The Dnipro dam atrocity must prompt a re-evaluation of Russian culture

So far, Russianists have been strangely resistant to confronting imperialistic, Russocentric narratives, says Nataliya Shpylova-Saeed

Published on
June 13, 2023
Last updated
June 20, 2023
Source: Satellite image © 2023 Maxar Technologies/Getty images

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (4)

Please provide evidence that proves that Russia destroyed the dam, when the Ukraine/US/NATO clearly had more to gain/less to lose from its destruction. You are aware of the Ukrainian/US destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, aren't you?
Ukraine has reportedly lost huge areas of agricultural land (for growing vegetables, grain, oilseeds, etc.) due to flooding, and future loss of irrigation water - the countries that import these commodities will have to look elsewhere, putting more strain on global food supply, civilians on both sides of the Dnipro have been forced to evacuate their homes, and these people, their pets and livestock have been lost to floodwaters. Tell us: How exactly is that "more to gain/less to lose"? Are you a Putin apologist? Do you justify the Russian invasion - an act of war - that brought about all this mayhem and destruction in the first place? Are you justifying the Russian infantry's atrocities in Bucha? The cruise missiles fired indiscriminately from Russian and Russian-occupied territories destroying residential apartments and killing civilian non-combatants? Both Ukranians and Russians are dying because of the paranoia and megalomania of a former KGB staffer... There are no winners!
The dam was constructed from thousands of tons of steel reinforced concrete. The breaches in it are hundreds of metres wide. This is not a product of shell or rocket impacts, the dam has clearly been blown up from the inside. Only the Russian army was in a position to do that.
The "who is to gain" question is a reasonable first question for a detective investigating a murder. Even then the answer does not necessarily lead to the murderer. In complex situations the question may be asked too, but the chances of the answer leading to the culprit are much reduced: there can be opportunistic agents around and the culprits can make mistakes. The situation with the North Stream pipeline is not as clearcut as Kremlin bots and useful idiots would lead you to believe: for example, the RF Baltic Fleet was engaged in war games in the right place and at the right time. In any case it is the RF who is an aggressor and it is the aggressor who bears the primary responsibility for all disasters of this kind. Imperial delusions of the Kremlin mafia and the Russians who want to believe in their superiority should not be supported by Western academia.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT