3 ms·

> The way the borders were set after the breakup of the USSR were based on certain assumptions that don't hold true today, and as a result Russia does not have

> The way the borders were set after the breakup of the USSR were based on certain assumptions that don't hold true today, and as a result Russia does not have a defensible border. In the thirty years since the USSR dissolved no one has so much as bothered Russia or even pretended like they wanted to bother Russia. Most NATO members in Europe vastly reduced their militaries and defense spending. Everyone was content to just buy shit from them as business relationships are far cheaper than invasions and annexation. NATO only expanded east because of Russia's posturing about reclaiming former SSRs. The only people worried about "defensible borders" are old Soviet hardliners pining for some past glory that didn't exist. They either see or pretend to see the specter of foreign invasion because it whips of nationalistic fervor. They use it to distract from their shit show governance and to blame "the West" for every self-inflicted problem they have. The most baffling part is literally no one wants to invade Russia. Outside of their propaganda machine no Westerner has any interest in Russian territory. No one is super excited to occupy Siberia or fish the "waters" of the Aral Sea.

throwawayay02 5y ago
Besides what another commentator already said, I'd also include China. Russia and China, despite the apparently good relations right now, have actively disputed regions that the Chinese believe were stolen from them on one of the unequal treaties.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  The US has 6 border disputes with Canada ongoing. It is the longest nonmilitarized border in the world. Border disputes are par for the course when you're a state managing a nation and territory. These disputes come up when other concerns are dealt with. They're bargaining chips. Right now China and Russia need each other. Later maybe they fight over them or they resolve them peacefully.
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    > The US has 6 border disputes with Canada ongoing. For those interested in the details, Wikipedia lists 5 current disputes[0], almost entirely relating to maritime borders, with some uninhabited islands being the only land in dispute. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_areas_disputed_by_Canada_and_the_United_States#Current_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_areas_disputed_by_Cana...
toyg 5y ago
> Most NATO members in Europe vastly reduced their militaries and defense spending Most western members did. Eastern ones, meanwhile, ramped it up very significantly. Which is the only reason Western countries could get away with it, really - NATO is supposed to feed the American defense industry. > NATO only expanded east because of Russia's posturing More like because of the bordering countries clamoured for protection, even when there was no threat whatsoever (since the Russian military was in utter disarray). In a way, they were right: the ones who didn't manage to escape Moscow's orbit back then (Ukraine, Belarus, the Caucasus stans...), are now enduring dictatorship or war. In another way, they fuelled the Russian paranoia that fed Putin's nationalism, eventually ensuring that the doomsday scenarios did, in fact, materialize. > The most baffling part is literally no one wants to invade Russia. It's not just about immediate military occupation. Gazprom is an important piece of Putin's kleptocratic powerbase, and Gazprom needs to be free of Ukrainian control of their pipelines. If NordStream2 can't happen, because the Germans have to obey their American lord-protectors, then Putin must establish an alternative to the South - which doesn't need to be entirely in Russian hands, but rather in a position where Russian troops can secure it in a matter of days if necessary. In my view this is the real endgame. This, obviously, on top of putting the strategic Crimean ports in a safer position; because NATO might not want to invade Russia, but Erdogan's Turkish troops are not shy about "securing" stuff (any sanctions against them carving up Syria? Not that I'm aware of...).

throwawayay02 5y ago

Besides what another commentator already said, I'd also include China. Russia and China, despite the apparently good relations right now, have actively disputed regions that the Chinese believe were stolen from them on one of the unequal treaties.

betwixthewires 5y ago
The US has 6 border disputes with Canada ongoing. It is the longest nonmilitarized border in the world. Border disputes are par for the course when you're a state managing a nation and territory. These disputes come up when other concerns are dealt with. They're bargaining chips. Right now China and Russia need each other. Later maybe they fight over them or they resolve them peacefully.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  > The US has 6 border disputes with Canada ongoing. For those interested in the details, Wikipedia lists 5 current disputes[0], almost entirely relating to maritime borders, with some uninhabited islands being the only land in dispute. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_areas_disputed_by_Canada_and_the_United_States#Current_disputes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_areas_disputed_by_Cana...

toyg 5y ago

> Most NATO members in Europe vastly reduced their militaries and defense spending Most western members did. Eastern ones, meanwhile, ramped it up very significantly. Which is the only reason Western countries could get away with it, really - NATO is supposed to feed the American defense industry. > NATO only expanded east because of Russia's posturing More like because of the bordering countries clamoured for protection, even when there was no threat whatsoever (since the Russian military was in utter disarray). In a way, they were right: the ones who didn't manage to escape Moscow's orbit back then (Ukraine, Belarus, the Caucasus stans...), are now enduring dictatorship or war. In another way, they fuelled the Russian paranoia that fed Putin's nationalism, eventually ensuring that the doomsday scenarios did, in fact, materialize. > The most baffling part is literally no one wants to invade Russia. It's not just about immediate military occupation. Gazprom is an important piece of Putin's kleptocratic powerbase, and Gazprom needs to be free of Ukrainian control of their pipelines. If NordStream2 can't happen, because the Germans have to obey their American lord-protectors, then Putin must establish an alternative to the South - which doesn't need to be entirely in Russian hands, but rather in a position where Russian troops can secure it in a matter of days if necessary. In my view this is the real endgame. This, obviously, on top of putting the strategic Crimean ports in a safer position; because NATO might not want to invade Russia, but Erdogan's Turkish troops are not shy about "securing" stuff (any sanctions against them carving up Syria? Not that I'm aware of...).