School of Thought
IT WAS a haunting image that would have touched any parent following the awful news in Ukraine.
Primary pupils, led single file through a metro station, were pictured huddled in an underground bomb shelter as air raid sirens sounded.
Scenes like this were being played out in different Ukrainian towns and cities.
Here in North Staffordshire, it’s hard to imagine the horrors, hardship and aching uncertainty that Ukrainian families are facing.
Just look at the port city of Mariupol, where residents have been under siege from a barrage of shelling. They have been left without water, electricity and sanitation.
It comes as more than a million people have fled over the border to neighbouring countries. Europe is now facing a humanitarian crisis.
Young people in England are among those trying to make sense of the news and the images they see shared on social media, both fake and real. Teachers says pupils have been coming to school expressing worries. Some have asked ‘Are we going to be bombed’ and ‘Is this a Third World War’?
For schools wanting to raise the issues in lessons, it’s a difficult balancing act. One headteacher in Devon recently came in for criticism for talking about the conflict in an assembly with children as young as five and six.
Children’s commissioner Rachel de Souza is convinced schools shouldn’t shy away from it. She said: “Children care passionately about the world around them, especially other children. We should not hide what is happening, but support children in understanding it.”
Communities across Staffordshire have also responded by organising collections.
Russia has become a pariah and any organisation linked to Vladimir Putin’s despotic regime is feeling the chill winds.
But it’s gone beyond targeting oligarchs and is now affecting everything from university research to theatrical productions.
It’s debatable whether the decision by Stafford’s Gatehouse Theatre to cancel a performance by the Russian State Opera is wise or an overreaction. After all, how can watching Madama Butterfly be seen as a political act? The production company stressed it condemned the invasion and had no connection to the Russian ‘state.’
Yet there are some areas where the public response has been sensible and proportionate. We know the dangers, for instance, of over-reliance on Russian gas.
It’s no surprise to see companies rush to switch their energy away from Russian firm Gazprom. Among those cancelling their contracts is Pear Hospitality Group, which runs a number of top restaurants in South Cheshire, including Peck’s.
It’s also a conundrum for schools as many use Gazprom as their gas supplier.
Education website Tes recently revealed that the firm is still being promoted through a Government ‘school switch’ service. It is one of 11 suppliers offering schools energy quotes to cut their bills.
Geoff Barton, general secretary of school leaders’ union ASCL, called on the Government to remove Gazprom from the scheme as ‘a matter of urgency.’
He said: “The abhorrent behaviour of the Russian government in Ukraine demands the strongest possible response.” But boycotts can also be a heavyhanded approach.
Over the years, we’ve seen them happen on university campuses in response to a variety of political conflicts. Last week, Universities UK cautioned against a blanket ban on collaborations with Russian universities. It wants to see decisions made on a case-bycase basis. In a statement, UUK said: “Many Russian students and academics, at great personal peril, have publicly criticised this invasion.”
What all this illustrates is that cutting ties with every organisation linked to Russia isn’t easy. We live in a global market. And ultimately, is it right to hold the ordinary Russian people responsible for the war crimes of their president?
Putin’s actions risk destroying his own country as well as Ukraine.