3 ms·
It's a little more nuanced than "they weren't able to defend their Eastern border". They had to balance between: - Too little force, which would allow the sepa
by karpierz 5y ago
It's a little more nuanced than "they weren't able to defend their Eastern border". They had to balance between:
- Too little force, which would allow the separatists to de-facto control the territories and lead to a Crimea situation.
- Too much force, which would lead to a Russia invasion triggered by either: Russians dying in Ukraine (since some Russian soldiers were in the region "on vacation") or conflict on the Ukrainian-Russian border (either accidental, or false flag).
I'm just trying to figure out what Ukraine can do aside from let itself get gobbled up. Holding its ground while the economic sanctions/protracted warfare eats into Russian morale might work, or it might take too long. Not sure what else will work though.
- stanski 5y agoIs it more nuanced though? The moment separatists started taking over Ukrainian territory, they should've attempted to take that back. Whether they were unable to or not willing to, as you suggest, now things are a lot worse. Either way it was a strategic failure, so yes, they did fail to protect their borders even back then.