The Globalist--Nationalist marriage of convenience shatters as President Zelensky sacks Commander-in-Chief Zaluzhny. Will Zaluzhny lead a rebel faction and become Putin's Kadyrov in Ukraine?
Thanks for your articles. Always a food for thought. A few notes:
1. Zaluzhny is no Kadyrov. The latter was a religious leader trusted by nearly all his people. Zaluzhny is a military Commander trusted by the army but quite distant from the general public.
2. While religion and tribalism in Chechen communities was and is a primary natural uniting force, nationalism, especially extreme far-right variety, wich Zaluzhny somewhat tries to associate himself with now, is interestingly discreet in Ukraine. It is artificially constructed and embedded in many layers of power, but not that much present or endorsed by the public. That is the main reason so many Ukrainians are genuinely puzzled and angered by the whole denazification rethoric by Putin. This far-right "movement" is effective to control power, radicalize army and motivate the pretorian guard, but will not be enough to unite the people. Especially with the aim to make peace with Russia.
3. Aligning himself with the nationalists Zaluzhny made himself the target of one of Russia's main stated goals of denazification. Bending on this one seems like a no-go for Putin.
4. Ukrainian society, in contrast to Chechen tightly knit Muslim dynastic unity, is very devided layered and individualistic. Will not be easy to reorient under Zaluzhny's rule.
5. Arestovitch is despised almost universally in Ukraine.
Thanks for you comments. I super appreciated feedback. No doubt this historical analogy is a bit of a stretch, and surely Ukraine will not play out just as .Chechnya but I thought it interesting to demonstrate some common ground.
1. There are Maidan protests, albeit modest, calling to bring Zaluzhny back.
2. agree--I'm looking at what would unite a rebel ruling class and assume the people will be sold whatever ideological goods necessary.
3. I'm betting Putin would forgive past sins in return for a loyal puppet on the condition Zaluzhny shifts to a pan-Slavic nationalism.
4. agree--Ukraine has a history of oligarchic control and so it doesn't really matter much what the people think.
5. Agree! He is a snake, a wannabe Beria, but he is also quite clever at creating narratives and is articulating the globalist versus nationalist theme.
1. There are small protests, mainly friends and relatives of army personnel who are afraid and unhappy with the change. Doesn't seem to be serious at the moment as far as I can gather.
3. Pan-Slavic nationalism or any kind of explicit nationalism is not welcome in Russia officially. Putin and the ruling elites are betting on a secular multi-nationalism that remained since Soviet times. The Tucker interview proves this further. So acceptance of any kind of nationalistic ideological structure in Ukraine is unlikely in my view.
There is definitely some common ground. The Ukrainian society is in dispair, as well as the army. Zelensky was a beacon of hope for many amongst regular public, while Zaluzhny fulfilled that role for the army. Zelensky is increasingly distrusted by both entities now and him dismissing Zaluzhny made things that much worse for people's perception of power.
The situation is ripe for a uniting Savoir figure. I have no slightest idea who that might be, frankly. That would be a favorable outcome for regular people. The dangerous outcome would be for a coup d'etat in favor of nationalistic elements who would radicalize and terrorize the people even more and double down on an outright terrorist war. There are plenty of willing and well funded candidates for that, unfortunately. And I am afraid that is the scenario the outside powers are willing to pursue using their GUT or other proxies.
One point I forgot to make in the article concerning Putin's potential toleration of Ukrainian nationalists--in POW exchanges, Russia has sent many Azov fighters back to Ukraine. There were several on the aircraft that was recently shot down. At the least this show a certain tolerance for Ukrainian nationalism. If the goal was a pure denazification then Russia would not send any Azov fighters back. Russia probably is however retaining the most extreme Nazis amongst them.
I think the exchange ratio for this kind of POWs is very favorable for Russia. And they always prioritize people first as far as I am concerned. And you are right in that probably the most extreme and important ones will be prosecuted rather than exchanged.
Thanks for your articles. Always a food for thought. A few notes:
1. Zaluzhny is no Kadyrov. The latter was a religious leader trusted by nearly all his people. Zaluzhny is a military Commander trusted by the army but quite distant from the general public.
2. While religion and tribalism in Chechen communities was and is a primary natural uniting force, nationalism, especially extreme far-right variety, wich Zaluzhny somewhat tries to associate himself with now, is interestingly discreet in Ukraine. It is artificially constructed and embedded in many layers of power, but not that much present or endorsed by the public. That is the main reason so many Ukrainians are genuinely puzzled and angered by the whole denazification rethoric by Putin. This far-right "movement" is effective to control power, radicalize army and motivate the pretorian guard, but will not be enough to unite the people. Especially with the aim to make peace with Russia.
3. Aligning himself with the nationalists Zaluzhny made himself the target of one of Russia's main stated goals of denazification. Bending on this one seems like a no-go for Putin.
4. Ukrainian society, in contrast to Chechen tightly knit Muslim dynastic unity, is very devided layered and individualistic. Will not be easy to reorient under Zaluzhny's rule.
5. Arestovitch is despised almost universally in Ukraine.
Thanks for you comments. I super appreciated feedback. No doubt this historical analogy is a bit of a stretch, and surely Ukraine will not play out just as .Chechnya but I thought it interesting to demonstrate some common ground.
1. There are Maidan protests, albeit modest, calling to bring Zaluzhny back.
2. agree--I'm looking at what would unite a rebel ruling class and assume the people will be sold whatever ideological goods necessary.
3. I'm betting Putin would forgive past sins in return for a loyal puppet on the condition Zaluzhny shifts to a pan-Slavic nationalism.
4. agree--Ukraine has a history of oligarchic control and so it doesn't really matter much what the people think.
5. Agree! He is a snake, a wannabe Beria, but he is also quite clever at creating narratives and is articulating the globalist versus nationalist theme.
1. There are small protests, mainly friends and relatives of army personnel who are afraid and unhappy with the change. Doesn't seem to be serious at the moment as far as I can gather.
3. Pan-Slavic nationalism or any kind of explicit nationalism is not welcome in Russia officially. Putin and the ruling elites are betting on a secular multi-nationalism that remained since Soviet times. The Tucker interview proves this further. So acceptance of any kind of nationalistic ideological structure in Ukraine is unlikely in my view.
There is definitely some common ground. The Ukrainian society is in dispair, as well as the army. Zelensky was a beacon of hope for many amongst regular public, while Zaluzhny fulfilled that role for the army. Zelensky is increasingly distrusted by both entities now and him dismissing Zaluzhny made things that much worse for people's perception of power.
The situation is ripe for a uniting Savoir figure. I have no slightest idea who that might be, frankly. That would be a favorable outcome for regular people. The dangerous outcome would be for a coup d'etat in favor of nationalistic elements who would radicalize and terrorize the people even more and double down on an outright terrorist war. There are plenty of willing and well funded candidates for that, unfortunately. And I am afraid that is the scenario the outside powers are willing to pursue using their GUT or other proxies.
One point I forgot to make in the article concerning Putin's potential toleration of Ukrainian nationalists--in POW exchanges, Russia has sent many Azov fighters back to Ukraine. There were several on the aircraft that was recently shot down. At the least this show a certain tolerance for Ukrainian nationalism. If the goal was a pure denazification then Russia would not send any Azov fighters back. Russia probably is however retaining the most extreme Nazis amongst them.
I think the exchange ratio for this kind of POWs is very favorable for Russia. And they always prioritize people first as far as I am concerned. And you are right in that probably the most extreme and important ones will be prosecuted rather than exchanged.