Russian troops are encircling Ukraine from three sides. In Washington and Brussels, there are warnings of crushing sanctions if Vladimir Putin orders an invasion. Embassy families — both American and Russian — are being evacuated from Kyiv.

Yet there are still diplomatic options — “off-ramps” in the lingo of the negotiators — and in the next several days the Biden administration and NATO are expected to respond, in writing, to Putin’s far-reaching demands.

The question is whether there is real potential for compromise in three distinct areas: Russia’s demand for ironclad assurances that Ukraine won’t enter NATO; that NATO won’t further expand; and that Russia can somehow restore some approximation of its sphere of influence in the region to before the strategic map of Europe was redrawn in the mid-1990s.

The hardest issue of all defies negotiation: Putin’s demand that Ukraine reverse its “drift” toward the West. That is a matter of national sentiment, and polls show that in the years since Russia’s seizure of Crimea in 2014, Ukrainians are more desirous than ever of joining the Western alliance. Putin’s massing of the troops is likely to accelerate that trend, US&nbsp;officials say, rather than reverse it.

And as in all conflicts with roots in the Cold War and its aftermath, the subtext of any negotiation includes how the world’s two largest nuclear-armed states manage their arsenals — and use them for leverage.

While there is still time to avoid the worst, even President Joe Biden’s top aides say they have no idea if a diplomatic solution, rather than the conquest of Ukraine, is what Putin has in mind. The Russian president views Ukraine not as a separate nation but as a land that was negotiated away after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Many who have dealt with Putin believe he now sees it as his mission to correct that error, even if that means risking war to redraw the map of Europe.

Even if the diplomacy is for real, no one is certain how long they have to head off military action. A few weeks? Until the end of the Beijing Winter Olympics, on the theory that Putin would not want to anger President Xi Jinping by starting a war that would divert attention from China’s big moment?

Not all the potential blockades to a solution involve the Russians. If facing down Moscow was once a bipartisan task in Washington, it is no longer. Even before the counterproposals to Russia are finished, Republicans have been using the tensions to portray the administration as offering “appeasement,” a word chosen to evoke images of Britain’s approach to Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, trying to blunt the angle of attack, shot back Sunday that “engaging in diplomacy doesn’t take the word ‘nyet’ out of your vocabulary.”

Defusing Ukraine

It is possible that Putin’s bottom line in this conflict is straightforward: that he wants to stop Ukraine from joining NATO and get an assurance that the United States and NATO will never place offensive weapons that threaten Russia’s security in Ukrainian territory.

On those two issues, it would seem, there is trading space. While the United States says it will never abandon the NATO “open door” policy — which means that every nation is free to make its own choice about whether it seeks to join the Western alliance — the reality is clear: Ukraine is so corrupt, and its grasp of democracy is so tenuous, that no one expects it to be accepted for NATO membership in the next decade or two.

On this, Biden has been clear.

“The likelihood that Ukraine is going to join NATO in the near term is not very likely,” he said at a news conference Wednesday, giving voice to a previously unspoken truth. “So there is room to work if he wants to do that.”

It seemed an open invitation to offer Russia some kind of assurance that, for a decade or maybe a quarter-century, NATO membership for Kyiv was off the table. But the Biden administration has drawn a red line at allowing Putin a right to veto which nations can join NATO.

More complex is negotiating the reverse problem: How the United States and NATO operate in Ukraine. Ever since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the United States and NATO nations have been haltingly providing Ukraine with what the West calls defensive arms, including the capability to take out Russian tanks and aircraft. That flow has sped up in recent weeks.

To hear Putin, those weapons are more offensive than defensive — and Russian disinformation campaigns have suggested that Washington’s real goal is to put nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Administration officials say the United States has no such plans — and some kind of agreement should be, as one official said, “the easiest part of this,” as long as Russia is willing to pull back its intermediate-range weapons as well.

Upending the European Order

Putin has made clear that he wants to restore what he calls Russia’s “sphere of influence” in the region — essentially a return to the Cold War order, before Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin agreed in 1997 that former Soviet states and Warsaw bloc nations could choose whether to seek membership in NATO. Since then, the alliance has roughly doubled in size.

Putin also wants all nuclear weapons out of Europe, even though those weapons — mostly gravity bombs that have been stored in Germany, Turkey, Italy and Belgium — have been there for decades.

Asked Wednesday whether he would take those weapons out or stop troop rotations through the former Soviet bloc, Biden said, “No, there’s not space for that.”

Rose Gottemoeller, who negotiated New START, the last major nuclear accord with Russia, said at the Center for the National Interest on Monday that Putin’s demands were partly “a temper-tantrum effect” after years in which Putin’s grievances have, in his view, never been taken seriously.

So is there room for negotiation? Perhaps there is, Gottemoeller said. She noted that Putin “cares about summitry with Biden,” which suggests that the two men might, ultimately, come to some kind of broader understanding about Europe’s future. At a minimum they could address the nuclear issues by reviving the Intermediate Nuclear Forces agreement, which Putin violated for years and President Donald Trump scrapped.

And the United States has suggested reviving an old agreement that would limit military exercises, prescribe how far away from borders they needed to be and reduce the fear that an “exercise” turns into an invasion.

The problem with this approach is that it sounds a lot like continuing the kind of grinding, incremental arrangements that have marked the post-Cold War era. And that is exactly the era Putin is trying to blow up.

Cuban Missile Crisis Redux?

If all these sound like quarter-century-old problems, well, they are. Which is why any new accords with Russia, to be truly effective, would have to embrace Russia’s turn toward deniable, hard-to-detect cyberweapons. As the Department of Homeland Security reminded private industry over the weekend, U.S. critical infrastructure, including the power grid, is laced with Russian-planted malware. So far, none has been triggered — and as a deterrent the United States has planted code in the Russian grid as well.

Such weapons do not lend themselves to arms control — they are hard to find and impossible to count. But no agreement with Russia that excludes them will address the constant, asymmetric battling that goes on between the two countries every day.

And then there is the problem that dominated the Cold War: nukes.

In the past week, Putin has been on the phone — not just to his old allies, but to the leaders of Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. Some Russian news organizations have said the topics might be what Putin likes to call a “military-technical” response to the Ukraine crisis.

There have been hints from Russian officials about what that means: Russia could consider placing nuclear weapons back in the Western Hemisphere, within easy, short reach of US&nbsp;cities. If that sounds familiar, it should. It was the core of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the closest the world came to annihilation during the Cold War.

Putin’s motivation is clear: If the United States won’t remove its weapons from Europe — even ageing tactical weapons that need to be dropped from airplanes — he is determined to put US&nbsp;cities at similar risk. So far, there is no evidence that he is doing anything but talking. But even the suggestion of it has revived old fears.

“The last thing in the world President Biden would want is to engage us and Russia in a nuclear exchange,” said Thomas Pickering, a veteran of Cold War diplomacy who is considered the dean of retired American diplomats.

The fear, now as then, is escalation. “Many people have postulated how that might happen,” Pickering said. “Almost no one that I know has given a conclusive way to stop it once it starts.”

Russian troops are encircling Ukraine from three sides. In Washington and Brussels, there are warnings of crushing sanctions if Vladimir Putin orders an invasion.

Russian troops are encircling Ukraine from three sides. In Washington and Brussels, there are warnings of crushing sanctions if Vladimir Putin orders an invasion. Embassy families — both American and Russian — are being evacuated from Kyiv. Yet there are still diplomatic options — “off-ramps” in the lingo of the negotiators — and in the next several days the Biden administration and NATO are expected to respond, in writing, to Putin’s far-reaching demands. The question is whether there is real potential for compromise in three distinct areas: Russia’s demand for ironclad assurances that Ukraine won’t enter NATO; that NATO won’t further expand; and that Russia can somehow restore some approximation of its sphere of influence in the region to before the strategic map of Europe was redrawn in the mid-1990s. The hardest issue of all defies negotiation: Putin’s demand that Ukraine reverse its “drift” toward the West. That is a matter of national sentiment, and polls show that in the years since Russia’s seizure of Crimea in 2014, Ukrainians are more desirous than ever of joining the Western alliance. Putin’s massing of the troops is likely to accelerate that trend, US officials say, rather than reverse it. And as in all conflicts with roots in the Cold War and its aftermath, the subtext of any negotiation includes how the world’s two largest nuclear-armed states manage their arsenals — and use them for leverage. While there is still time to avoid the worst, even President Joe Biden’s top aides say they have no idea if a diplomatic solution, rather than the conquest of Ukraine, is what Putin has in mind. The Russian president views Ukraine not as a separate nation but as a land that was negotiated away after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Many who have dealt with Putin believe he now sees it as his mission to correct that error, even if that means risking war to redraw the map of Europe. Even if the diplomacy is for real, no one is certain how long they have to head off military action. A few weeks? Until the end of the Beijing Winter Olympics, on the theory that Putin would not want to anger President Xi Jinping by starting a war that would divert attention from China’s big moment? Not all the potential blockades to a solution involve the Russians. If facing down Moscow was once a bipartisan task in Washington, it is no longer. Even before the counterproposals to Russia are finished, Republicans have been using the tensions to portray the administration as offering “appeasement,” a word chosen to evoke images of Britain’s approach to Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, trying to blunt the angle of attack, shot back Sunday that “engaging in diplomacy doesn’t take the word ‘nyet’ out of your vocabulary.” Defusing Ukraine It is possible that Putin’s bottom line in this conflict is straightforward: that he wants to stop Ukraine from joining NATO and get an assurance that the United States and NATO will never place offensive weapons that threaten Russia’s security in Ukrainian territory. On those two issues, it would seem, there is trading space. While the United States says it will never abandon the NATO “open door” policy — which means that every nation is free to make its own choice about whether it seeks to join the Western alliance — the reality is clear: Ukraine is so corrupt, and its grasp of democracy is so tenuous, that no one expects it to be accepted for NATO membership in the next decade or two. On this, Biden has been clear. “The likelihood that Ukraine is going to join NATO in the near term is not very likely,” he said at a news conference Wednesday, giving voice to a previously unspoken truth. “So there is room to work if he wants to do that.” It seemed an open invitation to offer Russia some kind of assurance that, for a decade or maybe a quarter-century, NATO membership for Kyiv was off the table. But the Biden administration has drawn a red line at allowing Putin a right to veto which nations can join NATO. More complex is negotiating the reverse problem: How the United States and NATO operate in Ukraine. Ever since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, the United States and NATO nations have been haltingly providing Ukraine with what the West calls defensive arms, including the capability to take out Russian tanks and aircraft. That flow has sped up in recent weeks. To hear Putin, those weapons are more offensive than defensive — and Russian disinformation campaigns have suggested that Washington’s real goal is to put nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Administration officials say the United States has no such plans — and some kind of agreement should be, as one official said, “the easiest part of this,” as long as Russia is willing to pull back its intermediate-range weapons as well. Upending the European Order Putin has made clear that he wants to restore what he calls Russia’s “sphere of influence” in the region — essentially a return to the Cold War order, before Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin agreed in 1997 that former Soviet states and Warsaw bloc nations could choose whether to seek membership in NATO. Since then, the alliance has roughly doubled in size. Putin also wants all nuclear weapons out of Europe, even though those weapons — mostly gravity bombs that have been stored in Germany, Turkey, Italy and Belgium — have been there for decades. Asked Wednesday whether he would take those weapons out or stop troop rotations through the former Soviet bloc, Biden said, “No, there’s not space for that.” Rose Gottemoeller, who negotiated New START, the last major nuclear accord with Russia, said at the Center for the National Interest on Monday that Putin’s demands were partly “a temper-tantrum effect” after years in which Putin’s grievances have, in his view, never been taken seriously. So is there room for negotiation? Perhaps there is, Gottemoeller said. She noted that Putin “cares about summitry with Biden,” which suggests that the two men might, ultimately, come to some kind of broader understanding about Europe’s future. At a minimum they could address the nuclear issues by reviving the Intermediate Nuclear Forces agreement, which Putin violated for years and President Donald Trump scrapped. And the United States has suggested reviving an old agreement that would limit military exercises, prescribe how far away from borders they needed to be and reduce the fear that an “exercise” turns into an invasion. The problem with this approach is that it sounds a lot like continuing the kind of grinding, incremental arrangements that have marked the post-Cold War era. And that is exactly the era Putin is trying to blow up. Cuban Missile Crisis Redux? If all these sound like quarter-century-old problems, well, they are. Which is why any new accords with Russia, to be truly effective, would have to embrace Russia’s turn toward deniable, hard-to-detect cyberweapons. As the Department of Homeland Security reminded private industry over the weekend, U.S. critical infrastructure, including the power grid, is laced with Russian-planted malware. So far, none has been triggered — and as a deterrent the United States has planted code in the Russian grid as well. Such weapons do not lend themselves to arms control — they are hard to find and impossible to count. But no agreement with Russia that excludes them will address the constant, asymmetric battling that goes on between the two countries every day. And then there is the problem that dominated the Cold War: nukes. In the past week, Putin has been on the phone — not just to his old allies, but to the leaders of Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. Some Russian news organizations have said the topics might be what Putin likes to call a “military-technical” response to the Ukraine crisis. There have been hints from Russian officials about what that means: Russia could consider placing nuclear weapons back in the Western Hemisphere, within easy, short reach of US cities. If that sounds familiar, it should. It was the core of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the closest the world came to annihilation during the Cold War. Putin’s motivation is clear: If the United States won’t remove its weapons from Europe — even ageing tactical weapons that need to be dropped from airplanes — he is determined to put US cities at similar risk. So far, there is no evidence that he is doing anything but talking. But even the suggestion of it has revived old fears. “The last thing in the world President Biden would want is to engage us and Russia in a nuclear exchange,” said Thomas Pickering, a veteran of Cold War diplomacy who is considered the dean of retired American diplomats. The fear, now as then, is escalation. “Many people have postulated how that might happen,” Pickering said. “Almost no one that I know has given a conclusive way to stop it once it starts.”

War may loom, but are there off-ramps?

Amid tensions with Ukraine at the border, deputy foreign minister Sergey Ryabkov said that Russia is not afraid of any state, including the United States.

Russia's TASS news agency quoted Russia's deputy foreign minister as saying that, "We are not afraid of anyone, even the US."

Ryabkov added that the US had promised a response over Russia's security guarantee document next week. In the document, Putin's regime had demanded NATO should not expand its influence to Russia's eastern frontier&nbsp;referring to Ukraine.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/russias-checkmate-why-the-orion-combat-drone-is-a-gamechanger-446455">Also Read in Pics |&nbsp;Russia's 'checkmate': Why the Orion combat drone is a gamechanger</a>

Meanwhile,&nbsp;the US said it will conduct NATO naval exercises in the Mediterranean from Monday which would include the aircraft carrier USS Harry Truman amid tensions with Russia.

"Neptune strike 22 is going to run through February 4 and it's designed to demonstrate NATO's ability to integrate the high-end maritime strike capabilities of an aircraft carrier strike group to support the deterrence and defence of the alliance,” said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby.&nbsp;Russia will also be conducting naval excercise in the Mediterranean

Watch:&nbsp;Will Russia go to war?

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-ukraine-crisis-will-russia-go-to-war-446578/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

On Friday&nbsp;US secretary of state Antony Blinken had met Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov in an attempt to de-escalate the Ukraine crisis as both leaders agreed to keep talking.

Blinken sought to address "mutual concerns" about security as the US secretary of state asserted if Russia chose the path to conflict it would lead to "severe consequences and international condemnation".

Blinken said he told Russia said that if its forces invaded Ukraine then it would be met with "swift, severe and a united response from the United States and its allies".

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/satellite-photos-show-russian-troops-deployed-near-ukraine-border-446072">Also Read in Pics |&nbsp;Satellite photos show Russian troops deployed near Ukraine border</a>

Russia however insisted that it awaits the US response to the security guarantee. Lavrov added that this is "not the end of our dialogue".&nbsp;

"I can't tell you if we're on the right track or the wrong track. We'll understand this when we receive the American response on paper to all the points in our proposal," Lavrov said.

Amid talks between the top diplomats, Russian troops conducted military drills in the Voronezh region on the border with Ukraine.

(With inputs from Agencies)

Amid tensions with Ukraine at the border, deputy foreign minister Sergey Ryabkov said that Russia is not afraid of any state, including the United States. Russia's TASS news agency quoted Russia's deputy foreign minister as saying that, "We are not afraid of anyone, even the US.

Amid tensions with Ukraine at the border, deputy foreign minister Sergey Ryabkov said that Russia is not afraid of any state, including the United States. Russia's TASS news agency quoted Russia's deputy foreign minister as saying that, "We are not afraid of anyone, even the US." Ryabkov added that the US had promised a response over Russia's security guarantee document next week. In the document, Putin's regime had demanded NATO should not expand its influence to Russia's eastern frontier referring to Ukraine. Also Read in Pics | Russia's 'checkmate': Why the Orion combat drone is a gamechanger Meanwhile, the US said it will conduct NATO naval exercises in the Mediterranean from Monday which would include the aircraft carrier USS Harry Truman amid tensions with Russia. "Neptune strike 22 is going to run through February 4 and it's designed to demonstrate NATO's ability to integrate the high-end maritime strike capabilities of an aircraft carrier strike group to support the deterrence and defence of the alliance,” said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby. Russia will also be conducting naval excercise in the Mediterranean Watch: Will Russia go to war? On Friday US secretary of state Antony Blinken had met Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov in an attempt to de-escalate the Ukraine crisis as both leaders agreed to keep talking. Blinken sought to address "mutual concerns" about security as the US secretary of state asserted if Russia chose the path to conflict it would lead to "severe consequences and international condemnation". Blinken said he told Russia said that if its forces invaded Ukraine then it would be met with "swift, severe and a united response from the United States and its allies". Also Read in Pics | Satellite photos show Russian troops deployed near Ukraine border Russia however insisted that it awaits the US response to the security guarantee. Lavrov added that this is "not the end of our dialogue". "I can't tell you if we're on the right track or the wrong track. We'll understand this when we receive the American response on paper to all the points in our proposal," Lavrov said. Amid talks between the top diplomats, Russian troops conducted military drills in the Voronezh region on the border with Ukraine. (With inputs from Agencies)

NATO to conduct naval exercise in Mediterranean amid tensions with Russia

Russian President Vladimir Putin while speaking at the annual news press conference said that insulting&nbsp;Prophet Muhammad is a "violation of religious freedom and the violation of the sacred feelings of people who profess Islam."

The Russian president also spoke out against users posting photos of Nazis on sites dedicated to Russians who had died in World War II while explaining that such acts lead to reprisals like the Charlie Hebdo incident after cartoons of Prophet Muhammad were published by the magazine which later led to a terror attack on its&nbsp;office in Paris.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/to-make-ends-meet-putin-worked-as-a-cab-driver-after-the-fall-of-ussr-436422">Also Read:&nbsp;To make ends meet, Putin worked as a cab driver after the fall of USSR</a>

The Russian president reportedly said that artistic freedom should not infringe on other freedoms as he emphasised that Russians respect other religions.

Tensions between the West and Russia has&nbsp;been at its&nbsp;peak with thousands of Russian troops gathered at the border. President Putin during the press conference reiterated security guarantees from the US over Ukraine.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/explainer-putins-red-line-what-is-russias-draft-treaty-on-security-guarantees-437995">Explainer: Putin's red line-What is Russia's draft treaty on security guarantees?</a>

In the press conference which lasted for nearly four hours, Putin said "this is not our choice," referring to conflict with Ukraine.

The Biden administration and the European Union have warned Putin's regime of "massive consequences" if it attacks Russia.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/dont-want-conflict-over-ukraine-but-nato-expansion-unacceptable-putin-439311">Also Read:&nbsp;Don't want conflict over Ukraine, but NATO expansion unacceptable, says&nbsp;Putin</a>

Amid the escalating tensions, Putin said security guarantees should be "immediate -now".

"They told us in the 1990s: not an inch to the East. What is the result? They cheated us. They simply impudently cheated us with NATO’s five waves of expansion," Putin alleged during the press conference.

The Russian president said his country hasn't "approached the borders of the United States or Britain" but "they have approached ours.".

"And now they say Ukraine will also be a NATO member. So, their weapon systems will emerge there," Putin asserted.&nbsp;

(With inputs from Agencies)

Russian President Vladimir Putin while speaking at the annual news press conference said that insulting Prophet Muhammad is a "violation of religious freedom and the violation of the sacred feelings of people who profess Islam.

Russian President Vladimir Putin while speaking at the annual news press conference said that insulting Prophet Muhammad is a "violation of religious freedom and the violation of the sacred feelings of people who profess Islam." The Russian president also spoke out against users posting photos of Nazis on sites dedicated to Russians who had died in World War II while explaining that such acts lead to reprisals like the Charlie Hebdo incident after cartoons of Prophet Muhammad were published by the magazine which later led to a terror attack on its office in Paris. Also Read: To make ends meet, Putin worked as a cab driver after the fall of USSR The Russian president reportedly said that artistic freedom should not infringe on other freedoms as he emphasised that Russians respect other religions. Tensions between the West and Russia has been at its peak with thousands of Russian troops gathered at the border. President Putin during the press conference reiterated security guarantees from the US over Ukraine. Explainer: Putin's red line-What is Russia's draft treaty on security guarantees? In the press conference which lasted for nearly four hours, Putin said "this is not our choice," referring to conflict with Ukraine. The Biden administration and the European Union have warned Putin's regime of "massive consequences" if it attacks Russia. Also Read: Don't want conflict over Ukraine, but NATO expansion unacceptable, says Putin Amid the escalating tensions, Putin said security guarantees should be "immediate -now". "They told us in the 1990s: not an inch to the East. What is the result? They cheated us. They simply impudently cheated us with NATO’s five waves of expansion," Putin alleged during the press conference. The Russian president said his country hasn't "approached the borders of the United States or Britain" but "they have approached ours.". "And now they say Ukraine will also be a NATO member. So, their weapon systems will emerge there," Putin asserted. (With inputs from Agencies)

Insulting Prophet Muhammad violation of religious freedom: Putin

Stepping onto a podium in heavy boots and military fatigues at a ceremony outside Moscow, six teenagers accepted awards for an increasingly important discipline in Russia: patriotism.

For days, students from around the country had competed in activities like map-reading, shooting and history quizzes. The contest was funded in part by the Kremlin, which has been making “military-patriotic” education a priority.

“Parents and children understand that this aggressive shell around us, it is tightening, it is hardening,” said Svyatoslav Omelchenko, a special forces veteran of the KGB who founded Vympel, the group running the event. “We are doing all we can to make sure that children are aware of that and to get them ready to go and serve.”

Over the past eight years, the Russian government has promoted the idea that the motherland is surrounded by enemies, filtering the concept through national institutions like schools, the military, the news media and the Orthodox Church. It has even raised the possibility that the country might again have to defend itself as it did against the Nazis in World War II.

Now, as Russia masses troops on the Ukrainian border, spurring Western fears of an impending invasion, the steady militarization of Russian society under President Vladimir Putin suddenly looms large, and appears to have inured many to the idea that a fight could be coming.

“The authorities are actively selling the idea of war,” Dmitry Muratov, the Russian newspaper editor who shared the Nobel Peace Prize this year, said in his acceptance speech in Oslo, Norway, this month. “People are getting used to the thought of its permissibility.”

Speaking to Russian military leaders Tuesday, Putin insisted that Russia did not want bloodshed but was prepared to respond with “military-technical measures” to what he described as the West’s aggressive behaviour in the region.

While there is no surging war fever taking hold, there are plenty of signs that the government has been nurturing a readiness for conflict. A $185 million four-year program started by the Kremlin this year aims to drastically increase Russians’ “patriotic education,” including a plan to attract at least 600,000 children as young as 8 to join the ranks of a uniformed Youth Army. Adults get their inculcation from state television, where political shows — one is called “Moscow. Kremlin. Putin.” — drive home the narrative of a fascist coup in Ukraine and a West bent on Russia’s destruction.

And all are united by the near-sacred memory of Soviet victory in World War II — one that the state has seized upon to shape an identity of a triumphal Russia that must be ready to take up arms once more.

Alexei Levinson, head of sociocultural research at the Levada Center, an independent Moscow pollster, calls the trend the “militarization of the consciousness” of Russians. In the center’s regular surveys, the army in 2018 became the country’s most trusted institution, surpassing even the president. This year, the share of Russians saying they feared a world war hit the highest level recorded in surveys dating to 1994 — 62%.

This does not mean, Levinson cautioned, that Russians would welcome a bloody territorial conquest of Ukraine. But it does mean, he said, that many have been conditioned to accept that Russia is locked in an existential rivalry with other powers in which the use of force is a possibility.

Celebration of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II — referred to as the Great Patriotic War in Russia — has played the most important role in that conditioning. Rather than promoting only a culture of remembrance of Soviet heroism and 27 million lives lost, the Kremlin applies the World War II narrative to the present day, positioning Russia as once again threatened by enemies bent on its destruction.

In his annual Victory Day speech this year after a monumental military parade, Putin tore into unnamed present-day enemies of Russia who were redeploying the Nazis’ “delusional theory of their exclusivity.” On state TV last week, a news show host ridiculed sanctions threats against Russia from those “who have no idea how to scare a people that lost more than 20 million of its men, its women and its elderly and kids in the last war.”

A popular World War II bumper sticker reads, “We can do it again.”

“There’s a transposition taking place of this victory” — in World War II — “into the present-day confrontation with the NATO bloc,” Levinson said.

One hour west of Moscow, the grand Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces opened last year. Its exterior is army green and its floors are made from weapons and tanks seized from the German Wehrmacht. Arched stained glass windows feature insignia and medals.

On a recent Sunday, the church and its accompanying museum and park were full of visitors. A group of fifth-graders from the Suvorov Military School in Tver, wearing their uniforms, filed out in two lines before marching to the museum. Their instructor said it was fundamentally important for the students, in their first year of military school, to learn about their predecessors.

“We’re doing a bit of propaganda, too,” the section leader quipped, declining to give his name.

Beyond the church grounds, visitors walked among snow-covered trenches in a simulated front line. Further afield, under the towering dome of the church, children could ride around a go-kart like track in a miniature replica of a battle tank.

“All children should come here and develop an interest in history from an early age,” said Alina Grengolm, as her 2-year-old son scrambled up an icy tank with his father’s assistance.

In Moscow recently, more than 600 people from across Russia gathered for a government-sponsored forum aimed at promoting patriotism among youth. Sergei Kiriyenko, Putin’s powerful deputy chief of staff, praised the attendees for doing “sacred work.”

At the conference, two “victory volunteers” spoke about their plans for teaching high school students about the Russian World War II victory at a regional event the following week.

In a Levada poll published last week, 39% of Russians said war between Russia and Ukraine was either inevitable or very likely. Half said the United States and NATO were to blame for the recent rise in tensions, and no more than 4% — across all age groups — said Russia was at fault.

The conviction across society that Russia is not the aggressor reflects a core ideology dating to Soviet times: that the country only fights defensive wars. The government has even earmarked money for movies that explore that theme. In April, the Culture Ministry decreed that “Russia’s historical victories” and “Russia’s peacekeeping mission” were among the priority topics for film producers seeking government funding.

“Right now, the idea is being pushed that Russia is a peace-loving country permanently surrounded by enemies,” said Anton Dolin, a Russian film critic. “This is contradicted by some facts, but if you show it at the movies and translate that idea into the time of the Great Patriotic War, we all instantly get a scheme familiar to everyone from childhood.”

On Russian state television, the narrative of a Ukraine controlled by neo-Nazis and used as a staging ground for Western aggression has been a common trope since the pro-Western revolution in Kyiv in 2014. After the revolution, Russia annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, fomented a war in Ukraine’s east and sharpened its messaging about Russia as a “besieged fortress.”

Some analysts fear that the escalating rhetoric is laying the foundation for what Russia would cast as a defensive intervention to protect its security and Russian speakers in Ukraine. Yevgeny Popov, a newly elected member of parliament and a host of a popular political show on state TV, said in an interview that his ratings were up in recent weeks — “the tension is rising,” he said.

“I think that most people in Russia would only be in favour if we defended Russian people who live in these territories,” Popov said, referring to the separatist territories in Ukraine where hundreds of thousands have received Russian citizenship.

The effectiveness of the state’s militarized messaging is up for debate. Polls show that young people have a more positive view of the West than older Russians, and the pro-Kremlin sentiment prompted by the Crimea annexation appears to have dissipated amid economic stagnation.

But the Kremlin is doubling down. Its drive to increase “patriotic education” includes funding for groups like Vympel. The “military-patriotic” organization has some 100 chapters around the country, and it organized the recent skills competition in the city of Vladimir that ended Thursday.

Veronika Osipova, 17, from the city of Rostov-on-Don near Ukraine’s border, won the award for best female student. For years, she played the harp, graduating with honours from an elite music school. But in 2015, she started learning how to shoot a machine gun and throw grenades. She resolved to join the Russian military to protect the country against its enemies.

“I follow the example of girls who, under bullets and grenades, went to fight during the Great Patriotic War,” Osipova said. “They had no choice, but we do have it, and I choose the army.”

Stepping onto a podium in heavy boots and military fatigues at a ceremony outside Moscow, six teenagers accepted awards for an increasingly important discipline in Russia: patriotism.

Stepping onto a podium in heavy boots and military fatigues at a ceremony outside Moscow, six teenagers accepted awards for an increasingly important discipline in Russia: patriotism. For days, students from around the country had competed in activities like map-reading, shooting and history quizzes. The contest was funded in part by the Kremlin, which has been making “military-patriotic” education a priority. “Parents and children understand that this aggressive shell around us, it is tightening, it is hardening,” said Svyatoslav Omelchenko, a special forces veteran of the KGB who founded Vympel, the group running the event. “We are doing all we can to make sure that children are aware of that and to get them ready to go and serve.” Over the past eight years, the Russian government has promoted the idea that the motherland is surrounded by enemies, filtering the concept through national institutions like schools, the military, the news media and the Orthodox Church. It has even raised the possibility that the country might again have to defend itself as it did against the Nazis in World War II. Now, as Russia masses troops on the Ukrainian border, spurring Western fears of an impending invasion, the steady militarization of Russian society under President Vladimir Putin suddenly looms large, and appears to have inured many to the idea that a fight could be coming. “The authorities are actively selling the idea of war,” Dmitry Muratov, the Russian newspaper editor who shared the Nobel Peace Prize this year, said in his acceptance speech in Oslo, Norway, this month. “People are getting used to the thought of its permissibility.” Speaking to Russian military leaders Tuesday, Putin insisted that Russia did not want bloodshed but was prepared to respond with “military-technical measures” to what he described as the West’s aggressive behaviour in the region. While there is no surging war fever taking hold, there are plenty of signs that the government has been nurturing a readiness for conflict. A $185 million four-year program started by the Kremlin this year aims to drastically increase Russians’ “patriotic education,” including a plan to attract at least 600,000 children as young as 8 to join the ranks of a uniformed Youth Army. Adults get their inculcation from state television, where political shows — one is called “Moscow. Kremlin. Putin.” — drive home the narrative of a fascist coup in Ukraine and a West bent on Russia’s destruction. And all are united by the near-sacred memory of Soviet victory in World War II — one that the state has seized upon to shape an identity of a triumphal Russia that must be ready to take up arms once more. Alexei Levinson, head of sociocultural research at the Levada Center, an independent Moscow pollster, calls the trend the “militarization of the consciousness” of Russians. In the center’s regular surveys, the army in 2018 became the country’s most trusted institution, surpassing even the president. This year, the share of Russians saying they feared a world war hit the highest level recorded in surveys dating to 1994 — 62%. This does not mean, Levinson cautioned, that Russians would welcome a bloody territorial conquest of Ukraine. But it does mean, he said, that many have been conditioned to accept that Russia is locked in an existential rivalry with other powers in which the use of force is a possibility. Celebration of the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War II — referred to as the Great Patriotic War in Russia — has played the most important role in that conditioning. Rather than promoting only a culture of remembrance of Soviet heroism and 27 million lives lost, the Kremlin applies the World War II narrative to the present day, positioning Russia as once again threatened by enemies bent on its destruction. In his annual Victory Day speech this year after a monumental military parade, Putin tore into unnamed present-day enemies of Russia who were redeploying the Nazis’ “delusional theory of their exclusivity.” On state TV last week, a news show host ridiculed sanctions threats against Russia from those “who have no idea how to scare a people that lost more than 20 million of its men, its women and its elderly and kids in the last war.” A popular World War II bumper sticker reads, “We can do it again.” “There’s a transposition taking place of this victory” — in World War II — “into the present-day confrontation with the NATO bloc,” Levinson said. One hour west of Moscow, the grand Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces opened last year. Its exterior is army green and its floors are made from weapons and tanks seized from the German Wehrmacht. Arched stained glass windows feature insignia and medals. On a recent Sunday, the church and its accompanying museum and park were full of visitors. A group of fifth-graders from the Suvorov Military School in Tver, wearing their uniforms, filed out in two lines before marching to the museum. Their instructor said it was fundamentally important for the students, in their first year of military school, to learn about their predecessors. “We’re doing a bit of propaganda, too,” the section leader quipped, declining to give his name. Beyond the church grounds, visitors walked among snow-covered trenches in a simulated front line. Further afield, under the towering dome of the church, children could ride around a go-kart like track in a miniature replica of a battle tank. “All children should come here and develop an interest in history from an early age,” said Alina Grengolm, as her 2-year-old son scrambled up an icy tank with his father’s assistance. In Moscow recently, more than 600 people from across Russia gathered for a government-sponsored forum aimed at promoting patriotism among youth. Sergei Kiriyenko, Putin’s powerful deputy chief of staff, praised the attendees for doing “sacred work.” At the conference, two “victory volunteers” spoke about their plans for teaching high school students about the Russian World War II victory at a regional event the following week. In a Levada poll published last week, 39% of Russians said war between Russia and Ukraine was either inevitable or very likely. Half said the United States and NATO were to blame for the recent rise in tensions, and no more than 4% — across all age groups — said Russia was at fault. The conviction across society that Russia is not the aggressor reflects a core ideology dating to Soviet times: that the country only fights defensive wars. The government has even earmarked money for movies that explore that theme. In April, the Culture Ministry decreed that “Russia’s historical victories” and “Russia’s peacekeeping mission” were among the priority topics for film producers seeking government funding. “Right now, the idea is being pushed that Russia is a peace-loving country permanently surrounded by enemies,” said Anton Dolin, a Russian film critic. “This is contradicted by some facts, but if you show it at the movies and translate that idea into the time of the Great Patriotic War, we all instantly get a scheme familiar to everyone from childhood.” On Russian state television, the narrative of a Ukraine controlled by neo-Nazis and used as a staging ground for Western aggression has been a common trope since the pro-Western revolution in Kyiv in 2014. After the revolution, Russia annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, fomented a war in Ukraine’s east and sharpened its messaging about Russia as a “besieged fortress.” Some analysts fear that the escalating rhetoric is laying the foundation for what Russia would cast as a defensive intervention to protect its security and Russian speakers in Ukraine. Yevgeny Popov, a newly elected member of parliament and a host of a popular political show on state TV, said in an interview that his ratings were up in recent weeks — “the tension is rising,” he said. “I think that most people in Russia would only be in favour if we defended Russian people who live in these territories,” Popov said, referring to the separatist territories in Ukraine where hundreds of thousands have received Russian citizenship. The effectiveness of the state’s militarized messaging is up for debate. Polls show that young people have a more positive view of the West than older Russians, and the pro-Kremlin sentiment prompted by the Crimea annexation appears to have dissipated amid economic stagnation. But the Kremlin is doubling down. Its drive to increase “patriotic education” includes funding for groups like Vympel. The “military-patriotic” organization has some 100 chapters around the country, and it organized the recent skills competition in the city of Vladimir that ended Thursday. Veronika Osipova, 17, from the city of Rostov-on-Don near Ukraine’s border, won the award for best female student. For years, she played the harp, graduating with honours from an elite music school. But in 2015, she started learning how to shoot a machine gun and throw grenades. She resolved to join the Russian military to protect the country against its enemies. “I follow the example of girls who, under bullets and grenades, went to fight during the Great Patriotic War,” Osipova said. “They had no choice, but we do have it, and I choose the army.”

How the Kremlin is militarizing Russian society

A day after Russian President Vladimir Putin&nbsp;met&nbsp;US President Joe Biden at a &nbsp;summit in Geneva, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Ukraine joining NATO would be a "red line" for&nbsp;Moscow.

The Kremlin spokesman added that&nbsp;Ukraine, as a NATO nation was a "concern" even as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy wanted a clear "yes" or "no" from President Biden on joining the military organization.

Watch:

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/ukraine-prez-zelensky-warns-russian-troops-can-return-at-any-moment-381050/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Tensions between Ukraine and Russia have increased ever since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. Russian forces had earlier this year built up forces in Crimea including Ukraine's border sending out alarm bells within&nbsp;the Biden administration.

Russia had reportedly deployed 100,000 soldiers near the Ukrainian border and in Crimea amid NATO warnings.

President Zelensky said recently that the country is "fighting a war" while pushing for NATO membership. Ukraine had applied to join the NATO alliance in 2008.

NATO had earlier said that Ukraine could join the US-European military alliance although Biden said the country needed to meet several conditions.

Zelensky had said President Biden should have met him before his summit with Putin as the Ukraine president seeks US support for the country's conflict with alleged Russian-backed separatists.

Zelensky has been unhappy with Russian authorities over the delay of a proposed meeting with Putin over the eastern Ukraine situation.

Ahead of the summit with Putin, Pentagon&nbsp;had announced a new $150 million package of military assistance for Ukraine.

(With inputs from Agencies)

A day after Russian President Vladimir Putin met US President Joe Biden at a summit in Geneva, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Ukraine joining NATO would be a "red line" for Moscow.

A day after Russian President Vladimir Putin met US President Joe Biden at a summit in Geneva, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Ukraine joining NATO would be a "red line" for Moscow. The Kremlin spokesman added that Ukraine, as a NATO nation was a "concern" even as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy wanted a clear "yes" or "no" from President Biden on joining the military organization. Watch: Tensions between Ukraine and Russia have increased ever since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. Russian forces had earlier this year built up forces in Crimea including Ukraine's border sending out alarm bells within the Biden administration. Russia had reportedly deployed 100,000 soldiers near the Ukrainian border and in Crimea amid NATO warnings. President Zelensky said recently that the country is "fighting a war" while pushing for NATO membership. Ukraine had applied to join the NATO alliance in 2008. NATO had earlier said that Ukraine could join the US-European military alliance although Biden said the country needed to meet several conditions. Zelensky had said President Biden should have met him before his summit with Putin as the Ukraine president seeks US support for the country's conflict with alleged Russian-backed separatists. Zelensky has been unhappy with Russian authorities over the delay of a proposed meeting with Putin over the eastern Ukraine situation. Ahead of the summit with Putin, Pentagon had announced a new $150 million package of military assistance for Ukraine. (With inputs from Agencies)

Day after Putin-Biden summit, Kremlin says Ukraine joining NATO would be a 'red line' for Russia

Ukraine's parliament approved a law on Thursday that grants special status <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/unsc-schedules-urgent-meeting-to-address-the-situation-in-eastern-ukraine-213439">to the Ukrainian language </a>and makes it mandatory for public sector workers, a move Russia described as divisive and said discriminated against Russian-speakers.

The law, which obliges all citizens to know the Ukrainian language and makes it a mandatory requirement for civil servants, soldiers, doctors, and teachers, was championed by outgoing President Petro Poroshenko.

He is expected to sign it into law before he leaves office in coming weeks after losing re-election on Sunday to Volodymyr Zelenskiy, an actor who mainly speaks Russian in public.

Ukrainian is the predominant language in western Ukraine, while Russian is predominant in much of the east. Both languages are spoken widely in the capital Kiev, and a large proportion of the population speaks both fluently.

Television is often bi-lingual, with talk show hosts and their guests slipping between the two languages, sometimes asking questions in one and answering them in another.

Language has become a much more sensitive issue since 2014, when a pro-Russian president was toppled in a popular revolt and Russia responded by annexing the Crimea region and backing a pro-Russian separatist uprising in the east.

The separatists argued in part that easterners were victims of growing discrimination against Russian-speakers. Some Ukrainian-speakers argue that the prominence of Russian is a legacy of the Soviet era that undermines Ukraine's identity.

On Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an order simplifying the procedure for obtaining a Russian passport for residents of eastern Ukraine's rebellious regions, prompting calls from Kiev for more international sanctions.

Poroshenko put promotion of the Ukrainian language at the heart of his unsuccessful re-election campaign.

Zelenskiy, who played a schoolteacher-turned-president in a Russian-language comedy series on Ukrainian TV before launching his political career, said on Thursday his team would examine the new law to see if the rights of all citizens were respected.

"We must initiate and adopt laws and decisions that consolidate society, and not vice versa," he wrote on Facebook.

Zelenskiy said the draft law's origins during the electoral cycle "made it hostage to political rhetoric", adding that it was hard to predict the consequences of adopting the law.

Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the new law would deepen divisions within Ukrainian society and impose severe limitations, including in some cases bans, on the use of Russian in Ukrainian public life.

Viktor Medvedchuk, a prominent figure in Ukraine's Russia-friendly opposition, said it violated the constitutional rights of millions of Ukrainian Russian-speakers.

The new legislation requires TV and film distribution firms to ensure 90 per cent of their content is in Ukrainian and for the proportion of Ukrainian-language printed media and books to be at least 50 per cent.

Computer software must also have a Ukrainian-language interface although the law also allows the use of English or any other official language of the European Union.

Lawmakers gave a standing ovation after the law was passed and sang the national anthem. Hundreds of people with Ukrainian flags had gathered outside parliament to support the law.

"This is a historic moment, which Ukrainians have been awaiting for centuries, because for centuries Ukrainians have tried to achieve the right to their own language," one of the authors of the bill, Mykola Knyazhytsky, said before the vote.

The make-up of the parliament has not changed since Zelenskiy's election win and remains dominated by a coalition supportive of Poroshenko.

Ukraine's parliament approved a law on Thursday that grants special status to the Ukrainian language and makes it mandatory for public sector workers, a move Russia described as divisive and said discriminated against Russian-speakers.

Ukraine's parliament approved a law on Thursday that grants special status to the Ukrainian language and makes it mandatory for public sector workers, a move Russia described as divisive and said discriminated against Russian-speakers. The law, which obliges all citizens to know the Ukrainian language and makes it a mandatory requirement for civil servants, soldiers, doctors, and teachers, was championed by outgoing President Petro Poroshenko. He is expected to sign it into law before he leaves office in coming weeks after losing re-election on Sunday to Volodymyr Zelenskiy, an actor who mainly speaks Russian in public. Ukrainian is the predominant language in western Ukraine, while Russian is predominant in much of the east. Both languages are spoken widely in the capital Kiev, and a large proportion of the population speaks both fluently. Television is often bi-lingual, with talk show hosts and their guests slipping between the two languages, sometimes asking questions in one and answering them in another. Language has become a much more sensitive issue since 2014, when a pro-Russian president was toppled in a popular revolt and Russia responded by annexing the Crimea region and backing a pro-Russian separatist uprising in the east. The separatists argued in part that easterners were victims of growing discrimination against Russian-speakers. Some Ukrainian-speakers argue that the prominence of Russian is a legacy of the Soviet era that undermines Ukraine's identity. On Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed an order simplifying the procedure for obtaining a Russian passport for residents of eastern Ukraine's rebellious regions, prompting calls from Kiev for more international sanctions. Poroshenko put promotion of the Ukrainian language at the heart of his unsuccessful re-election campaign. Zelenskiy, who played a schoolteacher-turned-president in a Russian-language comedy series on Ukrainian TV before launching his political career, said on Thursday his team would examine the new law to see if the rights of all citizens were respected. "We must initiate and adopt laws and decisions that consolidate society, and not vice versa," he wrote on Facebook. Zelenskiy said the draft law's origins during the electoral cycle "made it hostage to political rhetoric", adding that it was hard to predict the consequences of adopting the law. Maria Zakharova, a spokeswoman for Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the new law would deepen divisions within Ukrainian society and impose severe limitations, including in some cases bans, on the use of Russian in Ukrainian public life. Viktor Medvedchuk, a prominent figure in Ukraine's Russia-friendly opposition, said it violated the constitutional rights of millions of Ukrainian Russian-speakers. The new legislation requires TV and film distribution firms to ensure 90 per cent of their content is in Ukrainian and for the proportion of Ukrainian-language printed media and books to be at least 50 per cent. Computer software must also have a Ukrainian-language interface although the law also allows the use of English or any other official language of the European Union. Lawmakers gave a standing ovation after the law was passed and sang the national anthem. Hundreds of people with Ukrainian flags had gathered outside parliament to support the law. "This is a historic moment, which Ukrainians have been awaiting for centuries, because for centuries Ukrainians have tried to achieve the right to their own language," one of the authors of the bill, Mykola Knyazhytsky, said before the vote. The make-up of the parliament has not changed since Zelenskiy's election win and remains dominated by a coalition supportive of Poroshenko.

Parliament approves law to grant special status to Ukrainian language

putin-on-ukraine

Putin On Ukraine, News on Putin On Ukraine, stories on Putin On Ukraine, articles on Putin On Ukraine, Putin On Ukraine stories at Wion, Putin On Ukraine news, Putin On Ukraine latest news