. I made way too much though. Any suggestions for what to do with left over icing? I guess make another cake.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home