5 ms·

It's hard to view the events unfolding with an objective gaze. Virtually all of western journalism condemns Russia's attacks unilaterally, which seems reasonabl

It's hard to view the events unfolding with an objective gaze. Virtually all of western journalism condemns Russia's attacks unilaterally, which seems reasonable, considering people are dying to grow a dictator's empire. But then I read about the history of the conflict and see that Ukraine has had separatist states and civil war for years. It isn't like Ukraine is a stable, peaceful, and unwitting nation, like, say, Denmark. It's more similar to NATO "protecting" their national interests in Syria or Iraq. Not that I supported those interventions as ethical, either -- I just acknowledge the potential long term geopolitical motivations for doing so. Any Ukrainians or Russians have an alternative perspective to offer?

dostick 5y ago
Dont project “separatist” feudal states of 100s year ago on to modern Ukraine. Modern Ukraine is nothing like that.
crisdux 5y ago
This isn't a Ukrainian or Russian perspective, but an alternative perspective. John Mearsheimer gives a popular alternative perspective. He has a realist foreign policy perspective suggesting that the US and the west provoked Russia by trying to push Ukraine to join NATO and by intervening in the protests/coup in 2013/2014. Russia has a legitimate security interest in ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO and become militarized. https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-t...
- hamburga 5y ago
  Video lecture from Mearsheimer, for the lazy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
- SyzygistSix 5y ago
  Thank you for a written source. I much prefer it to a video lecture.
- msla 5y ago
  > Russia has a legitimate security interest in ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO and become militarized. An abusive spouse has a legitimate security interest in ensuring their victim doesn't find a new support network and learn Krav Maga.
  - crisdux 5y ago
    Edit: my comment was likely to be misinterpreted so I removed it. I don't agree with your metaphor. I think history and power politics should be respected to maintain world peace.
Ruphin 5y ago
The idea that the (in)stability of a nation can legitimize military incursion by another nation is plain absurd. At what point exactly does a war become legitimate? Is it okay to attack a country when they are entwined in civil war? What percentage of the country needs to be involved in the conflict? What if it is an unarmed but still major internal political conflict? No war is legitimate. Comparing this incursion to NATO "protecting" their national interests in Syria or Iraq is perhaps defensible, but the only logical conclusion is that these interventions were/are equally condemnable.
- lend000 5y ago
  No one said it was legitimate insofar as that means ethical. I am simply curious about the huge wave of groupthink sentiment that makes no attempt to fill everyone in on the context of the situation, and whether this was actually a logical (absence all ethics) move by Russia. One of the replies to my comment offered an interesting perspective. We live in a real world with real events. Just because us westerners have been shielded from war for most of our lives, and because war is immoral, does not mean that it won't happen, or that it isn't interesting to think about it objectively. Makes one wonder if the fact that most Ukrainians are white people living in an industrialized society has anything to do with the scale of the outpouring of emotion on HN and elsewhere.
  - pishpash 5y ago
    That's the thing. There is a war going on between Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and Syria is still festering. Nobody seems to care.
awb 5y ago
> But then I read about the history of the conflict and see that Ukraine has had separatist states and civil war for years. Ukraine voted 90+% in favor of independence from Russia back in the 1991, with 82% of the electorate participating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_of_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_of... Since Putin came to power, he's worked hard to expand Russia's influence outside of it's current borders and back towards it's former USSR or Russian Empire borders. This includes propaganda, instigating rebellions, etc. The "civil war" in Ukraine, started after a pro-Russian President was ousted, and without direct influence over Ukraine, Russia has been fighting a proxy war in the separatist regions. > It isn't like Ukraine is a stable, peaceful, and unwitting nation, like, say, Denmark. Russia is claiming that the people of Ukraine are Russian speaking and historically belong integrated with Russia. It's like Mexico saying they want the Southwest US back. Historically it was part of Mexico, has many Spanish speakers, etc. But where does this stop? What if Italy wants to recreate the Roman Empire or the UK wants to re-establish the British Empire? It's really bizarre to look backwards in time, as there are 30 year olds in Ukraine with kids of their own now who were never alive during the USSR and know nothing but Ukrainian independence. Ideally as a world, we allow people the right to self-determination. But every superpower I can think of throughout history is guilty of influencing (or attacking) foreign countries for political and military advantage and manufacturing any reason imaginable to justify it.

dostick 5y ago

Dont project “separatist” feudal states of 100s year ago on to modern Ukraine. Modern Ukraine is nothing like that.

crisdux 5y ago

This isn't a Ukrainian or Russian perspective, but an alternative perspective. John Mearsheimer gives a popular alternative perspective. He has a realist foreign policy perspective suggesting that the US and the west provoked Russia by trying to push Ukraine to join NATO and by intervening in the protests/coup in 2013/2014. Russia has a legitimate security interest in ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO and become militarized. https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-t...

hamburga 5y ago
Video lecture from Mearsheimer, for the lazy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
SyzygistSix 5y ago
Thank you for a written source. I much prefer it to a video lecture.
msla 5y ago
> Russia has a legitimate security interest in ensuring Ukraine does not join NATO and become militarized. An abusive spouse has a legitimate security interest in ensuring their victim doesn't find a new support network and learn Krav Maga.
- crisdux 5y ago
  Edit: my comment was likely to be misinterpreted so I removed it. I don't agree with your metaphor. I think history and power politics should be respected to maintain world peace.

Ruphin 5y ago

The idea that the (in)stability of a nation can legitimize military incursion by another nation is plain absurd. At what point exactly does a war become legitimate? Is it okay to attack a country when they are entwined in civil war? What percentage of the country needs to be involved in the conflict? What if it is an unarmed but still major internal political conflict? No war is legitimate. Comparing this incursion to NATO "protecting" their national interests in Syria or Iraq is perhaps defensible, but the only logical conclusion is that these interventions were/are equally condemnable.

lend000 5y ago
No one said it was legitimate insofar as that means ethical. I am simply curious about the huge wave of groupthink sentiment that makes no attempt to fill everyone in on the context of the situation, and whether this was actually a logical (absence all ethics) move by Russia. One of the replies to my comment offered an interesting perspective. We live in a real world with real events. Just because us westerners have been shielded from war for most of our lives, and because war is immoral, does not mean that it won't happen, or that it isn't interesting to think about it objectively. Makes one wonder if the fact that most Ukrainians are white people living in an industrialized society has anything to do with the scale of the outpouring of emotion on HN and elsewhere.
- pishpash 5y ago
  That's the thing. There is a war going on between Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and Syria is still festering. Nobody seems to care.

awb 5y ago

> But then I read about the history of the conflict and see that Ukraine has had separatist states and civil war for years. Ukraine voted 90+% in favor of independence from Russia back in the 1991, with 82% of the electorate participating: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_of_Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Independence_of... Since Putin came to power, he's worked hard to expand Russia's influence outside of it's current borders and back towards it's former USSR or Russian Empire borders. This includes propaganda, instigating rebellions, etc. The "civil war" in Ukraine, started after a pro-Russian President was ousted, and without direct influence over Ukraine, Russia has been fighting a proxy war in the separatist regions. > It isn't like Ukraine is a stable, peaceful, and unwitting nation, like, say, Denmark. Russia is claiming that the people of Ukraine are Russian speaking and historically belong integrated with Russia. It's like Mexico saying they want the Southwest US back. Historically it was part of Mexico, has many Spanish speakers, etc. But where does this stop? What if Italy wants to recreate the Roman Empire or the UK wants to re-establish the British Empire? It's really bizarre to look backwards in time, as there are 30 year olds in Ukraine with kids of their own now who were never alive during the USSR and know nothing but Ukrainian independence. Ideally as a world, we allow people the right to self-determination. But every superpower I can think of throughout history is guilty of influencing (or attacking) foreign countries for political and military advantage and manufacturing any reason imaginable to justify it.