Ukraine

[ardcarp]

Given the slaughter, bloodshed and general distress we and many Russians are about to witness, isn't it conceivable that some individual close to Putin might consider it a service to humanity to put him out of his misery? I'm afraid that's a somewhat naive and possibly dangerous idea to put forward, but that's how I'm feeling at the moment, seeing streams of refugee adults and their children on news channels.

[Petrushka]

Given the slaughter, bloodshed and general distress we and many Russians are about to witness, isn't it conceivable that some individual close to Putin might consider it a service to humanity to put him out of his misery? I'm afraid that's a somewhat naive and possibly dangerous idea to put forward, but that's how I'm feeling at the moment, seeing streams of refugee adults and their children on news channels.

Sorry to invoke Godwin's Law, but I'm reminded of what Field Marshall Walter von Brauschitsch replied when asked to join in an attempt to assassinate Hitler: 'I won't do it myself but I don't mind if someone else does'.

There might be a conversation like this circulating round the Kremlin.

[Serial_Apologist]

Sorry to invoke Godwin's Law, but I'm reminded of what Field Marshall Walter von Brauschitsch replied when asked to join in an attempt to assassinate Hitler: 'I won't do it myself but I don't mind if someone else does'.

There might be a conversation like this circulating round the Kremlin.

It might be recalled - both there and here -that a vital trigger for the Russian Revolution of October 1917 was the sending of unwitting and increasingly unwilling troops to the Eastern front.

[Bryn]

Sorry to invoke Godwin's Law, but I'm reminded of what Field Marshall Walter von Brauschitsch replied when asked to join in an attempt to assassinate Hitler: 'I won't do it myself but I don't mind if someone else does'.

There might be a conversation like this circulating round the Kremlin.

There are times when Godwin's Law simply has no jurisdiction.

[kea]

I am not sure either how rational Putin is being. It’s extremely difficult to read his objectives.

He wants to negotiate a new Minsk Agreement that's more favourable to him, from a position of strength. That seems fairly clear.

I think he has bitten off more than he can chew

He's watched Western countries and their agents continually violate international law for the last thirty years (or more) with no consequences: immensely destructive wars in Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and DRC, endless military occupations in Western Sahara and Palestine, and military coups and dirty wars in Honduras, Nicaragua, Haiti, Venezuela, Colombia, Bolivia, Myanmar, Ukraine (yes), et cetera. He's experimented with doing the same on a smaller scale in Georgia, Azerbaijan, Crimea, etc, as well as throwing his own military forces into Syria, and found that there are similarly no consequences for him. Why wouldn't he conclude that international law is simply a pretext by which the strong impose their will upon the weak? Sanctions against Russia, in his view, will simply weaken the American financial order, because Russia is (if only due to its position in the global energy industry) "too big to fail" and therefore can't be effectively sanctioned without severely harming the world economy—another lesson he picked up from the West. And even if he can't win a decisive military victory, the fact that Russian troops successfully entered Ukraine and got as far as the capital (as of today) will show other countries that simply allying with the USA will not act as a deterrent.

Is he correct? I have no idea. But the logic is fairly obvious, I think.

[RichardB]

the logic is fairly obvious, I think.

That is highly plausible. On the other hand there is the example of the USSR's ultimately disastrous occupation of Afghanistan, so Putin's calculation here isn't without risk. One of its outcomes is very likely to involve further moves, by European countries especially, towards renewable energy.

[Bryn]

That is highly plausible. On the other hand there is the example of the USSR's ultimately disastrous occupation of Afghanistan, so Putin's calculation here isn't without risk. One of its outcomes is very likely to involve further moves, by European countries especially, towards renewable energy.

It seems highly likely to me that one of Putin's aims is control over Ukraine's wheatfields.

[Beresford]

It seems highly likely to me that one of Putin's aims is control over Ukraine's wheatfields.

And the rest.....

For those who ask: “Why does Ukraine matter?”
1st in Europe in proven recoverable reserves of uranium ores;
2nd place in Europe and 10th place in the world in terms of titanium ore reserves;
2nd place in the world in terms of explored reserves of manganese ores (2.3 billion tons, or 12% of the world's reserves);
2nd largest iron ore reserves in the world (30 billion tons);
2nd place in Europe in terms of mercury ore reserves;
3rd place in Europe (13th place in the world) in shale gas reserves (22 trillion cubic meters)
4th in the world by the total value of natural resources;
7th place in the world in coal reserves (33.9 billion tons)

Ukraine is an agricultural country:
1st in Europe in terms of arable land area;
3rd place in the world by the area of black soil (25% of world's volume);
1st place in the world in exports of sunflower and sunflower oil;
2nd place in the world in barley production and 4th place in barley exports;
3rd largest producer and 4th largest exporter of corn in the world;
4th largest producer of potatoes in the world;
5th largest rye producer in the world;
5th place in the world in bee production (75,000 tons);
8th place in the world in wheat exports;
9th place in the world in the production of chicken eggs;
16th place in the world in cheese exports.
Ukraine can meet the food needs of 600 million people.

Ukraine is an industrialized country:
1st in Europe in ammonia production;
3rd largest in Europe and 8th largest in the world in terms of installed capacity of nuclear power plants;
3rd place in Europe and 11th in the world in terms of rail network length (21,700 km);
3rd largest iron exporter in the world
4th largest exporter of turbines for nuclear power plants in the world;
4th world's largest manufacturer of rocket launchers;
4th place in the world in clay exports
4th place in the world in titanium exports
8th place in the world in exports of ores and concentrates;
9th place in the world in exports of defence industry products;
10th largest steel producer in the world (32.4 million tons).
Source: Andriy Futey
Ukrainian Congress Committee of America Ukrainian World Congress

And "More Ukranians than Russians died in the 2nd world war" (heard on R4)

[french frank]

the fact that Russian troops successfully entered Ukraine and got as far as the capital (as of today) will show other countries that simply allying with the USA will not act as a deterrent.

Isn't that the reason he opposed Ukraine joining NATO? If it had been a member, Putin would certainly be facing NATO's troops instead of just Ukraine's.

NATO was formed with the objectives of: deterring Soviet expansionism, forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration.

At least one of those objectives would include opposing efforts to pursue a Greater Serbia.

[Ein Heldenleben]

That is highly plausible. On the other hand there is the example of the USSR's ultimately disastrous occupation of Afghanistan, so Putin's calculation here isn't without risk. One of its outcomes is very likely to involve further moves, by European countries especially, towards renewable energy.

Exactly - the gain isn’t worth the pain. That’s just not logical. He doesn’t have the total support of the Russian people.The most likely explanation is that historic one - that Putin believes Ukraine is part of Russia .Thing like that go beyond logic.

[richardfinegold]

I accept the point of view that after 20 years of being the Tsar, and isolating himself in a bubble of sycophants and not being accountable to either voters or a challenging Media, he wants to be remembered as a Great Russian Leader such as Ivan III, Peter The Great, Catherine The Great, Lenin and Stalin. In his view, Ukraine has been an integral part of Russia for over a millennium, and it was the weakness of a generation of leaders that preceded him that allowed it to slip away. He wants his legacy to be the Great Leader who restored the Russian Empire, and for him, as for the historical Russian figures cited above, the human cost of realizing such ambitions isn’t relevant. He probably views himself as the Russian Abraham Lincoln and not a Hitler like figure

[Serial_Apologist]

NATO was formed with the objectives of: deterring Soviet expansionism, forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration.

At least one of those objectives would include opposing efforts to pursue a Greater Serbia.

The inevitability of some kind of nationalist reaction to the breakup of the Yugoslav confederation following Tito's death was certain once the Balkan region was re-subsumed into the West, as there was no longer an overriding common regional interest as provided by the liberal form of socialism represented by Titoism. Much of the problem of which the present situation is an outcome can be traced back to the west's eagerness to get its mitts on the E bloc countries, viz ideologically exhausted populaces themselves eager for change and the end to monochrome-imposed lifestyles by comparison represented by free choice capitalism, and its failure to do so beyond the states taken under the wings of NATO. And, as can be seen, nationalism can become a mixed metaphor plaything for populism once capitalism in its late, globalised form, is demonstrated to fail.

[Bryn]

The inevitability of some kind of nationalist reaction to the breakup of the Yugoslav confederation following Tito's death was certain once the Balkan region was re-subsumed into the West, as there was no longer an overriding common regional interest as provided by the liberal form of socialism represented by Titoism. Much of the problem of which the present situation is an outcome can be traced back to the west's eagerness to get its mitts on the E bloc countries, viz ideologically exhausted populaces themselves eager for change and the end to monochrome-imposed lifestyles by comparison represented by free choice capitalism, and its failure to do so beyond the states taken under the wings of NATO. And, as can be seen, nationalism can become a mixed metaphor plaything for populism once capitalism in its late, globalised form, is demonstrated to fail.

There are those on the 'left' who are claiming that Putin's war is justified by the actions of Victoria Nuland back in 2014. She gets credited by them with single-handedly launching the 'coup' and appointing Ukraine's replacement leadership. The democratic election of the current Ukrainian government is ignored. There is, of course, a history of and current existence of neo-nazis in Ukraine. However, they failed to gain even a single seat in Ukraine's elections. If one wants to find neo-nazis in government, look in the Kremlin.

[kea]

Isn't that the reason he opposed Ukraine joining NATO? If it had been a member, Putin would certainly be facing NATO's troops instead of just Ukraine's.

Yes. Ukraine was in the process of applying for NATO membership, as of June 2021, and Russia cites this as a casus belli. Presumably the larger justification is to act as a deterrent to other aspirant members (currently including Georgia and Bosnia and Herzegovina; possibly in the future including Finland, Sweden, Moldova, Kosovo etc), since the accession process takes a good deal of time, whereas Russia has shown that it can initiate political, economic and military warfare relatively quickly and without much warning. This could easily backfire, of course, in that NATO could decide to start admitting new members on an emergency basis.

One of its outcomes is very likely to involve further moves, by European countries especially, towards renewable energy.

Regardless of one's position on NATO (or Russia) that would be a net positive I think.

[french frank]

The most likely explanation is that historic one - that Putin believes Ukraine is part of Russia .Thing like that go beyond logic.

Yes. Ukraine was in the process of applying for NATO membership, as of June 2021, and Russia cites this as a casus belli.

The problem for the West (it seems to me), is that Putin wants a buffer zone between NATO countries and the Russian border, but he doesn't want a neutral buffer zone. He envisages it as a non-NATO zone sympathetic towards Russia, with Ukraine part of Russia's 'sphere of influence' - a term which itself reeks of imperialism. Replace Zelinsky's government with a pro-Russia government and we can all breathe again …

There are also parallels with the current Russian backing for the separatist Donbas regions and Russian backing for separatist Abkhazia and South Ossetia in pro-West Georgia in 2008 which resulted in the Russian military 'peace-keeping' occupation of 2008 (still in place?); and finally recognising them as independent states.

In the case of Ukraine, Putin's 'security concerns' seem to be that a NATO-backed Ukraine might attempt to retake Crimea. But phrases coming out of the Kremlin like 'a resurgent Russia', 'Russia's development' and the West 'hindering Russia' all seem to spell plans for further Russian expansion.