As Dresden, the capital of Saxony, marked the anniversary of the World War II firebombing of the city, Saxon Premier Michael Kretschmer said he is "extremely concerned" about the large numbers of Russian soldiers deployed near Ukraine's border.
"We want everything to be done to prevent a warlike confrontation," Kretschmer told dpa on Sunday as Dresden marked the anniversary of the firebombing.
Windsor (Canada) (AFP) - A Canadian mayor Sunday declared the standoff on a key US border bridge over after police moved in and arrested protesters, but the trucker-led movement against Covid-19 restrictions remained defiantly mobilized in the capital Ottawa and elsewhere.
A heavy contingent of officers backed by armored vehicles made their way to the demonstration near Windsor, Ontario, to clear the Ambassador Bridge, a major border crossing to the US city of Detroit, Michigan.
On the outskirts of Dresden's Old Town, hundreds of neo-Nazis gathered in the morning for a "commemoration in honour of the Dresden air war dead of February 13, 1945."
Police estimated the number of participants in the procession at up to 500, which grew to around 750, who walked into the city centre to the sound of Wagner music and loud counter-protests nearby from hundreds of people.
At the Baroque landmark Zwinger palace, hundreds of counter-demonstrators loudly opposed the "silent march," which was already accompanied by shouts of "Nazis out" at the roadside.
A helicopter circled over the old town, while a water cannon and an evacuation tank stood near the route.
Is the co-opting of Canadian symbols shaping a collective sentiment about how they are viewed? And how did Canada land on those symbols in the first place?
An important point worth raising is that the flag protesters are waving about is a relatively young flag. It was designed and adopted in 1965, after 1964’s Great Flag Debate. At the time, Canada was going through a national identity crisis.
A new flag had been decades in the making. It was seen as a controversial move, reflecting a lack of political will to replace the Union Jack or the Canadian Red Ensign, both of which had served Canada over the years.
It was so controversial that previous prime ministers had postponed the issue of selecting a new flag for Canada on several occasions. Even when the committee met to select the successful design, the issue was hotly contested until it was eventually resolved to meet the looming deadline of Canada’s 1967 centenary celebrations.
When the flag was raised on Parliament Hill for the first time, Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson read: “May the land over which this new flag flies remain united in freedom and justice … sensitive, tolerant and compassionate towards all.”
This new flag was designed to articulate Canada as a sovereign nation, no longer bearing the heraldry of a colonial past.
The flag’s message about Canada as an inclusive, unified and just space has been debated since then — arguably more effectively than in Ottawa these past two weeks.
For many Indigenous Peoples, the symbolism of the Canadian flag is glaringly incommensurate with their colonial experience, a message that has been continuously contested through the development of flags of resistance and alternative imagery — like the Warrior Flag flown by members of the Kanien'kehà:ka community during the Oka Crisis.
Yet the Canadian flag, in another context, could be seen as reflecting reconciliation — flown at half-mast nationwide in remembrance of the children lost in residential schools. In this case, the national flag was used precisely because of its importance as a symbol of unity.
Farmers and other supporters of the ‘freedom convoy’ rally on Highway 402 in Sarnia, Ont., closing off the Bluewater Bridge border crossing to U.S.-bound traffic.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Geoff Robins
In contrast, the convoy’s efforts to appropriate national symbols and the Canadian imagination have proven ineffective.
While the jumbled host of flags used by this group is meant to reflect genuine grassroots spontaneity and a relatively small, though united and vocal presence, its effect is just the opposite. The efforts appear as incoherent as the set of symbols they have chosen to deploy in its cause.
The movement in its early days seemed in search of symbols. Parliament buildings, monuments and commemorative statues were all targeted. Part of the project included draping the statue of national hero Terry Fox – who spent his last moments on earth drawing attention to the critical role of scientific and health research — with paraphernalia in support of their cause.
Has the flag outlived its specific use and intended specific political representation? Or will it be now seen as a symbol which has outlived its usefulness?
Will more and more Canadians become increasingly uncomfortable with its symbolic content after such public demonstrations and its association with such a toxic brand of nationalism?
Wondering if the previously inoffensive symbolism of the maple leaf flag will remain unscathed is not so far-fetched. Can any one symbol suit the purposes of both those who enforce and challenge state laws and regulations equally?
It is hard to know whether to be morally outraged at the trivialization of the hard-won freedoms that the “freedom convoy” has perpetuated, or simply dumbfounded by the sheer nonchalance of the protesters choice of symbolism. For most Canadians, I suspect that it is a little of both.
In the School for the Study of Canada at Trent University, scholars delve into critical examinations across a range of themes — environment, nationalism, sovereignty, Indigeneity, diversity and immigration — exploring the Canadian identity and Canada’s role in the world today. This includes exploring how current issues, including the “freedom convoy”, are perceived by Canadians and people around the world.
The flag Canada first raised in 1965 was a symbol used to unite Canadians as a shared nation — an exciting new symbol that Canadians were proud of.
Feb. 15 marks Flag Day in Canada, and so perhaps this is a good time to ask ourselves if this is still true? Does the flag unite Canadians, or confuse them as its symbolism is used to different ends and causes? Can any symbol really speak for all of us?
Perhaps what will come of this moment in Canadian history is a new set of symbols, arguably not perfect and not uncontested, but reflective of our times.
Heather Nicol, Director, School for the Study of Canada & Canadian Studies and the Frost Centre for Canadian Studies and Indigenous Studies, Trent University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
But Russia has something that may undercut that solidarity: a network of European countries, Germany in particular, dependent on it for energy exports, especially natural gas. That may make them reluctant to go along with severe U.S. sanctions.
This dependence didn’t happen overnight. And as I’ve learned while working on a book on U.S. economic warfare against the USSR during the Cold War, this issue has tended to divide America and its allies – in part because of how Russia has exploited the ambiguity of its intentions.
The U.S. has long speculated about Russian willingness to use trade to tie the hands of other countries - a concern dating back to the early days of the Cold War.
For example, in the late 1950s and 1960s, as the USSR and the U.S. were competing for postwar hegemony, each side tried to influence countries not formally aligned with either superpower. Some American analysts warned of a “Soviet economic offensive.” This included Soviet efforts to use favorable trade deals and other economic assistance to Warsaw Pact countries and neutral targets like Finland, the United Arab Republic and India in a manner that created sustained dependence on Moscow, possibly enabling future Kremlin coercion.
Other analysts disagreed and thought Soviet trade was largely motivated by economics. So did American allies – especially Britain – which resisted American calls to restrict strategic trade with the Soviet Bloc and other efforts to curb their Soviet trade prospects.
These different perspectives demonstrate the ambiguity of Soviet intentions. Given the Cold War rivalry and the USSR’s status as a centralized, state-run economy, Moscow’s motives were not clear.
As the Soviet Union began developing oil and gas pipelines to Europe, European energy dependence on Russia became a particular concern in Washington.
In the 1960s, Western Europe only imported 6% of its oil from the Soviet bloc. But a new planned oil pipeline – running all the way from the Russian far east, through several European countries including Ukraine and Poland, and terminating in Germany – suggested the Soviets hoped to change that. The prospect of greater dependence, as well as other strategic concerns, raised alarm bells in Washington.
In 1963, the Kennedy administration attempted to stall construction of the Druzhba, or “Friendship,” Oil Pipeline by pushing an embargo on wide-diameter pipe to Soviet-aligned countries. Knowing it could not stop the project alone, it pressured allies – especially West Germany, a major pipe exporter – to join.
While Britain refused, West Germany reluctantly agreed, permitting a partial NATO embargo.
Nonetheless, the pipeline was completed a year later with only minor delays.
Listen to The Conversation Weekly podcast on the geopolitics of natural gas in Europe.
About two decades later, the Reagan administration faced a similar dilemma.
In 1981, the Soviet Union was building a natural gas pipeline from Siberia to Western Europe. Seeing it as another threat, the Reagan administration tried to persuade European allies such as France and Germany to join its embargo of not only pipeline equipment for the project but financing too. They refused, and the U.S. responded with sanctions intended to prevent European companies from providing money or equipment to the project.
The gambit sparked an intra-Western crisis, sowing division between the U.S. and Europe, and resulting in a sanctions retreat just a few months later.
The pipeline was completed in 1984.
The consequences of energy dependence on Russia began to manifest itself after the Soviet collapse in 1991 and the rise of Vladimir Putin a decade later. Unlike his Soviet predecessors, who refrained from shutting off energy exports, Putin has shown a willingness to conflate economic and geopolitical objectives in Russian energy policy, applying timely pressure on neighbors that he justifies in market terms.
In the mid-2000s, for example, Ukraine was still receiving the same heavily subsidized gas shipments from Russia as it did when it was part of the Soviet Union a few years earlier. The “Orange Revolution” near the end of 2004 led to the ouster of a pro-Kremlin leader, replacing him with one who sought closer ties with the West. A year later, Gazprom demanded Ukraine pay full market rates for its gas.
When Ukraine refused, Russia restricted the flow of gas through the pipelines – leaving only enough to fulfill its contracts to countries in Western Europe. To many observers, the move seemed aimed at destabilizing the pro-Western government in Kyiv. It was also later used as the basis for claims that Ukraine was an unreliable gas transit country, which helped build support for a new pipeline named Nord Stream that directly channeled gas from Russia to Germany.
That pipeline opened up in 2011 and resulted in the annual loss to Ukraine of US$720 million in transit fees. Nord Stream also significantly increased German energy dependence on Russia, which by 2020 was supplying an estimated 50% to 75% of its natural gas, up from 35% in 2015. Natural gas is used not only to power industry but also for heating and to generate electricity in Germany.
That pipeline is now responsible for a third of all Russian gas exports to Europe. As a result, Russian gas exports to Europe reached a record level in 2021 – despite U.S. efforts to ramp up exports of liquefied natural gas to Europe.
Europe got a glimpse of the potential consequences of this dependence in December 2021, when Russia reduced its gas exports to Europe as the crisis involving Ukraine was heating up. Although Russia was still technically meeting its contracts, it stopped selling additional gas as it had in the past. The next month, the International Energy Agency accused Russia of destabilizing European energy security.
Russia has reportedly amassed about 130,000 troops on its border with Ukraine - surrounding the country on three sides.
While Putin’s intentions remain unclear, the U.S. is leading efforts to deter a potential invasion by showing that its Western allies are on board with devastating sanctions - including Biden’s promise to thwart a new $11 billion pipeline running from Russia to Germany known as Nord Stream 2.
But Europe’s – and specifically Germany’s – already-significant dependence on Russia for energy make them vulnerable given Russia’s history of threatening to cut off gas supplies to its neighbors – and sometimes following through. This could potentially undermine the West’s ability to execute a coordinated sanctions campaign.
[Over 150,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to understand the world. Sign up today.]
For example, an energy crisis in winter could be a disaster for Germany, and fear of it may weaken German willingness to act against Russia. A recent example of potential German softness toward Russia can be seen in German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s failure to endorse stopping the Nord Stream 2 pipeline as a potential sanction for an invasion.
Russia’s use of trade and energy to create dependencies has given it a strong hand – one that the U.S. and its European allies have limited options to counter.
Ryan Haddad, Research Affiliate at the Ed Snider Center for Enterprise and Markets, University of Maryland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Senior officials and representatives of the German War Graves Commission commemorated the victims of the Allied bombing raids on the city of Dresden of February 13-14, 1945, who are buried in the city - mainly firefighters, soldiers and policemen.
In addition to Dresden Lord Mayor Dirk Hilbert, representatives of the state of Saxony, of which the city is the capital, remembered the dead in a traditional ceremony at Heide cemetery.
"With regard to the destruction of Dresden, we must not only look at 1945, but must broaden our perspective to the time between 1933 and 1945," Hilbert said in a short speech.
"In remembering, we must face up to the complexity of a simultaneously divisive and unifying history, an infinitely complex one, precisely because of the current political situation in our city, in our country and in Europe."
According to the police, the ceremony at the cemetery, where most of the dead of the air raids rest, went off without a hitch.
By Kayla Tarnowski
WINDSOR, Ontario (Reuters) -Canadian police said on Sunday they have arrested more protesters opposing COVID-19 restrictions and blocking a key trade route along the border with the United States, more than 24 hours after authorities moved in to impose a court order.
Pope Francis voiced his concern about the conflict in Ukraine in comments following his traditional Angelus prayer on Sunday.
"The news coming out of Ukraine is very worrying," the 85-year-old Catholic leader told thousands of worshippers and onlookers in St Peter's Square in Rome.
He called on political leaders to make every effort to bring about peace and then led the crowd in silent prayer for the country.
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has been re-elected for a second term in office.
He received 1,045 votes out of 1,437 cast in the Federal Convention on Sunday, Bundestag President Bärbel Bas (SPD) said.
