Faces and U-turns. Ukraine between Holiness and Prostitution

From the book of Sirach
Sir 27,5-8 (NV) [gr. 27,4-7]

When you shake a sieve, waste remains;
so when a man argues, his defects appear.
The ceramicist's vases are tested in the furnace,
So the way of reasoning is the test for a man.
The fruit shows how the tree is grown,
thus the word reveals the thoughts of the heart.
Don't praise anyone before they've spoken,
for this is the test of men.

Undoubtedly, the character traits of an individual are revealed when he confronts another in a discussion and, often, this happens regardless of what he says, it is enough to observe the attitudes that accompany the words. If it is Trump or Putin, it is not even necessary to make an effort of semiological decryption and psychological decoding of the para-verbal. Both are the incarnation of the concept of glasnost, in the sense of “transparency”, which we all illusorily and enthusiastically embraced at the beginning of the nineties of the last century.

Here, then, is the choice to quote the "book of Sirach" to make a quick reflection on the spectacle offered by the Trump-Zelensky meeting (one share (not even the Sanremo Festival has ever had one!) and then moved on to a comparison between the communication methods adopted by Trump and those of Russian President Putin.

The “sieve” of the pseudo-dialogue that took place between the paternalistic grandfather Trump who severely reprimands Zelensky, the unruly and ungrateful grandson will enter, indeed, has already entered the history of communication and has effectively sifted out the refusals/defects of the protagonists, in particular those of Trump. Zelensky, forced into a corner by a verbal and postural aggression that certainly did not suggest a meeting between heads of state, only managed to hint at a few objections of submission and could do very little against the Trump-Vance duo, another key element of the triumvirate formed by the American president with him and Elon Musk. And it is precisely the “two-way” intervention often adopted by Trump that represents an element of originality.

The constant search for “reinforcement” offered now by Musk, now by Vance, who participate in his official interventions with a role that places him as a primus inter pares It is a decidedly innovative element. The attitude is that of an individual who, without expressing himself openly, says to the interlocutor: “Speak without wonder and without reservations, they are with me…”

This is the “neighborhood boss with bodyguard” model, a form of oppression where the power of the leader is supported by his main acolytes. If Trump alone, especially in the meeting with Zelensky, recalls the "strict grandfather" mentioned above, the duo with Vice President Vance seems to have come out of an episode of And Soprano: two henchmen who, in an intimidating manner, demand protection money – in this case to be paid in rare earths – from the victim on duty.

In this regard, the issue of rare earths that Ukraine is rich in (not only wheat, therefore!) leads to a reflection. Trump wants minerals. In unsuspecting times, I wrote about the importance that lithium has for Russia, which does not belong to rare earths, but is still a valuable mineral, also for its applications in the military field:

"We want to start from a particular reading of the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine and the obstinacy with which the Kremlin wants to occupy Donbass at all costs. In this case, the Russian motivations should not be sought in the problems related to the defense of the Russian-speaking population in the area, but rather in its mineral resources"¹

Putin also wants minerals. So, it may no longer be a question of national identity, or at least not only.

The other interesting aspect that emerges from the "sieve" is precisely that of the group mode, so different from the “one man in command” attitude characteristic of Putin.

Putin is an absolute monarch, a tsar who keeps the members of the “magic circle” he surrounds himself with at a distance, always and in any case.

As an example, let us recall the emblematic image of him sitting at one end of a long table, conferring with General Valery Gerasimov, Chief of the Defense Staff of the Russian Federation, and Sergei Shoigu, Minister of Defense at the time, sitting next to each other at a considerable distance from the Russian president. Not to mention how he systematically treats all those who, even if they belong to theinner circle, when they do not maintain the role of yes men at their request. The members of theestablishment Putin's, unlike Trump's, do not have the dignity of "peers of England", but are only spokesmen.

In any case, whether it is a "leader with reinforcement” or “leader “lonely” the approach of these autocrats is always based on the ethics of the Marquis del Grillo played by the great Alberto Sordi.

One element that, however, unites the president of the United States and the Russian one is the adoption of surreal forms of propaganda, with which they try to make acceptable contents that are evidently in contradiction with reality and, generally, improbable or anti-historical.

Until Trump came to power, Putin was the paradigmatic example of the use of these communication techniques, including “plausible deniability.”², well represented by the narrative relating to the “denazification” of Ukraine, to justify the “special operation” – woe betide anyone who calls it a “war” – or the divine mission undertaken by Russia sanctified by the Orthodox Patriarch Kirill I, against the corrupt and bearer of negative values ​​West. Today, Trump’s self-sanctification, having escaped by divine will from the attacks during the election campaign, brings him very close to his new ally, to the point of making him state that Russia did not invade Ukraine and that Zelensky is a dictator. The Oscar-winning video clip of Gaz Vegas. What really matters is that there is aaudience ready to receive these messages and act as a sounding board for their contents.

In the 1970s, walking through the streets of the city, it was common to come across the following writing written on the walls: “Italy out of NATO!” For a long time, supporters of pro-Soviet or, in any case, anti-American ideology have hoped, if not for the dissolution of the Atlantic Alliance, at least for the removal of our Peninsula from the sphere of influence of the United States. Now there is no need for those who still vigorously oppose the American military umbrella to get too worked up: Trump is thinking about withdrawing from the Alliance or, at least, calling it into question..

What is certain is that, regardless of what Trump will actually implement and whether the long-term consequences will follow the end of his mandate, Europe must learn the lesson.

I join the chorus of lamenting democracies in pain to evoke a unity both economic and relative to common defense. Above all for a common Defense (with a capital D). A Defense that, net of the participation of stars and stripes, sees the European governments united if, in the absence of the American cat, the Russian mouse is not stung by the desire to test the reaction of the free world - and, therefore, weak in the Putinian sense - starting by conducting a "special operation" in the Baltic countries, to continue it perhaps in Finland and, why not, beyond the Polish border, waiting for someone, beyond the indignant proclamations, not to demonstrate that skin is sold at a high price, as happened in Ukraine. Yes, in Ukraine, where with all due respect to the pacifists toto (forgive the pun) resistance and the will to fight had little hope of prevailing, but at least they demonstrated that an invasion is not a walk in the park as Putin believed (or yes men they made him believe).

The most vulgar aspect of the whole story it is the betrayal of a woman (Ukraine) who is first helped to escape from a rapist (Russia), who is then asked for sexual favors (rare earths) in exchange for the help provided. And while doing so, it is also whispered in her ear that after all, he was asking for it.