311275Period 4

Putin the Cartographerby Gary Varvel

The Indianapolis StarMarch 24, 2014

In Putin the Cartographer Gary Varvel attempts to show the Russian President’s greed and ambition to expand Russia as much as possible. Vladimir Putin is portrayed as a ‘cartographer’ who is redrawing the map of the Eastern Hemisphere, labeling the entire area as Russia. This demonstrates Putin’s desire to gain land for Russia as well as his immense disregard for the countries that surround Russia; Putin does not see those countries as anything but more land for Russia to expand on. Varvel also shows Putin’s greed through the expression on Putin’s face; Putin is smiling greedily and proudly, showing off the map that he desires – the more land for Russia the better. This cartoon is a response to the annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation through the Treaty on the Adoption of the Republic of Crimea to Russia on March 19, 2014.

Varvel’s opinion in this cartoon is clear; he does not support the annexation of Crimea to Russia because it will lead to Putin wanting more and more land and becoming even greedier. According to the cartoon, Putin is in the wrong and the annexation of Crimea will lead to further expansion of Russia. In some sense, I agree with Varvel’s opinion because Putin has demonstrated greed, a desire for Russian expansion, and a disregard for other European nations in his time as President. This cartoon is intended to evoke feelings of distrust towards Putin and Russia. Varvel’s American and conservative viewpoints – he is known to hold mostly conservative opinions, according to the Indianapolis Star – are exposed through Putin the Cartographer because of the distrust and disgust the cartoon casts on Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

311275Period 4

Annexing Crimea By Martin Kozlowski

Cagle.comMarch 25, 2014

Annexing Crimea by Martin Kozlowski is a response to the annexation of Crimea by Russia on March 19, 2014. Kozlowski’s cartoon has multiple meanings through the symbols and figures represented in his work. In Annexing Crimea, a distressed Vladimir Putin is pulling Crimea attached to an anchor away from Ukraine and towards Russia. This represents the simplest meaning of the cartoon; Russia struggling to obtain Crimea for its own so as to expand onto new land. However, Russia seems to be succeeding as Crimea has practically broken off of Ukraine in the drawing. Instead of an anchor Kozlowski drew a hammer and sickle, or the communist symbol. Putin is using this communist symbol to pull Crimea, and where the symbol has impaled Crimea Kozlowski drew droplets of blood coming out of the land. This replacement of an anchor with the communist symbol seems to make a statement that Russia is reverting back to its old ways of communism or that Russia has never changed at all from it expansionist politics of the 20th Century. The droplets of blood spurting out of Crimea show how Russia is damaging Crimea and Ukraine – Kozlowski is showing that Russia is not annexing Crimea for the good of Ukraine but rather for Putin’s own interests.

Through this elaborate cartoon, Kozlowski also shows his own opinion of disapproval of Russia’s actions. The symbols and actions reflect Kozlowski’s opinion that the annexation of Crimea is not good for Ukraine and that Putin wants to promote the old ideas of the communist regime. I agree with Kozlowski’s point, only I hold a somewhat less extreme opinion. The

311275Period 4

annexation of Crimea is not good for Ukraine, Crimea, or Russia. Kozlowski’s bias and political leanings are exposed through this cartoon. As a liberal American living in New York, Kozlowski shows his hatred of communism through the idea that Russia is reverting back to the methods of the Soviet Union that Americans so despised in the 1940s and 50s. In Annexing Crimea, Kozlowski succeeds in evoking the emotional reaction of disgust towards Putin’s actions in the annexation of Crimea.

311275Period 4

Sanctions against RussiaBy Patrick Chappatte

March 21, 2014The New York Times

In the political cartoon Sanctions against Russia, Patrick Chappatte of the New York Times makes a statement about the sanctions that the United States and the European Union implemented in March on Russia after Putin failed to withdraw Russian troops from Crimea. Chappatte is showing his opinion that the sanctions were not enough to stop Russia from invading Crimea. In the corner of the drawing, Obama and a figure representing the European Union (EU) stand with a small weapon labeled ‘sanctions,’ while in the foreground of the drawing, stands a large Russian tank with Putin at the wheel. The tank represents the invasion of Crimea while the two figures in the corner represent the US and the EU. Chappatte’s opinion about the inadequacy of the sanctions on stopping the Russian invasion is visible in the cartoon through two factors; the size of the two groups and the weapons of the two opposing groups. Putin’s tank is the largest element in the cartoon, while Obama and the EU figure are small and stand in the corner, no match for the Russian tank. Also, while Obama holds a small weapon which represents the sanctions, Putin operates a large, heavy tank. The sanctions weapon is inferior to the Russian weapon; it will not make a dent in the tank. While the EU figure is telling Obama to “aim at the wallet,” Chappatte is portraying the idea that the sanctions will do nothing to stop Russia from proceeding in the invasion of Crimea. Chappatte’s message is that the US and the EU needed to take harsher actions against Russia to influence Putin’s decision to invade Crimea.

I agree with this opinion, especially looking back now a few months after the publication of the cartoon – the sanctions did nothing to stop Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Chappette’s political bias towards the US and against Russia is exposed through the look of upmost hatred on

311275Period 4

Putin’s face and the bold choice of weapon to represent the Russian troops. Patrick Chappette evokes an emotional reaction of a desire to act in his cartoon Sanctions Against Russia.

311275Period 4

Ali KhaliMarch 21, 2014Crimea Crisis

A judgemental Barack Obama overlooks Vladimir Putin sewing together Crimea and Russia in Ali Khali’s political cartoon, Crimea Crisis. The physical act of sewing the borders of the two countries together is a metaphor for the Russian annexation of Crimea on March 19, 2014. This action represents Putin’s desire to connect Russia and Crimea and to expand Russia. Khali has drawn Putin with a satisfied expression and a slight smile; a symbol of his happiness about the annexation of Crimea. In the corner, Obama has a different expression on his face, one of concern, judgment, and disapproval. Through Obama’s expression in this cartoon, Khali represents his opinion that the United States is a part of the Crimean crisis and that the US does not approve of Putin’s actions and of the situation as a whole. Obama is overlooking Putin in this drawing, showing that the US must closely monitor Russia’s actions to make sure that Putin doesn’t step out of line.

I agree with Khali’s opinion that the US must act as an overseer and moderator of Russia’s actions in regard to Crimea and that the US must disapprove of the annexation. Khali shows her American patriotism and disapproval of Russia through this cartoon; Obama is fulfilling America’s role as a superpower in overlooking Russia’s potentially inciting actions. Although the US has not succeeded at preventing the Russian invasion of Crimea, it must still hold a role in the Crimean crisis. Khali also uses the stylistic technique of dark shading behind Obama’s figure to present the grim mood of the US towards Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Khali evokes a downtrodden emotion in his portrayal of the American attitude towards the Crimean crisis.

311275Period 4

They’re Only Toes…By Tom TolesMay 9, 2014

The Boston GlobeTom Toles makes a negative statement about Russia’s annexation of Crimea in March

through this political cartoon. In the drawing, Russia is represented as a wild bear that has bitten off the toes of the figure portraying Europe. This is a metaphor for the Russian annexation of Crimea in March, while Europe did almost nothing to stop Russia’s actions. Toles’s opinion is that Europe has been too laid back and nonchalant about the Russian-Crimean crisis; the figure representing Europe is relaxing and seemingly not caring about the bear haven bitten of Europe’s toes which represent Crimea. Toles’s opinion in this cartoon is further demonstrated through the dialogue that Europe says to the figure representing America, “They’re only toes…” In the cartoon Europe does not care at all about the annexation and Toles believes that Europe has done nothing to stop Russia, as the weak and minimal sanctions imposed on Russia by the European Union did not have an effect on the country’s actions.

In the bottom right corner Toles has included a saying, “Give an inch and ye may take a foot.” This expression originally means if you give someone a little bit of something then they will end up taking more. In the context of this cartoon this expression stands by the original meaning, implying that Europe’s laid back attitude towards Russia’s annexation of Crimea will lead to bolder actions on the part of Russia. However, the saying also works as a pun, because the bear has bitten off an inch of toes off of the Europe figure so far and will end up taking off the figure’s entire foot. Also, Uncle Sam stands near Europe’s figure, seemingly questioning Europe as to why there haven’t been harsher actions taken to prevent the annexation. Through the expression on Uncle Sam’s face, it is visible that Toles is questioning Europe’s minimal actions to put a stop to the Russian invasion of Crimea. In this cartoon, Toles also demonstrates the opinion that once Europe has given Russia a little bit of what they want in hopes to appease the country, Russia will still end up wanting more. The American bias towards involvement in

311275Period 4

foreign affairs is visible through Toles’s message; the US has a history of involving itself in all kinds of foreign issues and is appalled that Europe will not do the same with Russia. I agree with Toles’s viewpoint, however, because the Russian government has often acted power hungry and unreasonable. Tom Toles evokes a disappointed and nervous emotion through his cartoon; readers are disappointed in Europe’s inability to act and they are nervous about what Russia will want next.

311275Period 4

Tough Sanctions against RussiaBy Daryl Cagle

Cagle.comMarch 24, 2014

In Tough Sanctions against Russia the cartoonist Daryl Cagle makes a point about how little the sanctions that the US and EU have been implementing against Russia have had an effect on Russia’s actions. In the cartoon Cagle makes a joke of a Russian official not being able to buy dinner with his credit card because of the sanctions on Russia. The sarcasm is prevalent in the caption which references tough sanctions against Russian officials while the cartoon is a joke about the Russian official not being able to pay for dinner. The fact that the Russian couple is sitting at a restaurant sipping wine reinforces Cagle’s joke about the ‘tough sanctions.’ Also, the facial expressions emphasize the joke even more; the bored expressions create yet another contradiction to the caption about ‘tough new sanctions,’ making the sarcasm and joke clear to readers. The characters are not amused by this development yet they are also unalarmed, as the sanctions have absolutely no effect on them. This is exactly the opinion that Cagle attempts to show through this cartoon; that the sanctions have little to no influence on Russia and its involvement in Crimea.

Cagle published this cartoon shortly after the annexation of Crimea by Russia in March, when it became very clear to America and to the European Union that the sanctions did not influence Russia’s desire to expand to Crimea. The sanctions were so insignificant to Russia and to Putin that they did not deviate whatsoever from their original plan to take over Crimea, which is the point that Cagle makes. I agree with Cagle’s opinion because despite the threat and implementation of sanctions from the US and the EU, Russia did not remove its troops from Crimea or stall its plan to annex Crimea. The sanctions imposed on Russia should have been much harsher and stricter so as to actually have an effect on Russia’s actions, possibly even persuading Russia to remove troops from Crimea. Cagle’s political leanings are exposed through

311275Period 4

this cartoon because Cagle wanted the US to take more action in the Crimean crisis; Cagle is probably a supporter of active American involvement in foreign issues. Through Tough Sanctions against Russia, Cagle evokes a feeling of remorse about the minimal amount of action that the US took to prevent the annexation of Crimea. If the US had imposed and threatened much tougher sanctions, there would’ve been a better chance that Russia would have changed its plans to annex Crimea.

311275Period 4

As a Russian-American, I feel as if I have a better understand of the functionality of the

Russian government and the attitude of the Russian people than the average American. However,

I also do not support most of Russia government’s actions because I am able to see the country

through a different lens than denizens of Russia who watch and read government-owned news

which is filled with propaganda. Through this assignment, I was able to reaffirm my anti-Russian

government viewpoints and understand that most of my opinions align with American opinions

about the situation in Crimea. I understand and agree with the idea that the US sanctions on

Russia were not strict enough and the idea that Russia has never completely moved on from its

communist roots. These cartoons aligned with my opinion that Russia has never really been a

democracy.

Despite this, I did have a few counter-opinions to those of American cartoonists. A

feeling that one gets from looking through American political cartoons about the Crimean crisis

is that Russia is this awful, evil place that is power hungry and completely anti-democratic. What

I’ve understood from my frequent travels to Russia and my communications with Russians and

Russian-Americans is that the majority of Russia does not support many actions of the Russian

government. In fact, almost all of the Russian community that I am a part of here in Maryland

laughs at Putin and vehemently desires a new government in Russia. As a dual citizen, I can’t

help but feel slightly offended by the portrayal of Russians in these political cartoons – the

culture in Russia is something absolutely different from the average American viewpoint, and the

many Russians who do agree with the Russian government have usually been fed propaganda

from the government-owned newspapers and television channels. Through this assignment I’ve

come to realize that I can’t help but feel defensive for the country that I have so many roots in

311275Period 4

when that same country is being analyzed by cartoonists who might not fully understand the

Russian culture and situation. As a whole, however, I support the US actions and I have

discovered that I hold views that are patriotic of America, such as increased US involvement in

the situation. My opinions on the issue generally stayed the same, although I did have a few

moments of reevaluation behind the reasoning of my opinions and the connections that I made

between my opinions and my Russian heritage.

This collection of political cartoons is not the most balanced selection, as I only included

cartoons from Americans because I wanted to study the American viewpoint on the Crimean

crisis. Mostly these cartoons represent one anti-Russian pro-American view, although I carefully

selected cartoons from different types of sources including various newspapers such as The New

York Times, the Boston Globe, and the Huffington Post. The general message of these cartoons is

one of support for stricter sanctions on Russia and more American involvement. Another

message of these cartoons is that the annexation of Crimea to Russia is unnecessary and Putin

simply desires more power and more land for Russia. As I selected these six cartoons, I looked at

many other American cartoons which presented many of these similar opinions and messages,

which leads me to believe that this collection represents the majority opinion of American

political cartoonists.

It was interesting for me to examine this issue keeping in mind the combination of the

two cultures in my life and the various insights I might have that other Americans do not. This

assignment gave me a chance to further examine an issue that as a Russian I should have full

awareness of. Through carefully reviewing six political cartoons on the Crimean crisis, I have

developed a better understanding of the opinions that Americans hold towards Russia in general

as well as specifically to the current situation.