311275

Period 4

Putin the Cartographer
by Gary Varvel
The I ndianapolis Star
March 24, 2014
In Putin the Cartographer Gary Varvel attempts to show the Russian Presidents 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 Putins 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 Putins greed through the expression on Putins
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.
Varvels 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 Varvels 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. Varvels 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 Russias annexation of
Crimea.
311275
Period 4

Annexing Crimea
By Martin Kozlowski
Cagle.com
March 25, 2014
Annexing Crimea by Martin Kozlowski is a response to the annexation of Crimea by
Russia on March 19, 2014. Kozlowskis 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 20
th
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 Putins own interests.
Through this elaborate cartoon, Kozlowski also shows his own opinion of disapproval of
Russias actions. The symbols and actions reflect Kozlowskis 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 Kozlowskis point, only I hold a somewhat less extreme opinion. The
311275
Period 4

annexation of Crimea is not good for Ukraine, Crimea, or Russia. Kozlowskis 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 Putins actions in the
annexation of Crimea.


311275
Period 4

Sanctions against Russia
By Patrick Chappatte
March 21, 2014
The 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. Chappattes 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.
Putins 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. Chappattes message is that the US
and the EU needed to take harsher actions against Russia to influence Putins 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 Russias annexation of Crimea. Chappettes
political bias towards the US and against Russia is exposed through the look of upmost hatred on
311275
Period 4

Putins 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.

311275
Period 4




Ali Khali
March 21, 2014
Crimea Crisis
A judgemental Barack Obama overlooks Vladimir Putin sewing together Crimea and
Russia in Ali Khalis 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 Putins 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 Obamas 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 Putins actions and of the situation as a whole. Obama is overlooking Putin in this
drawing, showing that the US must closely monitor Russias actions to make sure that Putin
doesnt step out of line.
I agree with Khalis opinion that the US must act as an overseer and moderator of
Russias 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 Americas role as a superpower in overlooking Russias 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
Obamas figure to present the grim mood of the US towards Russias annexation of Crimea.
Khali evokes a downtrodden emotion in his portrayal of the American attitude towards the
Crimean crisis.

311275
Period 4
























Theyre Only Toes
By Tom Toles
May 9, 2014
The Boston Globe
Tom Toles makes a negative statement about Russias 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 Russias actions. Toless 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 Europes
toes which represent Crimea. Toless opinion in this cartoon is further demonstrated through the
dialogue that Europe says to the figure representing America, Theyre 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 countrys 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 Europes laid back attitude towards Russias 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 figures entire foot. Also, Uncle Sam stands near Europes figure, seemingly questioning
Europe as to why there havent been harsher actions taken to prevent the annexation. Through
311275
Period 4

the expression on Uncle Sams face, it is visible that Toles is questioning Europes 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
foreign affairs is visible through Toless 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
Toless 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 Europes inability to act and they are nervous about what Russia will
want next.






























311275
Period 4

Tough Sanctions against Russia
By Daryl Cagle
Cagle.com
March 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 Russias 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 Cagles 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 Russias 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 Cagles 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 Russias actions, possibly even
persuading Russia to remove troops from Crimea. Cagles political leanings are exposed through
311275
Period 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 wouldve been a better chance that Russia would have changed its
plans to annex Crimea.








































311275
Period 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 governments 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
Ive 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 cant
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 Ive
come to realize that I cant help but feel defensive for the country that I have so many roots in
311275
Period 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.