5 ms·

It’s more a political signal sent to the west. Russia was designing the war in Ukraine as a special operation. That put some limits on what they could officiall

It’s more a political signal sent to the west. Russia was designing the war in Ukraine as a special operation. That put some limits on what they could officially do. With the referendum in Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia is reframing the conflict as happening on Russian soil. That allows them to declare it a war and open the door to nuclear retaliation. Mobilising and calling it a proxy war play with this line. It’s basically Russia telling the west they are serious about escalating if they keep pushing.

checkyoursudo 4y ago
> It’s basically Russia telling the west they are serious about escalating if they keep pushing. I think that's the message Russia believes it is conveying. The information I think they are really signaling (outside of the rhetoric), and what I suspect Nato sees, is that Russia is conceding that it cannot win and hoping its bluff will freeze the conflict, which I don't think it will do.
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  Russia remains a nuclear power. NATO should be and is careful. I agree they know they can’t win but they now need an exit ramp. That’s what I personally read in their posture. It would probably be wise to give them one.
  - TillE 4y ago
    The "exit ramp" is that they withdraw from Ukraine, or at the very very least they withdraw to the lines that existed before 2022. I'm really not sure what else people who say this mean.
    - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
      What I mean is that we need to use diplomacy to allow Russia a way to enter negotiations and stop the war while keeping a modicum of face. There is absolutely no chance Russia just leaves Ukraine on their own while saying "we have lost, we were bad and will now behave as you wish" so there would be little point insisting on that. If what we want is a come back to pre-invasion frontiers we need to give them a way to spin that as an acceptable outcome. The alternative is escalation and that doesn’t seem to end well. It might be what the USA wants - they are unlikely to be the ones nuked after all but Europe would be bearing the most of it and that’s not something I wish.
      - sofixa 4y ago
        Russia has plenty of nukes for the US and Europe if Putin decides the murder-suicide path is the only way forward. The problem with your line of thinking is that Russia needs to lose. It's citizens need to understand that it has lost. Germany after WWI didn't and it gave rise to the stab in the back myth and nationalism. If Russia is allowed to spin anything as a victory here, it and it's citizens would learn nothing and it will just be a truce. Not to mention how extremely unfair would be to deny Ukraine it's integrity to placate Russia, a violent genocidal invader.
        checkyoursudo 4y ago
        I tend to agree with this. Anything less than unequivocal, total loss will mean that we are right back at this in 8 or 12 years. Nuclear countries must not be allowed to take what they want and threaten nuclear destruction if anyone tries to stop them. That would be a terrible outcome.
        WastingMyTime89 4y ago
        What is that supposed to achieve exactly? The reverse of what you are writing actually happened at the end of WW1 by the way. Germany definitely understood they lost. They were humiliated, were dragged to Versailles to sign an armistice treaty and had to pay an insane reparation amount. That’s what gave rise to nationalism. Russia army has been mostly destroyed. Its economy is faltering. Its ability to wage war is greatly reduced. Its standing on the international scene forever diminished. There is no point in dragging them in the mud further than strictly necessary. Why back them in a corner to the point they are tempted to do the unthinkable?
        sofixa 4y ago
        > They were humiliated, were dragged to Versailles to sign an armistice treaty and had to pay an insane reparation amount. Technically the armistice is in Compiègne, the peace treaty is in Versailles (as revenge for the proclamation of the German empire there after the Franco-Prussian war), but yes, however > Germany definitely understood they lost. This is false. Germans were getting glorious victories propaganda up until Ludendorff said they can't win, and threw the hot potato at the Kaiser and a civilian government was formed to seek a peace. So from a citizen's perspective, there were privations but they were winning until suddenly there's a civilian government, communist rebels and we have surrendered (to be later humiliated). Germany wasn't occupied. The German people didn't understand they lost, really, and why. Hence Ludendorff's stab in the back myth and nationalism proliferated. > Russia army has been mostly destroyed. Its economy is faltering. Its ability to wage war is greatly reduced. Its standing on the international scene forever diminished. But Russians don't know that because they're being fed propaganda to the opposite effect. So if today Putin declares withdrawal, Russian people won't know what happened and why, so we'll be back at it in a few years time. The point isn't to make Russia suffer for the humiliation, but Russians need to understand they've lost and all the horrors they've inflicted while losing. And yes, they should pay for it.
  - polotics 4y ago
    Who is "they" in this dialectic? The Russian people definitely deserves a future. They could even win freedom from corruption, also win democracy, and even pluralism, thanks to the outcome of this war. They deserve no less. Vladimir and his cronies deserves a hefty wake-up call...
    - rasz 4y ago
      russian people should do something about it then. Iron curtain didnt fell on it own, there were years of strikes involving bloody clashes with military. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970_Polish_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970_Polish_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_1976_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_1976_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Lublin_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Lublin_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_Wujek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_Wujek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Popie%C5%82uszko#Assassination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Popie%C5%82uszko#Assassi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Polish_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Polish_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(Polish_trade_union) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(Polish_trade_union... Similar things were happening in Czechoslovakia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution and other European countries under Soviet occupation.
    - emptyfile 4y ago
      Here in the real world no one gets anything because they "deserve it". If they want a future they have to fight for it.
lolc 4y ago
I don't think the signal was intended primarily for the international audience. Putin is under a lot of pressure from hawks in his own ranks to win this war. They were asking him why he isn't mobilising. And now they will be saying that it's not enough. I guess there won't be enough boots for the new conscripts, so this dynamic will be interesting to watch.
- saiya-jin 4y ago
  I really don't think he is facing any kind of true rivalry here. Read up a bit (ie [1] is fantastic since its from 2018 but still 100% valid) on the structures of power and ingrained potential (and limits) of corruption that he gives to those under him. Its not like there is any democracy, other hawks/oligarchs with big ego need to shut up and follow within their constraints or they are murdered or imprisoned, usually pretty visibly, sometimes with whole families. He did it in very smart way, I leave him that (plenty of KGB experience to learn from). Hitler and other dictators were proper amateurs compared to how Russia is run today. Nobody on their own has enough power to stand against him. He has a separate branch of paramilitary forces (on top of Wagner, GRU and KGB forces) that answer only to him and is there only to protect him. What it would require is massive conspiracy and cooperation of literally all of his underlings to topple him down, which is unrealistic to ever happen. Lone shooter/poison deliverer from his closest circle may have the best chance, but I presume he has multiple safeguards there too. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw
  - lolc 4y ago
    Yea I didn't want to imply that they could replace him. Or that they even aspire to that. It's more that Putin is losing the narrative. As long as people believe in his strong Russia, they are much easier to govern. As he's losing that story, he has to govern by fear. Much harder, because people will be weasely, instead of proud. In the end, aside from talking to a bunch of Russians, I don't know the place. So my understanding is incomplete I'm sure.
tromp 4y ago
> With the referendum in Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia is reframing the conflict as happening on Russian soil. That allows them to declare it a war By their logic it would allow them to declare it a Ukrainian Special Military Operation...

checkyoursudo 4y ago

> It’s basically Russia telling the west they are serious about escalating if they keep pushing. I think that's the message Russia believes it is conveying. The information I think they are really signaling (outside of the rhetoric), and what I suspect Nato sees, is that Russia is conceding that it cannot win and hoping its bluff will freeze the conflict, which I don't think it will do.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago
Russia remains a nuclear power. NATO should be and is careful. I agree they know they can’t win but they now need an exit ramp. That’s what I personally read in their posture. It would probably be wise to give them one.
- TillE 4y ago
  The "exit ramp" is that they withdraw from Ukraine, or at the very very least they withdraw to the lines that existed before 2022. I'm really not sure what else people who say this mean.
  - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
    What I mean is that we need to use diplomacy to allow Russia a way to enter negotiations and stop the war while keeping a modicum of face. There is absolutely no chance Russia just leaves Ukraine on their own while saying "we have lost, we were bad and will now behave as you wish" so there would be little point insisting on that. If what we want is a come back to pre-invasion frontiers we need to give them a way to spin that as an acceptable outcome. The alternative is escalation and that doesn’t seem to end well. It might be what the USA wants - they are unlikely to be the ones nuked after all but Europe would be bearing the most of it and that’s not something I wish.
    - sofixa 4y ago
      Russia has plenty of nukes for the US and Europe if Putin decides the murder-suicide path is the only way forward. The problem with your line of thinking is that Russia needs to lose. It's citizens need to understand that it has lost. Germany after WWI didn't and it gave rise to the stab in the back myth and nationalism. If Russia is allowed to spin anything as a victory here, it and it's citizens would learn nothing and it will just be a truce. Not to mention how extremely unfair would be to deny Ukraine it's integrity to placate Russia, a violent genocidal invader.
      - checkyoursudo 4y ago
        I tend to agree with this. Anything less than unequivocal, total loss will mean that we are right back at this in 8 or 12 years. Nuclear countries must not be allowed to take what they want and threaten nuclear destruction if anyone tries to stop them. That would be a terrible outcome.
      - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
        What is that supposed to achieve exactly? The reverse of what you are writing actually happened at the end of WW1 by the way. Germany definitely understood they lost. They were humiliated, were dragged to Versailles to sign an armistice treaty and had to pay an insane reparation amount. That’s what gave rise to nationalism. Russia army has been mostly destroyed. Its economy is faltering. Its ability to wage war is greatly reduced. Its standing on the international scene forever diminished. There is no point in dragging them in the mud further than strictly necessary. Why back them in a corner to the point they are tempted to do the unthinkable?
        sofixa 4y ago
        > They were humiliated, were dragged to Versailles to sign an armistice treaty and had to pay an insane reparation amount. Technically the armistice is in Compiègne, the peace treaty is in Versailles (as revenge for the proclamation of the German empire there after the Franco-Prussian war), but yes, however > Germany definitely understood they lost. This is false. Germans were getting glorious victories propaganda up until Ludendorff said they can't win, and threw the hot potato at the Kaiser and a civilian government was formed to seek a peace. So from a citizen's perspective, there were privations but they were winning until suddenly there's a civilian government, communist rebels and we have surrendered (to be later humiliated). Germany wasn't occupied. The German people didn't understand they lost, really, and why. Hence Ludendorff's stab in the back myth and nationalism proliferated. > Russia army has been mostly destroyed. Its economy is faltering. Its ability to wage war is greatly reduced. Its standing on the international scene forever diminished. But Russians don't know that because they're being fed propaganda to the opposite effect. So if today Putin declares withdrawal, Russian people won't know what happened and why, so we'll be back at it in a few years time. The point isn't to make Russia suffer for the humiliation, but Russians need to understand they've lost and all the horrors they've inflicted while losing. And yes, they should pay for it.
- polotics 4y ago
  Who is "they" in this dialectic? The Russian people definitely deserves a future. They could even win freedom from corruption, also win democracy, and even pluralism, thanks to the outcome of this war. They deserve no less. Vladimir and his cronies deserves a hefty wake-up call...
  - rasz 4y ago
    russian people should do something about it then. Iron curtain didnt fell on it own, there were years of strikes involving bloody clashes with military. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970_Polish_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970_Polish_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_1976_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_1976_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Lublin_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Lublin_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_Wujek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacification_of_Wujek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Popie%C5%82uszko#Assassination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerzy_Popie%C5%82uszko#Assassi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Polish_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Polish_strikes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(Polish_trade_union) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_(Polish_trade_union... Similar things were happening in Czechoslovakia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution and other European countries under Soviet occupation.
  - emptyfile 4y ago
    Here in the real world no one gets anything because they "deserve it". If they want a future they have to fight for it.

lolc 4y ago

I don't think the signal was intended primarily for the international audience. Putin is under a lot of pressure from hawks in his own ranks to win this war. They were asking him why he isn't mobilising. And now they will be saying that it's not enough. I guess there won't be enough boots for the new conscripts, so this dynamic will be interesting to watch.

saiya-jin 4y ago
I really don't think he is facing any kind of true rivalry here. Read up a bit (ie [1] is fantastic since its from 2018 but still 100% valid) on the structures of power and ingrained potential (and limits) of corruption that he gives to those under him. Its not like there is any democracy, other hawks/oligarchs with big ego need to shut up and follow within their constraints or they are murdered or imprisoned, usually pretty visibly, sometimes with whole families. He did it in very smart way, I leave him that (plenty of KGB experience to learn from). Hitler and other dictators were proper amateurs compared to how Russia is run today. Nobody on their own has enough power to stand against him. He has a separate branch of paramilitary forces (on top of Wagner, GRU and KGB forces) that answer only to him and is there only to protect him. What it would require is massive conspiracy and cooperation of literally all of his underlings to topple him down, which is unrealistic to ever happen. Lone shooter/poison deliverer from his closest circle may have the best chance, but I presume he has multiple safeguards there too. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw
- lolc 4y ago
  Yea I didn't want to imply that they could replace him. Or that they even aspire to that. It's more that Putin is losing the narrative. As long as people believe in his strong Russia, they are much easier to govern. As he's losing that story, he has to govern by fear. Much harder, because people will be weasely, instead of proud. In the end, aside from talking to a bunch of Russians, I don't know the place. So my understanding is incomplete I'm sure.

tromp 4y ago

> With the referendum in Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia is reframing the conflict as happening on Russian soil. That allows them to declare it a war By their logic it would allow them to declare it a Ukrainian Special Military Operation...