Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[nicholas.slaydon]

Anyway my brain had two thoughts today.

First, Putin's really trying to sell this as his own Great Patriotic War, taking on all the trappings of the man protecting the rodina or whatever.

Second, while Putin has been able to carve out a niche for himself and is likely floundering badly in trying to get Ukraine into said niche, it's perfectly possible that in the future of Russian soft power is to align itself with European institutions. "Rebrand itself" as being in accord with Western Europe and European ideals. This would have to be post-Putin, but it could eventually allow them to undo the PR damage they've dealt themselves in this war for good and possibly become the strongest player in European institutions.

Key word is: may. Lord knows what will happen to Putin, or how Russia will orient itself over the coming decades.

If Ukraine is an EU member (potentially possible if Russia plays its hand bad enough in this war),  the Russian elite might in fact decide it has to follow its Slavic neighbors into hirtherto Western institutions in order to maintain their relevance on the world stage.

If you think either of these sound like crazy thoughts, please be blunt about it. My mind just wonders what impact this war could have on long-term geopolitical alignments.

The perfect place for Russia really would be to reorient toward a pro-European stance. There is no reason why Russia could not be member of the European Union, if they reorient away from the post-Soviet style of Russian politics and Putinism. I pray that the Russians see the madness that Putin and other post-Soviet politicians have brought their country to, and decide that model of government has gotten them nowhere, either economically, politically, or with their reputation on the world stage.

[nicholas.slaydon]

https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1499479196778709019

Good riddance.

[nicholas.slaydon]

First Germany rearming, now Japan is setting the political foundation for recovering the Kuril Islands. Let's gooo!

https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1500891170964217862?s=20&t=JfyXOI...

There will certainly be no better time to retake (either through a bilateral agreement or military action) the Kurils than now.

The Japanese should declare that they have to step in to de-nazify the Kuril Islands from the Russian Fascists.

[nicholas.slaydon]

The Russians have invented their own "Putin salute":

https://twitter.com/YMonastyrskyi/status/1501666277919707150

That is very cringe

[nicholas.slaydon]

I'm sure Pooty will honor any deal like he did the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances if Ukraine pledges neutrality. 

Exactly why Ukraine should accept nothing short of victory against Russia.

[nicholas.slaydon]

I'm sure Pooty will honor any deal like he did the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances if Ukraine pledges neutrality. 

Exactly why Ukraine should accept nothing short of victory against Russia.

Hear me out, a deal in which Ukraine can receive back Donetsk and Luhansk in exchange for Crimea recognition and neutrality is not a bad thing. For one, it doesn’t reward Putin, in practice it gives Ukraine territory back and Crimea was a lost cause.
Secondly, the Ukrainian identity has been forged by this, Ukraine has had a problem for years but now it will truly be able to unite.
Thirdly, while Ukraine won’t officially be in NATO, we can and will arm Ukraine to the teeth to the point they can prevent any future invasion. What will Russia do, invade Ukraine again, except this time it’s more armed and prepared for defense?

I understand that it’s hard to emotionally accept any “deal” with Putin, but Ukraine can’t hold forever, and if we can get a deal like this, we can ensure Ukraine and it’s people remain an independent and self determining people for a long time. And yes a Marshall Plan is desperately needed for Ukraine, I’m guessing Europe, the US, and even China (hey they will want to buy some Ukrainian influence, that’s probably while they have been neutral) will be willing to invest in Ukraine, due to both public support and real opportunities in the country.

If Ukraine plays her cards right and the West truly is willing to back up their words, Ukraine can be a stronger and more prosperous nation with such a deal.

The crucial part of this hypothetical deal is "and the West is willing to back up their words". Maybe Europe and the US are willing to enact sanctions against Russia today and supply Ukraine weapons to adequately defend themselves, but what about thirty years down the line? What security guarantees other than NATO membership can Ukraine receive that they can trust, not just in the immediate future, but years and decades down the line? That's why if I were in the White House or in the position of Zelenskyy I would not find any deal that forces Ukrainian neutrality at all acceptable. The only way to deter Russia, and for the West to back up their words on how they support Ukrainian territorial sovereignty, is to have all of Ukraine returned to Ukraine, including Crimea. Which is why we should be providing Ukraine with as much support as would be required to not only repel the Russian invasion and return to the pre-envision stalemate, but to allow the Ukrainians to defeat the Russians and push them out of Ukraine in totality.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Does anyone here actually realize how uniquely evil Hitler/Nazis were? Not every bad person, or every person who starts a war, is the same level as Hitler. Not even close.

Putin may not be another Hitler (yet), but I think that the events in Bucha have shown that he certainly is another Milosevic, and his military commanders are cut from the same cloth as Mladic and Karadzic. Will we sit around and wait until another Srebrenica occurs right under our noses, or will take action to prevent another Srebrenica from ever occurring in the first place?

[nicholas.slaydon]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuzivska_gas_field

You guys think this is part of Putin's calculation?

The total reserve amount is eye watering.

Not really, Putin has clearly stated why he is attacking Ukraine, and this isn't one of them. This seems to me like those people who claim that the US started the Iraq war just for Iraqi oil, which is in my estimation a very shallow interpretation of that war, just as it would be to say that Putin has called for the invasion of Ukraine because they have natural resources.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Well, that was fairly uneventful, thank God. No declaration of war, and no national mobilization.

[nicholas.slaydon]

I think it is paramount to consider the difficult situation of Germany, Italy et al. and the political and economic stakes at play. From a U.S. perspective, it is always easy to come up with maximalist (e.g., "Ukraine should retake Crimea as well!") demands since Washington, D.C. is thousands of miles away and there is no dependence on Russian energy.

Berlin, Rome, and Paris, however, are much closer to Moscow and much more strongly affected by the fallout of the war. Consequently, they have an interest in peace and, as much as this is possible, a normalization of the situation (which would probably be a return to the status quo ante). Neither an endless prolongation of the war nor a serious destabilization of the Russian regime helps them.

In practice, this means that they support the Ukrainian efforts (Germany does so to a degree that would have been unthinkable a few months ago) but clearly prefer a solution at the negotiation table and refuse to give Zelenskyy a carte blanche. I don't see how this is wrong given their predicament.

The is just short term thinking from the political officials in these countries. Which solution to this war will cause greater peace and stability in the region? A Ukrainian victory or Russian appeasement? The simple fact of the matter is that if Europe wants greater peace and stability looking decades ahead, they will have to sacrifice their immediate comforts, and suck in their gut and muddle through the temporary downturns that will come from their years of reliance on Russia.
 
Likewise, I agree that they have a vested interest in peace, but through their short sightedness they may simply push Ukraine into a settlement that appeases Russia now, but will Russia be appeased 20 or 30 years from now? A negotiated settlement with Russia is simply showing that the Western Alliance is too soft and committed to their luxuries that they are not willing to defend the ideas that they constantly pontificate about. The only way to guarantee a true and lasting peace is to stand firm behind our values, defend a country that has been invaded by its neighbor, and show the world that baseless agression will not be tolerated. If that message is not sent loud and clear, Russia will take note, and will continue further agressions against their neighbors, and if the political leaders in Germany, France, and Italy are too near sighted to see that, then they are truly lost and helpless.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Awful.
https://twitter.com/OSINT88/status/1534897134146883584

Ugh.

I thought Russia doesn't have the death penalty?

Russia might not, but apparently the so called Donetsk People's Republic does.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Biden's comments were made at a fundraiser and were clearly "off the cuff" remarks. Also, I feel obligated to add that everyone who followed the run-up to the invasion knows that he is correct and won't be gaslit by Ukraine's actor President trying to find cover. It certainly surprises me that he receives fawning adoration among posters who aren't idiots.

I certainly agree that Zelenskyy and Ukraine seemed at least in public to be quite unprepared for the war, though it absolutely is not helpful for Biden to be saying so in public.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Supporting a right to conquest is a valid position to take, no one should be banned for it.

Wrong

[nicholas.slaydon]

Interesting how people think they know you based on a few posts online.

I don't support war of conquest, I support in principle territorial integrity of any sovereign country. Only problem is in unipolar world one county, USA, gets to decide which countries can gain independence and which don't. So when we are talking about Kosovo unilateraly gaining independence it's ok, but with let's say Catalonia in Spain or DNR in Ukraine not so much.

It's a year 2022 and some people honestly believe in morale in international politics. People really think that countries and their leaders aren't guided by pure self interest for them personally or for their countries. So when Putin decides to stop NATO expansion on their own borders, it's pure evil, yet expansion itself is democracy at work. Because coup in 2014 is democracy probably. And when some people decide they don't want to live in this US "democracy" in Ukraine, it doesn't matter because they have no right for independence.

Breaking news: Putin invaded Ukraine for Russia's and his own interests and USA is doing everything in Ukraine not for the sake of Ukrainian people but for their own interest. And yes, they will fight till the last Ukrainian, because their own wars in the last decades went so horribly wrong.

The only problem with this is that it is entirely wrong. First off, Kosovo is not relevant to the Ukraine case in any way. Kosovo needed to obtain independence due to the fact that the Serbian government was attempting ethnic cleansing and genocide in Kosovo, which prompted the need for independence to defend the Kosovar Albanians as a people against the genocidal Serbs who had already committed acts of genocide against the Bosnians. Catalonia can make no such claim to need independence in order to defend the Catalans as a people. There is absolutely no provision in the Spanish Constitution which Catalonia is subject to for any region to secede, and any attempt to secede from Spain would be just as legitimate as a state to try and secede from the United States, which is not at all.
Likewise, clearly Putin did not invade Ukraine in order to stop NATO expansion, as his invasion of Ukraine has only made NATO larger with the addition of Finland and Sweden. Likewise, Putin did not say that he invaded Ukraine in order to stop NATO expansion, but rather states that he invaded because he does not consider Ukraine to be a legitimate country with rights to independence, and made his nonsense claims of denazification of the Ukrainian government, all absurd claims, and notably all have nothing to do NATO, which Ukraine is not a member of.

[nicholas.slaydon]

RTL poll in Germany on "should Ukraine give up territory for peace?" has Yes/No at 47/41

I assume they'd also be in favour of giving East Germany back too?

Crimea has been occupied for 8 years, I don't think Ukraine is getting it back.

"Alsace-Lorraine has been occupied for 43 years there is no way France is ever getting it back"- Central Powers appeaser in 1914.

[nicholas.slaydon]

RTL poll in Germany on "should Ukraine give up territory for peace?" has Yes/No at 47/41

I assume they'd also be in favour of giving East Germany back too?

Crimea has been occupied for 8 years, I don't think Ukraine is getting it back.

"Alsace-Lorraine has been occupied for 43 years there is no way France is ever getting it back"- Central Powers appeaser in 1914.

So basically Ukraine isn't getting it back without a world war? As bad as WW1 was, at least it didn't have nukes.

Not a world war, just a war, and thankfully Putin has provided Ukraine with that war. However, Ukraine can't win this war on their own, and need our backing to be able to secure their land that we claim we support going back to Ukraine. It's on the Western Alliance leaders to give Ukraine the tools necessary to get the job done. The leaders of the Western Alliance didn't appease the Germans in 1918, and we shouldn't appease the Russians now, but should fully support Ukrainian sovereignty over Ukrainian soil.

[nicholas.slaydon]

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/18/eu-signs-deal-with-azerbaijan-to-double-gas-imports-by-2027

"EU signs deal with Azerbaijan to double gas imports by 2027"

Yes, the EU will dump the evil Russians and instead get its gas from a country that will never invade a neighbor.  

BTW, my understanding is that a lot of the Azerbaijan energy assets are partially owned by the Russians anyway.

It's the same thing as Biden with MBS. When they know they're screwed they'll drop all their democracy and human rights bs and shows us all who they really are.

Nagorno Karabakh is recognized as a part of Azerbaijan, it is Armenia that was illegally occupying it. Azerbaijan has every right to use force in order to restore its territorial integrity. Doing so, does not constitute invading your neighbor, because Azerbaijan's neighbor has no right to be in Nagorno Karabakh at all. It was Armenia that invaded their neighbor, not Azerbaijan .

[nicholas.slaydon]

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/18/eu-signs-deal-with-azerbaijan-to-double-gas-imports-by-2027

"EU signs deal with Azerbaijan to double gas imports by 2027"

Yes, the EU will dump the evil Russians and instead get its gas from a country that will never invade a neighbor.  

BTW, my understanding is that a lot of the Azerbaijan energy assets are partially owned by the Russians anyway.

Nagorno Karabakh is recognized as a part of Azerbaijan, it is Armenia that was illegally occupying it. Azerbaijan has every right to use force in order to restore its territorial integrity. Doing so, does not constitute invading your neighbor, because Azerbaijan's neighbor has no right to be in Nagorno Karabakh at all. It was Armenia that invaded their neighbor, not Azerbaijan .

Under international law, Azerbaijan’s war was probably justified. This doesn’t change that the way it was prosecuted was morally reprehensible, and beheading/ethnically cleansing its own citizens afterwards wasn’t even legally excused by “but they were ethnic Armenians and their leaders committed ethnic cleansing 30 years ago”.

The EU becoming dependent on multiple corrupt petrostates means individual suppliers have less bargaining power unless they all launch wars at the same time, but it’s obviously better to find less comically evil alternatives to the governments of Azerbaijan and Russia.

This should be a short-term backstop at most, but Europe cares about Armenia even less than Ukraine, so I fear it’s likely to last.

I am not trying to dismiss the inappropriate actions of the Azerbaijani military during the war, lest anyone think that I was. Many of their actions along with the actions of the Armenian military were reprehensible. However, there is still no moral equivalency between the Nagorno Karabakh war and the Russian invasion Ukraine. Russian stooges like bilaps might not see the difference, but Armenia was the one who invaded Azerbaijan, and not the other way around like bilaps and jaichind want to make it seem. There is absolutely no moral equivalency between a country restoring its territorial integrity, and one that denies the right of its neighbors to exist, and engages in an imperialist invasion meant to eradicate an entire nation.

[nicholas.slaydon]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1549381189336711169

Stage one: Classification (check)
Stage two: Symbolization (check)
Stage three: Dehumanization (check)
Stage four: Organization (check)
Stage five: Polarization (check)
Stage six: Preparation (check)

[nicholas.slaydon]

A good example of just how manipulative Russian state TV is:https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1554052487623098370?s=20&t=DD9xDLbo...

Wow, that's like some North Korea style propaganda there.

[nicholas.slaydon]

I hope after the war is over the US, UK, Germany and France issue a defense guarantee to Ukraine.  They should have done it in 2014 after before the Russian invasion of Crimea.

The US has said to China that they will defend Taiwan, they should do the same with Ukraine.

Corrected that for you

[nicholas.slaydon]

Flashback to the man who foresaw this

Well, a stopped clock is right twice a day, and the Germans nor any others who put their energy dependence in the hands of tyrannical dictator are reaping that to which they have sown.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Wouldn't Russia sooner drop nuclear bombs than let Ukraine do a sustained invasion of what they see as Russian territory?

Putin and Russian leaders may say so, but that all comes down to whether you believe that Russia would risk using nuclear weapons (Personally, I don't think nuclear weapons pose a real threat to any country, as I don't believe that any world leader is bold enough to use  nuclear weapons, or indeed would be obeyed if they made such an order). Even against Ukraine, which itself is not a nuclear armed country, using nuclear weapons against Ukrainian forces would force the hand of any sane government to not only sever all ties with Russia period, but in a way would force their hand to start calling for, and indeed preparing a regime change mission in Russia.

[nicholas.slaydon]

If Putin tries to drop a nuke on Ukraine he will get fragged. It is not a serious concern.

The problem for Putin that the same will happen if he loses in the Ukraine.

The more dangerous the situation becomes for him, the more dangerous he might become.

However, it is also the case that as the war becomes worse for Putin, his legitimacy will degrade, which makes it less likely that he would be obeyed if he started giving out insane orders.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Unlucky:

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1569365739512991746?s=20&t=RVMQ2b...

This is a bit too much. I am not convinced that university staff, unless very politically vocal, are valid targets. I mean, come on, this is just some old woman.

Obviously, it is different when it comes to governors, mayors, security forces etc.

I think the fact that she was given a Russian security guard speaks volumes as to what her character is, and to the level of her collaboration, than merely the position she holds. Why would Russia give her protection if she wasn't there to propagandize the population into supporting Russia? If that was indeed her job, then absolutely as a propagandist of an invading enemy, she is a valid target.