18 ms·

Russia and the Curse of Geography (2015)

11 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

Const-me 10y ago
Before Russia attacked Ukraine, there was no NATO treat that side. Before the war, vast majority (60-70%) of Ukrainians were against NATO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations#Popular_opinion_in_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations... NATO is already directly at Russian borders: Norway, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The distance between Moscow and closest point in Latvia is about 600 km = 375 miles. Between Moscow and closest point in Ukraine 460 km. Not a big difference. Finally, the Crimea is not the proper warm-water port for Russia, because Turkey controls the straights at the exit of the black sea, and Turkey is a NATO member state. The main reason why Russia attacked Ukraine is internal. The two countries are very close historically and culturally, and the number of immigrants is millions both directions. Ukrainians were able to forcefully remove their corrupt leader from power. This was extremely scary for Putin, as he knew he’s likely the next. He started the war to teach Ukraine a lesson, and to alienate Russians against Ukrainians so Russians will see Ukrainians as their enemy, not the role model.
squozzer 10y ago
Another thing Russian leaders know pretty well -- every invasion from the West ultimately failed. Invasions from the East, that's a different story. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Rus%27 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Rus%27
woodandsteel 10y ago
Good article. I would just add that Russia's geography has had an odd impact on its culture. It is close to Europe, so it has had to modernize to have the economic and military strength to resist invasion. But it is so vast and hence hard to conquer that it could without going all the way and becoming a free market liberal democracy. So the country is always going back and forth between modernizing and returning to its authoritarian traditions.

11 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

Before Russia attacked Ukraine, there was no NATO treat that side. Before the war, vast majority (60-70%) of Ukrainians were against NATO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations#Popular_opinion_in_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations... NATO is already directly at Russian borders: Norway, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The distance between Moscow and closest point in Latvia is about 600 km = 375 miles. Between Moscow and closest point in Ukraine 460 km. Not a big difference. Finally, the Crimea is not the proper warm-water port for Russia, because Turkey controls the straights at the exit of the black sea, and Turkey is a NATO member state. The main reason why Russia attacked Ukraine is internal. The two countries are very close historically and culturally, and the number of immigrants is millions both directions. Ukrainians were able to forcefully remove their corrupt leader from power. This was extremely scary for Putin, as he knew he’s likely the next. He started the war to teach Ukraine a lesson, and to alienate Russians against Ukrainians so Russians will see Ukrainians as their enemy, not the role model.

squozzer 10y ago

Another thing Russian leaders know pretty well -- every invasion from the West ultimately failed. Invasions from the East, that's a different story. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Rus%27 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Rus%27

woodandsteel 10y ago

Good article. I would just add that Russia's geography has had an odd impact on its culture. It is close to Europe, so it has had to modernize to have the economic and military strength to resist invasion. But it is so vast and hence hard to conquer that it could without going all the way and becoming a free market liberal democracy. So the country is always going back and forth between modernizing and returning to its authoritarian traditions.