Why is Dick short for Richard?

In the 1990s, when I worked for a British company, one Mr Dick Howe was the general manager of our office. He introduced himself as Dick Howe, everyone called him by that name. In official correspondence, though, he was Richard Howe. His secretary, with a developed faculty for curiosity, once said to me: “I can understand Stephen becoming Steve, Andrew becoming Andy, Jim short for Jamie, but why is Dick the nickname for Richard? Don’t you find it odd?”

“Not really,” I said, “because my mother is a professor of the Sanskrit language.”

Linguistics and Phonetics

The world of languages and sounds is immensely vast, like an ocean. It’s a fascinating world for the inquisitive. Why, for example, do the Christian languages (English, German, Russian and others) have CAPITAL and small letters, but not Hindu, Buddhist or Islamic languages? Why are Islamic languages written from right to left, their books begin on what we consider the last page? Why the English alphabet is written in that order, I mean starting with A, then B, C… and going up to Z. Is there any logic to it? In this article, I’ll confine myself essentially to explaining why Richard becomes Dick.  I’ll also present my theory on the sequence of the letters in the English alphabet.

व ब यो अभेदः (No difference between V and B)

As a child, this was one of the Sanskrit sayings I had heard from my mother, the Sanskrit professor. My official name Ravindra was similar to that of the noble-winner Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore. In Bengali, it is shortened as Rabi. Vijay becomes Bijoy, Veena becomes Beena, Bengalis pray to lord Bishnu, and the Bangladeshi airline is called Biman (Viman in Marathi). When I first visited Wawel, the magnificent royal castle complex in Krakow, I remembered the V and B rule and wondered if Wawel comes from Babel, the biblical mythical tower which, in pictures, looks quite similar.

B is a labial sound, meaning the upper and lower lip need to touch for making it. Now hold your fingers between the lips, and try saying B. Others will hear it as a ‘V’ (or W) sound.

Interesting to note that in Russian and Greek languages the letter V is written as “B”. This is how Victoria looks in those languages: Виктория/ Βικτόρια.

When words migrated from Latin to Italian, many of them replaced B with V. (e.g. Cabbalous, a horse, became Cavallo. Cavallo is also the root of the word Cavalry). The Italians were probably too lazy to purse their lips every time.

You’ll see similar etymological connections between ‘move’ and ‘mobile’.

Talking about English names, this rule explains why William Jefferson Clinton became President Bill Clinton. William becomes Will, and then Will turns into Bill. Because there is no difference between w and b sounds.

(W, in fact, was v or u written two times and hence called “double-u”. Texans have shortened double to dub, and pronounce the letter ‘W’ as Dub-ya. That’s how the 43^rd president of the USA got his nickname – from his middle initial.) 

Sanskrit language’s Devnagari alphabet

The human race spoke for thousands of years before developing the ability to transcribe the sounds or read them. The printed word should not dictate how we speak; it should represent how we speak. Among the languages I know, Sanskrit and its daughter languages (Marathi, Hindi and others) have the most scientific alphabet – the Devnagari script. It is phonetic and represents the sounds systematically. Out of the 33 consonants, 25 consonants fall into five rows of five letters each, every row transcribing sounds made from the throat, palate, roof of the mouth, teeth and lips respectively.

You can listen to the alphabet in this 11 minute clip, or if short of time, this 40 second alphabet song.

					Nasal	Slight contact	Slightly open
Throat	K	Kh	G	Gh	ṅ		H
Palate	C	Ch	J	Jh	ñ	Y	ś
Cerebral	T	Th	D	Dh	ṇ	R	ṣ
Teeth	t	th	d	dh	n	L	s
Lips	P	Ph	B	Bh	M	V or W

Kiss/ Bunkhouse/ Good/ Loghouse/ sing

Chair/ Coachhorse/ joy/ hedgehog/ enjoy

Tub/ anthill/dog/ redhead/hand (In the ‘Dental’ row only n (nose) in English)

Pick/uphill/be/clubhouse/amble

Yum/rum/luck/wine

ship/ (ṣ is absent in English)/ seek / Ham  

The beauty of the Sanskrit table 

You’ll notice the sound B and V (or W) are in the same row, both made by joining the lips. When saying B, lips make a full contact; in V they make a slight contact.

Another similar pair from the palate row is ‘J’ and ‘Y’. In North India and Bengal, Yashvant becomes Jaswant, and a yoga practitioner is a Jogi rather than yogi. In the Polish language, names written with J are pronounced as Y, for example Justina (Yustina), Johanna (Yohanna). In other cultures, you have Jacob and Yakob, Joseph and Yoseph, Jasmine and Yasmin. In Marathi, Jesus Christ is called Yeshu Christ.

I’ll turn to another pair which is not a Sanskrit saying – G and H. In the Russian language, sound H is surprisingly absent, and often replaced by G. The monster was Gitler, the film world is Gollywood, the names of the countries are Golland (ia), GongKong, Gonduras, and the highest mountains in the world are Gimalayas. It should not shock you to learn that Garry Kasparov and Harry Potter have the same name.

Now, if you look at the above table, you will find G and H are in the same row – the throat row. G is pronounced with a full contact, whereas in saying H, the contact is slightly open.

The English Alphabet 

Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz= 26 letters

The number 26 can be split only as 13x2 (abcdefghijklm/ nopqrstuvwxyz) which is equally inane.

In my school days, when I thought over this problem, this is how I had classified the English Alphabet.  Two groups of four letters each, and three groups of six letters each, with a vowel to head each group. This appeared to be the most mathematical arrangement.

A	E	I	O	U
B	F	J	P	V
C	G	K	Q	W
D	H	L	R	X
		M	S	Y
		N	T	Z

As an adult interested in languages, I refined the above table as:

Vowels	A	E	I	O	U
Lips	B	F	J	P	V
Throat	C	G	K	Q	W
Cerebral	D	H	L	R	X
			M	S	Y
			N	T	Z

You’ll notice that apart from the five vowels, four letters fall in the lips row (including B and V), and four letters in the throat row (C when pronounced as K). The rest of the table is fairly messy. Latin script was not as scientifically constructed as Devnagari. The above arrangement makes the best sense of the English alphabet’s order.

In my school days, I had spent months before “inventing” the binomial theorem. Later, I was devastated to learn it already existed. (There was no internet, no Google and no Wikipedia). This time, I have checked the internet endlessly, and have found no evidence that anyone has come close to explaining the order in the English alphabet. It’s possible that all you have read here already exists somewhere else. Until it is found, I would like to take credit for it.

Genetic or acquired

A mother is the first one to teach her child how to say words. Our mother tongue, our first language, is the one we learn “naturally”.  Grammar, conjugation of verbs, cases of nouns, punctuation rules… none of that is needed. Our mother tongue normally defines the way we pronounce sounds. This is more a result of environment than genetics. My relatives born in the USA speak English like Americans. Despite their best effort, they are unable to pronounce certain Indian sounds.

In the old days, communication was only oral. People lived in tribes or clans. As recently as when Jesus Christ was born, the world had fewer than 200 million inhabitants, with only 28 million living in Europe. Not a single person lived in North America, Latin America, Australia and New Zealand. (That is why these places have languages borrowed from Europe).

I presume it was good enough for one influential person from the clan to mispronounce a sound. Or to mishear a sound from someone else. B can be misheard as V, J can be mispronounced as Y or in case of a Russian tribal chief, Homer can be mistakenly called as Gomer. The entire tribe then begins to pronounce that word as their leader does, and phonetics alter. Over the years, the throat, palate, mouth, teeth and lips get trained to produce sounds in a certain way. Until someone more influential comes across and changes them further.

R and D 

In this letter swapping game, since the middle ages, R could be swapped for D. You will note in the Devnagari table both sounds are cerebral or made from the inner roof of the mouth. D is said with the tongue making a full contact with the roof, and only a slight contact when saying R. Surprisingly, in the English alphabet arrangement suggested by me, D and R are again in the same row.

Spanish language has an “R” that sounds like D to the foreigners.

This phenomenon has contributed to Sarah being shortened as Sadie. Richard was first shortened as Rick and then Dick.

Ravi

Human Rights, Human Wrongs

Mexican American Jailed for eight years

This month, on 8 February 2017, Rosa Maria Ortega was sentenced to 8 years in prison and fined 5000 USD on two counts, both sentences to be served concurrently. Had she been born just four months later than she did, she would be free and with her four children today.

USA had annexed Mexican Texas in 1845

In 1979, Rosa was born in Monterrey, Mexico. Her mother carried her as an infant through the Laredo USA-Mexico border.  Laredo, on the north bank of the Rio Grande river, is in Texas, USA and Nuevo Laredo, on its south bank, is in Mexico. Over the years, this is one of the crossing points where Mexicans have risked crossing into Texas. They may have a sense of entitlement. After all, in 1845, the USA had annexed Texas. Before that, it had belonged to Mexico.

Rosa’s parentless growing up

In 1979, crossing the border was much easier than it is today, and Rosa’s mother settled down in Dallas with Rosa. Rosa’s two brothers, born in 1981 and 1983, were American citizens by virtue of their birth. In a few years, Rosa’s mother, an illegal immigrant, was deported back to Mexico, but her children were allowed to remain in the USA. In any case, apart from Rosa, the other kids were American.

Rosa had a learning disability, and gave up school after the sixth grade. She needed to work and couldn’t afford to spend time in school. Without parents, the kids couldn’t simply live on food stamps. As Mexicans often do, Rosa did all sorts of lowly paid jobs, earning the minimum wage when lucky, or getting cash at lower rates.

As often happens with little educated Mexicans, Rosa married young, and by the time she was 24, already had four children. Again, as sometimes happens with husbands, after marrying and having four kids, the husband left Rosa, leaving her to look after the kids.

Rosa continued to work in as many jobs as her body and spirit managed; coming home to her four children was her daily reward.

Registering to vote

As a conscientious person, she wanted to register as a voter. She applied and was confused with a question on the form offering a binary choice. Are you a (a) citizen (b) non-citizen? The form for driving licence had a choice that said ‘permanent resident’. This form didn’t. Except for the first few months as an infant, Rosa had spent her whole life in the USA. Her accent was American, she spoke with her children in English, she considered herself to be a proud citizen of the USA. She ticked the box saying she was a citizen, and got a voter ID.

Rosa was a Green Card holder, and only the dread of filling dozens of forms had stopped her from applying for citizenship. Her siblings and children were all American citizens.

Rosa was a registered Republican. In 2012, she voted for Mitt Romney. In 2014, she voted for Ken Paxton in the Republican primaries. Following that election, Ken Paxton became the Attorney General of Texas.

Meanwhile Rosa was in love again. Her fiancé Oscar Sherman, a truck driver, and she were seriously discussing plans about marrying, possibly in 2017. They moved to Tarrant county, very close to Dallas.

When you move counties, you need to register afresh to get a local voter ID. Rosa, a diligent voter, reapplied for voter registration. She was denied registration, because she was not a citizen. ‘But I have voted in the past,’ she said, ‘in Dallas I was allowed to vote without difficulty, why not now?”

Arrest and Trial

The authorities noted her words, dug up her voting record. On Friday, 6 November 2015, she was indicted and arrested for voter fraud. Ironically, this Mexican semi-literate woman was charged with a ‘white collar crime’.

Life is full of strange coincidences. The person in charge of her case was Ken Paxton, the attorney general of Texas, for whom she had voted in 2014. Clark Birdsall was Rosa’s attorney. He was confident the case would be dismissed. Rosa was genuinely confused about the difference between a citizen and a resident. She had spent her entire conscious life in the USA. Her voting had no criminal intent; she had not materially gained anything by voting; it had not influenced any result. (In fact, Romney had lost).

Birdsall decided he should get more women on the jury to gain sympathy for the single mother of four children. The final jury panel was made of ten women and only two men. (A blunder, women are ruthless and vicious when dealing with other women, men are more humane – R.)

Mexican Wall and Voter Fraud

Meanwhile, Donald Trump was elected as a president. He planned to build the most beautiful wall between the USA and Mexico. He would like to deport all illegal and undocumented people to Mexico (irrespective of where they came from, believe it or not). Before his election, he talked of possible rigging and after he was elected he hollered ‘voter fraud’ as the reason he didn’t win the popularity vote. On 25 Jan, his tweet said: “I will be asking for a major investigation into VOTER FRAUD…”

Plea bargain rejected

At the beginning of this month, on 3 February, 2017, Rosa was told by her lawyer that her case would be dismissed. Mr Birdsall had tried negotiating a plea bargain. Rosa should agree to testify on voting procedures before the Texas Legislature. In exchange, the charges against her would be set aside. Of course, Rosa agreed to it. Her sense about her country’s justice and fairness was reaffirmed. In a week, this nightmare should be over, in a few months, she would be able to marry Oscar.

However, last minute, the Tarrant County criminal district attorney, Sharen Wilson, (another woman) vetoed the deal. She insisted on a “trial that would showcase her office’s efforts to crack down on election fraud.”

The jury panel of 10 women and 2 men deliberated, not for too long, and on 8 February, pronounced Rosa guilty on two counts (illegal voting in 2012 and in 2014). For each count she was given 8 years imprisonment, and a fine of USD 5000. Fortunately for Rosa, both sentences would run at the same time, rather than consecutively. After her spending 8 years in prison, she would be deported back to Mexico. A convicted felon, a non-citizen, is sent to the country she came from.

Ken Paxton, the attorney general, triumphantly summarized: “The case shows how serious Texas is about keeping its elections secure.”

*****

Analysis

Citizen vs. Resident

In most European countries, permanent residents are on par with citizens as far as voting rights are concerned. In England, even Indian passport holders with PR (Leave to Remain) status can vote in all elections. EU citizens, Irish citizens and commonwealth citizens (including countries such as Pakistan and Nigeria) with resident status can also vote in England. USA has almost 15 million Green Card holders. More than half of them haven’t, like Rosa Ortega, converted that status into citizenship, though eligible. What’s the point of depriving them of their voting right?

Rosa and other green card holders can own property; serve in the military; get a job; pay taxes. But they can’t vote.

A person doesn’t change by changing documents that identify her.

The political franchise process in the USA has been slow. Before 1870, only white men who paid taxes were allowed to vote. In 1870, non-whites and in 1920 women were allowed. Poll tax was removed in 1964, not before John Kennedy was voted in by taxpayers alone. In 1971, the voting age was reduced from 21 to 18. As much as I know, that was the end of electoral reform in the USA. Nobody has made any attempts to include green card holders as voters. You have Rosa Ortega imprisoned for 8 years for voting diligently, and there is no punishment for the 50% of eligible voters who don’t vote.

Eighth amendment of the US constitution

The eighth amendment prohibits excessive fines or cruel or unusual punishment. Justice demands the sentences are proportionate and equitable.

Let’s look at some sentences given in the same county and jurisdiction in the past few years. (a) Javier Luis, 27, was sentenced to five years last year for murdering Jose Arista. (b) Christian Fuentes, 21, was sentenced to five years in 2015 for sexually assaulting a drugged woman. (c) Jason Tomilson, 30, was sentenced in 2015 to one year for videotaping people undressing in a restroom, and probation for possessing child pornography. (d) Adam Cardinal, 27, was sentenced to four years for a road rage shooting (e) Desmond Campbell, 23, was sentenced to five years for robbing three men at gunpoint and striking them with his weapon.

In short, Rosa’s crime is adjudged more severe than a murder, sexual assault, illegal videotaping, road rage shooting, and robbery.

As far as voter fraud cases in the same court are concerned (f) Hazel Woodard pleaded guilty to voter fraud where she had made her son vote on behalf of his father. In 2015, she received a two year probation. (g) Sonia Solis, who voted five times in five different names on absentee ballots, received six months home confinement and a five year probation.

Of course, Hazel Woodard and Sonia Solis were white and full-fledged American citizens. (And these rulings were carried out before Trump became President).

Letter and Spirit of the Law

The United States of America, for centuries, has been an icon for the rest of the world in matters of liberty, justice, independent judiciary and independent media.

The purpose of justice is to serve the spirit of the law. When laws are well written, the letter and the spirit are capable of delivering the same verdict. But fairness demands that human judgment is used to uphold the spirit. If it were not that, computers and robots can interpret and deliver judgments based on the printed letter of law.

The case of Rosa Maria Ortega is a stark example of how the US judiciary is in danger of getting influenced by the political thuggery of the new administration.

Ken Paxton, the attorney general who presided over this case, is himself charged with two first degree felonies for securities fraud. In October 2016, the Texas high court refused to halt the fraud trial against him. His trial will begin next month. It is possible his sycophant handling of this case could reprieve him.

More worrying is the limited coverage by the US media. Wall Street Journal wrote an editorial on Rosa Maria Ortega saying: An individual case of voter fraud is not a violent felony. And then the US media went silent. No petitions, no appeals, no protests. Rosa is imprisoned and not likely to come out for eight years. She may not have money for appeals. Her lawyer seems to have given up. Oscar Sherman can’t marry her, and is denied custody of the children because they were not married.

USA, for years a self-professed champion of Human Rights across the world, has callously committed a blatant Human Rights Violation. This may only be a beginning.

Ravi 

Crimea: Why it will never leave Russia

My visit to Crimea

In April-May 2015, I was invited to attend an International business conference in Crimea. I was one of the only two Indian delegates. Aside from the conference, I was interested to see firsthand what was happening there, to talk to people, to find reality. Reality was trapped in the crossfire between Western and Russian propaganda. I managed to get a business visa from the Russian consulate. As a matter of curiosity, I phoned the Ukrainian embassy in Delhi, and after several attempts a man picked up.

‘I’m planning to visit Crimea, could I please apply for a visa at your embassy?’ I asked.

‘Don’t you watch TV?’ the embassy man sounded surprised. ‘Russia has illegally annexed it. Crimea belongs to Ukraine. And once we get it back, we’ll start issuing visas again. Right now I won’t advise you to go there. Not safe.’

Since March 2014, you can fly to Crimea only via Moscow. From the time I landed at the Simferopol airport, and throughout my Crimean stay, I talked to taxi drivers, waiters, hotel receptionists, businessmen, the President of Crimea, the conference’s young organisation team, bureaucrats, local journalists, and Yalta film studio representatives.

Crimea was Russian since 1783

The Black Sea separates Crimea to its north and Turkey to its south. In fact, Crimea was annexed by Russia way back in 1783. In the Russia-Turkey war, Catherine the great, the legendary Russian empress, defeated the Ottoman Empire to capture Crimea. Since then, for more than two centuries, the majority of the Crimean population is Russian.

Nikita Khrushchev’s gift

Once the USSR was formed, Russia was its largest republic, and Crimea continued to be part of the Russian republic, until 1954. That year, Nikita Khrushchev, the head of the USSR, decided to gift Crimea to Ukraine, ostensibly because of their proximity and cultural ties. Several possible motives have been suggested, and the legality of the decision questioned. Analysts agree that Khrushchev was fond of Ukraine, and this was his personal symbolic gesture.

In 1954, that gesture made little difference, because both Russia and Ukraine belonged to the same country, USSR. If Las Vegas was transferred from Nevada to California, it wouldn’t matter much…. Unless California were to become an independent nation.

1991: Russia and Ukraine independent nations

Before the fall of the USSR, in a prescient move, Crimea organized a Crimean Sovereignty Referendum on 20 Jan. 1991. Supported by 94% of the voters, Crimea became an autonomous republic; with a right to leave Ukraine when/if it so wished. In 1993, the “President of Crimea” position was created. 

With USSR disintegrating into fifteen republics, the Crimean problem became acute. Russia demanded back the peninsula it had de facto owned for two hundred years.

The third biggest nuclear state   

Crimea was only one of the hundreds of problems confronted by Yeltsin. Communism had collapsed, prices were freed, hyperinflation had set in, pensioners were dying, daily necessities were in shortage, Chechen terror attacks had started. But these were Russia’s domestic problems. For the West, the biggest headache was the sudden appearance of three new nuclear states: Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Russia was admitted as USSR’s successor state. Ukraine was the third biggest nuclear power after Russia and the USA. It had nuclear stocks and installations, but the control remained with Moscow. As the Chernobyl disaster (Chernobyl is in Ukraine) of April 1986 showed, nuclear plants are dangerous no matter who controls them. (A similar situation would arise if Scotland were to leave the UK).

Belarus and Kazakhstan agreed, but Ukraine was reluctant to give away its nuclear status. After prolonged negotiations, the official nuclear club and the three new accidental entrants met in Budapest in Dec. 1994. The Budapest Memorandum on security assurances was signed by Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan promising denuclearization; and USA, UK and Russia as nuclear powers. In exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear arsenal, Russia assured to respect its territorial integrity (meaning obviously Eastern Ukraine and Crimea as well). USA and UK assured immediate action in case Ukraine was attacked with nuclear weapons.

Within three months, in March 1995, Ukraine cancelled Crimea’s constitution. The post of President of Crimea was also revoked.

Two peaceful decades

Almost for the next twenty years, nothing cataclysmic happened between Ukraine and Russia. Putin was in power for more than 12 years. He didn’t start a border war, he didn’t annex Crimea, Russia continued to supply cheap gas to Ukraine. After all, Russians and Ukrainians belong to the same tribe- they are Slavic. Russia and Ukraine were the founding members of CIS (The Russian commonwealth). At one time, the Russian Tsardom had Kiev, the current Ukrainian capital, as its centre. Like Australia and New Zealand, like USA and Canada, Russia and Ukraine were considered to be neighbours unlikely to engage in a war.  What changed and why?

My German friends

In 2014, after Crimea was taken over by Russians, two German friends of mine were visiting me. We were discussing issues of sovereignty and annexation. My German friends knew I was in essence a pro-EU person, a democrat, liberal; I support free speech and free market. So, they were surprised when I said, “you are not a sovereign nation either.”

“Of course we are.” They said. “In Germany, we elect our own leaders.”

I asked them to show me their passports. The cover had Europäische Union written at the top.

“Is your currency exclusive to your own country?”

“No, we share it in the Euro zone, by agreement.”

“Is Germany not part of the Schengen area?” The girls chose not to answer.

“So you have a country which has European Union written on its passport cover, doesn’t have its exclusive currency or borders, and still you consider yourself to be a sovereign nation?”

“But… this is all voluntary…. And democratic.” The German girls protested.

Expansionism vs. Imperialism  

Yes, European Union’s expansionism has been democratic, voluntary and essentially bloodless. But in some cases that voluntary membership is like corporate slavery – where you sacrifice your soul for material gain. (Ask the Greeks). The processes of standardization (currency, freedom of movement, detailed regulations), influence of the central bank, wealthy men and companies purchasing property and exploiting cheap labour (e.g. Germans in Eastern Europe) are common factors whether membership is voluntary or by force. EU was doing fairly well when it had its six founding members, or even with 15 members until 2003. Then it became greedy, and included eight Eastern countries on 1 May 2004. Even greedier was their act of including Bulgaria and Romania in 2007. Romania is possibly the worst qualified country to become an EU member.  And then EU had its eyes on Ukraine, geographically the largest country in Europe. (Russia is bigger, but it’s in Europe and Asia).

EU= USA= NATO

EU equals USA equals NATO is the perception of Russia and cold analysis supports it. EU has always been complicit with and has actively supported American military aggression worldwide. The talks for EU membership and NATO membership start surprisingly close to one another. Five Eastern countries became members of both blocks in the same year, 2004. They were previously the members of the Russian NATO (Warsaw Pact) that died along with the USSR.

This map is very interesting and worth spending some time on. US military bases have appeared in Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria (and now Romania). NATO’s strategy is to militarily encircle Russia. (Task Force East is the US Army initiative with bases in Bulgaria and Romania.) The cold war was supposedly over in 1991. However, the eastward expansionism of NATO in the past fifteen years belies it. An objective analysis must ask why America needs military and nuclear bases in Europe. If they exist for the defence of the European nations, why is America NATO’s main spender? Why does the US military personnel far outnumber the European ones? (Despite EU population being 60% more than the US population).

Ukraine applied for NATO membership in 2008. 

Infidelity

In 2012, EU (the lover) started an affair with Ukraine (the wife). Ukraine should leave Russia (her long married husband) and marry the lover (eventually), EU said. The engagement was due to happen in March 2014. The husband, on learning about the infidelity, tried to sweet-talk the wife with a variety of new proposals, but alas, the wife was attracted to this apparently rich man from another culture. Finally, the furious husband took steps to prevent his wife from meeting her lover, and also began torturing her in every possible way. The lover, instead of challenging the husband in a duel, made loud noises of protest and ran away, leaving the ill-fated wife in dire straits.

Buffer States

In the cold war, both the Soviet Union and the USA had a strategy of not letting the opposition come close to their respective borders. USSR had buffer states such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Romania. Russia continues that strategy with Ukraine and Belarus as its new buffer states.

The Ukraine-EU agreement was scheduled to be signed on 21 March 2014. Hurriedly before that on 16 March, Crimea held a referendum to free itself from Ukraine, and joined Russia on 18 March. Ukraine was in such bad shape that it would not be ready to become an EU member for at least 25 years. Instead of solving the current problems (Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy), inviting Ukraine was clearly a greedy expansionist move on EU’s part. The EU-Ukraine marriage was not on the cards, but using the engagement, NATO (read Americans) would have definitely created new bases in Ukraine and Crimea. Putin, or any rational strategic leader, could not allow it. An American Black Sea fleet is a concept repulsive to Russians.

Black Sea Fleet

Crimean conflict also includes the independent city of Sevastopol. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is located there since 1783. Black Sea Fleet is Russia’s pride. Though Crimea belonged to Ukraine until 2014, Russia had signed a long-term treaty with Ukrainians, leasing Sevastopol until 2042. Just as Russian remained the language of Crimea, the Black Sea Fleet has remained mainly Russian. Giving up Sevastopol and the Black Sea Fleet (particularly to Americans) was not only a military but a deeply emotional issue.

 Keep your enemy away

The question of whether Russia has annexed Crimea becomes moot. Russia is entitled to keep the US military and nuclear bases away for as long as it can manage. An enemy’s nuclear bases positioned at your buttocks is an unpleasant feeling. Those fond of history will remember the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962), when the same Khrushchev agreed to place nuclear missiles in Cuba (90 miles from Florida) for Cuba’s defence.  Americans and their president John Kennedy went bananas and were about to start a nuclear war with Russia. The war didn’t happen; a settlement was reached with missiles withdrawn and both sides offering concessions. The current Russia-Ukraine-EU-NATO situation is very similar.

In Crimea, I talked to Russians, Ukrainians and Tatars, Crimea’s three demographic components. Many showed me their new Russian passports with pride and delight; Russian was the first language for most of them. Everyone (except two) I spoke to said they had voted to join Russia; it was a homecoming for them. In the past twenty years, Ukraine had treated Crimea as a stepchild shrinking Crimean budgets and investments, they said. Now they looked forward to the mighty Russia helping them.  The transfer had happened peacefully and efficiently. Unlike what the Ukrainian Embassy official in Delhi had warned me, my stay in Crimea was absolutely safe.

(The only Crimean people who complained were the Ukrainian bureaucrats and ministers who ran Crimea until 2014. They said they sincerely governed Crimea with whatever little money they got from Ukraine. They disapproved the term ‘stepchild’, which is a perception of the Russians.)    

Verdict: Crimea will be in Russia forever, and Ukraine will have to split in two parts if it wishes to join EU

Based on my visit and analysis, I can confirm Crimea will remain with Russia no matter what, definitely in our lifetime (or should I say Putin’s lifetime). The city of Sevastopol will continue to host the Russian, and not American, Black Sea Fleet.

If Ukraine were to ever join EU/NATO, Putin/Russia will make sure Ukraine splits into two parts: The pro-Russian East and the pro-EU West. Then the pro-Russian East Ukraine by whatever name can become the new buffer state. If Ukraine is keen to avoid splitting into two parts, it will need to sign an agreement with Russia guaranteeing no US military bases anywhere in Ukraine. (A similar agreement was signed to resolve the Cuban missile crisis). If Ukraine were to agree to that, unfortunately USA and NATO will lose interest in it. And if NATO/Americans can’t enter Ukraine, EU is not interested in Ukraine. Ukraine is a burden that the crumbling EU can’t afford now or in the foreseeable future.

Ravi 

Vladimir Putin – The Russian Microsoft

Sun. 5 February:

While interviewing Donald Trump, Fox news host Bill O’Reilly referred to Vladimir Putin as a killer.

Wed. 8 February:

Russia’s loud opposition activist Alexey Navalny was found guilty and given a five year sentence.

Fri. 10 February:

US investigators corroborated some aspects of the 35-page Trump-Russia Dossier published in January. It was purportedly prepared by a British spy - an MI6 agent, Christopher Steele. The document claimed, among other things, that Kremlin had secretly videotaped Trump engaged in pervert acts in a Moscow hotel room. That Kompromat will enable Putin to blackmail and control the US president. That’s one possible reason for Trump praising Putin, and talking about removing sanctions.

2016:

US intelligence agencies confirmed Putin personally directed the influence campaign to assist Trump. Apparently, Russian intelligence groups Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear conducted hacking and other cyber attacks at Putin’s behest.

As a result of the US presidential election, Vladimir Putin and Russia are suddenly part of global headlines every week.

 *****

In April 2015, N.K., my Russian teacher from Pushkin University had invited me for lunch to her Moscow house. She holds a linguistic doctorate, is widely travelled, rational, elegant, articulate, a Moscow intellectual, has worked as an expat teacher for several years in Delhi and Germany, and is a well read person. N.K. was my teacher in 1986-87. Since then we have remained in contact despite ups and downs in our personal and national lives.

When we sat down to lunch I thought it was inevitable we would talk politics. The Russia-Ukraine conflict was red hot, Crimea had just been annexed, opposition leader Boris Nemtsov was murdered outside the Kremlin walls, a Malaysian passenger plane was shot down by Russians in Ukraine; oil prices, the Russian economy and sentiment were depressed, Putin was still in power and the next presidential elections were three years away.

“Thank God we have Vladimir Vladimirovich” N.K. started, “may God give him a hundred years. He is the savior of Russia. Putin is the real muzhik, the only man capable of running the largest country on the planet.”

N.K. went on to say how Americans were out to destroy Russia. (They always have been, she added, and the end of the cold war hasn’t stopped them). Without Putin, they would have succeeded. Ukraine was definitely to blame for what happened. Crimea was anyway Russia’s, and we’ve got back what was ours. Hopefully, we’ll be able to capture more territory from Ukraine where Russians are in majority. And Nemtsov? No wonder he was killed. Did you read who he was with? A Ukrainian model in her twenties. What moral turpitude. And a national disgrace. Imagine a man in his fifties going around with a Ukrainian girl just out of school.

*****

In December 2016, during my latest trip to Moscow, I was walking with G., my Russian friend who is part of the Moscow Hare Krishna community. The Hare Krishnas in Russia were persecuted and prosecuted during Yuri Andropov’s regime. Many landed in Siberian penal colonies, and some in psychiatric hospitals. I’ve written extensively on this subject in the past. (Brest Border: open diaries weeks 1/2/3/4: 2008).

G, this Hare Krishna friend of mine, is a strict vegetarian, non-drinker, non-smoker, practices yoga on a daily basis, and passionately studies Indian philosophy. He is a music composer and teaches music at a British school. He is another intellectual (like most of my friends), broad minded, appreciative of market economy and capitalism, is strongly opposed to communism, KGB and most things Soviet. Last year we celebrated 30 years of our friendship.

“G., who did you vote for in the last presidential elections?’ We usually discuss literature, music, philosophy, anything but politics. I had never earlier thought of asking a Krishna devotee a political question.

‘Who? Of course, Putin.’ G. said.

‘G., you voted for Putin?’

‘Yes, he’s the only one able to run Russia competently.’

I thought this must be the influence of Russian television which is Kremlin-controlled. When listening to N.K., she sounded like a Russian TV anchor. And now G... Since we are close friends, I asked him if Russian television had managed to wash his brains.

‘No, I never watch TV.’ G. said.

‘But you don’t have democracy any longer- like the one you had under Yeltsin.’

‘Under Yeltsin, we had chaos. Chaos and crises. One after another. Yeltsin razbazaril (frittered away) Russia. In Yeltsin’s time, we were ashamed to say we were Russians. Now we can proudly say it. Putin has brought stability and order. Pensioners get their pensions on time.’

*****

I can go on and on. I tend to trust my friends and people I personally talk to more than media.

I feel most issues have two views: an insider’s view and an outsider’s view. An insider lives and feels the issues, an outsider merely hears about them as distorted by whichever media he is exposed to.

If a majority of my Russian friends are willing to vote for Putin, if my teacher calls him a savior, and my pious friend trusts him, I’m willing to accept Putin’s popularity numbers are what Russian media claims they are. If the Russians are happy with their leader, it’s surely their own business, and not anybody else’s.

*****

Rulers for life: Since the Russian revolution that happened 100 years ago, the Soviet rulers were expected to be rulers for life. Lenin, Stalin, Brezhnev and others ceased to rule Russia only because they died. Gorbachev didn’t die in office, only because his office, along with the country he governed, died before he could. Unlike in the West, a ruler’s longevity is not a source of discomfort in Russia. Ruler for life has been the norm during Russia’s entire history. Assuming all rulers are devils, an established devil is more acceptable than a fresh one.

*****

Putin, the KGB chief: A universal misconception is that Putin’s KGB background led to his becoming Russia’s president. In fact, Putin’s resigning from the KGB brought him into politics. True, in the 9^th grade at school, he had explored ways to join the KGB. However, in his career, he was a relatively small, insignificant cog in the KGB machinery. During his posting in Dresden, Germany (1985-1990) he was the Head of the local House of Friendship. His work as a Russian-German translator was possibly more useful than his intelligence activities. At the earliest possible opportunity, on 20 August 1991, the day the coup failed, Putin was among the first ones to resign from the KGB.

After the fall of the Berlin wall, Putin worked as a deputy mayor of St Petersburg, under the mayor Anatoly Sobchak, his mentor (1990-1996). In 1996, Sobchak lost the re-election, and Putin was sent to Moscow. As a hard working, competent administrator, he gained Yeltsin’s trust.

In July 1998, Yeltsin appointed him the head of FSB (KGB’s successor) for a year. This loyal man was the only person Yeltsin could wholeheartedly trust. Putin’s appointment as the head of FSB was simply a transit step to carry out any necessary cleaning for enforcing the deal (Putin becomes president and in exchange Yeltsin and his family gets immunity from corruption charges).

Yuri Andropov was the KGB chief for 15 years before becoming the head of USSR. What drove Putin’s political success were his other qualities, not his KGB background.

*****

A sophisticated dictator: One biographer describes Putin’s devotion to the State, pride in his country, fierce sense of personal honour and loyalty, ferocious work ethic and profound fear of disorder as his hallmarks. He is a competent, efficient, rational, assertive, and straightforward guy. I have watched his annual marathon Q&A sessions, a direct line with the Russian people. Without a piece of paper, he answers questions with a degree of depth. I’ve not seen him hesitate or evade a question. His ruthlessness comes from his Judo and Sambo skills as much as his KGB background. At the same time, he possesses a wry sense of humour, and a level of sincerity one doesn’t expect in strongmen.

Putin appears to believe in market economy and the benefits and ills associated with it. His dictatorship is not the all-encompassing Soviet type. Under Putin, Russians can become rich, can go abroad, can practice religion, and can speak freely as long as they don’t threaten his political power. Castro, Saddam, Mugabe, Khamenei, Mao Zedong, Stalin, Kim II Sung, Franco, Tito…. Putin doesn’t fit into that list. He is more intelligent, modern and civilized than most of them. His leadership as a CEO stabilized Russia for a decade (2000-2010). During this time, he was comparable to Lee Kuan Yew, the (almost) benign dictator of Singapore.

Russia’s fortunes swing in line with oil prices. With low oil prices and without nuclear weapons, Russia would be irrelevant. Putin makes sure Russia remains relevant in global politics.

*****

Self-censorship: Putin’s political power and aura are such that media, legislative bodies, police or judiciary routinely practice self-censorship.

In 2010, I was in Khanti-Mansiysk, Siberia, supporting the team of Karpov and Kasparov for the Global chess federation election. Not a single media person interviewed Kasparov. I asked my friend Y.V., a top sports journalist, as to why he refused to talk to Kasparov. He had interviewed Kasparov for years as a chess player.

‘Why interview him?’ Y.V. asked me. ‘He is a destructive personality.’

‘Has your newspaper got an order not to interview him?’

‘No, not at all. If I wished to interview him, I easily could.’

None of the media people I knew talked to Kasparov. I am convinced nobody had officially blacklisted him, nor had Putin given any written or oral order. But since Kasparov is passionately anti-Putin, journalists have decided to self-censor Kasparov out.

*****

Putin and Microsoft: Putin is a law graduate. As much as possible, he tries to follow the framework of constitution and existing laws.

After the defeat of Russia in the cold war, Russians tried to copy what is considered good in the American constitution. They agreed that a Russian president, like the US president, should enjoy a maximum of two terms, each lasting four years. Living in Moscow at that time, I had witnessed those debates on television. In the final version, in a typical Russian fashion, a single word was anonymously inserted – a maximum of two consecutive terms. Putin used that legal loophole in 2008 to swap places with Medvedev.

In Russia, a Prime Ministerial post is largely ceremonial. It’s the President who has real power. For four years (2008-2012) Putin became the Prime Minister and Medvedev, his proxy or puppet, became the president. The Russian voters happily joined in this legal farce. Putin could have suspended the constitution, he didn’t. He followed the letter of the law, not the spirit, and was free to become president again for two terms in 2012.

He then played out another legal charade. In December 2008, President Medvedev and the parliament agreed that the president’s term (from 2012 onwards) should be 6 years rather than 4 years (nobody asked why). Medvedev did it, Putin didn’t. This ensured that Putin, on his comeback could be the president for 12 years, until 2024.

***

Do you remember the Microsoft case? Or Intel?

The USA has fairly strict anti-monopoly laws. Intel (inside), the chip maker, has always allowed its competitor AMD to gain around 25% of market share (not more) to make sure Intel is not charged as a monopolist.

In United States v. Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft was accused and tried for abusing its monopoly. (Each of us has experienced it). Microsoft had, for years, engaged in anti-competitive practices. Bill Gates was fairly evasive at the trial, and earnestly considered Microsoft’s monopoly to be the result of its superior products.

As Microsoft is to Gates, Russian political power is for Putin. He sincerely believes he is the most capable man entitled to monopolize it, and tries to stop possible competition. In 2003, a year before the election, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Russia’s richest man then, anti-Putin and politically influential, was charged with fraud, stripped of his fortune, jailed for the next ten years. Later, he was pardoned and sent on exile to Switzerland a year after the 2012 election.

Alexei Navalny, a Russian blogger and activist, was allowed to stand for the election of the Moscow mayor in 2013. He got 27%, which is fairly healthy. This week, in a bogus trial, he was given a five year suspended sentence. More importantly, as a result, he is barred from contesting the election next year. Not certain if Russian voters would have preferred Navalny over Putin, but Putin doesn’t like to leave anything to chance.

By the way, Russia does have separation of executive, legislative and judiciary powers just as in the USA, UK or India. Prima facie, Navalny was convicted by the independent judiciary, and not by Putin. In playing out all these farces, Putin is quite child-like. His conscience dictates him to engage in ludicrous games.

In Soviet days, every election had a single candidate. (You had to say yes or no, and 99.96% said yes).  Like Intel allows AMD, Putin in each election has non-threatening opposition candidates lined up who collectively gather 30-40%. That way the sanctity of the constitution and multi-party elections remains intact.

People struggle to name Microsoft’s competition. And we know we can’t live without Microsoft, a top class product. Putin also believes himself to be a top class product, the best for Russia, and Russians can’t imagine who can compete with him. By barring Navalny this week, Putin has ensured he remains Russia’s president until 2024 – a single man in charge for 25 consecutive years.

Ravi