Ukraine flashbacks: Chamberlain and Hitler 1938 and Cuba 1962

"Cuba and Ukraine."  Echo opinion letter published in The Tucson Star

Oh My Dear Ukraine 

America's support for the sovereign nation of Ukraine is comparable to Russia’s aggressive act of placing nuclear missiles in Cuba, sixty years ago. (Cuban Missile Crises October 16, 1962 – October 28, 1962)

A flight of fancy so divorced from reality smells like Republican propaganda. I checked, and sure enough, Tucker Carlson of Fox propaganda, I mean News, claims that Ukraine is of no particular importance to the U.S. And Donald Trump says Putin’s move into Ukraine is "super smart".  (Maine Writer: Ha! So smart that today Feb. 28, 2022, the Russian Ruble is useless currency valued at $0.01! How "smart" is that?)

(Unfortunately!) I voted for Trump in 2016, liking his idea of America first, but four years later I realize the importance of sovereignty for all nations.

Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler September 24, 1938

Neville Chamberlain's placating of Hitler led to WW2. Let’s not placate Putin and end up fighting WW3.

From Robert Mann, Northwest side (Tucson)

And this:  Response from reader Steve Rasmussen "Vladimir Putin is suspected of being a primary psychopath. Combine this with his latest threat to use nuclear weapons, and we have a real cluster flub in the works."

Putin has Czaar envy: Delusions of empire but forgets how history can repeat itself

Obviously, the KGB operative Vladimir Putin took the time he needed to understand how to be a spy, but during his studies, he should have also learned about the 1917, Russian Revolution.

Russia seem to be ready for a repeat.

Putin's invasion is a brutal attack on Ukraine's unique history and reveals his (delusional) imperial intentions.

Published in The Conversation by Olivia Durand and republished under a the terms of  free Creative Common License.

The coat of arms of Russia derives from the earlier coat of arms of the Russian Empire which was abolished with the Russian Revolution in 1917. Though modified more than once since the reign of Ivan III (1462–1505), the current coat of arms is directly derived from its medieval original, with the double-headed eagle having Byzantine and earlier antecedents (having existed before).

Vladimir Putin has long insisted Ukraine is part of the country he rules. This was painted more starkly than ever as he announced that Russian troops were undertaking a “special military operation” in its western neighbour. But to the rest of the world, what Russia is undertaking is simply an invasion.

Putin has been softening up the world for its latest foreign policy adventure for some years now. “Kiev is the mother of Russian cities,” he wrote in March 2014. “Ancient Rus is our common source and we cannot live without each other.” A few days later Russia completed the annexation of Crimea. Eight years later, during which time more than 14,000 people have died in a Russian-instigated war of insurgency in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, he has returned to this theme – backed by the might of Russia’s armed forces.

(Vladimir Putin, the cruel) Russian president made this intention crystal clear in an hour-long and fairly wide-ranging speech on February 21. “Ukraine is not just a neighbouring country for us,” he told the Russian people in a national broadcast. “It is an inalienable part of our own history, culture and spiritual space.” He repeatedly denied Ukraine’s right to independent existence – and, at times, that the country exists at all as an independent entity. Instead he appeared to accept the unity of the two countries as historical fact.

In doing so, he revealed the structures of an imperial ideology with a chronology and ambition that goes far beyond post-Soviet nostalgia to the mediaeval era. But to what extent is that ideology shared by Russians?

One of the striking elements of Putin’s latest speech about Ukraine, which accompanied the recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent states, was his insistence that Ukraine exists as a by-product of Russian history, insisting that “Since time immemorial, the people living in the south-west of what has historically been Russian land have called themselves Russians and Orthodox Christians.”

But he later undercut his insistence of these shared origins, stating that “Modern Ukraine was entirely created by Russia or, to be more precise, by Bolshevik, Communist Russia.”

Putin's delusions of grandeur

But when it comes to the question of how Russia should position itself with regards to claiming eastern Ukrainian provinces as long-lost parts of the “Russian empire”, opinion is more clearly divided. Only 26% of Russians wanted the Donbas to become part of Russia, while 54% are in favour of varying forms of independence (within Ukraine or separate). War remains an unpopular choice, with only 18% of Russians unreservedly supporting armed conflict in defence of the two breakaway republics in a poll from April 2021.
Post-Soviet neo-imperialism

Ultimately, the use of “empire” as an ideology reveals Russia’s yearning for – or sense of entitlement to – a third imperial regime. The rhetorical and physical erasure of Ukrainian history and identity makes it much easier to assert claims of shared Russian heritage. This will be important to bear in mind as we watch the development of this renewed conflict over Ukraine.

Parallels with other formerly colonized peoples abound. But, as Kenya’s envoy to the UN put it, no matter what conditions presided over the drawing of modern borders, “we must complete our recovery from the embers of dead empires in a way that does not plunge us back into new forms of domination and oppression.”

To #evilPutin, the making of modern Ukraine only started “after the 1917 revolution”, and Ukrainians have “Lenin and his associates” to thank for their state. This was a reference to Lenin’s creation of a federation of Soviet states, the USSR, out of the ethnic diversity of the former Russian empire.

In reality, Ukrainian aspirations for statehood predated revolution by at least two centuries. From the Ukrainian Hetmanate’s 1710 Bendery Constitution to the 1917 establishment of the West and Ukrainian People’s Republics and appeals at the Paris Peace Conference for status, Ukrainians have continuously asserted themselves as a distinct people.

The formation of the USSR was, in part, conditioned by the previous creation of these two independent Ukrainian Republics in the aftermath of the revolution and the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. These republics stemmed directly from the 19th century Ukrainian romantic national movement that reassessed the impact of the Cossack past, fueling the development of an identity centering on a distinct language, culture, and history.

When the Bolsheviks, Lenin at their head, took control over the Ukrainian territories, the idea of Ukraine as an independent nation could not be ignored, and led to the independent status – on paper – of the Ukrainian Soviet Republic in 1922.

What Putin’s address reveals is the desire to plot Russian and Ukrainian history through the lens of imperialism. He is attempting to establish a direct line from shared ancient origins to a first and second Russian empire: one under the Romanov Tsars (1721-1917) and the second as part of the USSR.

Across those two imperial epochs, Ukraine is reduced to a tributary state and mentions of national aspirations are smothered. This is precisely the message that the Kremlin continues to disseminate in the 21st century.

A lack of popular appetite

But what does the Russian public believe? Three decades ago, when the USSR collapsed, only rare and often ultra-nationalist politicians resorted to imperial history in imagining Russia’s post-soviet future. As early as the 1990s, ultra-nationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky advocated ceasing coal supplies to Ukraine as a tactic to bring back Russia’s lost territories, but he remained a fringe figure in Russian politics.
Still, in 2011 and 2012 Global Attitudes surveys conducted by Pew Research Centre, support for imperial ideology was not insignificant. When asked whether “it’s natural for Russia to have an empire”, only 31% of Russian respondents disagreed. Whether nostalgia for empire translates to appetite for war to “regain territory” remains unclear.

It is impossible to paint all Russian perceptions of Ukrainians with the same brush. 

Russian feelings toward their neighbor have historically ranged from genuine feelings of brotherhood and warmth to virulent expressions of xenophobia manifesting in episodes of ethnic cleansing, such as the 1932, orchestrated famine known as the Holodomor* (from 1932 to 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians. It was a large part of the wider Soviet famine of 1932–1933. The term Holodomor emphasizes the famine's man-made and allegedly intentional aspects such as rejection of outside aid, confiscation of all household foodstuffs and restriction of population movement. As part of the wider Soviet famine of 1932–1933 which affected the major grain-producing areas of the country, millions of inhabitants of Ukraine, the majority of whom were ethnic Ukrainians, died of starvation in a peacetime catastrophe unprecedented in the history of Ukraine.)

But when it comes to the question of how Russia should position itself with regards to claiming eastern Ukrainian provinces as long-lost parts of the “Russian empire”, opinion is more clearly divided. Only 26% of Russians wanted the Donbas to become part of Russia, while 54% are in favour of varying forms of independence (within Ukraine or separate). War remains an unpopular choice, with only 18% of Russians unreservedly supporting armed conflict in defence of the two breakaway republics in a poll from April 2021.

Post-Soviet neo-imperialism

Ultimately, the use of “empire” as an ideology reveals Russia’s yearning for – or sense of entitlement to – a third imperial regime. The rhetorical and physical erasure of Ukrainian history and identity makes it much easier to assert claims of shared Russian heritage. This will be important to bear in mind as we watch the development of this renewed conflict over Ukraine.

Parallels with other formerly colonized peoples abound. But, as Kenya’s envoy to the UN put it, no matter what conditions presided over the drawing of modern borders, “we must complete our recovery from the embers of dead empires in a way that does not plunge us back into new forms of domination and oppression.”

* Some scholars believe that the famine was planned by Joseph Stalin to eliminate a Ukrainian independence movement.

The author Olivia Durand is a post doctoral research associate of the Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation. This article was written with the assistance of Katria Tomko, a Research Associate at the Institute for Historical Justice & Reconciliation.

Ukraine call to action: Ukrainians need our help

Echo opinion letter to the editor of the The Post-Star in Glenn Falls, New York:

Official flag of the Ukraine

Times are troubling. We have just started to see declining rates of mortalities from the COVID-19 pandemic. But now we are on the cusp of witnessing another war - a potential World War III in Europe. 

Ukraine is under attack, as (evil) Vladimir Putin sends in the Russian forces to seize control of the country. Recently, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced 137 people of Ukraine have died, with 316 being injured, that number is climbing. Most recently Russian forces have seized control of Chernobyl, and consequences from that could be catastrophic.

Flag map of Ukraine

This letter isn’t meant to be a recap of information that can be accessed by Google, it’s meant to be a call for action. The American people are meant to be United, to believe in liberty and justice for all. America is meant to be a welcoming haven in a hate-filled world. Our country gives hope to those who seek freedom and opportunity, stateside or not.

But lately there is a divide. Here we are fighting over political parties. We are at war over COVID protocols, and we are continually fighting the racism that exists in our communities. This needs to stop before the divide becomes too great. The American people need to join together, regardless of our status in the Russo-Ukrainian war, and support the people of Ukraine. The people there are innocent bystanders, as were those in other wars.

The people of Ukraine need our help. We can offer moral support, prayers, good wishes, or supply and ration support. We cannot help those who need us if we are at war with ourselves here. We need not to abandon our beliefs, but rather join together, and see what great opportunities are afforded to us. Unite to support those who cannot. Let’s stop the war within ourselves, and unify for those in Ukraine.

Kyra Bennett, Glens Falls 

Vaccines can prevent the debilitating symptoms of long COVID

Long COVID: Long-term consequences are increasingly reported in the current literature after COVID-19 infections. Some patients suffer from persistent pulmonary and extrapulmonary symptoms even months after the acute infection. Pulmonary impairment, but also dysregulation ( i.e., poor ability to manage emotional responses) and effects on the immune system, cardiovascular system, neurological system, skin and kidney are described or anticipated. 

Echo report about long haul COVID research published in National Geographic, written by Emily Sohn.

Maine Writer- As a registered nurse, this article provides even more evidence to support COVID vaccines. Being vaccinated is essential to prevent the infection's unknown side effects. Research about long COVID reveals interesting patterns.  

As long COVID cases grow, clues emerge about who is most at risk.

Tens of millions of people now have an array of lingering symptoms. Figuring out their common risk factors could help tailor treatments.

Eliana Uku wasn’t too worried when she got sick from COVID-19 in March 2020. She was 26, and healthy, she exercised most days, and at first her symptoms were mild. Even with a low fever, cough, fatigue, and mild headache, she kept working in her job as a corporate strategist in New York City. Three weeks after her first symptoms appeared she felt well enough to resume running.

But her cough persisted, and after a month or so, new symptoms appeared, such as memory lapses and sensitivity to sound. Everything was painfully loud, including the sound of her boyfriend washing dishes, leading the couple to switch to paper plates. She would forget words, and her mind would go blank at work meetings. By May she had insomnia, restless legs, and severe nausea. Her heart rate would skyrocket into the 160s after standing for a few minutes, even though she used to be a marathon-runner with a resting heart rate in the high 40s.

Scared and confused, Uku went to the emergency room in May 2020, where a doctor told her that some patients were reporting lingering or even new COVID-19 symptoms—a condition now called long COVID. Now, nearly two years after she first got sick with SARS-CoV-2, Uku still can’t work, and she has had to defer admission to Stanford Business School.

With scientific studies ongoing and a definition in flux, long COVID continues to confuse and frustrate patients and healthcare providers. But estimates of the number of people who suffer from long COVID range from 10 percent to more than 50 percent of all confirmed cases, making it imperative for researchers to understand its causes and effects. (Photo by Rob Kim)

In one important step forward, scientists are now sleuthing out biological risk factors that make some people more susceptible to this condition. In a recent paper, researchers completed the most comprehensive analysis to date of predictors of long COVID, discovering a set of specific conditions that were associated with lingering symptoms.

Figuring out how these factors influence an individual’s COVID-19 trajectory could alert people—either before they get sick or early on in the infection—that they are vulnerable to developing long COVID, says Jim Heath, president of the Institute for Systems Biology, a research nonprofit in Seattle and one of dozens of co-authors on the new paper.

The new study, while thorough, is not the only attempt to identify biological vulnerabilities of long COVID, says Anna Ssentongo, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Penn State College of Medicine in Hershey, Pennsylvania, who was not on the study team. But it’s not the only attempt to identify biological vulnerabilities, she notes. Other studies have zeroed in on genetic factors and even changes in the microbiome as possible risk factors for long COVID.

Eventually, research into these risk factors could lead to personalized treatments for long COVID, says Avindra Nath, the clinical director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. It could also reduce the rates of long COVID, he adds, and help legitimize the complaints of people who developed an illness that doesn’t have an obvious test or even a clear definition.

Huge spectrum of symptoms

Uku encountered much skepticism when she started seeking medical care for her post-COVID-19 problems. Friends and family members doubted her symptoms were real. Doctors prescribed antidepressants and told her boyfriend her illness was probably psychosomatic.

“Patients who have long COVID go to the doctor, and they say they’ve got brain fog, or they can't sleep or they're tired all the time, and the doctor just tells them to get some rest or something. And people find that incredibly frustrating. They know something's wrong with them,” says Heath. “As soon as you can begin to define a condition like that, that's the first step toward treating it.”

But not everyone was surprised that Uku and people like her were showing up at hospitals and clinics.

Before the pandemic began, Ssentongo was a graduate student looking at long-term illnesses that follow various viral, bacterial, and parasitical infections. Researchers have seen that dementia that can follow HIV infections, she says, and lifelong epilepsy can develop after a severe case of malaria.

When Ssentengo heard about long COVID—known medically as post-acute sequelae of COVID-19, or PASC—she shifted gears and began exploring how common it was. In a review of 57 studies that included more than 250,000 people, she and colleagues reported in October 2021 that 54 percent of people who survived COVID-19 had at least one lingering symptom six months after either diagnosis or discharge from the hospital. In the mostly unvaccinated population included in the review, nearly 80 percent of people had been hospitalized, but rates of long COVID were the same after both mild and severe cases.

Those numbers are still a work in progress. Other studies have found higher rates of long COVID in people with more serious disease. Among people with mild infections who were not hospitalized or in the ICU, Nath says, long COVID rates are closer to 10 percent.

What makes this condition difficult to study and quantify is that long COVID has become a catch-all term for a wide diversity of experiences. In the research Ssentengo reviewed, symptoms ranged from mild to life-threatening. The list of possible issues included memory problems, trouble concentrating, difficulty breathing, joint pain, skin rashes, sleep problems, and symptoms that worsen with exercise. Some problems seem the direct result of viral infection, Ssentengo’s team wrote in the paper, while others may originate from post-traumatic stress and other mental health consequences of the original COVID-19 illness.

That huge spectrum of long COVID symptoms suggests that many processes in the body can trigger the condition, Ssentengo says, and that risk factors for each route will also differ. “There is no one clear set of symptoms, and there are likely different biological causes of each post-COVID condition we see,” she says.
Finding the risk factors

To understand how COVID-19 might cause long-term symptoms, Heath and his colleagues tapped into data from a cohort of people they had started studying at the beginning of the pandemic. Using medical records, surveys, blood samples, and nasal swabs, they mined the data for all sorts of biological and immunological patterns.

The investigation revealed that lingering symptoms were common, a finding that Heath and his team reported in the journal Cell in January. Three months after symptoms began, more than half of participants reported fatigue, a quarter were still coughing, and 18 percent still had trouble with their sense of taste or smell, among other issues. About 35 percent of patients in the study reported between three and 10 symptoms.

Of those with ongoing symptoms, virtually all had at least one of four distinct risk factors: type 2 diabetes; measurable levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the blood during the initial COVID-19 infection; circulating Epstein-Barr virus early in the infection; and a high level of autoantibodies.

Autoantibodies, proteins made by the immune system, can start to attack the body rather than just viral invaders. Having elevated levels of these proteins before even getting an infection was the most common predictor, showing up in two-thirds of people with lingering COVID symptoms, Heath says. A resurgence of Epstein-Barr in people who were previously infected with the virus, which can cause infectious mononucleosis, appeared in one-third of their long COVID cohort. Diabetes and SARS-CoV-2 also showed up in one-third of the long-Covid group. Some patients had multiple factors.

Each risk factor was linked to specific long COVID symptoms. Those with autoantibodies, for example, tended to experience fatigue and respiratory symptoms. Type 2 diabetes was associated with the common symptoms of respiratory viruses, like fatigue. And reactivation of the Epstein-Barr virus was associated with neurological symptoms, such as brain fog, difficulty sleeping, and memory loss.

Those findings corroborated previous results, says Michael VanElzakker, a neuroscientist at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital. For instance, research has connected resurgence of Epstein-Barr with diseases such as multiple sclerosis and chronic fatigue syndrome, also known as ME/CFS.

“I think that the surprising thing is how much of the long COVID these past factors account for,” Heath says, “and the fact that you can see them all at diagnosis.”

The ecosystems inside us

In a review of research on SARS-CoV-2 and other RNA viruses published in October 2021, VanElzakker and his colleague Amy Proal, a microbiologist at PolyBio Research Foundation, a research nonprofit in Kenmore, Washington, proposed a number of other possible routes to long-term symptoms. 

Among them: The virus might injure organs, persist in tissues, or disrupt the microbiome in ways that could cause inflammation and trigger neurological symptoms. The virus might derail the immune system, spur blood-clots, or disturb nerve signaling in the brain stem and in the vagus nerve, which could lead to symptoms resembling chronic fatigue syndrome.

Or, much like the reactivation of Epstein-Barr, microorganisms that normally inhabit us without causing trouble may start sparking problems when a SARS-CoV-2 infection stresses the immune system.

One pathogen of concern is the parasite Toxoplasma gondii, which is found in cat feces and undercooked meat and lives in an estimated 11 percent of people past infancy in the U.S. It has been linked with cancers, epilepsy, Alzheimer’s disease, and schizophrenia. 

Studies have suggested that immunosuppressant medications that treat diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn’s disease—and now severe cases of COVID-19—might reactivate T. gondii into a pathogenic state. Depending on where the parasite ends up, scientists speculate it could cause eye problems, heart problems, or neuropsychiatric issues, among other issues.

That line of research spotlights the vast ecosystems of bacteria, viruses, and other microorganisms that occupy us and have the potential to affect our immune function and health, says VanElzakker.

“We have this ongoing Serengeti inside us,” he says. “When a pathogen comes in and disrupts the immune system, a lot of the stuff that's in us already can sort of gurgle up and change its behavior, because it's got the opportunity.”

Researchers are also trawling for genetic variants that raise the risk of severe or long COVID-19. In January, scientists linked two genes to the loss of taste or smell after an infection, which is a symptom that can linger.

Heping Zhang, a data scientist at Yale University, co-authored a study identifying eight genetic variants that confer a higher risk of mortality from COVID-19. Understanding how a gene variant influences the potential for an immune system overreaction, he says, could lead to medications that block that immune response from turning deadly.

Ongoing research is likely to turn up more pre-existing conditions as risk factors for long COVID, Heath says, but it will take larger studies to find them. Another limitation is that most current studies don’t distinguish between symptoms that linger for just a couple months and then go away from those that last longer. People with organ damage after spending time in the ICU are lumped together with people who developed fatigue, dizziness, or trouble concentrating a few weeks after a mild infection. They are not the same, Nath says.

It might also be worth casting a wider net to include environmental factors such as air pollution that might harm the immune system, VanElzakker adds. “That could be something that is a vulnerability factor that we haven't really thought about and isn't really being measured.”

Hope and caution for long COVID

Eventually, a biological understanding of long COVID could produce treatments that anyone could take to prevent lingerin

g symptoms. “You get sick, you're treated aggressively, you're done,” Nath says. “You don't even need to know whether you are at risk or not.

For people with reactivation of viruses like Epstein-Barr, for example, taking antiviral medications very early in an infection might help stave off lingering effects, Heath says. 

If autoantibodies are an issue, people might benefit from treatments for lupus, which also involves autoantibodies that interfere with the immune system. Identifying genetic links, Zhang adds, could illuminate mechanisms that would suggest other treatment strategies.

There is still a long way to go. Even the strongest predictors identified to date raise questions. Epstein-Barr infection is extremely common, for example; some 90 percent of people harbor the virus in their bodies, making it unclear why reactivation happens only in some cases. Then there are people with multiple risk factors who escape an infection unscathed, VanElzakker adds, while healthier people with fewer risks remain sick for months.

Given the vast and complex number of ways that long COVID can play out, there is unlikely to ever be a simple test or treatment that will work for everyone, VanElzakker says. Instead, his work with chronic fatigue syndrome suggests that multiple hits might be more important than any one risk factor.

“If I had diabetes and a history of clotting problems, and I had bad mononucleosis when I was younger, there'd be a list of things that would cause me to be think long COVID might be a little bit more of a risk for me and I better be extra careful when I go out,” he says. “It's unlikely that it's going to be a one-to-one where we just know, Oh, you better not get COVID because you'll definitely end up with long COVID.”

While researchers continue to probe the underlying mechanisms, one step people can take now to protect themselves is to get vaccinated, Ssentengo says.

In a study of healthcare workers in Israel, 19 percent of 39 people with breakthrough cases reported symptoms that persist beyond six weeks—a lower rate than in studies of unvaccinated people who developed long COVID.

“That study was definitely hopeful that the vaccine potentially could reduce your risk of long COVID,” says Ssentengo, who in the midst of larger studies to determine whether vaccines can avert long-term symptoms. It’s since been backed up by additional research, including an analysis of medical records from more than 240,000 people infected with COVID-19 that also showed far better outcomes for vaccinated people.

For people like Uku, who got sick before vaccines were available, efforts to understand long COVID offer hope for relief along with a sense of validation. She has been thinking back to her freshman year of college in 2011, when she had a serious case of mononucleosis. She wonders if that virus permanently altered her biology and set the stage up for what she’s experiencing now. Still unable to work and eager to start her graduate program, she’s hoping that more insights will come soon.

If she had known that she was vulnerable to long-term consequences of COVID-19, she says, she would’ve made different choices. “I was going into the office and going out up until the day that the lockdown started in New York, and so was my partner,” she says. 

“Had I known that I was high risk, I would have started isolating the day that the very first case was recorded in New York.”

Pope Francis in Rome stands with Ukraine: visits the Russian Embassy in Italy

VATICAN CITY, Feb 25 (Reuters) - Pope Francis went to the Russian embassy to the Vatican on Friday to relay his concern over Russia's invasion of Ukraine to Moscow's ambassador, in an unprecedented departure from diplomatic protocol.

Echo report published by Reuters by Phillip Pullella.

Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni said the Pope spent more than half an hour at the embassy.

Pope Francis was born December 17, 1936, in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Pope Francis is the head of the Catholic Church and sovereign of the Vatican City State since 2013. Francis is the first pope to be a member of the Society of Jesus, the first from the Americas.

"He went to express his concern over the war," Bruni said, declining to give details about the visit or the conversation.

Bruni would not comment on an Argentine media report that the pope, 85, had offered the Vatican's mediation. 

Moreover, the ambassador, Aleksandr Avdeyev, denied this, according to the Rome correspondent of Russian TASS new agency.

Instead, Avdeyev told the RIA Novosti news agency that the meeting lasted about 40 minutes and that the pope expressed "great concern" about the humanitarian situation in Ukraine.

The ambassador was quoted as saying that the Argentine pontiff "called for the protection of children, the protection of the sick and suffering, and the protection of people."

When contacted for comment by Reuters, the Russian embassy said the ambassador was not available.

The visit by a pope to an embassy to talk to an ambassador in a time of conflict is unprecedented in living memory.

Foreign envoys are usually summoned by the Vatican's Secretary of State or meet with the pope in the Apostolic Palace.

In an interview with Reuters on February 14, before the Russian unprovoked invasion, Ukraine's ambassador to the Vatican, Andriy Yurash, said Kyiv would be open to a Vatican mediation of the conflict. 

Several hours after meeting the ambassador, the pope telephoned Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, leader of Ukraine's Eastern-rite Catholics who has vowed not to leave Kyiv and who has opened up his cathedral's basement as a bomb shelter.

Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk discusses solidarity, patriotism, power for a free Ukraine. (The Catholic World)

Shevchuk's Rome office said in a statement that the pope told the archbishop "I will do everything I can" to help.

In a statement on Thursday, Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin said the Holy See hoped that those who hold the destiny of the world in their hands would have a "glimmer of conscience". 

World leaders have accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of a flagrant violation of international law by launching the biggest attack by one state against another in Europe since World War Two.

Francis made many appeals for peace in Ukraine before the invasion on Thursday, but has not spoken publicly since. He has proclaimed next Wednesday, Ash Wednesday, as a day of prayer and fasting for peace in Ukraine.

The Vatican announced separately on Friday that Francis would not be able to preside at the Ash Wednesday services because of an acute flare-up of pain in his knee. He also will have to skip a planned trip to Florence this Sunday.

Ukraine churches provide shelter to victims of Putin's War

Litany for Ukraine: Holy saints and martyrs, pray for peace.

Echo report published by Karol Wojteczek in Aleteia:  

Families taking cover in our rectory: A priest reports from Ukraine during the unprovoked #PutinWar.

"This is not a war against Ukraine, but a war in the heart of Europe. We are all under attack. It is a war against the whole world."

“This is not a war against Ukraine, but a war in the heart of Europe. We are all under attack. It is a war against the whole world. Pray for us as we wait for good news, news of peace, because God is with us and is our greatest strength. We pray that He will convert hearts and crush them with the power of peace, not weapons,” Fr. Sergiei Palamarchuk, pastor of the Greek Catholic parish in Lisichansk in the Luhansk region, said in an interview with the Italian agency SIR.

The problem is that we know where to flee from, but we don’t know where to go.

According to SIR, the priest — speaking by phone — was on his way from Muratov to Lisichansk. He was bringing with him several families seeking shelter in his rectory. “Right now we are fleeing Muratov because there are too many weapons there. We see military vehicles, we hear the sounds of bombing and mortar shelling. The situation here was already not safe,” the priest said.

Stand With Ukraine: Підтримуйте Україну Pidtrymuyte Ukrayinu

“Many families have fled in cars, and we are the last ones to leave the area. Some, however, have stayed because they don’t know where to go. The problem is that we know where to flee from, but we don’t know where to go. We are getting bad news about Kiev, Kharkiv, so no city is safe at the moment. When we get to my house in Lisichansk, we will have to think about what to do and where to go,” the parish priest reported.

Thank you for your prayers and please pray for us. 

Do not stop praying for us.

Despite the difficulties in continuing the conversation, Fr. Sergei reconnected to deliver an appeal for prayers through the media.

“Thank you for your prayers and please pray for us. Do not stop praying for us. This is the greatest and most important thing. And one more thing. We must understand that this is not a war against Ukraine, but a war in the heart of Europe. We are all under attack. It is a war against the whole world. Pray for us as we wait for the good news to come, the news of peace, because God is with us and God is our greatest strength. We pray that he will convert hearts and humble them with the power of peace and not weapons,” the priest stressed.

According to the information reported by the media and confirmed repeatedly by Ukrainian services, fighting and evacuation of the population are ongoing in the Luhansk district.

Ukrainians deserve US support: Allies and NATO must hold evil Putin accountable

Echo letters to the editor of the Los Angeles Times: 

Imagine if the Russian president took over two counties in Alaska. Would there be any discussion about how to respond?

I am generally opposed to war, including Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, and I endorse the decision to not have U.S. troops on the ground in Ukraine. Having said that, this is an invasion by any stretch of the imagination, and the U.S. should immediately impose severe sanctions.

We owe it to the Ukrainians and to democratic values to confront the world’s biggest bully.  From Barbara H. Bergen, Los Angeles, CA

Shouldn’t the lessons of Hitler and Stalin have taught the U.S. and the European Union that appeasing bullies like Putin leads to catastrophic consequences? The occupation of Crimea in 2014, should have given clear warning of Russia’s intentions.

Hitler at war- HitlerismPutinism

Adolf Hitler, byname Der Führer (German: “The Leader”), (born April 20, 1889, Braunau am Inn, Austria—died April 30, 1945, Berlin, Germany), leader of the Nazi Party (from 1920/21) and chancellor (Kanzler) and Führer of Germany (1933–45).

Why does the country with the world’s largest territory seek more land? This is a scheme by Putin to stroke his ego and distract from Russia’s faltering economy, which is half the size of California’s.

Putin has been conniving to secure his power and personal wealth while failing to provide for his people’s welfare.

What is the world waiting for before imposing severe sanctions on Russia? A bloodbath in Ukraine? Aren’t Putin’s actions provocative enough already? From Ted Carmely, Sherman Oaks, California

Could Putin purposefully have put nearly all the Russian military far away from Moscow?

Surprising cracks, if small ones, appear in Kremlin support for Putin on Ukraine: Excellent echo opinion by David Igntius for The Washington Post.

File under, "Putinology 103"

Russian Revolution March 8, 1917 – June 16, 1923:
The Russian Revolution was a period of political and social revolution that took place in the former Russian Empire which began during the First World War. This period saw Russia abolish its monarchy and adopt a socialist form of government following two successive revolutions and a bloody civil war.

Maine Writer's two cents: With a huge chunk of Russia's military positioned around the Nation of Ukraine, these hungry soilders do nothing but wait for their KGB "wizard of oz", to give the order to advance.  Obviously, the world is furious with Putin for risking war in Europe without any provocation from the Ukrainians.  

In my opinion, Putin's political veneer is peeling away. Therefore, putting the Russian military far away from Moscow keeps him safe from another Russian Revolution. Obviously, as 1917 proves, the Russian people know how to start and end revolutions!  

David Ignatius writes- Vladimir Putin presented a theatrical justification for war with Ukraine on Monday, but initial Russian military actions along the border were limited — and there seemed to be a few small cracks in Kremlin support for Putin’s obsession with regaining Russian dominion in Kyiv.

Putin appeared to be setting the stage on Monday for an all-out invasion. Under the dome of a grand state chamber in the Kremlin, he signed documents recognizing two Russian-backed enclaves in eastern Ukraine as independent “republics.” He then ordered some of the 150,000 Russian combat troops surrounding Ukraine to enter the breakaway regions in a (#FakeNews!) “peacekeeping” operation.

Putin may hope to provoke an armed response from Ukraine that would provide a pretext for a larger assault. But the initial “peacekeeping” move into Donetsk and Luhansk was limited, and a senior Biden administration official was careful to avoid describing it as an invasion, noting that Russian forces have been operating covertly in the two enclaves for nearly eight years.

In fact, Biden administration seemed to be calibrating its response, reacting less sharply to Putin’s recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk than did some other world leaders. The administration clearly wants to leave the door open for Moscow to stop short of an attack on Ukraine that is opposed not only by a unified NATO alliance but — perhaps more sobering for the Russian leader — by China as well.

Putin is “the ultimate political performance artist,” as Fiona Hill and Clifford Gaddy put it in a biography. Monday’s carefully staged events evoked both the majesty of imperial Russia and the pettiness and paranoia of its modern-day leader.

The day’s events began with a televised command performance of Putin’s security council in the ornate Kremlin chamber. 

Putin asked each of his ministers for their recommendations (??) about recognizing Donetsk and Luhansk. Many responses were dutifully on script, but there were several surprises.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia’s demands for security guarantees were “not an ultimatum,” and he seemed ready to meet Thursday with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, for more talks. Lavrov also conceded NATO’s unity, advising Putin that at this past weekend’s Munich Security Conference, “every Western representative declared their absolute commitment to a unified approach,” which “confirmed that we need to negotiate with Washington.”

Some of Putin’s other ministers fed his passion to subdue Kyiv. Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Ukraine could obtain nuclear weapons and pose a greater threat than Iran or North Korea. And Nikolai Patrushev, head of the security council, said Western nations “are hiding their true goal — to destroy the Russian federation,” a favorite Putin theme.

But the big surprise came when Putin quizzed Sergei Naryshkin, head of the SVR, Russia’s foreign intelligence service. Naryshkin advised that threatening to recognize Donetsk and Luhansk would be useful leverage for implementing the 2015 Minsk agreements to settle the conflict in the eastern region. Russia has claimed to support Minsk, but Monday’s recognition of the two breakaway enclaves as independent will probably derail any chance for the agreement. In response to Naryshkin’s answers, Putin got antsy.

Russian official, politician, businessman and the Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service since 2016.

Sergey Yevgenyevich Naryshkin

What followed was a rare Kremlin moment of quasi-dissent. “Speak clearly, do you support recognition?” demanded Putin. “I will,” answered his spy chief. “You will, or you do?” demanded Putin. When Naryshkin waffled and said he would support “bringing them into Russia,” Putin shot back, “That’s not what we are discussing. Do you support recognizing independence?” To which the vexed spymaster answered, “yes.”

The SVR chief may have been rattled by the astonishing ability of U.S. intelligence to read (and publicize) Russian intelligence plans about Ukraine. Whatever the reason, Max Seddon, Moscow correspondent for the Financial Times who translated the exchange in Twitter posts, noted that the session was “like the finale of the Sopranos.”

White House officials see other signs of dissension within the Russian leadership. Retired generals have criticized the invasion plan. Prominent Russian intellectuals have publicly challenged Putin. And public opinion polls have suggested limited support for war.

Putin tried to woo the public with a solo television performance after the Kremlin meeting. It was a meandering, seemingly unscripted monologue from his office, with Putin sitting at a big desk surrounded by three phones, two computer screens and a potted plant.

Putin sounded like a man trying to sell his country on the need for war. He offered a long, rambling history lesson, the gist of which was that Ukraine had become, in his words, a Western “colony with a puppet regime” that didn’t deserve to be independent of Russia. He even offered a WMD rationale for taking action, repeating Shoigu’s warning that a future Ukraine could obtain nuclear weapons.

The omnipresent chip on Putin’s shoulder has never seemed heavier. “We are being blackmailed, they are threatening us with sanctions,” he said. “A new pretext will always be found or fabricated. Irrespective of the situation in Ukraine.” And why? “To keep Russia behind, to prevent it from developing. … Just because we exist.”

Putin is very far out on a limb with the huge invasion force he has assembled, poised for action. He runs a one-man show in Moscow. 

In the Ukraine confrontation, anything can happen, but that limb has never looked shakier than it did on Monday.

Rich Lowry knows nothing about Canadian trucking: He is a terrible journalist

As a blogger, it always brings a big smile to my face when I find an opinion I've written about and then see what I wrote serendipitously show up in the main stream media!  

Although I know nothing about truckers or the trucking business, what I do know, with 100 percent certainty is that Rich Lowry knows even less than me about this issue impacting Canada's Prime Minister Trudeau and the Canadian demonstrators.

Thank you Bakersfield!

I'm hoping @RichLowry has a day job because his column needs facts. "Trudeau should give in to truckers" — what? 

Moreover, Lowry went on to say "truckers aren't selling concessions at arenas, or waiters circulating at crowded restaurants and they do work in remarkably self-contained professions."

BUT, they may deliver to concessions, restaurants, loading docks, fuel stations and use the restrooms or showers at a truck stop or come into close contact with those protesters marching with them across the bridge. With all these human contacts while driving back and forth between the United States and Canada, Lowry can say with certainty that unvaccinated/unmasked truckers would not get exposed?

I wonder what they were carrying in the cargo trailers that allowed them to sit for long periods on the bridge blasting their Lowrys (horns)? I'm thinking the protesters marching were leftovers from the school boards or city halls as they had little effect there.

I'm vaccinated and wear the mask in public. If the guy in front of me in the checkout line is not wearing a mask, I don't care. I'm protecting myself and him.

 

From James McCall, in Taft, California

American conservative news and opinion magazine. Rich Lowry became editor of National Review in 1997.

Rich Lowry needs to find a real job because he is a terrible journalist!

Echo report published in RawStory by Tom Boggioni:

Steve Schmidt blows conservative out of the water for claiming Putin was 'frightened' of Trump

Following Russian President Vladimir Putin's (dangerously crazy!) - wrongminded-decision to send troops into Donetsk and Luhansk as part of his incursion into Ukraine, the National Review editor-in-chief Rich Lowry (ugh!) tweeted out that Putin likely made the move because Trump is out of office and the Russian strongman was "frightened' by the ex-president's unpredictability. (IMO Rich Lowry is guilty of journalistic opportunism. He either plagiarizes what he writes by lifting it from other sources - like EuroNews- or he just makes stuff up.)

Thank you! Schmidt has been extremely critical of former President Donald Trump, and of the GOP for supporting him. In June 2018, Schmidt renounced the Republican Party as "fully the party of Trump".

Lowry's stupidity, in turn, led to a scathing response from former the Republican campaign consultant Steve Schmidt, who let Lowry know, in no uncertain terms, that he regards Trump as "a whore ... who would sell out his country; her values and ideals for nothing but flattery."

As Lowry sees it, "The sheer unpredictably of Trump, his anger at being defied or disrespected, his willingness to take the occasional big risk (the Soleimani strike), all had to make Putin frightened or wary of him in a way that he simply isn’t of Joe Biden."

Schmidt begged to differ in a tweetstorm that began, "This is a world view I have never understood. Trump is the most predictable person in the world. He is as predictable as the Sun setting in the west and rising in the east. There is no mystery around Trump. How could there be? The idea that Vladimir Putin was kept guessing by Trump is lunacy."

He then added, "What Putin saw was strategic incoherence shaped by a vast ignorance of the world," before later adding, "Trump fetishized the world’s strongmen and lambasted our allies. He was as indifferent to repression abroad as he was to democracy at home. He was a Buffon set loose upon the stage and everyone played their part."

At the end, Schmidt took a veiled swipe at the longtime National Review editor by writing, "He [Trump] has blighted the culture for more than 40 tedious years. In all that time, it wasn’t until he got to Washington DC that he found marks naïve enough to believe there is an actual strategy to it all."

Maine Writer- Quick thinking from Steve Schmidt!

Mr. Schmidt gives expert advice from Twitter: "The United States should destabilize Putin by destabilizing the Russian elite. Make them pay the price. Financial, legal and immigration restrictions should be imposed immediately. Access to Western education should be shuttered to Russian nationals and Russian owned and flagged private vessels 🚢 should be refused anchorages in Western waters. There is still plenty of winter left in Moscow."

P.S. IMO: Rich Lowry should find a job as a night shift copy editor for Pravda. 

Putinology 102: Putin is paranoid about freedom

Echo opinion published in EuroNews by Oleksandr Sushko: This report in EuroNews has introduced me to this excellent news source!

Check it out! 

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is a Russian politician and former KGB intelligence officer. He has been the president of Russia 2012, and he previously held this office from 1999 until 2008. He was also the prime minister from 1999 to 2000, and again from 2008 to 2012. 
Putin was Born: October 7, 1952.

Despite his rhetoric, Putin is not challenging NATO's expansion, but Ukraine’s right to make sovereign choices and forge alliances that will make the country flourish. All of these are decisions denied to anyone living under Russia’s "sphere of influence".

The argument is that Vladimir Putin is so afraid of NATO that he has no choice but to menace neighboring countries and occasionally invade them, as he is threatening to do once again in Ukraine.

Lowry: Putin fearful of freedom, not NATO:  

The root cause of this Ukrainians conflict isn't NATO. 

Rather, it's Putin. He is the aggressor. Vladimir Putin is the one who has created an international emergency from out of nowhere by moving 130,000 troops to the border of a country that represents no conceivable physical threat to Russia.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a defensive alliance. No one sincerely believes, not even the Kremlin, that it is going to wage a war of aggression against Russia. Think about it. Since when does Russia have more to fear from, say, Estonia or Poland — countries on the eastern flank of NATO — than those countries have to fear from Russia?

Surely, what worries Putin most isn't any military threat, but the Western model of free, accountable government that puts his kleptocratic authoritarianism in a particularly bad light, especially the closer it gets to Mother Russia.

Even if NATO completely collapsed and Putin swept to control of all of continental Europe, it's not clear that his head would rest easy on his pillow at night, knowing that his government lacks democratic legitimacy and is being outstripped by countries reaping the benefits of self-government, the rule of law, independent judiciaries and constitutional rights.

Amid the drumbeat of war, it is often pointed out that Russia has already invaded Ukraine in 2014: first with the annexation of Crimea, and with the continuing occupation of parts of the Donbas.

But although parts of eastern Ukraine are a combat zone, the country’s future should not be reduced to a battlefield between great powers.

To describe Ukraine as a site of struggle between competing spheres of influence takes away its agency and frames the debate completely on terms set by the Kremlin.

Ukraine made its choice to move forward as a European nation with liberal, democratic institutions, not as a Russian satellite state.

Western commentators risk viewing the current tensions through the lens that Vladimir Putin desires - one of military chess moves - rather than Ukrainians’ legitimate demand for the right to self-determination. This can be a non-negotiable.

Ukraine has a strategic purpose for joining NATO and the EU, codified in the Ukrainian constitution, though these are objectives that are unlikely to be met for many years. But Russia wants the world to believe that they are somehow imminent and so artificially concentrates on this issue.

Putin has already de facto blocked NATO and EU membership by frightening European governments into thinking that they will get sucked into the conflict. NATO membership is exaggerated in the debate as a ruse by Russia to conceal its real ambitions.

Putin talks about the need to prevent the deployment of offensive weapons in Ukraine - but they only exist for defensive purposes due to Russia’s ongoing occupation of the eastern regions.

Hollow justifications for Putin's aggression

Putin’s specialty is in dividing the West, to the point where he has managed to convene the West to talk to him as a reward for his belligerence, over the heads of Ukraine and even its European allies.

There is nothing wrong with the US and Russia discussing military issues. Even at the height of the Cold War, Washington and Moscow discussed the deployment of weapons.

But the future of Ukraine, and eastern Europe more widely, is not a bilateral issue for Russia and the West. This is a journey that the people, their elected officials, and Ukrainian civil society walk together. Putin is escalating the situation because he understands that this aim, for a peaceful, democratic society, is irreversible.

Freedom and self-determination ought to be non-negotiable

In recent focus groups, Ukrainians were asked to identify a one-word concept that would make the most positive difference to their country.

"Freedom" was the overwhelming answer, outranking concerns over low average income and a lack of confidence in public institutions.

Ukraine's national journey is seen as a threat

Moscow wants to revive the Brezhnevian idea of limited sovereignty in which those in the "near abroad" have scope to run some of their affairs, but the boundaries are always set by Moscow, and the penalties for insubordination are deadly, as Hungary and Czechoslovakia found out.

If the West accepts these terms, it will be another tragedy for eastern Europe. NATO does not wish to expand for the sake of ideology: the pressure to join is coming from countries like Ukraine and Georgia, whose sovereign territory is menaced by Russia.

Ukraine has many struggles -- debilitating corruption, weak governance, the lack of a fair judiciary -- but it also has a strong civil society that is constantly providing innovative ways to resist the authoritarian backlash.

What else should be done?

The West can support Ukrainian freedom by weaning itself off the oil and gas that Russia uses to blackmail Europe, and by withholding regulatory approval for Nord Stream 2.

It must strengthen efforts to track Russian dirty money and freeze the assets of the regime. To prevent Russia from spreading its malign influence, its investments in Europe must be screened, and it must be prevented from buying stakes in crucial sectors like defense, energy infrastructure and IT.

Not invading Ukraine is not enough. The West should demand Russia stop undermining the free choice of democratic societies in Eastern Europe, while at the same time increasing support to strengthen democratic institutions, civil society, and independent media.

This crisis must not be viewed as a contest between large geopolitical entities. It is a contest between freedom and tyranny, and the West must not find itself humming along to the Kremlin’s song.

Ukraine's national journey is seen as a threat

Moscow wants to revive the (failed!) Brezhnevian idea of limited sovereignty in which those in the "near abroad" have scope to run some of their affairs, but the boundaries are always set by Moscow, and the penalties for insubordination are deadly, as Hungary and Czechoslovakia found out.

If the West accepts these terms, it will be another tragedy for eastern Europe. NATO does not wish to expand for the sake of ideology: the pressure to join is coming from countries like Ukraine and Georgia, whose sovereign territory is menaced by Russia.

Oleksandr Sushko is executive director of the International Renaissance Foundation in Ukraine.