Becoming Estonians.

Russians are stereotyped globally as drunks and hot shots (Irish might contest that), English--as pompous and having bad teeth, in Russia Estonians are stereotyped as slow. Consider this: what is infinity? It is when Estonians count Chinese. Evidently, most of the American geopolitical pseudo-intellectuals are Estonians, otherwise how can you explain this. Kofman and Kendall-Taylor write in this petty cash rag for STEM-challenged "thinkers", Foreign Affairs, about the myth of Russian decline:

The problem is that the case for Russian decline is overstated. Much of the evidence for it, such as Russia’s shrinking population and its resource-dependent economy, is not as consequential for the Kremlin as many in Washington assume. Nor should the United States expect that Russia will automatically abandon its course of confrontation once President Vladimir Putin leaves office. Putin’s foreign policy enjoys widespread support among the country’s ruling elite, and his legacy will include a thicket of unresolved disputes, chief among them that over the annexation of Crimea. Any disagreements with the United States are here to stay.

As I am on record for many years, the Russia Study field in the West is a fraud and the crop of current Russia "experts" is a prefect reflection of the overall decline of the Western intellectual elites, of which I warned since the inception of this blog and am contemplating writing the book on precisely how this all occurred. Most importantly, majority of the so called "experts" in the West are highly uncultured people despite their many a Ph.D degrees in such subjects as "history", political "science" etc. Why they are uncultured is a separate issue, but it is a fact that they have a very skewed understanding of ethics and the extreme manifestation of such "ethics" one may easily find in the US media and in "Let's Go Brandon". People with actual ethics approach life with the assumption that they do not know much, in the modern West it is exactly the other way around, hence a dominance of clueless "experts" and onset of radical ideologies as a main tool for inquiry. Ideologies are much easier than actual study--as electric current, they take the path of the least resistance. Pontification increasingly becomes the only way of "intellectual exchange".

At this stage, it really doesn't matter what any of US "experts" think or project. Kofman and his co-writer are no exception. They state:

Expectations of Russian decline contain important truths. The country’s economy is stagnant, with few sources of value other than the extraction and export of natural resources. The entire system is rife with corruption and dominated by inefficient state-owned or state-controlled enterprises, and international sanctions limit access to capital and technology. Russia struggles to develop, retain, and attract talent; the state chronically underfunds scientific research; and bureaucratic mismanagement hinders technological innovation. As a result, Russia lags considerably behind the United States and China in most metrics of scientific and technological development.

Kofman, being a proud product of the US "humanities" degree-mill, writes on matters in which he precisely has zero expertise but what can you do? This is how US think-tankdom operates. But then again, you cannot teach the old dog new tricks because Kofman, obviously, has a very vague understanding of what real "metrics of scientific and technological developments" are, because he has degree in political "science" and the only "metric" he knows is that of iPhone. It is understandable in a way, it is difficult to resign oneself to the realities of the West's in general, and American in particular, decline, especially in the field of STEM in which Russia produces almost equal with the US number of graduates (two times more per capita than in the US). But then again, can you explain the difference between Russian public school Physics text book for the 10th grade and the same in the US, ah...wait, I forgot. In related news, Rosatom is a "state-controlled" company, as is most of Russian MIC, which produces weapons (and not only) the United States can only dream about. Well, never mind. 

Kofman's ego is hurt. He is not completely dumb, he feels that things do not go his way, he knows his grasp of Russia and her affairs, from military to economic ones, is at best tenuous. He doesn't understand Russia, he cannot, because he needs to study real history of the 20th century and of Russia's history--he is not able to. He still lives in La La Land of America's hegemony handed to her by providence and a series of historic events of unimaginable magnitude but he is afraid to recognize that. Hence, same beaten to death mantras trying to ignore such facts that today the third of Americans are forced to skip a meal to make their ends meet. 

Our survey results reaffirmed troubling data relating to food insecurity and food prices. The Zogby Poll® found food insecurity is being experienced by almost a third (29%) of respondents, while two thirds said no, and 5% were not sure. It's quite astounding to think nearly three in ten likely voters said they had or family members missed meals due to food price inflation.

Boy, talk about delusion. But then again, this is modern American expertdom for ya. But why being Estonian? Because the slow realization of truth is creeping in as is understanding of a fraudulent nature of any "metrics" by which modern West committed suicide. Kofman finally admits:

Washington must move past the myth that Russia is a beleaguered or cornered state, lashing out in recognition of its own demise. In truth, there is little evidence that Russia’s leaders see their country in this way—on the contrary, they consider Russia to be the center of power in its own region and an assertive player globally. Events such as the bungled U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan only reinforce Moscow’s perception that it is rather the United States that is in decline. Ignoring that view will create false expectations for Russia’s behavior, leaving the United States and its allies poorly positioned to anticipate Russian actions.

Mr Kofman, "perceptions", really? For a man claiming to be an expert in "military affairs" it is about time to start learning about warfare, not from BS propaganda but face a hard cold fact of the United States losing, or not winning, all its wars (with the exception of invasion of mighty Grenada) since 1945 (and even then, in 1945, defeat of Nazi Germany was not exactly to the America's credit as it is claimed often) and escape from Afghanistan was not a "perception" but a solid forecast very many years prior to this embarrassment in Kabul. Many people warned about it. But it is what it is, US geopolitical "elites" continue to fail in finding their own asses with their both hands in a brightly lit room and refuse to recognize that the United States today is at the mercy of global forces which it cannot recognize nor accept as objective laws of real economy, warfare, politics and culture and continue to delude themselves with "garrulous patriotism", as noted by both Alexis de Tocqueville and, later, in different words, by Mencken, in feeble attempts to avoid facing a reality of a multi-polar world in which the US is but one of few global powers and is impotent militarily when facing real militaries and real economies.  

UPDATE: speak of the devil. Putin at Valdai on WW II history. 

It is totally pertinent to this piece above and this is very important. I, however, have an issue with Putin's statement that "they know". Not anymore, many of them are true believers in the Allies defeating Nazism, with some minor help from USSR. They have a completely distorted picture of the events of the 20th century and a defining role (crucible really) of WW II in creating conditions for what we have today--a systemic crisis of liberalism. None of them have any clue on the real price of peace.

Total Recall-2.

Before I start--a disclaimer: this is to give an impression, not to gloat or be condescending. It is for educational purposes only. 

This is so funny how it all coincided with the whole vector of my series of posts about military education. Almost surreal.  I am on record that Bologna Process, all these Bachelor's and Master's Degrees are useless inventions in the world where something else is needed entirely for a serious and deep education. Now get this, today:

Президент России Владимир Путин поставил под сомнение разделение обучения на бакалавриат и магистратуру. «Это модная схема или в этом есть какой-то смысл». Кроме того, министр просвещения Ольга Васильева заявила, что бакалавриата недостаточно для обучения гуманитарным специальностям. Глава ведомства считает, что бакалавриат – «всего лишь незаконченное высшее образование».

Translation: The President of Russia Vladimir Putin express doubts about separation of education for Bachelor and Master degrees. "Is this some kind of fad, does it make any sense?" Moreover, The Minister of Education Olga Vasilieva declared that Bachelor is not enough for humanities education. She (Vasilieva) thinks that Bachelor's Degree is merely incomplete higher education.  

Finally! This stupid and baneful European gradation of "degrees" came to post-Soviet Russia on the heels of devastating "reforms" of by a bunch of creeps in power in 1990s. It had a disastrous influence on Russia's always very impressive higher education. Yet, leading Russia's universities, such as the cradle of Russia's (and world's) space program, nuclear power and weapons, Bauman Moscow State Technical University (MGTU), among many others, still maintains the program of Specialitet (Specialist). Take a look:

Specialist Ed is highlighted in Yellow.

Now, let us define what Specilaist is: 

Специалитет — это традиционный для России уровень высшего образования, подразумевающий пятилетнее обучение. Выпускнику присваивается степень «специалист» и выдается государственный диплом о высшем профессиональном образовании. В связи с переходом в 2011 году на государственные образовательные стандарты III поколения и присоединении России к Болонской декларации осуществлен переход на двухуровневую систему образования: бакалавриат (1 уровень высшего профессионального образования) и магистратура (2 уровень высшего профессионального образования). В рамках специалитета были специальности и специализации, а в рамках бакалавриата — направления и профили.     

Translation: Specialist, is a traditional for Russia (and USSR, I may add) level of higher education implying 5 year long study. The graduate is granted degree of Specialist and receives diploma (degree) of Higher Professional Education. In 2011 due to the transfer to the educational standards of the III  generation and Russia joining Bologna declaration and transferring to two-tier system of education: Bachelor's (1st level of higher professional education) and Master's (2nd  level of higher professional education). Within the framework of Specialist type education, specialties and specializations do exist, within Bachelor's--only general directions and profiles. 

Confusing? Hell, yes. Now let me explain what five-year long higher education was in USSR. In reality it was 6 academic years long due to Soviet military academies studying full day on every Saturday, with the exception of holidays. Calculate the number  of the work weeks for each of the five years? Right--additional year of education. Here comes another thing in modern Russia, people with B.S. (Bachelor's) in engineering, as an example, are viewed in very many places as nedouchki (not fully educated people). I happen to agree with such harsh assessment. In STEM, to become a good level professional roughly 50 weeks x 4 years= 200 weeks, and 50 x 6 years= 300 weeks (all very roughly) in case of specialist or, for that matter, Master, compare very unfavorably. I am, of course, not talking about humanities. A remarkable comment to the news of Putin and Vasilieva effectively putting this stupid two tier system down as, pardon my French, complete crap and hinting on return to good ol' superb Soviet professional Specialist education reads like this:

          И кому-то понадобилось 25 лет, чтобы это понять...   

Translation:  It took somebody 25 years to finally figure this out...

Here comes second important notion--Russian and Western STEM higher educations are simply NOT-compatible on a fundamental level because even today, after disastrous "reforms" of 1990s, kids in Russia (I am not even talking about USSR) who aspire for STEM higher education receive in public school the volume of instruction in math, physics, chemistry or geography to name a few subjects, which is beyond the grasp of most Western schools, including elite private ones. This was even more true in Soviet times where average Soviet school graduate received three times more instruction in math, physics, chemistry and biology than it was stipulated for the entrance to MIT. Not to mention the fact that institutions of such level as Bauman's MGTU, Moscow State University, Novosibirsk SU etc. still retain own ENTRANCE exams beyond the required scores at standardized school exams known as EGE. Here is a typical problem in Physics (1 level of priority) at the entrance exams, that is upon graduation from public school, to MGTU. 

Translation: the bubble of gas  with the diameter d has occurred at the bottom of the pond. During ascent to the surface its diameter increased n-times. Find the depth of this pond in this place. Atmospheric pressure Po, coefficient of surface tension (lower case sigma) and water's density p (rho) to be considered known. During the expansion gas temperature remains constant. 

Here is the solution:

A typical problem for a school graduate. Requirements for entrance to MIT you can see here. While tests for Physics you may see here--as expected from College Board.  In fact, you are not even required to take Physics exam, you can take Biology instead. Wanna know what Math 1 stands for? Browse MIT site. Hell, while at it go to Math 2 also, and why not. The point? The point is that students who have to solve trigonometric equations like this by the 10th grade:

an extremely easy equation based on basic identities and quadratic substitutions, will have very little difficulty after going though hell of physics-math-language entrance exams getting to serious calculus and differential equations, not to mention mechanics and, eventually, weapons' and industrial design.  And that is the only thing that matters--HOW hard it is for future elite to go through this academic survival course. In my case add here nightmarish conditions of a brutal military regimen, especially the boot (and especially in Baku in Summer) and combination of simply unrelenting pressure of academics combined with an incessant sleep deprivation, hunger and necessity to carry out military duties ranging from duties in company quarters to actual guard duties of naval academy arsenal and classified facilities. If you survived the first year (many didn't), our company shrank in 1980 from 4 platoons and roughly 125 cadets to 3 platoons of about 90 cadets. The same trend was in other new companies--washouts numbered in many dozens. Symptomatically the first year of academy is called Guilty Without Guilt (Bez Viny Vinovatye) after Alexander Ostrovsky's famous play. As the senior (starshina) of our company in 1980, then himself a cadet of the 4th year (a normal practice of appointment of senior cadets to command 1st-2nd year companies, assistant to officers in charge. used to say--you will be like that until you stop shitting with home made pies, then, maybe something will come out of you....Damn he was right. It begins to dawn on you once you enter the world of serious military technology and weapons, and people who use them--that is a cultural shock. 

To Be Continued....