Here’s one for the books. Last week, as reported by Russian state media TASS, Vladimir Putin signed a new decree allocating funds “for the research and registration of Russian property overseas, including that in former territories of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union.” [Miranda Nazzaro, The Hill, Jan. 23, 2024.] Putin wasn’t talking about individual bank accounts; he was looking at prime real estate — and lots of it.

Although Alaska — which, as you may know, was purchased from Imperial Russia by the United States in 1867 for the bargain price of $7.2 Million, or around two cents ($0.02) an acre — wasn’t specifically mentioned in the decree, there are those whose attention has understandably been drawn to the situation. Some military bloggers have argued that Putin was using the decree to declare the sale illegal.

All right, are you finished laughing? Good. To continue . . .

On Monday, the State Department’s principal deputy spokesperson, Vedant Patel, responded at a press briefing as follows: “Well, I think I can speak for all of us in the U.S. government to say that certainly he’s not getting it back.” [The Hill, Jan. 23, 2024.] There was laughter from his audience, too.

I agree . . . the concept is as funny as anything I’ve heard coming from the direction of the Kremlin in a long time. But, knowing the skullduggery of which Vladimir Putin is capable, we can’t really dismiss anything he or his henchmen say without careful consideration.

The Institute for the Study of War noted last week that the “exact parameters of what constitutes current or historical Russia property are unclear.” Even assuming they know they can’t simply say they want it and then actually hope to get it back, this could be used as “soft power mechanisms in post-Soviet and neighboring states ultimately aimed at internal destabilization.” One military blogger, in a Telegram post, “suggested Russia could start enacting the law in Alaska and parts of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia.” [The Hill, Jan. 23, 2024.]

As with so many of Vladimir Putin’s grand pronouncements, his words and actions can, and usually do, hold one or more hidden meanings. Perhaps he thinks he has a chance of regaining some of the Baltic states, the Caucasus or the Central Asian “Stans,” and has tossed Alaska into the mix simply to stir things up and create a bit of chaos in the U.S. — much as he has done in our elections — or to divert attention from his actions elsewhere . . . a typical Russian red herring (pun intended).

In any event, I wouldn’t start relocating the good people of Alaska any time soon. Remember . . . we didn’t march in and snatch it from Russia’s hands; we paid cold, hard cash for those 586,412 acres. And if they’re now thinking the price was too low . . . well, they agreed to it. In fact, they thought it was useless property and that they had gotten the best of us, which is why it was referred to as “Seward’s Folly.” Nobody knew then that it would have all that lovely oil. Sometimes, Mr. Putin, life just sucks.

*. *. *

But one thing does concern me, and that is the question of who will be President of the United States for the four years from 2025-29. From Putin’s point of view, he’s hoping it will be an old friend of his, someone he can easily manipulate and convince that he has that friend’s best interests at heart. Someone who already admires Putin to the extent of emulating his high-handed, dictatorial style of governing. And Putin will do anything to see that that happens.

This election is ours, not Vladimir Putin’s. And it’s not about making America great again. America already is great, and always has been. This time, it’s about keeping America great, and keeping her united . . . Alaska included!

Just sayin’ . . .

Brendochka
1/24/24