Putin names regional Russian airport Stalingrad
World War Two, in which around 22-25 million Soviet citizens are estimated to have died, is known in Russia as The Great Patriotic War. For many Russians, Stalingrad conjures memories both of the war's sacrifice and the murderous rule of dictator Josef Stalin.
Putin has often compared his invasion of Ukraine to the fight against Nazis, presenting the war to Russians as a 'special military operation' to 'demilitarize' and 'denazify' Ukraine.
Ukraine – which was part of the Soviet Union and itself suffered devastation at the hands of Adolf Hitler's forces – rejects those parallels as spurious pretexts for a war of imperial conquest.
In a fiery 2023 speech in Volgograd marking the 80th anniversary of the battle of Stalingrad, Putin lambasted Germany for helping to arm Ukraine and reiterated that he was ready to draw on Russia's entire arsenal, which includes nuclear weapons.
Stalingrad, which was renamed Volgograd in 1961, was the bloodiest battle of the war, when the Soviet Red Army, at a cost of over 1 million casualties, broke the back of German invasion forces in 1942-43.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
18 hours ago
- IOL News
Russia-Ukrainian Conflict: 'Give me liberty or give me death'
Rescuers work at Ohmatdyt Children's Hospital, which was damaged during a Russian missile strike, in Kyiv, Ukraine in July, 2024. What we are witnessing in Ukraine is not only one of Russia's 'final pushes', but the realisation of Vladimir Lenin's prophecy. Image: Gleb Garanich/Reuters HISTORY, as CV Wedgwood observed, is written backwards but lived forwards. In the fog of war, the path ahead is obscured by ambiguity and risk. Kierkegaard put it well: 'We can only understand life backwards, but life must be lived forwards.' This lens helps make sense of the Russia-Ukraine war — not as a sudden crisis, but as the unfolding of long-standing ideological and geopolitical currents. In 1921, Lenin presciently wrote that Western capitalists would willingly supply the Soviet Union with the technology and credit it needed to eventually overthrow them. 'They will work hard,' he said, 'in order to prepare their own suicide.' This vision was not mere rhetoric. OC Boileau argued in 1976 that Soviet leaders saw themselves not just as national rulers, but as stewards of a revolutionary mission — the inevitable triumph of communism over the West. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, after fleeing to America, echoed this warning in his 1978 Harvard speech: 'The West is on the verge of a collapse created by its own hands.' He observed a weakening of Western resolve and warned that the Soviet economy was so entrenched in militarisation that even if its leaders wanted peace, they could no longer stop the machine. 'The degeneration of America is underway,' he said, 'and off there in the wings, the military power is being prepared to apply the final push.' Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ What we are witnessing in Ukraine is not only one of Russia's 'final pushes', but the realisation of Vladimir Lenin's prophecy. Jim Courter, in *Step by Step: The Soviet Bloc's Global Challenge to Democracy*, reminds us that a larger story underpins the current crisis — one of territorial expansion and the consolidation of political, economic, and military power. Guided by proletarian internationalism, the Soviet bloc has long aimed at the destruction of the 'Free World' — the great democracies. Courter does not claim the Soviets want war, but insists it would be naive to assume they desire peace. The evidence is clear: the Soviet Union ceaselessly prepared for war, and those designs continue wherever opportunity allows. When Americans spent 40% of their defence budget on personnel, the Soviets invested in weapons. As Robert McFarlane noted, the USSR produced twice as many fighter aircraft as the US and NATO combined, four times as many helicopters, and 50 times as many bombers. The armoured battalions now rolling into Ukraine are not new, they are the legacy of a system that never stopped building. In his Crimean annexation speech, Russian President Vladimir Putin declared that Crimea is saturated with shared history and pride, that St Vladimir's baptism in Chersonese laid the spiritual foundation for a common civilisation linking Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus. 'We are not just close neighbours,' he said, 'we are actually the same nation. Kyiv is the mother of Russian cities. Ancient Rus is our common origin; we cannot live without each other.' This deep historical bond explains Russia's sensitivity to Ukraine and its inevitable involvement. Samuel Charap and Keith Darden cite Samuel Huntington's *Clash of Civilisations*, which argues that nations need enemies for self-definition. While discredited, Huntington's thesis gains credibility in Ukraine. After more than 30 years of the West treating Russia as an adversary, Moscow may have truly become one. Putin's private remark to George W Bush — questioning whether Ukraine was a real country — reveals a dismissive attitude. Yet, as Charap and Darden note, until the collapse of the EU-brokered settlement on February 21, 2014, Russia's role did not warrant labels like 'aggressive' or 'expansionist'. Until then, blaming Russia for Ukraine's crisis was unjust. The Russia-Ukraine war marks the second major confrontation with NATO. In 2008, Russia occupied Georgia, a NATO aspirant, and recognised breakaway regions. In 2013, it repeated the pattern with Ukraine, annexing Crimea and backing separatists. The West rightly condemned these actions. Yet, as Safak Oguz argues, NATO's weak response to the 2008 Georgia war failed to deter future aggression. Its posture lacked the strength to prevent Russia from challenging the West again. The UN's inability to mediate was summed up by Boutros Boutros-Ghali: 'The whole philosophy is to avoid military force. If we have used force, we have failed.' When asked how to respond to a voracious fighting force, he replied: 'Our philosophy is based on talk — negotiate — and then talk again.' To move to force, he said, is 'like someone doing therapy who suddenly decides to do brain surgery'. This aversion renders the UN — and similar bodies — 'toothless dogs', a flaw mirrored in the OAU's non-interference clause that enabled coups across Africa. Lee H Hamilton noted six shifts after the Cold War: the end of the communist challenge, Soviet instability, fragile new democracies, the rise of Western Europe and Japan, Middle East instability, and emerging transnational threats. The Warsaw Pact dissolved in 1991, ending the threat of Soviet invasion. Yet thousands of nuclear weapons still pointed west. The danger faded — but did not vanish. Many believe negotiations will end the war. But history cautions against blind trust. Fred Ikle once said, 'Negotiating with the Russians is tough. They tend to press for higher numbers.' Boutros-Ghali's mantra — 'talk, negotiate, talk again' — offers little hope. The prospect of peace through such diplomacy is bleak. Rather than suffer under authoritarianism, Ukrainians echo Patrick Henry: 'Give me liberty or give me death.' The wealth of the modern world is created in free nations. The Soviets come to the West for food, not because they lack resources, but because their leaders choose arms over agriculture. One gets the impression that Soviet, and now Russian, leaders would rather their people starve than risk the 'contamination' of freedom. Plato said: 'Only the dead have seen the end of war.' Rosenberg, a poet who died at 28 on the Western Front, mourned a world where: 'Red fangs have torn His face. God's blood is shed.' He longed for the world to regain its 'pristine bloom'. For those in Ukraine, Palestine, and Syria, every day is a battle. Only death brings peace. If Ukrainian freedom is to survive, negotiations must not compromise liberty. As Jesse Helms argued, only the free world has the creativity to adapt. Each free citizen holds a power no oppressive state can match — the power to shape their own life. True security lies not in control, but in freedom. As JFK said: 'We must never negotiate out of fear, but we must never fear to negotiate.' Weinberger warned that concession after concession leads to empty agreements. Reinhold Niebuhr cautioned that democratic failure often comes from idealists facing ruthless realities with too many illusions. The real conflict is not between Russia and Ukraine, but between Russia and the United States. What we see is either the resurgence or continuation of the Cold War. There was no official end — only an assumption, fueled by Reagan's 1987 meeting with Mikhail Gorbachev. When asked how long the conflict would last, Reagan said: 'Oh, that's a thing of the past. They no longer believe in one-world Marxian domination.' But do they? Could nations like Ukraine, Georgia, and Hungary have turned to NATO not just for security, but for survival? Russia feeds its military, not its people. Dmitry Medvedev once told Crimeans: 'There is no money, but you be strong.' Hunger-fueled revolutions in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. Today, Russians queue for bread while trains haul armoured battalions to Ukraine. As a song says: 'There are more questions than answers.' But this is clear: NATO's Supreme Allied Commander stated, 'What is happening in eastern Ukraine is a military operation… carried out at the direction of Russia.' And so we return to Lenin's warning: 'They will supply us with the materials and technology which we need for our future victorious attacks upon our suppliers. In other words, they will work hard in order to prepare their own suicide.' Let Ukraine decide: bow to pressure, or rise with Henry's cry? 'Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!' * Dr Vusi Shongwe works in the Department of Sport, Arts, and Culture in KwaZulu-Natal and writes in his personal capacity. ** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, IOL, or Independent Media. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
From Epstein to empire: The historical continuity of men buying and selling the bodies of women and young girls
I have kept one eye on the Epstein-Trump-Maxwell story, and another on research for the book on which I am working. There's a link between the two stories. It is the continuity of men trading, buying and selling the bodies of women and young girls, and, as I came to learn, 'managing' prostitution to protect European colonialists and settlers (white men) from diseased 'natives' in the tropics. I should make a couple of things clear. Whatever is written below is taken from either official records and/or the research and the writing of British colonialists and settlers. Because of space constraints, I don't list all the references and use quotation marks only to draw attention to some of the absurdities of colonial policies, statements and expressed ideals. So, as the Russians would say, Doveryay, no proveryay (Trust, but verify). The set of chapters I am currently working on is about the societies that British colonisers and subsequent settlers created. It's not about South Africa, although I did drop in a short reference to the creation of gardens across the British Empire and the way they are being maintained by post-colonial governments. The chapters look at prostitution, the trafficking of women and the creation of brothels in the colonies, and how the British colonists 'managed' the sexual relations between their bureaucrats and settlers. More below. The faces of evil Let's get the Epstein-Trump-Maxwell stuff out of the way, but keep in the frame the way that the bodies of women and young girls have historically been treated as 'things' that can be traded and used to satisfy sexual pleasures and perversions. Or, as British and US records show, to satisfy the lustful urges of invaders, settlers and soldiers. My colleague Marianne Thamm has written about the Epstein story. I won't go into the sordid details. What I will say, to illustrate further a continuity of cruelty, is that the late Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and her father, the late Robert Maxwell (as venal, vile and corrupt a man as there has been) represent the face of evil. (Unless evil does not quite capture paedophilia, the trafficking of young girls, stealing money from his [Maxwell's] company's pension fund, and leaving people who had been paying into the fund penniless.) He, Robert Maxwell, was ' up there with Bernie Madoff,' said Roy Greenslade, author of 'Maxwell: The Rise and Fall of Robert Maxwell and His Empire'. Maxwell was described as evil (see John Preston's book, 'Fall: The Mysterious Life and Death of Robert Maxwell, Britain's Most Notorious Media Baron') and admitted that during the Second World War, he shot a group of German soldiers despite their displaying a white flag, and (much) later remarked to one of his sons, 'I once killed boys your age. I regret it deeply'. He would be considered a war hero by the British. The continuity referred to three paragraphs above has come a long way, I would suggest. Satisfying the lusts of colonists, invaders and conquerors Let me work backwards. Though the following are not the main focus of my current work, I should start with a passage from The New York Times: 'When Cho Soon-ok was 17 in 1977, three men kidnapped and sold her to a pimp in Dongducheon, a town north of Seoul. She was about to begin high school, but instead of pursuing her dream of becoming a ballerina, she was forced to spend the next five years under the constant watch of her pimp, going to a nearby club for sex work. Her customers: American soldiers.' In the prologue of ' Sex Among Allies: Military Prostitution in US/Korea Relations ', Katherine Moon wrote: 'The selling and buying of sex by Koreans and Americans have been a staple of US-Korean relations since the Korean War (1950-53) and the permanent stationing of US troops in Korea since 1955. It is not simply a matter of women walking the streets and picking up US soldiers for a few bucks. It is a system that is sponsored and regulated by two governments, Korean and American (through the US military). The US military and the Korean government have referred to such women as 'bar girls,' 'hostesses,' 'special entertainers,' 'businesswomen,' and 'comfort women.' Koreans have also called these women the highly derogatory names, yanggalbo (Western whore) and yanggongju (Western princess).' In ' Pulp Vietnam, War and Gender in Cold War Men's Adventure Magazines ', Gregory Daddis echoed this abuse of women, and referred to 'sexual conquest of Oriental women' as a means to prove the virility of US soldiers and demonstrate power and dominance over 'savages' (see the chapter on 'War Heroes and Sexual Conquerors'). See also ' Beyond the Shadow of Camptown: Korean Military Brides in America' by Ji-Yeon Yuh. Women's bodies as a colonial project In South and Southeast Asia (and in early European settlement of North America), women were effectively traded, and prostitutes were corralled, as it were, into brothels under the guise of 'management' to protect white men from contracting diseases that were carried by the indigenous population. (It should be pointed out that the Japanese invaders in East and Southeast Asia also created brothels. My focus is, however, mainly on European, especially British colonial and settler expansionism.) In North America, the colonists and settlers moved readily 'from the raping of a woman to the raping of a country to the raping of the world. Acts of aggression, of hate, of conquest, or empire-building [evolve to] harems of women and harems of people; houses of prostitution and houses of pimps.' (Jack Forbes, 'Columbus and Other Cannibals: The Wetiko Disease of Exploitation, Imperialism, and Terrorism', p 8). In South and Southeast Asia, the sanitised basis for (venereal) disease control became a matter 'central to the state', enabled by the Contagious Diseases Act (in India) in 1886, where it was deemed necessary to provide soldiers and settlers with 'attractive' women, and make sure that everyone adhered to hygiene practices. The overriding policy in parts of the European empire in the east (and subsequent settlers) was as much about domination and control, as it was to get prostitutes 'off the streets and into brothels' to better manage women's bodies, and make sure 'natives' were 'safe' for satisfying the lusts and libidos of 'white' men. 'Surrounded by garbage, domestic animals, crawling children, and the stench of human excretion, the whole area was a scene of filth, pollution and vice. Superimposed on this was the fear of the 'native' as a rebel. The 'native' prostitute was thus by her very origin perceived as an amalgamation of all three — filth, disease and crime.' (See 'The Indian Prostitute as Colonial Subject: Bengal 1864 – 1883', by Ratnabali Chatterjee). 'The Victorian age,' wrote Chatterjee in Prostituted Women and the British Empire, 'provided a paradigm of sexual and moral hypocrisy.' Beyond Asia, the British were more concerned with the preservation and protection of whiteness than they were with 'natives'. The rise of eugenics, with attendant notions of 'racial purity', introduced a whole new raft of concerns about whether 'native' or 'white' prostitutes ought to be traded. The examples I found in these cases were from the British colonial era in Nigeria. That was when 'all sexual activities of white women in the colonies were an important part of empire building and the maintenance of white prestige,' wrote Linda Bryder in 'Sex, Race, and Colonialism: An Historiographical Review' (pp 809 – 810). In Southeast Asia, Dutch colonists considered the indigenous women 'untameable'. The indigenous women, too (not unlike the modern-day women who would lure girls into networks of abuse), would 'sell' young girls to colonists and settlers. (See ' Wives, Slaves and Concubines: A History of the Female Underclass in Dutch Asia ', by Eric Jones). Nonetheless, the female body was traded in European, notably British colonies, and as one historian of the era explained, 'The expansion of Europe was not only a matter of 'Christianity and commerce,' it was also a matter of copulation and concubinage.' Robert Hyam's work is not without criticism (see Carina Ray's criticism in ' Interracial Sex and the Making of Empire '), but he explained, nonetheless, that 'sexual opportunities were seized with imperious confidence', and that such opportunities were 'a perk' of imperial expansion of the British Empire across the world. He contended (further) that the sexual opportunities came with the service of empire, which freed men from 'repressive Victorian morality codes at home' and they could 'fulfil their libidinous desires with the colonies' sexually decadent 'natives''. This use and abuse, trade and 'management' of the bodies of women and young girls is continuously exposed, researched and discussed. It is a part of my current research (not academic), which focuses specifically on the societies established by the British empire-builders and subsequent settlers. With one eye on this history, the Epstein-Maxwell abomination represents, to me at least, a continuity of the history of the way the bodies of women and girls have been bought and sold — very often to satisfy the libidos of men. It goes much deeper than mere misogyny and has to do with deeply embedded (cultures and habits) of assuming that women are things that can be played with, fondled and exploited for sexual pleasure. Or, as Stephanie Pappas wrote in Scientific American, 'Our brains see men as whole and women as parts … sexualised body parts.' DM
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
Russia claims capture of Chasiv Yar after 16-month battle
Russia said on Thursday it had captured the town of Chasiv Yar in eastern Ukraine after nearly 16 months of fighting, opening the way for potential further advances. Russia's Defence Ministry said in a brief statement its forces had 'liberated' the town. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy dismissed the claim as 'disinformation'. A Ukrainian military spokesperson called it 'propaganda'. But a video posted by a Russian military unit and verified by Reuters showed a Russian paratroop banner and the national flag being raised by soldiers in the desolate ruins of the town. Russia has been slowly grinding forward in eastern Ukraine as talks to end the 3-1/2 year war have failed to make progress towards a ceasefire, prompting U.S. President Donald Trump to threaten new sanctions on Russia and buyers of its exports from next week. Moscow's forces are also mounting intense pressure on the city of Pokrovsk, 60 km (37 miles) southwest of Chasiv Yar. Military analyst Emil Kastehelmi, co-founder of the Finland-based Black Bird Group, said it was likely that battles were continuing near Chasiv Yar. 'The terrain of Chasiv Yar has favoured the defender. Forested areas, waterways, hills and a varied building stock have enabled Ukraine to conduct a defensive operation lasting over a year, in which the Russians have made minimal monthly progress,' he told Reuters. GRADUAL ADVANCE Kastehelmi said it was likely that the town's fall, if confirmed, would create conditions for Russia to advance further in eastern Ukraine, but still only gradually. 'The fall of the city to the enemy is nevertheless a challenging situation for Ukraine, as it will bring the Russians closer to Kostiantynivka, which Russia is now approaching from several directions,' he said. 'The logistics in the area will also be affected, as Russians can bring drone teams even closer.' Zelenskiy, in his nightly video address, said Ukrainian units around Chasiv Yar were 'defending our positions. Every Russian attempt at advancing in Donetsk region, in Sumy, in Kharkiv is thwarted in the end.' Quoting a report from top Ukrainian commander Oleksandr Syrskyi, Zelenskiy said the most intensive battles were still near Pokrovsk. Ukrainian forces, he said, were repelling Russian sabotage and reconnaissance parties. The popular Ukrainian blog DeepState, which uses open source materials to track the movements of Russian forces, also denied that Moscow's forces were in control of Chasiv Yar. The battle for Chasiv Yar began in April last year, when Russian paratroopers reached its eastern edge. Russian state media reported then that Russian soldiers had begun phoning their Ukrainian counterparts inside the town to demand they surrender or be wiped out by aerial guided bombs. The town, now destroyed, had a pre-war population of more than 12,000 and its economy was based around a factory that produced reinforced concrete products and clay used in bricks. It lies just west of Bakhmut, which Russia captured in 2023 after one of the bloodiest battles of the war.
