It’s much safer from retributive violence than Finland, more politically realistic than the Gulf Kingdoms who don’t want to complicate their ties with the interim administration, and very friendly with Russia and India, who support her but also feel the same way about this as the Gulf Kingdoms do.
"...Nobel Peace Prize [in 2006, which] is a largely politicized process as astute observers know."
I would agree, at some point and to some degree, observers would have needed to be have been somewhat (more) astute (than the average... What?) to realise and understand how and to what extent the Nobel Peace Prize (winning and awarding process) was politicised BEFORE it was given to an American Head of State (President). It is, however, perhaps one of Obama's most significant effects on contemporary society that he made the something-other-than-overtly-obvious patently obvious to so many. Credit where it's due: to paraphrase words I'm sure the Nobel Peace Prize winning president would approve of, I feel it fair to say of this revelation he performed in full sight of the whole world, 'Never before has something so obviously hidden been made so obviously obvious to so many by so few (and so quickly).' Believe NOT those who say his eight-year rule was effectively meaningless; he has done much to enlighten many. Were it not for him, there would still be many more than there are today who might never understand the significance of 'The Fall of Minneapolis'. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFPi3EigjFA)
I wrote that this morning, before needing to rush off. Re-reading it, I see it could be much more easily-digestible. I'll try it in bullets:
1 True, once upon a time, people who realised the Nobel Prize process served political purposes were relatively rare.
2 The American President Obama changed all that.
3 Many people believe this is the most important thing he did with his eight-year reign.
4 It would have taken a lot of people a lot longer to realise how degraded and corrupt the system which brought him to power had become, if he had acted in any other way.
5 A lot of people like that, who weren't able to get their heads around what had become of the societies they once held in high esteem, really liked a lot of old-fashioned politicians, like Winston Churchill.
6 In one of his most famous speeches (about Britain's role in defeating Nazism) he proclaimed, "Never was so much owed by so many to so few!" which is, actually, something of a paraphrase.
7 People like Obama like to think of themselves as important people, like Churchill.
8 He would probably not understand the sarcastic irony, and would probably be pleased in any case, if Churchill's words were adapted to say the world owes him a great deal for the great service he did for everyone by exposing how superficial and meaningless — hypocritical — the Nobel Prizes had become by being so heavily politicised.
9 You could say, 'Never before has something so obviously hidden been made so obviously obvious to so many by so few (and so quickly).'
10. You can still find some people who will say his rule was far from meaningless, but he was the harbinger of a great new social movement.
11. 'The Fall of Minneapolis' does much to explain how fallacious this idea is.
12 This is particularly relevant now because it's the day after one of the people who politicised the death of George Floyd in 2020, Tim Walz, in a manner very similar to how the Nobel Prizes were co-opted, has seemingly escaped responsibility.
Most peculiar, it seems to me: surely, one would have expected those responsible, even if only indirectly so, like the current hopeful running for US President, to do everything possible to avoid any light being shone on this subject. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFPi3EigjFA) Yet, here we have such 'doubling-down'. I guess you've got to give them credit for having such great faith that those who elect them are so deaf, dumb and blind and will so remain. One hell of a gamble; I guess you've got to give them credit for that — having the courage to take such a risk, such unshakable faith in human fallibility (or stupidity, to be a bit more blunt about it).
"...Nobel Peace Prize [in 2006, which] is a largely politicized process as astute observers know."
I would agree, at some point and to some degree, observers would have needed to be have been somewhat (more) astute (than the average... What?) to realise and understand how and to what extent the Nobel Peace Prize (winning and awarding process) was politicised BEFORE it was given to an American Head of State (President). It is, however, perhaps one of Obama's most significant effects on contemporary society that he made the something-other-than-overtly-obvious patently obvious to so many. Credit where it's due: to paraphrase words I'm sure the Nobel Peace Prize winning president would approve of, I feel it fair to say of this revelation he performed in full sight of the whole world, 'Never before has something so obviously hidden been made so obviously obvious to so many by so few (and so quickly).' Believe NOT those who say his eight-year rule was effectively meaningless; he has done much to enlighten many. Were it not for him, there would still be many more than there are today who might never understand the significance of 'The Fall of Minneapolis'. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFPi3EigjFA)
I wrote that this morning, before needing to rush off. Re-reading it, I see it could be much more easily-digestible. I'll try it in bullets:
1 True, once upon a time, people who realised the Nobel Prize process served political purposes were relatively rare.
2 The American President Obama changed all that.
3 Many people believe this is the most important thing he did with his eight-year reign.
4 It would have taken a lot of people a lot longer to realise how degraded and corrupt the system which brought him to power had become, if he had acted in any other way.
5 A lot of people like that, who weren't able to get their heads around what had become of the societies they once held in high esteem, really liked a lot of old-fashioned politicians, like Winston Churchill.
6 In one of his most famous speeches (about Britain's role in defeating Nazism) he proclaimed, "Never was so much owed by so many to so few!" which is, actually, something of a paraphrase.
7 People like Obama like to think of themselves as important people, like Churchill.
8 He would probably not understand the sarcastic irony, and would probably be pleased in any case, if Churchill's words were adapted to say the world owes him a great deal for the great service he did for everyone by exposing how superficial and meaningless — hypocritical — the Nobel Prizes had become by being so heavily politicised.
9 You could say, 'Never before has something so obviously hidden been made so obviously obvious to so many by so few (and so quickly).'
10. You can still find some people who will say his rule was far from meaningless, but he was the harbinger of a great new social movement.
11. 'The Fall of Minneapolis' does much to explain how fallacious this idea is.
12 This is particularly relevant now because it's the day after one of the people who politicised the death of George Floyd in 2020, Tim Walz, in a manner very similar to how the Nobel Prizes were co-opted, has seemingly escaped responsibility.
Most peculiar, it seems to me: surely, one would have expected those responsible, even if only indirectly so, like the current hopeful running for US President, to do everything possible to avoid any light being shone on this subject. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFPi3EigjFA) Yet, here we have such 'doubling-down'. I guess you've got to give them credit for having such great faith that those who elect them are so deaf, dumb and blind and will so remain. One hell of a gamble; I guess you've got to give them credit for that — having the courage to take such a risk, such unshakable faith in human fallibility (or stupidity, to be a bit more blunt about it).
It will be interesting to see if she indeed decides to seek asylum in Belarus - thanks for the update Mr. Korybko.
Belarus? well, you could be right
As briefly mentioned, having a nephew in Belarus makes it a compelling destination not only for asylum, but for respite and consolation as well.