Husband and wife outed as GRU spies aiding bombings and poisonings across Europe

> Do you think anyone in 1991 wanted to see Poland in the EU?

A hundred percent positive. Maybe Poland was viewed with some reservations, but with Czech, Baltic states and Croatia there was no cloud of doubt. Each one of these had patron states inside EU who would spend effort to ensure their entrance. Poland they mostly got as a land bridge and because of its patron USA.

> But Russia never took the first step of swallowing their pride

Why?

Seriously though, why does anybody has to swallow pride in order to enter bilateral relations? You've also refused to swallow your pride regarding potraying some journalists as a principial obstacle. Shouldn't pride swallowing go both ways, if at all?

Now we are having a war because apparently not enough pride was swallowed by both sides, and I hope you are happy. Any takeaways from that?

> narrative keeps shifting

There are multiple narratives.

One narrative for Putin who does not like what Ukraine is doing and also does not like coups.

A different narrative for fellow Russians who have uneasy relations with Putin and are divided on coups but also do not like what Ukraine is doing, for only partly overlapping of reasons.

I am not Putin so my view is the latter, but since we all live in society I can also decode the former.

There are other narratives there as well.

> A hundred percent positive. Maybe Poland was viewed with some reservations, but with Czech, Baltic states and Croatia there was no cloud of doubt. Each one of these had patron states inside EU who would spend effort to ensure their entrance. Poland they mostly got as a land bridge and because of its patron USA.

That is not a very widely shared view, to put it mildly. Memoirs of Eastern European statesmen, diplomats and other officials, as well as business representatives are littered with stories how they were laughed out of the room when they raised the topic of EU and NATO membership in early-to-mid 1990s. The prevalent vision was the so-called "multi-speed Europe"[1] with Western European members maintaining their tight integration and newer members getting some form of a diluted access to the common market.

The fact that Eastern European countries became full members of the EU and NATO in 15 years without any restrictions is considered one of the most impressive diplomatic achievements in those countries, odds of which were considered fairly low in the early days.

Ukraine is currently in a similar situation. While they have lots of sympathy, Ukraine is nevertheless a large country with lots of social and economic issues (now amplified by the war), and the EU is hesitant about fast integration out of fear that those issues could spill over into the EU. Through Macron, even the concept of "multi-speed Europe" has returned to circulation.[2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-speed_Europe

[2] https://www.politico.eu/article/france-president-emmanuel-ma...

> Seriously though, why does anybody has to swallow pride in order to enter bilateral relations?

Because it is Russia, not anyone else, who has the delusion of being a great empire that deserves preferential treatment. If you are interested in EU integration, then there's a proven path to that goal. If you are too proud to take that path, then good luck underperforming for another century. The positive effects of EU's common market are well known, and above all it's your loss if boyars keep you out of it because Europeans don't bow down deep enough in front of them.

> Perhaps there was an option of multi-speed Europe and perhaps it will perform better in maintaining peace in Europe, but it wasn't chosen. It was decided to integrate all the Eastern Europe into the EU.

That decision came late in the process, and wasn't something that was thought to be viable at the start. To say that it was certain from the start is just plain wrong.

> We need(ed) a very different kind of integration, one that EU has failed to follow. Putin was practically betting his first two terms on that it will happen, but EU turned out too stiff. It's a question of civilization and cultural choice and not some common market and farmer subsidies.

Exactly what I said: expectation of a special treatment. Russia simply has never wanted to become a normal European country like the rest, because it has imperialistic delusions about cultural superiority, which come in the way of pursuing pragmatic and mutually beneficial relations. Imagine if Germans still held on to their ideas of superiority and saw Danes, Poles, Czechs, Austrians, and others as lesser people, and threatened to invade if their governments did anything Germans didn't like. Willingness to let go of imperialist mindset and adopt humanist values is a crucial step in entering the European family of countries, and the change can only come from within.

> We don't care about common market and all that bullshit. We also don't need your money as other young EU members do.

Calling the common market or other key areas of European cooperation "bullshit" is a sign of deep immaturity. Common agricultural policy, joint customs rules or harmonized food safety standards are not as sexy as fantasies of "bashing in heads of other countries", but serve the people better. But ultimately, I don't care that you don't care. It's your life that is worse off as a result of that, not mine.

> You are interested in integration with Russia because otherwise Russia will continue to bash in heads of other countries over their integration with EU, among other things. Basically, because we can and want to go to war over it.

Not at all. For the longest time, Europe expected Russia to grow into a normal, healthy society that could become a part of pan-European cooperation sooner or later. Bombing each others cities is simply not the way European leaders think or expect others to think and act when it comes to resolving political conflicts in Europe. Nobody ever thinks about calling their military leaders for advice when they are stuck in disagreements with other countries over fishing policies. That's why the attack on Ukraine was such a surprise: it is not a brilliant power move, but unbelievable stupidity that puts you on track of reliving the 1990s again. That's the great irony of Putinism - for all the bitterness and resentment towards Gorbachev and fall of the USSR, he has cursed the country into going through that once more.

> The problem of EU as I see it is that it is comprised of "normal" European countries - meaning, for all of their economic development, small-ish and not having direct military ambitions, or requirement to have those.

If Russia were a member of the EU, it would not even make it to the top 3 of largest economies in the union. Nor will the military be anything remarkable after Soviet stockpiles run out or rot away without leaving any more T-72 bodies to refurbish. You are living in the final days of a colonial empire that hasn't yet come to terms with the fact that the world has changed. Spain, France, the UK, Portugal, Italy, Belgium and others all had "military ambitions" and empires once, several of them much more impressive than Russia ever was. The war against Ukraine perfectly mirrors the pointless wars that European colonial powers were waging in the middle of the previous century in Malaysia, Algeria, Angola, Indochina and elsewhere. Desperately clinging to the past won't change anything and only prolongs the pain of inevitable transformation.

> There is some discrepancy: you are telling that Russians can only blame themselves for being worse off, but in fact Russians aren't complaining, and it is fellow Europeans who all the time blame Russia and also complain about their political and economic conditions.

Why are you killing people in Ukraine every day if you are happy with your lives?

The entire war seems like a giant temper tantrum over the fact that a nation that you've seen as one of the closest to you sees you as the inferior option and has chosen the EU as their partner instead. And what fuels the incredible inferiority complex, jealousy and resentment is knowing how it's all true: European integration is a better option for Ukraine, and that despite all the "jewrope" and "gayropa" garbage on the telly and in the newspapers, people really do live better, happier, safer and more fulfilling lives in Europe.

You act like creeps who think that you have a special relationship with that woman down the street, and viciously attack when she dares to have a relationship with anyone but you, while she has time and time again made it clear that she is not interested in you. Beating and raping her won't make her love you either.

I agree that there are many stories where the fade away works just fine. I’m a bit baffled at the use of The Americans in this context though. It is distinctly not one of those stories, but one where each such scene — down to the literal blocking of action — helps explicate the narrative in terms of both plot and emotional arcs.