Black mark on Russia

Re: “Grim reflections in the mirror of Ukraine crisis,” (Opinion, May 20).

For the second time in recent months, the Russian Ambassador Evgeny Tomikhin has been given a platform to espouse, in a lengthy op-ed, his views on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He does so with such conviction that he probably believes the fantasy world he attempts to project.

The ambassador’s opinion piece contains so many falsehoods and inaccuracies that it would require a much longer rebuttal than PostBag has room for. Take, for example, the ridiculous assertion that Russia’s invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014 was meant to prevent “genocide and mass slaughter”; that the Russian language would be “prohibited” throughout Ukraine and policy objectors “outlawed”. Regarding the latter, it’s interesting that his article fails to mention his own government’s penalty of 15 years’ imprisonment for patriots who simply dare to call Russia’s invasion a “war”.

Equally absurd: the claim that the weapons being sent to Ukraine to defend itself against Russian aggression are meant for “offensive” purposes to threaten the existence of its vast neighbour. Finally, for the ambassador to suggest that Russia alone is not directly responsible for the looming global food crisis, by virtue of its blockade and shelling of vital Ukrainian port cities, is derisory.

One point on which we may agree is that Russian athletes who disavow the atrocities being committed in Ukraine shouldn’t be banned from participating in international sports tournaments. And, yes, the ambassador may take comfort in the fact that there are some Thais with business connections to Russia who may turn a blind eye to the massacre of innocent Ukrainian civilians in Bucha, Mariupol and elsewhere — but I have no doubt that the vast majority of Thai people understand right from wrong.

Vladimir Putin initiated this tragic war and Russia will, quite rightly, bear the consequences for decades to come. K MALEVICH