3 ms·

Precisely this. I'd argue that ALL wars are foundationally resource wars - in contrast to the limited scope of what most historians would point to as "resource

Precisely this. I'd argue that ALL wars are foundationally resource wars - in contrast to the limited scope of what most historians would point to as "resource conflicts" that are more acute conflicts. Iran-Iraq is a perfect example of this 1. Proto-states of Iraq and Iran claimed monopoly access to the Shatt Al Arab [1] river starting 3000 years ago (the original resource conflict) 2. These proto-states eventually signed a treaty in 1937 3. Iran stopped abiding by the 1937 treaty in 1969 - because they wanted fewer constraints on their use of the resource 4. Iraq and Iran then agreed to the Treaty of Algiers in 1975 5. Iraq kicked off the first derivative conflict by invading Iran - because they wanted fewer constraints on their use of the resource - this time funded by the Kuwaitis 6. The second derivative conflict started when Iraq invaded Kuwait to cancel the debt it had with Kuwait leading to the.... 7. Third derivative conflict called Desert Storm The desire for greedy monopolization of resources to the exclusion of others - based on a fear of persistent and forever scarcity is the ACTUAL root problem. There's plenty of river to go around as was proven time again with treaties, but greedy avarice rules the day and the entirety of the Levant has handicapped itself with these repeated insane wars based on fake scarcity. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shatt_al-Arab https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shatt_al-Arab

imtringued 3y ago
>I'd argue that ALL wars are foundationally resource wars - I mean, this much should be obvious. When Prussia, Russia and Austria partitioned Poland, they weren't exactly happy about the polish citizens they acquired.
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  It's far from obvious in the gov/policy world - either out of ignorance or because they don't actually care about anything but keeping their own power. As in, if you were to interrogate policy makers and elected officials, they have no incentive nor interest in solving root problems I think the world would benefit from a truly objective international negotiation facilitation organization. And yes I'm aware that "objective" isn't a platonic object - but I think we can get close to that for human systems if properly organized (like Médecins Sans Frontières).
denton-scratch 3y ago
> ALL wars are foundationally resource wars I can't see any conflict over resources between Russia and Ukraine. Both countries have abundant natural resources, including minerals and water; both are large net exporters of food. As far as I can see, that war is primarily about ideology, not natural resources. At a pinch you could argue that Russian naval access to the Black Sea is access to a natural resource; but then Russia had unquestioned access to the Black Sea before the invasion of Crimea.
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  >As far as I can see, that war is primarily about ideology, not natural resources. The area of Ukraine is and has been the Bread-Basket of Europe since pre-modernity and also is EXTREMELY strategic for logistics routes from the "East" to the "West" Which is why it has literally forever been disputed territory So yes the conflict is foundationally about food and logistics access https://www.farminglife.com/country-and-farming/why-is-ukraine-known-as-the-breadbasket-of-europe-heres-what-it-produces-and-exports-3584361 https://www.farminglife.com/country-and-farming/why-is-ukrai...
  - denton-scratch 3y ago
    > and also is EXTREMELY strategic for logistics routes from the "East" to the "West" But Ukraine was serving Russia nicely as a logistics channel, until Russia started strangling its own channel by using oil and gas pipelines through Ukraine as a political lever. That behaviour long precedes 2014. If Ukraine was a vital logistics channel for Russia, why would they deliberately sabotage it? But they did this repeatedly, under cover of various transparent excuses. The "breadbasket" thing is irrelevant; it was not called "the breadbasket of Russia", because Russia didn't rely on Ukraine for food.

imtringued 3y ago

>I'd argue that ALL wars are foundationally resource wars - I mean, this much should be obvious. When Prussia, Russia and Austria partitioned Poland, they weren't exactly happy about the polish citizens they acquired.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago
It's far from obvious in the gov/policy world - either out of ignorance or because they don't actually care about anything but keeping their own power. As in, if you were to interrogate policy makers and elected officials, they have no incentive nor interest in solving root problems I think the world would benefit from a truly objective international negotiation facilitation organization. And yes I'm aware that "objective" isn't a platonic object - but I think we can get close to that for human systems if properly organized (like Médecins Sans Frontières).

denton-scratch 3y ago

> ALL wars are foundationally resource wars I can't see any conflict over resources between Russia and Ukraine. Both countries have abundant natural resources, including minerals and water; both are large net exporters of food. As far as I can see, that war is primarily about ideology, not natural resources. At a pinch you could argue that Russian naval access to the Black Sea is access to a natural resource; but then Russia had unquestioned access to the Black Sea before the invasion of Crimea.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago
>As far as I can see, that war is primarily about ideology, not natural resources. The area of Ukraine is and has been the Bread-Basket of Europe since pre-modernity and also is EXTREMELY strategic for logistics routes from the "East" to the "West" Which is why it has literally forever been disputed territory So yes the conflict is foundationally about food and logistics access https://www.farminglife.com/country-and-farming/why-is-ukraine-known-as-the-breadbasket-of-europe-heres-what-it-produces-and-exports-3584361 https://www.farminglife.com/country-and-farming/why-is-ukrai...
- denton-scratch 3y ago
  > and also is EXTREMELY strategic for logistics routes from the "East" to the "West" But Ukraine was serving Russia nicely as a logistics channel, until Russia started strangling its own channel by using oil and gas pipelines through Ukraine as a political lever. That behaviour long precedes 2014. If Ukraine was a vital logistics channel for Russia, why would they deliberately sabotage it? But they did this repeatedly, under cover of various transparent excuses. The "breadbasket" thing is irrelevant; it was not called "the breadbasket of Russia", because Russia didn't rely on Ukraine for food.