Dwindling body of water makes stunning comeback: 'The result of two years of systematic work'
A conservation project to revitalize the North Aral Sea in Kazakhstan has delivered encouraging returns, with the lake now nearly twice the size it was in 2008.
According to the Astana Times, Kazakhstan's Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation announced in January that its efforts, in coordination with the World Bank, increased the body of water's volume by 42%. As a result, the North Aral Sea now contains 27 billion cubic meters of water, and its salinity has dropped by a factor of four.
Additionally, the plan has helped local fisheries up their annual catch total to 8,000 tons, which pales in comparison to peak levels but is still a positive development.
"These figures are the result of two years of systematic work. We have reached mutual understanding with neighboring countries on the protection and equitable sharing of water resources in transboundary rivers," Nurzhan Nurzhigitov, the department's minister, said during a public meeting in the Aral district of the Kyzylorda Region.
Improved water management of the Syr Darya River allowed authorities to fill the North Aral Sea with 2.6 billion cubic meters of water last year. Deutsche Welle also noted that conservationists are planting native black saxaul trees in the area to combat desertification and improve climate resilience.
The Aral Sea was once the fourth-largest lake in the world at around 68,000 square kilometers, per the U.S. Geological Services. However, it split into two and is now just a 10th of the size it was in 1960 after the Soviet government diverted the rivers that feed into the sea to irrigate the arid region surrounding it.
This led to what the U.S. Embassy & Consulate in Kazakhstan called "one of the worst ecological catastrophes in human history."
The Aral Sea's heightened salinity rendered the water undrinkable and killed off several commercial fish species, impacting the lake's biodiversity and economic productivity. Dust from the exposed seabed has also caused numerous health issues, such as respiratory illness and cancer.
That's what makes continued commitments to improve the North Aral Sea and others like it, including Michigan's Great Lakes and Bolivia's Lake Uru Uru, all the more crucial. Many lakes and other aquatic habitats are disappearing because of Earth's overheating and anthropogenic activities.
"We will continue negotiating and making every effort to maintain a stable level of important reservoirs. The Aral Sea restoration project aims, first of all, to improve the environmental situation in the region, develop fisheries and tourism, and improve the well-being of the population," Nurzhigitov added.
How often do you worry about the quality of your drinking water?
Never
Sometimes
Often
Always
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Waste Management Market to Attain Astonishing Valuation of US$ 2.30 Trillion By 2033
Waste management market is dynamic, shaped by urbanization, technology, and regulations. Generating 2.5 billion tons of waste yearly, it tackles challenges with AI, circular models, and collaboration for sustainability. Chicago, June 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The global waste management market was valued at US$ 1.20 trillion in 2024 and is expected to reach US$ 2.30 trillion by 2033, growing at a CAGR of 6.72% during the forecast period 2025–2033. The waste management market is under immense strain in 2024 due to rapid urban expansion. According to the United Nations, over 4.4 billion people reside in urban areas globally, generating approximately 2.24 billion tons of municipal solid waste annually as reported by the World Bank in recent 2024 updates. Cities like Dhaka, Bangladesh, and Manila, Philippines, face severe landfill overflow, with daily waste collection falling short by over 1.5 million tons collectively in these regions. This surge, driven by consumerism and packaging, particularly plastics, clogs urban infrastructure and pollutes ecosystems, demanding urgent scalable solutions. Request Sample Pages: Moreover, inadequate funding exacerbates urban waste challenges. A 2024 World Bank study reveals that over 90 countries still rely on open dumping, with Southeast Asian municipalities managing only 1.2 million tons of waste daily against a generation of 2 million tons. However, cities like Singapore are setting benchmarks, handling over 7,000 tons daily through smart waste bins and automated systems since 2023. These innovations reduce collection inefficiencies by optimizing routes, yet adoption remains limited in resource-constrained areas. Bridging this gap in the waste management market requires global investment and localized strategies to manage urban waste effectively, ensuring public health and environmental safety are prioritized in densely populated regions. Key Findings in Waste Management Market Market Forecast (2033) US$ 2.30 Trillion CAGR 6.72% Largest Region (2024) Asia Pacific (59.14%) By Waste Type Municipal Waste (32%) By Service Type Collection (43%) Top Drivers Rising urbanization increases waste generation, demanding efficient management solutions. Stringent government regulations enforce sustainable waste handling and recycling practices. Technological advancements drive adoption of smart waste management systems globally. Top Trends Growing use of waste-to-energy plants for sustainable power generation. Increased focus on e-waste recycling due to shorter device lifespans. Smart waste technologies like IoT optimize collection and reduce costs. Top Challenges Inadequate infrastructure for waste collection hampers effective management systems. High operational costs challenge sustainable waste management in low-income regions. Improper e-waste disposal poses environmental and health risks globally. Circular Economy Fuels Progress of the Waste Management Market In the waste management market, the circular economy is a driving force for innovation in 2024. This model focuses on reducing, reusing, and recycling, with the European Union targeting to recycle 2.5 million tons of municipal waste annually by 2030, as per 2024 EU Commission reports. Germany leads with over 1.8 million tons recycled yearly through advanced material recovery facilities. Corporate giants like Unilever are also contributing, repurposing over 500,000 tons of packaging waste into sustainable materials since early 2023, illustrating how business models are aligning with circular principles. Furthermore, technological advancements are bolstering circular efforts. In 2024, US-based startups like Amp Robotics sort over 200,000 tons of recyclables annually using AI, achieving precision unattainable by manual labor. Japan's cultural initiatives, such as the "Mottainai" campaign, have reduced household waste by 150,000 tons yearly through public engagement. Yet, challenges like high setup costs—often exceeding US$10 million per facility—and inconsistent regulations hinder progress, especially in developing nations where infrastructure handles less than 500,000 tons annually. Overcoming these barriers in the waste management market demands collaborative funding and policy alignment to scale circular economy practices, ensuring waste transforms into a valuable resource globally. Rapidly Advancing Technology Redefines Waste Handling The waste management market is experiencing a technological overhaul in 2024, enhancing efficiency and sustainability. IoT-powered smart waste systems in Dubai manage over 3,000 tons of waste daily, with sensors optimizing collection routes and cutting fuel use by 1.2 million liters annually, according to 2024 city reports. Robotics firms like ZenRobotics in Finland sort 250,000 tons of waste yearly, reducing manual labor costs significantly. These innovations are vital as global waste generation nears 2.5 billion tons annually, per World Bank 2024 estimates, necessitating faster, smarter solutions. Additionally, technology targets specific waste streams like e-waste, which reached 62 million tons globally in 2023, with 2024 projections estimating a rise to 65 million tons, as per UN data. South Korean firms recover over 100,000 tons of rare metals yearly from electronics via chemical recycling. However, high costs—often US$5 million per plant—and limited access in regions like Africa, where only 50,000 tons are processed formally, pose barriers. Addressing this digital divide in the waste management market requires international support and investment. As tech integration accelerates, it promises to revolutionize waste handling, provided scalability and affordability are prioritized to meet global demand effectively. Regulatory Shifts Drive Change to Define Market Growth Momentum In the waste management market, regulatory frameworks are pivotal in 2024, shaping industry practices. The EU's Single-Use Plastics Directive, fully enforced by 2023, has reduced plastic waste by 800,000 tons annually across member states, per 2024 EU reports. China's expanded waste import ban in 2024 impacts over 1 million tons of global recycling flows, pushing nations like the US to process 600,000 tons more domestically. These policies highlight a global shift toward accountability, addressing the 2.3 billion tons of waste generated yearly, as noted by the World Bank. Beyond restrictions, incentives are catalyzing progress. Australia's 2024 extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes hold manufacturers accountable for 400,000 tons of end-of-life products yearly, a model adopted by over 30 countries, per OECD 2024 data. Enforcement varies, with Sweden managing 1.1 million tons under strict compliance, while developing nations struggle, handling less than 200,000 tons formally. Rwanda's plastic bag ban since 2019 has cut 50,000 tons of waste annually through local innovation. Harmonizing standards in the waste management market remains challenging, yet policy-driven change is essential to curb environmental degradation, requiring global cooperation to ensure consistent, impactful implementation across diverse economic landscapes. Tackling Plastic Waste Crisis to Remain a Key Challenge The waste management market faces a daunting plastic waste crisis in 2024, with significant environmental implications. The UN Environment Programme reports over 300 million tons of plastic waste generated annually, with 8 million tons entering oceans yearly. Indonesia, a key contributor, manages only 1.5 million tons of its 9 million tons of plastic waste through collection systems, per 2024 national data. Consumer demand drives innovation, with Coca-Cola piloting plant-based bottles, reducing 20,000 tons of traditional plastic use since 2023 across select markets, showcasing industry response. On the ground, solutions are evolving despite hurdles. In 2024, UK firms process 100,000 tons of hard-to-recycle plastics yearly via chemical recycling, though energy costs exceed US$2 million per facility. Kenya's informal waste pickers recover 80,000 tons of plastics annually, yet lack formal support, risking health and inefficiency. Scaling infrastructure in the waste management market is critical, as only 9 million tons of global plastic waste are recycled yearly against 300 million tons produced. Collaborative efforts among governments, industries, and communities are essential to curb pollution, requiring investments in technology and education to manage this pervasive issue threatening ecosystems worldwide. E-Waste Management Becoming Need of an Hour Within the waste management market, e-waste poses a growing challenge in 2024, driven by tech proliferation. The Global E-waste Monitor estimates 62 million tons of discarded electronics in 2023, with 2024 projections reaching 65 million tons. India, a major producer, generates 1.6 million tons yearly, but only 400,000 tons are processed formally, exposing workers to toxins, per 2024 national reports. This underscores the need for structured systems to handle over 500,000 tons of hazardous materials safely and recover valuable resources. Efforts are progressing, though unevenly. The EU's 2024 WEEE Directive mandates collection of 1.2 million tons annually across member states, while Japan's take-back programs recycle 300,000 tons yearly. Conversely, illegal exports to Ghana burden the region with 200,000 tons of unprocessed e-waste annually, creating environmental hazards. Urban mining in Canada extracts 50,000 tons of metals yearly, yet costs exceed US$1 million per operation, limiting scalability. Addressing disparities in the waste management market requires global funding—potentially US$500 million annually—to balance tech advancement with sustainable disposal, ensuring e-waste doesn't overwhelm future generations with unmanageable toxic legacies. Industrial Waste Handling Dynamics are Reshaping the Market The waste management market is witnessing evolving industrial waste trends in 2024, driven by manufacturing demands. The World Bank estimates industries like construction and chemicals generate 1.5 billion tons of waste annually. In the US, 2024 EPA regulations push firms to manage 800,000 tons of hazardous waste yearly through cleaner methods. China's industrial parks pilot zero-waste initiatives, handling 500,000 tons annually with minimal landfill use. These efforts aim to curb contamination from the 300,000 tons of toxic byproducts released yearly, as per global 2024 industrial data. Moreover, industrial symbiosis offers innovative solutions. Denmark's 2024 projects repurpose 200,000 tons of waste—like excess heat—into resources for other firms, enhancing efficiency. Yet, logistical barriers persist, with Brazil struggling to manage 400,000 tons due to illegal dumping from weak enforcement. Waste-to-energy plants convert 150,000 tons of industrial residues into power yearly in Europe, though setup costs reach US$15 million per facility. Scaling such solutions in the waste management market requires tailored incentives and stricter oversight. As industries face decarbonization pressures, sustainable waste practices will be vital to align with environmental goals and ensure operational resilience across sectors. Need Custom Data? Let Us Know: Community Behavioral Impact on Market to Stay Profound In the waste management market, community engagement is crucial for sustainable outcomes in 2024. South Africa's 'Waste Wise' program, active since 2023, educates over 2 million citizens yearly on segregation, recovering 100,000 tons of recyclables, per national data. In the Philippines, local barangays organize clean-ups, managing 50,000 tons monthly through grassroots efforts. These initiatives demonstrate how collective action reduces the 2 billion tons of global municipal waste burden, as reported by the World Bank in 2024, fostering a culture of accountability at the community level. However, behavioral change faces obstacles. A 2024 Ellen MacArthur Foundation study notes that misinformation affects 1.5 million tons of recyclable waste yearly due to contamination. Canada's city-specific apps guide 3 million residents on disposal, recovering 200,000 tons annually, yet rural areas lack access, managing only 50,000 tons. Leveraging social media and local leaders can bridge this gap in the waste management market, with campaigns reaching over 10 million users globally in 2024. As communities become active stakeholders, their role in reducing waste generation and supporting systemic solutions will be indispensable for a sustainable, inclusive future in waste management worldwide. Waste Management Market Major Players: Casella Waste Systems, Inc. China Everbright International Limited Clean Harbors, Inc. Covanta Holding Corporation DAISEKI CO., LTD Hitachi Zosen Corporation Newater Technology, Inc. Remondis AG & Co. Kg Renewi plc Republic Services, Inc. Veolia Environnement S.A. Waste Connections, Inc. Waste Management Inc. Other Prominent Players Key Market Segmentation: By Waste Type Hazardous Waste E-waste Municipal Waste Plastic Waste Industrial Waste Others By Service Type Collection Open Dumping Incineration/Combustion Landfill Recycling By End User Residential Commercial Industrial By Region North America Europe Asia Pacific Middle East & Africa (MEA) South America Need More Info? Ask Before You Buy: About Astute Analytica Astute Analytica is a global market research and advisory firm providing data-driven insights across industries such as technology, healthcare, chemicals, semiconductors, FMCG, and more. We publish multiple reports daily, equipping businesses with the intelligence they need to navigate market trends, emerging opportunities, competitive landscapes, and technological advancements. With a team of experienced business analysts, economists, and industry experts, we deliver accurate, in-depth, and actionable research tailored to meet the strategic needs of our clients. At Astute Analytica, our clients come first, and we are committed to delivering cost-effective, high-value research solutions that drive success in an evolving marketplace. Contact Us:Astute AnalyticaPhone: +1-888 429 6757 (US Toll Free); +91-0120- 4483891 (Rest of the World)For Sales Enquiries: sales@ Follow us on: LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube CONTACT: Contact Us: Astute Analytica Phone: +1-888 429 6757 (US Toll Free); +91-0120- 4483891 (Rest of the World) For Sales Enquiries: sales@ Website:
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Exiled Russian scholar on why Dugin is no philosopher, and Russia no defender of ‘traditional values'
In recent years, the Kremlin has sought to cast Russia as a bastion of so-called traditional values, positioning itself in stark contrast to what it describes as the morally decaying West. Yet beneath this veneer, a more complex reality persists. As exiled Russian philosopher Alexey Zhavoronkov told the Kyiv Independent, 'conservative rhetoric and concepts are employed to mask a different reality.' Within the framework of traditional conservative thought, personal liberty is regarded as a foundational principle. But in today's Russia, such freedom is markedly absent. As Zhavoronkov observes, those advancing the narrative of a 'conservative' Russia frequently do so less out of ideological conviction than opportunism — aligning themselves with the Kremlin to serve as de facto spokespeople for President Vladimir Putin's regime while also enriching themselves. Among those frequently cited as intellectual architects of the Kremlin's 'traditional values' worldview is Alexander Dugin, referred to in Western media as 'Putin's brain' — a title that belies the ambiguous and likely overstated nature of his actual influence. Dugin, who has openly called for the genocide of Ukrainians and maintains a network aimed at exporting his ideology far and wide abroad, presents himself as a philosopher. But as exiled Zhavoronkov explained to the Kyiv Independent, Dugin's work is marred by intellectual incoherence and lacks the philosophical depth required for serious consideration. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. The Kyiv Independent: Some right-wing contingents in the West claim that Russia is a last holdout for 'traditional values.' Could you go into more detail about the image that Russia is trying to project versus what is really happening there? Alexey Zhavoronkov: This concept of 'traditional values' — and by that I mean the political use of the concept of traditional values — is very illustrative because there are hundreds of its interpretations in different documents and publications. If we look at official documents like Russian national development strategies, which offer lists of specific 'traditional values,' most of these values are not strictly conservative. We see notions like individual freedom, or we see something more associated with the philosophy of enlightenment (like the idea of human dignity) — meaning that traditional values are more along the lines of liberal thought. There are also certain concepts, such as collectivism, that were carried over from the Soviet period. Conservative values mentioned in Russian official documents are mostly centered around 'traditional family' — beyond that, there isn't much. This serves as a good example of how conservative rhetoric and concepts — sometimes even borrowed from Western traditions, which are officially condemned in Russia — are employed to mask a different reality. If we look at the conservative tradition in the U.S. and compare it to the Russian tradition, the differences are striking — they're two entirely different worlds. The Kyiv Independent: How so? Alexey Zhavoronkov: The differences exist on many levels, including political practice. But if we start with the theoretical side, the Anglo-American conservative tradition has a long and deep history. It doesn't begin as a reaction to the French Revolution (in the 18th century), but rather can be traced back to 15th- and 16th-century England. There's a lot to examine when analyzing this tradition. There was no major rupture in the American conservative tradition after World War II. In contrast, the Bolshevik Revolution (in 1917) in Russia effectively severed the continuity of the country's conservative tradition. In the U.S., there have certainly been political crises within the conservative movement, but the development of the tradition was never interrupted. Moreover, in the U.S., after World War II, much of the conservative movement was defined by anti-communism. Overall, if we look at major themes and the political policies associated with them, there's very little overlap between the Russian and American traditions. Russia sees itself as having a unique role in the world — it believes it should save the world, but it will save it by means of destruction. The Russian tradition faced multiple issues that differentiated it from the American tradition — which itself had internal problems, such as the split between neoconservatives and paleoconservatives since the 1970s. I'll return to that later, because I think there are some similarities between American and Russian neoconservatives, though only at the level of the international political agenda. As I mentioned, in Russia, we see a major interruption in the conservative tradition. There was certainly a conservative tradition before the revolution, though by the end of the 19th century, it was already in decline. It's also quite telling that as soon as the Russian (imperial) government, under Emperor Alexander III, officially adopted conservative rhetoric, conservatism as an intellectual movement practically disappeared. The government wasn't interested in serious programmatic works; it only needed slogans, which were mostly supplied by the official press. There were a plethora of newspapers and some journals that labeled themselves as conservative, but there were virtually no intellectual platforms for Russian conservatives. The golden era of Russian conservatism — associated with the Slavophile movement in the mid-19th century — was already long gone. It wasn't revived later under Emperor Nicholas II, and then came the revolution. After that, there were only limited attempts to revitalize the conservative tradition during the Soviet period, by figures like Alexander Solzhenitsyn, for instance. There were also some more radical conservative, mostly Orthodox, movements during the Soviet period. But aside from a few collections of essays and Solzhenitsyn's publications, there were no major works that could be considered significant intellectual manifestos. So we are left to piece together fragments from various texts — texts that are neither philosophical in nature nor structured as political programs. I think the last truly meaningful intellectual exchange between Russian conservatives and Russian liberals was the debate between Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov in the 1970s and 1980s. Both of them had clearly defined (but incompatible) visions of Russia's future. Many aspects of that debate are either no longer relevant or problematic, such as Solzhenitsyn's idea of the nation. But still, it was a genuine (direct and indirect) debate that highlighted fundamental differences in how each thinker envisioned Russia's path forward over the coming century. The Kyiv Independent: Why do you think the Russian government following the USSR's collapse, chose the path of neoconservatism? Alexey Zhavoronkov: I think if we return to the issue of tradition, it's clear that there has been a break in its continuity. Contrary to what the Russian government suggests, this tradition has not been restored. Instead, the government is attempting something similar to what American anti-traditionalist neoconservatives aimed to do starting in the 1980s — namely, to formulate a global political agenda based primarily on the country's national interests rather than on international agreements and rules. These national interests are used to justify what I would describe as aggressive, even imperialist, policies aimed at establishing or maintaining dominance in various regions of the world. Of course, the economic weight of a country like the U.S. is incomparably greater than that of Russia. Russia represents only a small fraction of the global economy and is now largely isolated from many international markets. Therefore, the Russian government had to come up with a different kind of justification for its imperial ambitions. This justification has taken on a radical Orthodox form. This is where figures like Alexander Dugin come into play, along with many other ideologists who popularized the concept of 'Katechon' — which has become one of the key notions in Russian politics today. The Kyiv Independent: Could you explain what that is? Alexey Zhavoronkov: This concept enforces the idea that Russia is the world's sole and last protector against the Antichrist. Instead of American political and economic exceptionalism, which is manifested in (U.S. President Donald) Trump's policies, Russia has its own form of exceptionalism, but with different pillars supporting the ideology. For the U.S., the pillar is economic dominance, as seen in Trump's obsession with tariffs. For Russia, the pillar is spiritual or radical Orthodoxy, which contains strong elements of messianism. Russia sees itself as having a unique role in the world — it believes it should save the world, but it will save it by means of destruction. And to protect the world, Russia must be in a constant state of war with those who worship the Antichrist, namely with the 'Collective West.' The so-called 'Collective West' is another political concept actively used in Russian politics. The permanent state of war also means a permanent state of exception within Russia, because war serves as a perfect justification for almost any political action. In such a situation, established rules no longer apply. The government can always claim that it's an exceptional circumstance. The Kyiv Independent: You mentioned Alexander Dugin. Could you just go into who he is and how he came into prominence? In the West, they call him 'Putin's brain.' But his connections to Putin are highly debated. Does he have any real influence in Russia or is it just an outward projection? Alexey Zhavoronkov: Yes, Dugin is a really interesting figure from the perspective of how he's seen from the West. For a long time — even in Western political science — he was widely regarded as Putin's favored ideologist, someone with direct access to him and the ability to advise him on key issues. This was, of course, not the case. And this still isn't the case today, although Dugin has gained significantly more favor in recent years for various reasons, one of which is the murder of his daughter. I think Dugin is perhaps the most eclectic ideologist in Russia as of today. What he writes is mostly eclectic and situational commentary on what the Russian government does. At the heart of his 'philosophy' is the so-called Fourth Political Theory, a framework intended to create a new political ideology to replace existing ones such as Liberalism and Marxism. This idea is understandable on an elementary level, but there is no intellectual content in this theory. It consists only of slogans about the need to establish such a theory, without offering any clear explanation of what that theory should actually be. It's also evident that Dugin has no intention of developing it further, and neither do other ideological figures in Russia, largely due to the nature of Russian politics. Contemporary Russian politics — much like during the reign of Emperor Alexander III — has no need for intellectual manifestos. The role of ideologists is largely to retroactively justify actions already taken. Their task is to claim, for example, that they have long supported a particular policy or alliance, referencing something they wrote in a book a decade ago. The Russian government uses the strategy of fusionism. It has encompassed pretty much all movements that existed around it. Nowadays, we have Marxists and Stalinists who support Putin, but also traditionalists like Dugin, fascists, etc. This is a wild mix of people from diverse backgrounds who, in theory, should hold differing opinions — but in practice, they do not, at least not publicly. Many of them even collaborate within government-affiliated organizations, such as the Izborsky Club (a Russian think tank which Dugin is a member of, among others). What we see in Russia is an eclectic blend of very different ideologies, all loosely labeled as conservatism. To better disguise this inconsistency, Putin — or more accurately, his speechwriters — occasionally reference conservative literature, sometimes even theories by Western authors. Take, for example, Putin's speech from October 2021 — just a few months before the war began. In it, there's a noteworthy section where he offers a clear definition of conservatism. Interestingly, this definition closely aligns with liberal conservatism as understood by scholars like Michael Freeden and others. Conservatism, in this context, is portrayed as cautious progress based on principles of healthy realism and anti-isolationism, a framework of cultural relations that emphasizes respect for different traditions and viewpoints, aversion to extremism, etc. All the rhetoric about cautious decision-making, anti-isolationism, and respect for others stood in stark contrast to what unfolded just a few months later. It's clear that Putin aims to appeal to the more conservative segments of the Russian population — and indeed, many Russians hold culturally conservative views in their everyday lives. But ultimately, this conservative messaging serves to mask policies that are, in many respects, deeply anti-conservative. This is why I would label it as pseudo-conservatism — it mimics conservatism with the clear goal of making people feel more secure in turbulent times and fostering pride in their nation and government. However, in practice, what's actually happening has little to do with traditional conservatism. The Kyiv Independent: We see from here in Ukraine why people like Dugin are so dangerous. He has actively called for the genocide of Ukrainian people for years — that's what got him kicked out of one university back in 2014 or 2015, if I'm not mistaken. But what damage has he and others like him inflicted upon Russian academia over the past decade of war? What damage can they inflict abroad? Alexey Zhavoronkov: It's a really good question. I think Dugin's academic trajectory shows us that nowadays, the Russian government is seriously concerned with the issue of Russian academics not being too cooperative, for the most part. There's a set of statistics from 2022 that breaks down how different social groups relate to the war, whether they support it actively, passively, or oppose it altogether. The group with the least support for the war was Russian academics, which signals to the government that this is a significant issue. The government uses various means to control the excessively 'cosmopolitan' Russian academia. We see now that pro-government ideologists have been gifted their own institutes. Dugin now directs the Ivan Ilyin Higher Political School, an institute within the Russian State University for Humanities. This, along with other recent policies in education, is a signal to Dugin's colleagues from the same university and other institutions that they are now being closely watched. Naturally, this contributes to an atmosphere of paranoia and self-censorship. This self-censorship did not start in 2022. We do not have hard statistical data, but we still have some facts from recent history, like the dissolution of the Department for Constitutional Law at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow directly after the public debate concerning the necessity of the 2020 amendments to the Russian constitution. This action was not the government's initiative. The university itself decided to lay off leading scholars in constitutional law, de facto, because there was no living constitution anymore. The constitution was amended in a way that several parts of it were practically destroyed. People like Dugin contribute to the deterioration of the overall intellectual climate and the rise of self-censorship, which, I believe, is even worse than state censorship. In today's Russia, state censorship is more about punishing a few individuals, while the universities punish the other 200 people themselves out of fear. It's different from the Soviet Union, where state control was stricter and all-encompassing. Externally, Dugin makes an impression, partly because he has an army of writers, translators, and many supporters promoting his books in Europe and the U.S. I know several colleagues here in Germany, for instance, who were excited that there was supposed to be a workshop on Dugin's philosophy at the Danube Institute in Hungary and wanted to attend. However, after watching some of his videos, they started questioning what he was actually saying. They realized it wasn't philosophy but more like justificatory commentary on the Russian political agenda, filled with big slogans trying to align him with current policies. For instance, in his talk with John Mearsheimer, Dugin explicitly states that Ukraine should have been either neutral or part of Russia, and now Eastern Europe should be either neutral or "ours." Dugin gives the impression, externally, that he represents Russian philosophy today and embodies the intellectual majority among his colleagues, which is not the case. However, he is the loudest, with all the necessary resources and instruments at his disposal. While he presents himself as a traditionalist, he also uses capitalist tools to commercialize his ideas in the West, adapting his views depending on where he is. In this way, he reminds me of Trump a bit. If we look at some of the translations of Dugin's books, like the German or English versions, it's striking how much he tailors his message to please his European audience. In Russia, he often speaks of the 'collective West' or Europe as a declining culture, a culture that promotes degeneration. But for his German audience, he or his ghostwriters prepared an introduction to one of his major works that says something like this: 'Germany has historically been oppressed by the U.S., but I, Dugin, am fond of German culture and thinkers.' Indeed, his Russian publications frequently reference Hegel and Heidegger, although he never understands their ideas. However, for his Russian audience, he also emphasizes the need for authoritarianism or even totalitarianism. When appealing to a German audience, he avoids such statements, knowing they wouldn't resonate with his readers there. Instead, he tries to appeal to a broader public, not just the most radical circles, by presenting himself as a German sympathizer. Hi, this is Kate Tsurkan, thank you for reading this article. You might have noticed that none of our reporting is behind a paywall — that's because we believe that now, more than ever, the world needs access to reliable reporting from the ground here in Ukraine. To keep our journalism going, we rely on our community of over 20,000 members, most of whom give just $5 a month. Help us today. Read also: Aestheticized aggression — why Gosha Rubchinskiy's 'Victory Day' photo book is Russian propaganda We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Bloomberg
2 hours ago
- Bloomberg
South Africa Wins $1.5 Billion World Bank Infrastructure Loan
The World Bank has approved a $1.5 billion loan to support structural reforms aimed at boosting South Africa's infrastructure. The Washington-based lender said in a statement the operation will address the nation's challenges of low growth and high unemployment by easing constraints in its energy and freight transport sectors.
