3 ms·

I think Russians can articulate a logical reason for the war: in their perception, Ukraine was becoming unacceptably close to the West/NATO and they took a gamb

I think Russians can articulate a logical reason for the war: in their perception, Ukraine was becoming unacceptably close to the West/NATO and they took a gamble to prevent it. Whether the gamble will pay off, we'll see. But I can follow the logic - risk for a chance at upside. What's the upside of blowing up your own pipeline and then denying it?

mandevil 4y ago
I mean, I can tell a just-so-story as well. It's just that, like your explanation, it involves Putin making what seems to me to be a dumb decision. Some parts of game theory emphasizes ostentatious signaling that you can't turn back (e.g. 'win the game of chicken by clearly throwing your steering wheel out of the car before the game starts, so the other person KNOWS you can't turn' line of reasoning, which is stupid but some people occasionally try- the most famous successful example is of course Cortes burning his ships). In support of that, it's possible Putin was afraid of a coup: shortly before the invasion, he made each and every member of the cabinet get up on national TV (recorded to tape and broadcast a few hours later) and give a speech about why the war was a great idea and just the thing for Russia, that seems consistent with preventing an anti-war clique from trying to seize power if the war became unpopular, because you had everyone even close to power on the record, before the war, as major cheerleaders for it. If Shoigu or Lavrov or whomever try to seize power in a coup, banking on ending an unpopular war to give them legitimacy, they have to explain away those speeches and their full-throated support of the war back in 2/2022. Similarly, ostentatiously destroying the pipelines in a way that will take months to fix even if you wanted to removes the ability of a coup to win goodwill and legitimacy with Europe by immediately turning on the pipeline and letting the CH4 flow. Is it what motivated the bombing? I don't know. Does Putin fear a coup by his senior people? I mean in the vague sense that all dictators are aware that it's a threat, certainly. But is he actually taking steps to prevent it? I dunno. Is this explanation plausible? I dunno, but I wouldn't bet my life on it. Is it just as plausible as the US or Poland or Norway or Ukraine or even Germany blowing up the pipeline? That I do think is a clear yes. Which is why I paraphrased that analyst before, none of the explanations really seem plausible, but one of them has to be true.
- aetherson 4y ago
  Would a coup struggle to get the goodwill of Europe? Kinda feels like they'd top themselves up on European goodwill just by, you know, removing Putin.
  - XorNot 4y ago
    Goodwill from Europe is not currency, and they're also not stupid collectively: the most likely outcome of removing Putin is a power-struggle vacuum which you either think you can win, or plan to buy your way free of. The problem with being part of a conspiracy to overthrow the leader of your country, is the only thing you really know about your co-conspirators is that they're traitors willing to stage a coup.
  - thephyber 4y ago
    A coup could result in a more or less desirable regime, from a western perspective. I’ve read that Putin is getting lots of pressure from his extreme right that criticize him of half-assing the invasion and not being harsh enough on Ukrainian citizens. Be careful what you wish for when you consider a coup. It likely won’t be the intelligent moderates with peaceful sensibilities that do it. Those types have already left or are keeping their heads down.
thoewiruoi2343 4y ago
[flagged]
epistasis 4y ago
We don't need to speculate here, Putin has been quite open with his weird attempts at being a historian, that he openly publishes and which make his worldview extremely clear. Ignoring these works from his own hand, would be as hopeless as understanding Hitler's motivations without understanding Mein Kampf. Putin views "Ukraine" as not a real nation, and Ukrainians as a subservient people that belong to the Russian empire and specifically to him, as the ruler of the Russian empire. Too "close" to the West/NATO is not the real issueg, rather it's the audacity of a subservient race pretending that they don't owe everything to the racially superior Russians. I run into this all the time with Russians, even here on HN. They view all Slavic people as "little Russians" and their personal serfs. All the other Slavic countries as "little Russias" that belong to their true master Slavic nation. And this worldview is 100% consistent with Putin's actions. He never thought that Ukrainians could ever resist, because they are supposed to be inherently inferior to Russians. And for the moment, that is kinda working in Belarus, and it worked in Georgia, but Ukraine has been different. Ukraine has been preparing for the past 8 years, purging all the traitors from their army, and working on removing Russian corruption. And really Ukrainians are fundamentally different from Russians. Ukrainians experienced Stalin and thought about what they could do to prevent it in the future. Russians view the terribleness of bad leaders as something like the weather, or a natural disaster: they take no agency when it comes to their rulers, they are sheep, but they console themselves with their perceived racial superiority over the other subjects of the empire. The other subjects are not the same...
thephyber 4y ago
Putin’s statement the night of the invasion: [1] [1] https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-putin-recognizes-independence-donetsk-luhansk-ukraines-donbas-region https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-put...
- epistasis 4y ago
  Exactly, the NATO stuff is nonsense from Westerners who are trying to backform a rationale to support Russia, that directly contradicts the motives of Russia. Those who now claim NATO as justification for Russia's aggression were also saying that Russia would not invade as the US predicted, right up until it happened. For true motivations, your video is spot on, and see for example Putin's 2021 essay which was basically a declaration of war: https://huri.harvard.edu/news/putin-historical-unity https://huri.harvard.edu/news/putin-historical-unity And Russian TV since then has shown that the entire society is being mobilized in similar ways into embracing genocide, such as here: https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1626266991739666434?s=46&t=z00fWB4iIQAoZbzaLEANYQ https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/16262669917396664... Claiming that Russia is somehow justified in their imperialism is basically admitting to complete ignorance of Russia, it's aggressions, and it's goals.
  - thephyber 4y ago
    I don’t buy the Mearsheimer narrative as the primary purpose for invasion, but I do think it contributed in a small way. I just happen to believe that Putin wanted the prize, had flawed intelligence, and had gotten away with progressively larger incursions (Georgia, Crimea, fomented rebellions in the Donbas, etc) and nobody was willing/able to stop him, so he had no reason to believe they would in Kyiv. I’m also not convinced that we know enough of the story yet. Water shortage in Crimea, Putin pressured from the political hardliners, maybe a Wag The Dog situation, possible newly discovered hydrocarbon deposits in UA, loss of energy supply lines, or simply sending a message to other former USSR satellite states.
    - epistasis 4y ago
      I read a lot about Ukraine, live with Ukrainians, consume lots of non-Ukrainian Eastern European history and commentary, but I don't know Mearshiemer's point of view. He looks to be a "realist" which I tend to think of as fabulists, so I will happily continue in my ignorance of his views. What you say are all strong possibilities, in my view. But IMHO the strongest is that he's getting old, drunk on power, too steeped in the pre-WW2 imperial history mindset, and wants a legacy. And when combined with the limp response to his past misdeeds in Georgia, Syria, etc., and watching what happened to Gaddafi in Libya, he massively miscalculated. But if Ukraine had folded quickly, he would not have miscalculated, IMHO. Western powers, with Ukraine overrun, would probably have just let him have it. If Ukrainians didn't stand up for themselves, put up a fight way above their weight class, and enable the West a trivially easy method of support with just ammo and small amounts of equipment, this would have ended the way of Georgia, with lots of hand wringing and weak sanctions. Maybe more hand wringing than Georgia, because Ukraine is clearly closer to Western Europe, and Ukraine had been the actual battleground in prior European wars, but still nothing more than hand wringing. It's possible that there would not even be NATO applications from Finland. Nobody fights for somebody who won't fight for themselves, and Ukrainian identity has been growing exceptionally strong. Even amongst those in the East with parents from Russia, who only know a very little of the Ukrainian language, a strong civic Ukrainian identity is fomenting, in a country with many language and many ethnicities. My hope for the future of Ukraine is to band together with other post-colonial nations, especially those in Africa, to use their massive brain power to build new industries, rather than shipping all their best minds to other countries. Perhaps not likely, but there is a new consciousness rising which makes a huge amount of growth possible.

mandevil 4y ago

I mean, I can tell a just-so-story as well. It's just that, like your explanation, it involves Putin making what seems to me to be a dumb decision. Some parts of game theory emphasizes ostentatious signaling that you can't turn back (e.g. 'win the game of chicken by clearly throwing your steering wheel out of the car before the game starts, so the other person KNOWS you can't turn' line of reasoning, which is stupid but some people occasionally try- the most famous successful example is of course Cortes burning his ships). In support of that, it's possible Putin was afraid of a coup: shortly before the invasion, he made each and every member of the cabinet get up on national TV (recorded to tape and broadcast a few hours later) and give a speech about why the war was a great idea and just the thing for Russia, that seems consistent with preventing an anti-war clique from trying to seize power if the war became unpopular, because you had everyone even close to power on the record, before the war, as major cheerleaders for it. If Shoigu or Lavrov or whomever try to seize power in a coup, banking on ending an unpopular war to give them legitimacy, they have to explain away those speeches and their full-throated support of the war back in 2/2022. Similarly, ostentatiously destroying the pipelines in a way that will take months to fix even if you wanted to removes the ability of a coup to win goodwill and legitimacy with Europe by immediately turning on the pipeline and letting the CH4 flow. Is it what motivated the bombing? I don't know. Does Putin fear a coup by his senior people? I mean in the vague sense that all dictators are aware that it's a threat, certainly. But is he actually taking steps to prevent it? I dunno. Is this explanation plausible? I dunno, but I wouldn't bet my life on it. Is it just as plausible as the US or Poland or Norway or Ukraine or even Germany blowing up the pipeline? That I do think is a clear yes. Which is why I paraphrased that analyst before, none of the explanations really seem plausible, but one of them has to be true.

aetherson 4y ago
Would a coup struggle to get the goodwill of Europe? Kinda feels like they'd top themselves up on European goodwill just by, you know, removing Putin.
- XorNot 4y ago
  Goodwill from Europe is not currency, and they're also not stupid collectively: the most likely outcome of removing Putin is a power-struggle vacuum which you either think you can win, or plan to buy your way free of. The problem with being part of a conspiracy to overthrow the leader of your country, is the only thing you really know about your co-conspirators is that they're traitors willing to stage a coup.
- thephyber 4y ago
  A coup could result in a more or less desirable regime, from a western perspective. I’ve read that Putin is getting lots of pressure from his extreme right that criticize him of half-assing the invasion and not being harsh enough on Ukrainian citizens. Be careful what you wish for when you consider a coup. It likely won’t be the intelligent moderates with peaceful sensibilities that do it. Those types have already left or are keeping their heads down.

thoewiruoi2343 4y ago

[flagged]

epistasis 4y ago

We don't need to speculate here, Putin has been quite open with his weird attempts at being a historian, that he openly publishes and which make his worldview extremely clear. Ignoring these works from his own hand, would be as hopeless as understanding Hitler's motivations without understanding Mein Kampf. Putin views "Ukraine" as not a real nation, and Ukrainians as a subservient people that belong to the Russian empire and specifically to him, as the ruler of the Russian empire. Too "close" to the West/NATO is not the real issueg, rather it's the audacity of a subservient race pretending that they don't owe everything to the racially superior Russians. I run into this all the time with Russians, even here on HN. They view all Slavic people as "little Russians" and their personal serfs. All the other Slavic countries as "little Russias" that belong to their true master Slavic nation. And this worldview is 100% consistent with Putin's actions. He never thought that Ukrainians could ever resist, because they are supposed to be inherently inferior to Russians. And for the moment, that is kinda working in Belarus, and it worked in Georgia, but Ukraine has been different. Ukraine has been preparing for the past 8 years, purging all the traitors from their army, and working on removing Russian corruption. And really Ukrainians are fundamentally different from Russians. Ukrainians experienced Stalin and thought about what they could do to prevent it in the future. Russians view the terribleness of bad leaders as something like the weather, or a natural disaster: they take no agency when it comes to their rulers, they are sheep, but they console themselves with their perceived racial superiority over the other subjects of the empire. The other subjects are not the same...

thephyber 4y ago

Putin’s statement the night of the invasion: [1] [1] https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-putin-recognizes-independence-donetsk-luhansk-ukraines-donbas-region https://www.c-span.org/video/?518097-2/russian-president-put...

epistasis 4y ago
Exactly, the NATO stuff is nonsense from Westerners who are trying to backform a rationale to support Russia, that directly contradicts the motives of Russia. Those who now claim NATO as justification for Russia's aggression were also saying that Russia would not invade as the US predicted, right up until it happened. For true motivations, your video is spot on, and see for example Putin's 2021 essay which was basically a declaration of war: https://huri.harvard.edu/news/putin-historical-unity https://huri.harvard.edu/news/putin-historical-unity And Russian TV since then has shown that the entire society is being mobilized in similar ways into embracing genocide, such as here: https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1626266991739666434?s=46&t=z00fWB4iIQAoZbzaLEANYQ https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/16262669917396664... Claiming that Russia is somehow justified in their imperialism is basically admitting to complete ignorance of Russia, it's aggressions, and it's goals.
- thephyber 4y ago
  I don’t buy the Mearsheimer narrative as the primary purpose for invasion, but I do think it contributed in a small way. I just happen to believe that Putin wanted the prize, had flawed intelligence, and had gotten away with progressively larger incursions (Georgia, Crimea, fomented rebellions in the Donbas, etc) and nobody was willing/able to stop him, so he had no reason to believe they would in Kyiv. I’m also not convinced that we know enough of the story yet. Water shortage in Crimea, Putin pressured from the political hardliners, maybe a Wag The Dog situation, possible newly discovered hydrocarbon deposits in UA, loss of energy supply lines, or simply sending a message to other former USSR satellite states.
  - epistasis 4y ago
    I read a lot about Ukraine, live with Ukrainians, consume lots of non-Ukrainian Eastern European history and commentary, but I don't know Mearshiemer's point of view. He looks to be a "realist" which I tend to think of as fabulists, so I will happily continue in my ignorance of his views. What you say are all strong possibilities, in my view. But IMHO the strongest is that he's getting old, drunk on power, too steeped in the pre-WW2 imperial history mindset, and wants a legacy. And when combined with the limp response to his past misdeeds in Georgia, Syria, etc., and watching what happened to Gaddafi in Libya, he massively miscalculated. But if Ukraine had folded quickly, he would not have miscalculated, IMHO. Western powers, with Ukraine overrun, would probably have just let him have it. If Ukrainians didn't stand up for themselves, put up a fight way above their weight class, and enable the West a trivially easy method of support with just ammo and small amounts of equipment, this would have ended the way of Georgia, with lots of hand wringing and weak sanctions. Maybe more hand wringing than Georgia, because Ukraine is clearly closer to Western Europe, and Ukraine had been the actual battleground in prior European wars, but still nothing more than hand wringing. It's possible that there would not even be NATO applications from Finland. Nobody fights for somebody who won't fight for themselves, and Ukrainian identity has been growing exceptionally strong. Even amongst those in the East with parents from Russia, who only know a very little of the Ukrainian language, a strong civic Ukrainian identity is fomenting, in a country with many language and many ethnicities. My hope for the future of Ukraine is to band together with other post-colonial nations, especially those in Africa, to use their massive brain power to build new industries, rather than shipping all their best minds to other countries. Perhaps not likely, but there is a new consciousness rising which makes a huge amount of growth possible.