5 ms·

Surely Russia will be declaring war on the West if this happens. Certainly a load of Russian naval assets will be sunk if they start cutting Internet cables and

Surely Russia will be declaring war on the West if this happens. Certainly a load of Russian naval assets will be sunk if they start cutting Internet cables and attacking Norway’s gas infrastructure is an attack on NATO and would elicit an equivalent response against Russian gas infrastructure. It can’t be done without WW3. Or is Putin assuming he can behave like a gangster and eventually we’ll back down? I’m not sure this is possible given that any sign of weakness leads to more threats.

H8crilA 4y ago
They (most likely they) already cut Norway cables to Svalbard last year. Also, see the history of this vessel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_research_vessel_Yantar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_research_vessel_Yantar
- andy_ppp 4y ago
  The threat is there, sure, but they have to understand that escalation like this will and has to lead to escalation from the West, otherwise we are showing Russia can do what it likes without costs. Or we can just appease them and watch them try to destroy our way of life anyway.
  - H8crilA 4y ago
    They are already paying the price: hydrocarbons are mostly gone as a source of income; besides they cannot even spend that income due to sanctions. And yet they continue the "hybrid war". I'm on your side, but I'm also realistic.
    - replygirl 4y ago
      last time i read, lower volume was offset by higher prices and russia stood to increase both their export earnings and their domestic stockpile
      - zelphirkalt 4y ago
        The fewer buyers you have, the less flexible you can be with you prices.
      - zaarn 4y ago
        Higher prices on the open market yes, but not enough to offset the volume loss. A good chunk of new volume is sold to China, which buys at staggering discounts (as high as 50% over market rates).
hackly 4y ago
It may elicit an illicit response.
rmind 4y ago
The civilized world must respond, no questions about that. However, the idea of "WW3" is wrong and helps the Russian regime to instigate the fears in our societies. Unfortunately, it was echoed even by some top politicians. Let's put it this way: - Before all sanctions, the Russian economy was about the same size as the Italian economy. Russia barely has any allies: Belarus and to some extent Iran (with some vocal supporters like Venezuela or Syria, but they have nothing substantial to offer). Neither China nor India will back Russia. You can see how isolated Russia is in the United Nations (e.g. UNGA Resolution ES-11/4). - Russia has lost most of its conventional military capacity and capability in Ukraine. Russia is nowhere near the Soviet Union with its Warsaw Pact satellites. The illusion of its mighty power was based on propaganda. To the point where Putin himself began believe his own propaganda and Russia's invincibility. - Yet, they threaten NATO and the aligned countries. NATO is a military superpower. These countries combined (USA, EU, UK) have a population of ~1 billion people. It is also nearly a half of the world economy. There will be no WW3.
- roenxi 4y ago
  Funnily enough, before WWII I suspect a lot of people in Europe were predicting there would be no WWII because the consequences would be so horrific for the Germans that it just wouldn't happen. Then the Germans did it anyway. The outcomes were somewhat predictable - all their leadership was killed and their state was dismantled. Just because the consequences for Russia would be unimaginably bad doesn't mean much. What is important is that the de-escalation happens. And part of that involves listening to what the Russians are saying earnestly, rather than going with millennia of monkey-instincts that say to stop listening to the out group when times are tough.
  - rmind 4y ago
    World War II wasn't just Germany. As a matter of fact, Poland was invanded jointly by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. I think you partly missed the point. Anyway.. It is certainly important to de-escalate, but it cannot happen under the Russian terms. The current war in Ukraine is a war of conquest. Moreover, it is genocidal (as dictator in Russia is questining the very existance of the Ukrainian nation). There must be serious consequences for this, otherwise we just go one or rather two centuries back when invading, conquering territories and enslaving the local populations was a norm.
dirtyid 4y ago
> equivalent response against Russian gas infrastructure. It can’t be done without WW3. In terms of equivalent / proportional response, RU can fuck with maritime infra and disproportionately disrupt NATO countries more reliant on imports and trade flows / connectivitiy. NATO would have to escalate to disrupting RU within RU soil, or hit one of their critical connections to PRC which would be... bold.
- jopsen 4y ago
  Disrupts maritime infrastructure and NATO would start escorting Russian ships home. If not straight up convert their navy into a submarine only fleet. I don't think the west would take kindly to commerce raiders, or cutting of cables. If Russian forces NATO to make a kinetic response, then what is Russia's next play? It's probably fine for Russian propaganda to claim they are fighting NATO in Ukraine, but that line becomes much harder to keep if they are suddenly fighting NATO.
  - dirtyid 4y ago
    The question was about equivalent / proportional response, for which RU has more leverage and impose more costs by virtue of being more resource/economically autarkic. NATO of course free to escalate if they think they can win the escalation game (i.e. sinking RU fleet), then it's a question of how far RU willing to go to fight NATO, in which case it's matter of who has more to lose and can stomach more loss, up to and including tactical nukes. Does RU want full spectrum fight with NATO that could go nuclear? Probably not, but does RU think it can sabatoge NATO maritime infra with managable conesquences, IMO yes. NATO propaganda will also have to work hard trying to rationalize going into recession for a buffer state versus going war with a nuclear state.

H8crilA 4y ago

They (most likely they) already cut Norway cables to Svalbard last year. Also, see the history of this vessel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_research_vessel_Yantar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_research_vessel_Yantar

andy_ppp 4y ago
The threat is there, sure, but they have to understand that escalation like this will and has to lead to escalation from the West, otherwise we are showing Russia can do what it likes without costs. Or we can just appease them and watch them try to destroy our way of life anyway.
- H8crilA 4y ago
  They are already paying the price: hydrocarbons are mostly gone as a source of income; besides they cannot even spend that income due to sanctions. And yet they continue the "hybrid war". I'm on your side, but I'm also realistic.
  - replygirl 4y ago
    last time i read, lower volume was offset by higher prices and russia stood to increase both their export earnings and their domestic stockpile
    - zelphirkalt 4y ago
      The fewer buyers you have, the less flexible you can be with you prices.
    - zaarn 4y ago
      Higher prices on the open market yes, but not enough to offset the volume loss. A good chunk of new volume is sold to China, which buys at staggering discounts (as high as 50% over market rates).

hackly 4y ago

It may elicit an illicit response.

rmind 4y ago

The civilized world must respond, no questions about that. However, the idea of "WW3" is wrong and helps the Russian regime to instigate the fears in our societies. Unfortunately, it was echoed even by some top politicians. Let's put it this way: - Before all sanctions, the Russian economy was about the same size as the Italian economy. Russia barely has any allies: Belarus and to some extent Iran (with some vocal supporters like Venezuela or Syria, but they have nothing substantial to offer). Neither China nor India will back Russia. You can see how isolated Russia is in the United Nations (e.g. UNGA Resolution ES-11/4). - Russia has lost most of its conventional military capacity and capability in Ukraine. Russia is nowhere near the Soviet Union with its Warsaw Pact satellites. The illusion of its mighty power was based on propaganda. To the point where Putin himself began believe his own propaganda and Russia's invincibility. - Yet, they threaten NATO and the aligned countries. NATO is a military superpower. These countries combined (USA, EU, UK) have a population of ~1 billion people. It is also nearly a half of the world economy. There will be no WW3.

roenxi 4y ago
Funnily enough, before WWII I suspect a lot of people in Europe were predicting there would be no WWII because the consequences would be so horrific for the Germans that it just wouldn't happen. Then the Germans did it anyway. The outcomes were somewhat predictable - all their leadership was killed and their state was dismantled. Just because the consequences for Russia would be unimaginably bad doesn't mean much. What is important is that the de-escalation happens. And part of that involves listening to what the Russians are saying earnestly, rather than going with millennia of monkey-instincts that say to stop listening to the out group when times are tough.
- rmind 4y ago
  World War II wasn't just Germany. As a matter of fact, Poland was invanded jointly by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. I think you partly missed the point. Anyway.. It is certainly important to de-escalate, but it cannot happen under the Russian terms. The current war in Ukraine is a war of conquest. Moreover, it is genocidal (as dictator in Russia is questining the very existance of the Ukrainian nation). There must be serious consequences for this, otherwise we just go one or rather two centuries back when invading, conquering territories and enslaving the local populations was a norm.

dirtyid 4y ago

> equivalent response against Russian gas infrastructure. It can’t be done without WW3. In terms of equivalent / proportional response, RU can fuck with maritime infra and disproportionately disrupt NATO countries more reliant on imports and trade flows / connectivitiy. NATO would have to escalate to disrupting RU within RU soil, or hit one of their critical connections to PRC which would be... bold.

jopsen 4y ago
Disrupts maritime infrastructure and NATO would start escorting Russian ships home. If not straight up convert their navy into a submarine only fleet. I don't think the west would take kindly to commerce raiders, or cutting of cables. If Russian forces NATO to make a kinetic response, then what is Russia's next play? It's probably fine for Russian propaganda to claim they are fighting NATO in Ukraine, but that line becomes much harder to keep if they are suddenly fighting NATO.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  The question was about equivalent / proportional response, for which RU has more leverage and impose more costs by virtue of being more resource/economically autarkic. NATO of course free to escalate if they think they can win the escalation game (i.e. sinking RU fleet), then it's a question of how far RU willing to go to fight NATO, in which case it's matter of who has more to lose and can stomach more loss, up to and including tactical nukes. Does RU want full spectrum fight with NATO that could go nuclear? Probably not, but does RU think it can sabatoge NATO maritime infra with managable conesquences, IMO yes. NATO propaganda will also have to work hard trying to rationalize going into recession for a buffer state versus going war with a nuclear state.