4 ms·

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-ukr

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.

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.