4 ms·
> It cannot stomach the thought of losing dominance over them Historically, there is a reason for that. Those countries are used as a buffer against an invasio
by chaostheory 3y ago
> It cannot stomach the thought of losing dominance over them
Historically, there is a reason for that. Those countries are used as a buffer against an invasion from Western Europe. US and EU officials have tried to convince Putin that this was no longer the case over the years, but he never bought it since NATO continued to expand despite Russian protests.
- cmrdporcupine 3y agoThis is just ends in a circular argument because in the end NATO has expanded into the areas bordering Russia precisely because those countries (the Baltics, mainly) have a history of having their sovereignty violated by Russia, and continue to have serious and probably legitimate worries about that happening again. So you have to ask exactly why Russia protests so strongly about NATO expanding? And why countries on Russia's borders were so eager to join it? The only way Russia gets "invaded" by the "west" is by redefining its borders to include chunks of Ukraine... and now Ukraine defending itself and its internationally recognized borders is an "invasion" of "Russian sovereignty." Preposterous.
- chaostheory 3y agoI agree with what you’ve written. Basically, Russia has used Eastern Europe the same way China uses North Korea, Xinjiang, Tibet, and parts of Mongolia: as a defensive buffer. Im not trying to ignore that occupations by authoritarian regimes tend to not be nice. I’m just stating the cold logic of it. I totally also get why the Ukrainian people want to fight for their freedom from authoritarian corruption. as for the larger “reason” it’s simply human nature. We’ve gotten better over the centuries, but game theory’s core idea is still in play.