Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

None of what you just postulated, even if it was true, is any modicum of proof for your claims here.
If there is any difference, if anything it would be the opposite of how you are putting it; if you can't censor in a total way and you can't stop people from saying anything through direct means, then the solution is to flood the space with untrue things so that you don't lose credibility. You have more incentive to lie, not less.

But, in a democracy, you are free to investigate and question official claims. Hence, Ukraine had to officially walk back some of its more absurd claims, such as the improbable deaths of Russian generals (remember then?). Becoming known as a liar would also open the door for the enemy to spread disinformation without consequence. On the other hand, questioning official Russian claims means you will be "discrediting the Russian army" or "spreading fake news" (best), or your bullet-strewn body will be found on the ground under an open window (worst). It also means that enemy disinformation (such as rumours about Putin's health) cannot be credibly refuted even when they are actually false.

Information control from elites is broadly a thing regardless of where you live under or whether it would be called a "democracy" by media coverage from the outlets that in America serve the role that pro-Kremlin media has in Russia. This is because information is incredibly powerful in its potential.

But where does the thumb on the scale go? Where in the process does it take place? Because, it is sure to end up somewhere. Unless the elite just does not care about its job security.

[lfromnj]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Yes. Having a free press ensures less graft and corruption within the armed forces. Putin learned this last year when he discovered the truth of just how ineffective his military is.

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Yes. Having a free press ensures less graft and corruption within the armed forces. Putin learned this last year when he discovered the truth of just how ineffective his military is.

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

"All warfare is based off deception, unless it is a democracy, then they are automatically more trustworthy by default" - Sun Tzu, allegedly

[John Dule]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Yes. Having a free press ensures less graft and corruption within the armed forces. Putin learned this last year when he discovered the truth of just how ineffective his military is.

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

Sure. The fact remains that they're less likely to make things up than Russia.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Ukraine has definitely earned a benefit of the doubt as they have been good throughout this war in being transparent. Also to answer Bakmut Bob there is a big difference between posting Prigozhin‘s vodka fueled “whoa is me” statements to point and laugh at and actually saying he’s a reliable source of info

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Ukraine has definitely earned a benefit of the doubt as they have been good throughout this war in being transparent. Also to answer Bakmut Bob there is a big difference between posting Prigozhin‘s vodka fueled “whoa is me” statements to point and laugh at and actually saying he’s a reliable source of info

I will grant that the former is a far from unjustifiable stance. Also worth noting that Wagner's ongoing feud with the Kremlin has something of a shade over them at the moment, if the overall picture is coming up, that's something relevant to a lot of what Prigozhin is saying in terms of assessment.

[2952-0-0]

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

The Ukrainian government and military have to deal with domestic criticism. A few months ago, there was a scandal that the Ukrainian military had food supply contracts where the stated prices were far higher than reasonable. As a result, the contracts were changed, and the officials responsible were fired. The officials should feel lucky that Ukraine is dependent on western aid: if it weren't, they would have faced the firing squad.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/02/28/7391403/

These stories also prove that Ukraine's democratic institutions are still doing their jobs and having a real impact:

https://kyivindependent.com/investigative-stories-from-ukraine-defense-ministry-allegedly-buys-food-supplies-for-military-at-inflated-prices/

By contrast, any criticism of the Russian army - even from the true Zealots who criticise its corruption and incompetence - is dangerous. Hence, it still hasn't resolved the problems that were exposed at the beginning of the war.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1653435184950149131

[Woody]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Yes. Having a free press ensures less graft and corruption within the armed forces. Putin learned this last year when he discovered the truth of just how ineffective his military is.

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

Sure. The fact remains that they're less likely to make things up than Russia.

How would you know, you're a guy from California.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

The Ukrainian government and military have to deal with domestic criticism. A few months ago, there was a scandal that the Ukrainian military had food supply contracts where the stated prices were far higher than reasonable. As a result, the contracts were changed, and the officials responsible were fired. The officials should feel lucky that Ukraine is dependent on western aid: if it weren't, they would have faced the firing squad.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/02/28/7391403/

These stories also prove that Ukraine's democratic institutions are still doing their jobs and having a real impact:

https://kyivindependent.com/investigative-stories-from-ukraine-defense-ministry-allegedly-buys-food-supplies-for-military-at-inflated-prices/

By contrast, any criticism of the Russian army - even from the true Zealots who criticise its corruption and incompetence - is dangerous. Hence, it still hasn't resolved the problems that were exposed at the beginning of the war.

Ukraine cannot afford to have the kind of military that Russia does. Ukraine isn't defended by nuclear weapons. It's not defended by defense in depth or large territorial expanses. Russia's military is a dump, riddled by hazing, dominated in numbers by people looked down on by the bulk of Russian society, and by non-ethnic Russians both within Russia and elsewhere who want a paycheck courtesy of the Kremlin. In general terms, Russian soldiers are more a corvee force for generals who want work done on their dachas than a force acting to absolutely defend the Russian Federation.

The US military has a lot of money ending up in what is basically excess expenditure, subsidizing businesses connected to the Pentagon and connected individuals within that ecosystem. No doubt, Russia has similar things going on to some degree. Russia is absolutely protected by nukes and by its huge amounts of natural resources, the proceeds fueling a state with the largest footprint of any country on Earth. America is protected by two oceans and by a bureaucracy that keeps the ship of state going incredibly well, allowing us to, in part, have broad global influence. Ukraine, meanwhile, literally means "borderlands" and it is a place that has ended up under the rule of other places for the vast bulk of its history. Ukraine cannot afford to rest easy, if it did, Russia would have already won.

[Stranger in a strange land]

I’m shocked Wagner isn’t a reliable source of information

You sure? Because not long ago you were quoting the same man like crazy when he was fearmongering.

Yes, I'm completely sure Wagner PMC is not a reliable source for a conflict that Wagner PMC is fighting in.

This logic is not inherently wrong, but it needs to be applied equally.

Ukraine is a democratic country, Wagner is a PMC staffed by convicts.

You think militaries in countries arbitrarily labelled as "democratic" are suddenly less likely to make things up or deny things?
You sweet, summer child...

Yes. Having a free press ensures less graft and corruption within the armed forces. Putin learned this last year when he discovered the truth of just how ineffective his military is.

I'll take this opportunity to remind everyone to watch Perun's masterpieces "How Corruption Destroys Armies" and "How Lies Destroy Armies" if you haven't already. Regarding the latter video, my theory is now that the US has a mole within Putin's office, which is why US intelligence is so spot-on when it comes to Russia's intentions, but tends to VASTLY overstate the Russian military's capabilities.

[Storr]

Bryansk Oblast borders both Ukraine and Belarus:

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1652961662465343488?s=20

Interesting....

https://twitter.com/GlasnostGone/status/1653462046338416640?s=20

https://twitter.com/Hajun_BY/status/1653475391615451137?s=20

[Torrain]

Huh, that's interesting. Wonder which of the three countries the saboteurs are from...

[2952-0-0]

Ukraine cannot afford to have the kind of military that Russia does. Ukraine isn't defended by nuclear weapons. It's not defended by defense in depth or large territorial expanses. Russia's military is a dump, riddled by hazing, dominated in numbers by people looked down on by the bulk of Russian society, and by non-ethnic Russians both within Russia and elsewhere who want a paycheck courtesy of the Kremlin. In general terms, Russian soldiers are more a corvee force for generals who want work done on their dachas than a force acting to absolutely defend the Russian Federation.

So why is the Russian army a shambles that you described? Why is it more of a grift machine than a force to actually defend the nation? Does it have something to do with Russia's domestic politics?

The US military has a lot of money ending up in what is basically excess expenditure, subsidizing businesses connected to the Pentagon and connected individuals within that ecosystem. No doubt, Russia has similar things going on to some degree. Russia is absolutely protected by nukes and by its huge amounts of natural resources, the proceeds fueling a state with the largest footprint of any country on Earth. America is protected by two oceans and by a bureaucracy that keeps the ship of state going incredibly well, allowing us to, in part, have broad global influence. Ukraine, meanwhile, literally means "borderlands" and it is a place that has ended up under the rule of other places for the vast bulk of its history. Ukraine cannot afford to rest easy, if it did, Russia would have already won.

Yes, the US military is bloated. Every military contractor has a facility in every state so that every Senator has a vested interest in keeping the military well-funded. But, nobody doubts its fighting power.

Nations are not monoliths. They are collections of individuals who have their relationships and make their calculations. At the beginning of the war, there were plenty of traitors within the Ukrainian military and government, which allowed the Russians to quickly take the southern plain. But the bulk of the Ukrainian establishment chose to fight on, thus repelling the Russian attack on the capital. Why? Because they know the legitimacy of their power came from the Ukrainian people, and that therefore Putin viewed them as "Ukrainian nationalist neo-Nazis". They were fighting for their lives, because a Russian victory meant another Katyn.

On the other hand, Lukashenko knows his legitimacy comes from his iron fist. So what did he do in 2020, when the people protested his shameless stealing of the election? He asked Putin to bail him out. He has had a history of playing to both Russia and the west to maximize his own power, but when his own power was actually threatened, he chose to sell out his country to maintain his power. He was also fighting for his life, because he could have followed the fate of Ceaucescu.

In this context, both Zelensky and Lukashenko did what was rational. The difference is that, the former appealed to his people to fight off Putin, while the latter appealed to Putin to fight off his people. And that was because of the difference in their respective political systems.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/status/1653435184950149131

"Raw map on the Niu-York-Avdiivka axis where a Ukrainian movement, if it continues, could have an impact on the front line in this sector. Case to follow."

Blue = Ukrainian controlled

Yellow = contested

Dark/solid Pink = Russia/DPR controlled, taken before February 24th, 2022

Light Pink = Russia/DPR controlled, taken after February 24th, 2022

https://twitter.com/Pouletvolant3/status/1653472097937551365?s=20

[Woody]

https://twitter.com/Suriyakmaps/status/1653430908492423173?cxt=HHwWioC9ldWplfItA...

[Woody]

US aware of Ukraine's counteroffensive coming within weeks, Blinken says

"We know that Ukrainians are planning a counterattack in the coming weeks," Voice of America quotes Blinken.

According to the secretary, Kyiv’s success on the battlefield is the best and perhaps the quickest way to negotiations that would bring a just and lasting peace.

https://news.yahoo.com/us-aware-ukraines-counteroffensive-coming-200600696.html

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Ukraine cannot afford to have the kind of military that Russia does. Ukraine isn't defended by nuclear weapons. It's not defended by defense in depth or large territorial expanses. Russia's military is a dump, riddled by hazing, dominated in numbers by people looked down on by the bulk of Russian society, and by non-ethnic Russians both within Russia and elsewhere who want a paycheck courtesy of the Kremlin. In general terms, Russian soldiers are more a corvee force for generals who want work done on their dachas than a force acting to absolutely defend the Russian Federation.

So why is the Russian army a shambles that you described? Why is it more of a grift machine than a force to actually defend the nation? Does it have something to do with Russia's domestic politics?

The US military has a lot of money ending up in what is basically excess expenditure, subsidizing businesses connected to the Pentagon and connected individuals within that ecosystem. No doubt, Russia has similar things going on to some degree. Russia is absolutely protected by nukes and by its huge amounts of natural resources, the proceeds fueling a state with the largest footprint of any country on Earth. America is protected by two oceans and by a bureaucracy that keeps the ship of state going incredibly well, allowing us to, in part, have broad global influence. Ukraine, meanwhile, literally means "borderlands" and it is a place that has ended up under the rule of other places for the vast bulk of its history. Ukraine cannot afford to rest easy, if it did, Russia would have already won.

Yes, the US military is bloated. Every military contractor has a facility in every state so that every Senator has a vested interest in keeping the military well-funded. But, nobody doubts its fighting power.

Nations are not monoliths. They are collections of individuals who have their relationships and make their calculations. At the beginning of the war, there were plenty of traitors within the Ukrainian military and government, which allowed the Russians to quickly take the southern plain. But the bulk of the Ukrainian establishment chose to fight on, thus repelling the Russian attack on the capital. Why? Because they know the legitimacy of their power came from the Ukrainian people, and that therefore Putin viewed them as "Ukrainian nationalist neo-Nazis". They were fighting for their lives, because a Russian victory meant another Katyn.

On the other hand, Lukashenko knows his legitimacy comes from his iron fist. So what did he do in 2020, when the people protested his shameless stealing of the election? He asked Putin to bail him out. He has had a history of playing to both Russia and the west to maximize his own power, but when his own power was actually threatened, he chose to sell out his country to maintain his power. He was also fighting for his life, because he could have followed the fate of Ceaucescu.

In this context, both Zelensky and Lukashenko did what was rational. The difference is that, the former appealed to his people to fight off Putin, while the latter appealed to Putin to fight off his people. And that was because of the difference in their respective political systems.

People tend to get what they prioritize the most from their government, while people within said government get what they want on the side while still providing said things. Russia continues to have an ethos affected by being invaded through the lands of the Northern European Plain, and thus security from outside threats is an big priority for many Russians.

Said needs can be furnished by any kind of governmental setup; what form said setup takes and how it behaves varies from culture to culture and place as well as time, as if it were a liquid filling a vessel. Political elites, anywhere, have some kind of limit, some things that touching and changing would be tantimount to political suicide. America's government in the 2000s furnished similar things to what Putin is promising now, and Americans ate it up then.

As it is, Russia in many ways may as well as continental Eurasian United States. We're more similar than we realize.

[Storr]

An article talking about how Russia establishes loyal media outlets in the occupied territories.

It notes: "professional Russian journalists are not flocking to Mariupol, Henichesk, or Melitopol like they did to Crimea nine years ago", so the Russians are having to recruit locals willing to work for the occupiers, often attractive looking young women.

I guess the idea of living near or in a warzone isn't attractive to your average Russian journalist:

"But now there are neither [media professionals] eager to go to the ’new territories’ nor state officials calling for them to go there. Nobody knows whether these jobs will last or not. But everybody knows that there’s shelling there."

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1653387512197312514?s=20

[oldtimer]

An article talking about how Russia establishes loyal media outlets in the occupied territories.

It notes: "professional Russian journalists are not flocking to Mariupol, Henichesk, or Melitopol like they did to Crimea nine years ago", so the Russians are having to recruit locals willing to work for the occupiers, often attractive looking young women.

I guess the idea of living near or in a warzone isn't attractive to your average Russian journalist:

"But now there are neither [media professionals] eager to go to the ’new territories’ nor state officials calling for them to go there. Nobody knows whether these jobs will last or not. But everybody knows that there’s shelling there."

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1653387512197312514?s=20

If Russia didn't waste that much money and time on propaganda they might have won the war.

[lfromnj]

Ukraine probably has a more transparent officer corp within the military but they absolutely do make up random propaganda for the media which are obvious lies. Nothing wrong but ots whats happening

The Ukrainian government and military have to deal with domestic criticism. A few months ago, there was a scandal that the Ukrainian military had food supply contracts where the stated prices were far higher than reasonable. As a result, the contracts were changed, and the officials responsible were fired. The officials should feel lucky that Ukraine is dependent on western aid: if it weren't, they would have faced the firing squad.

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/02/28/7391403/

These stories also prove that Ukraine's democratic institutions are still doing their jobs and having a real impact:

https://kyivindependent.com/investigative-stories-from-ukraine-defense-ministry-allegedly-buys-food-supplies-for-military-at-inflated-prices/

By contrast, any criticism of the Russian army - even from the true Zealots who criticise its corruption and incompetence - is dangerous. Hence, it still hasn't resolved the problems that were exposed at the beginning of the war.

That is where the Ukranian military has an advantage but at the same time their propaganda does exist and its for perfectly valid reasons. The best false operations in WW2 didn't come from the totalitarian communists or fascists but in fact America and the UK misleading with D-Day. Ukraine took pretty good advantage in the early chaos with stuff like the ghost of Kyiv. It was fake but still boosted morale.

[2952-0-0]

People tend to get what they prioritize the most from their government, while people within said government get what they want on the side while still providing said things. Russia continues to have an ethos affected by being invaded through the lands of the Northern European Plain, and thus security from outside threats is an big priority for many Russians.

But don't you seen the contradiction from your previous statement?! A Russia with historical memories of invasions across the steppe should have a military with a fearsome track record, a continent-sized Israel. That contradicts your previous claim that Russia doesn't really need an army to defend its nation, and can afford to let its military decay into a corvée force for its generals.

It also doesn't address my point on why the Ukrainian elites chose to fight on, while the Belarusian elite chose to sell out their country. Was it because Belarusians are inherently more servile than Ukrainians? No. The biggest difference between them was their political systems, and that affected the decisions made by the leadership.

Said needs can be furnished by any kind of governmental setup; what form said setup takes and how it behaves varies from culture to culture and place as well as time, as if it were a liquid filling a vessel. Political elites, anywhere, have some kind of limit, some things that touching and changing would be tantimount to political suicide. America's government in the 2000s furnished similar things to what Putin is promising now, and Americans ate it up then.

As it is, Russia in many ways may as well as continental Eurasian United States. We're more similar than we realize.

Something more convincing than broad platitudes is needed here.

The US equivalent to Putin's actions today would be a a "special military operation" to annex Canada, with the US military failing to capture any major Canadian cities and resorting to Blackwater, which is trying to capture Penticton by reducing it to rubble. That would be a whole magnitude different from an adventure eight time zones away.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

People tend to get what they prioritize the most from their government, while people within said government get what they want on the side while still providing said things. Russia continues to have an ethos affected by being invaded through the lands of the Northern European Plain, and thus security from outside threats is an big priority for many Russians.

But don't you seen the contradiction from your previous statement?! A Russia with historical memories of invasions across the steppe should have a military with a fearsome track record, a continent-sized Israel. That contradicts your previous claim that Russia doesn't really need an army to defend its nation, and can afford to let its military decay into a corvée force for its generals.

It also doesn't address my point on why the Ukrainian elites chose to fight on, while the Belarusian elite chose to sell out their country. Was it because Belarusians are inherently more servile than Ukrainians? No. The biggest difference between them was their political systems, and that affected the decisions made by the leadership.

Said needs can be furnished by any kind of governmental setup; what form said setup takes and how it behaves varies from culture to culture and place as well as time, as if it were a liquid filling a vessel. Political elites, anywhere, have some kind of limit, some things that touching and changing would be tantimount to political suicide. America's government in the 2000s furnished similar things to what Putin is promising now, and Americans ate it up then.

As it is, Russia in many ways may as well as continental Eurasian United States. We're more similar than we realize.

Something more convincing than broad platitudes is needed here.

The US equivalent to Putin's actions today would be a a "special military operation" to annex Canada, with the US military failing to capture any major Canadian cities and resorting to Blackwater, which is trying to capture Penticton by reducing it to rubble. That would be a whole magnitude different from an adventure eight time zones away.

First of all, there is no contradiction. I was talking about what human government tends to work towards and the way the social contract works. Just because government works towards something does not mean it will succeed at that of course. If that was somehow the case, the New Soviet Man and the New Soviet Woman would have been completely successful.

Secondly, the biggest difference is the combined sum of what large sums of resources (human, monetary, natural, etc.) and the efforts of the leadership in question are able to do with them. That will vary from place to place and the various times. To quote you, "Nations are not monoliths. They are collections of individuals who have their relationships and make their calculations." The skills of the people in the managerial echelons tends to have considerable importance here, but it does depend on what they have on hand too.

Ukraine's in the fight still because 1) their leadership has the skills to hold on, in turn because all this in part is something they're ready for, and 2) America gives them enough resources to keep going. If Ukraine had zero help from the US, Ukraine would have probably lost big by now. American intelligence help was very key to stopping the Russians at Hostomel!

While US and Russia fundamentally have a lot of similarities in their nature, Russia has less favorable geography and has been broadly less lucky since 1945**. Since 1800, America has only faced a real land war in its heartland against a foreign power once...while Russia has faced such in, 1812, the 1910s, and the 1940s*. And America has never undergone anything as damaging to its power as the breakup of the Soviet Union, which undid hundreds of years of work by Russian leaders to expand Moscow's influence.

In a world where America suffered a similarly bad contraction in its influence and an elite facing some issues maintaining its sphere against up-and-coming players, a war of the sort that you are describing absolutely could have happened against Canada. And the results might not be too different either.

*=Russia having so many nukes reflects the fact that nuclear weapons are an effective defender for a country that has a heartland as flat as it is.
**=You could put 1941 here. Barbarossa heavily harmed the Soviet Union and even victory did not fully undo the cost dealt to it, even with American help. The deaths of tens of millions of Soviet citizens left a long shadow on the USSR's potential.

[The Mikado]

Interestingly Kazakhstan also voted in favor of the resolution. The Central Asian countries had all abstained or were/voted absent in previous UN votes related to the war in Ukraine (iirc).

https://twitter.com/Biz_Ukraine_Mag/status/1653036142520856584?s=20

B-but muh global south solidarity!

tbf.... Kazakhstan are also returning Russian draft dodgers back home when they caught sneaking across the border, to which they might meet a less than favorable resolution now that Russia has effectively banned military aged men from leaving the country.

There are many former Soviet Republics who are sitting on the wings a bit, waiting to see how this whole Ukraine thing plays out, and certainly not wanting to be the next in line for a Russian "Invasion", "Peace Keeping Operation", let alone a "Special Operation".

The sins of the Czars and later on in the form of Soviet "Czar" in the form of Stalin still indicate that the "chickens are coming home to roost", in the words of the great late Malcom X.

Internal colonization sometimes takes many decades before resolution, as surely the Irish might attest.

I mean, if you're the Kazakh (are we saying Qazaq yet?) government, you know perfectly well that Russia uses ethnic Russian minorities as an excuse to meddle and even invade other countries. Do you really want hundreds of thousands MORE ethnic Russians coming in strengthening Moscow's eventual claim on northern Kazakhstan?

[NOVA Green]

Interestingly Kazakhstan also voted in favor of the resolution. The Central Asian countries had all abstained or were/voted absent in previous UN votes related to the war in Ukraine (iirc).

https://twitter.com/Biz_Ukraine_Mag/status/1653036142520856584?s=20

B-but muh global south solidarity!

tbf.... Kazakhstan are also returning Russian draft dodgers back home when they caught sneaking across the border, to which they might meet a less than favorable resolution now that Russia has effectively banned military aged men from leaving the country.

There are many former Soviet Republics who are sitting on the wings a bit, waiting to see how this whole Ukraine thing plays out, and certainly not wanting to be the next in line for a Russian "Invasion", "Peace Keeping Operation", let alone a "Special Operation".

The sins of the Czars and later on in the form of Soviet "Czar" in the form of Stalin still indicate that the "chickens are coming home to roost", in the words of the great late Malcom X.

Internal colonization sometimes takes many decades before resolution, as surely the Irish might attest.

I mean, if you're the Kazakh (are we saying Qazaq yet?) government, you know perfectly well that Russia uses ethnic Russian minorities as an excuse to meddle and even invade other countries. Do you really want hundreds of thousands MORE ethnic Russians coming in strengthening Moscow's eventual claim on northern Kazakhstan?

Fair enough and certainly get your point.

Still it's difficult to imagine the number of Russian draft dodgers coming anywhere close to that number, with many of those attempting to slip across the border quite possibly intending to transit through on their way to other places.

I could imagine a another large issue might be loss of domestic political support for the regime if a large number of Russian emigres were to create competition of jobs in Kazakhstan, which after all is a net exporter of workers to Russia for job opportunities.

Additionally, some migrant workers within Russia proper have already ended up in one way or another in the meat grinder of Putin's war in Ukraine, which might make competition for jobs even fiercer within Kazakhstan, despite the official unemployment rate of just under 5%.