“It is a rare thing to live through a moment of huge historical consequence and understand in real-time that is what it is.” It is with this quote that Allan Little begins his article on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and it was a line that struck me deeply. Especially in the throes of the pandemic, the awareness of the world fundamentally and forever changing around me was a sensation that I felt keenly and somewhat anxiously. Considering that yesterday was the anniversary of 9/11, it comes to mind that for most Americans, watching the Twin Towers fall 22 years ago was another one of those moments. It is, however, much easier to have this awareness when monumental change and tragedy are happening at your doorstep. Before beginning this week’s readings, I unfortunately don’t think I really was able to comprehend the real gravity of the war. “This is a third seismic event.” Lindsey Hilsum writes, naming 9/11 and the fall of the Berlin Wall as the two prior. “At the time of writing, we are in the perilous moment of not knowing if the war will widen, and bring NATO into direct conflict with Russia. Whether Ukraine will survive. Whether Putin will survive. Anything could happen.”While Western countries have been looking the other direction – the US involved in its domestic political drama, European countries blinded by Russian gas dependence – Putin has been making frequent moves reminiscent of the Bosnian invasion by Serbia. He is following the same model of invalidating Ukrainian identity and statehood followed by military siege. As the the US and EU respond with economic sanctions and war continues on, we are at a junction in which the international financial map can be redrawn – primarily based on how China may move through this landscape — on top of the devastation human and political consequences of war. Putin’s nuclear threats bring back a sense of brinkmanship to international relations that has not been felt since the Cuban Missile Crisis. The rules of international relations conduct are not only changing but may even dissipate.
Falling consequence to this dissipation of international rules is the adjudication of rape as a war crime. Rape and sexual violence in a civilian context is severely under-prosecuted, in an ordinary military context is even further silenced, and amidst war, it is heartbreakingly weaponized. Further, victims of rape during war are traumatized beyond belief and struggle with feelings of shame around deciding to testify. If they decide to testify, the odds of finding justice are slim to none. Brigitte Messe was only 15 years old when the Red Army raped millions of women in the final days of the second World War. “She believes mass rapes were revenge taken out on the bodies of German women,” Amos comments. Mass rapes were widely acknowledged but never formally acknowledged in Germany, and expressly denied as ever happening by Russia. When asked what she might tell a young Ukranian woman who might find herself in a similar position, she said, “ I would tell her to forget about it if she can. I think even nowadays, it’s something you want to forget.” When will women’s bodies stop being considered collaterally damaged property?
