5 ms·

The US would be quite lucky if Russia turned back to a frenemy relationship with NATO. It seems highly unlikely that will happen given the last 15 years of conf

by ctrlp 2y ago

The US would be quite lucky if Russia turned back to a frenemy relationship with NATO. It seems highly unlikely that will happen given the last 15 years of conflict. The attempt to Balkanize and neuter Russia looks like an abject failure. Throwing more arms and Ukrainian youth into that meat grinder is a very cynical way to proceed. Rather than growing closer to Europe via trade and energy interdependence, the strategy in Ukraine and Syria has driven Russia further into alliance with China and Iran. Looks like a mistake in hindsight. Would have been better to cultivate Russia against China and align Russian interests with Europe rather than Beijing.

ctrlp 2y ago
Before the negative reviews come pouring, consider that the rise of China was the result of exactly this strategy in reverse. At the time "Nixon in China" was an attempt to support a largely agrarian Chinese communist state to give Russia (the stronger competitor) something to worry about on its eastern flank. Strengthening and emboldening the communist "little brother" was a deliberate foreign policy goal during the Cold War. This strategy was what the protean Henry Kissinger was most famous for at the time. Talk about unforeseen consequences. Maybe we bet on the wrong horse. China in 2025 seems like a much more serious global competitor than Russia. Ask yourself, who would you rather compete with?
- stephen_g 2y ago
  I mean, the US is also sort of responsible for what happened in Russia too, with the oligarch class being born out of the 'shock therapy' that US-based institutions and economists pushed for... Russia might be a much more democratic place today if not for the massive economic problems that caused...
  - ctrlp 2y ago
    That is true and also deliberate US policy to ensure there would never be a strong Russia again. Russia has always loomed large over Europe since probably the Huns. There have been times when the Russian state was Europhilic (e.g., Peter the Great or when the language of the Russian court was French). And times when the Slavic and Eastern impulses have reigned. The claims that Putin is trying to rebuild the Soviet Empire is probably mostly propaganda. But something can be literally false, but spiritually true. Given its geographic perch across Eurasia, Russia's spiritual destiny may demand Empire or Death. It's an open question whether the Russian Federation can accept a subordinate role on the world stage. They will likely continue to aspire to being a sovereign pole in proposed multipolar world order.
    - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
      "The claims that Putin is trying to rebuild the Soviet Empire is probably mostly propaganda" is correct by Putin's own he words. He just wants control of everywhere in the ex-Soviet where Russian speakers live.
      - ctrlp 2y ago
        Russian speakers live everywhere. Russian majority states are a smaller set than the old USSR.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    US experts also came up with the voucher system that allowed Oligarchs to buy everything up.
hobs 2y ago
You do realize nobody wanted to do that, and Putin's aggressive thuggery is 100% the reason why Russia has been isolated. Cultivating an invader doesn't make sense for anyone.
- ctrlp 2y ago
  Respectfully, you clearly don't know much about the history or about geopolitics if you believe such things.
  - panick21_ 2y ago
    Its seems you have bought into the Russian propaganda about how they were victimized with NATO. The reality is Russia got everything it needed, its economy was doing comparatively well, its elites were welcome all over Europe. Europe ignored all the shade stuff they continue to do all the time. The Russian elite enriched itself buying all the luxury products of Europe and going to St.Moriz and living in London.
    - ctrlp 2y ago
      I have only bought into my readings in history. The events I credit are: - The 1970s opening of China by Nixon and the documented policy goals contra the USSR. - The waning years of the Cold War when the Soviet Union was weakened and falling apart leading to 1989 and the aftermath in Eastern Europe and Russia. - The documented US policy of economic warfare against the remnant of the Soviet Union as written about by George Kennan and others that destroyed the Russian economy and handed key industries individual gangsters (the "oligarchs"). - The documented US policy of color revolutions in Ukraine to undermine democratically elected but "pro-Russian" leadership. - The placing of bioweapons labs and other military installations in Ukraine, intentionally provoking Putin and creating internal pressure on Putin vis a vis Russia's own military hawks. - Using Ukraine as a poison pawn in a documented policy to provoke Russia into an "unwinnable" war intended to bankrupt the country, isolate it via sanctions, deplete Russia's military, and ultimately, depose achieve regime change to a more pliable Western allied Russian leadership (essentially to do to Russia what was done in Ukraine). The ultimate policy goal being to "balkanize" (weaken) the Russian Federation to achieve Western dominance over Russian policy and resources. I'm not terribly concerned with whether this was sound policy or not. Or what corrupt "elites" do with their ill-gotten gains. I'm just interested in the facts of history. This doesn't say that Putin is blameless or even a "good leader". Takes that say something is 100% clearly one side's fault are just stupid. Germans may be the biggest dupes of all in this whole mess. I get that Russia has traditional regional enemies who want Europe and the US to make this about good vs evil, and Russia being a local thug antagonizing smaller countries "for no reasons whatsoever", but that's a story for children.
panick21_ 2y ago
That's EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID. Literally all of Europe and the US bent over backwards for Russia. German made it one of there central geopolitical missions to integrate Russia. They invaded Georgia and did many other questionable things, then took Crimea and still most countries were willing to basically not upset the Apple cart. So they did 'cultivate' Russia. Russia always loves to only talk about NATO and how bad it is. But NATO actually helped Russia because it let the Eastern European feel save and that convinced them that economic collaboration with Russia was in their benefit. And it also passivized these countries, making them far less militarist. Without NATO, these countries would have invested far more in conventional defense for the last 30 years and would have refused any Russian integration. But at some point cultivation goes to far and you can't just forever say 'well we need Russia against China so they can have Ukraine', 'well we need Russia against China so the can have Georgia', 'well we need Russia against China so they can have the Baltics'. Like at some point 'cultivating' only works if you have a partner on the other side that has even the slightest interest in cooperation. Russia elites care about their own power, and that power is threatened by justice and democracy, not China. They will not switch and view China as their enemy unless China want to start to be an enforcer of democracy or actively take Russian land. China knows this and is prepared to wait to get back their Russian territory (and maybe more). China is well aware that Russia is a massively declining power, suffering from massive brain-drain, bad demographics, surviving off left over Soviet industry and massive amount of natural resources (that China can already acquire). So China, despite Russia owning a lot of land that China absolutely believes is theirs, will focus on the US because the West, is a much bigger economic, political and ideological competitor. So the simply reality is, as long as China has major 'Western' allies close to its borders, you will simply not get Russia and China to really go at each other as they did during the Communist competition days. No matter what day dreaming old Cold Wars have about doing the Sino-Soviet split again. > Throwing more arms and Ukrainian youth into that meat grinder is a very cynical way to proceed. Its not cynical if the population there actually wants that. This is not a case where Ukraine has some dictator who is doing some vanity invasion of foreign territory. Its not even like Afghanistan. Because in Ukraine you actually have a pontifical system that can be converted into a long time useful ally. > driven Russia further into alliance with China and Iran This is always the fear mongering people use. But this has a number of limitations. First, non of these countries actually like each other. Russia and Iran work together but don't like each other. Russia and China are the same. Russia know well that China really wants to own 80% of Russia, even if this isn't their primary focus right now. They will never be true allies as the US is in NATO, its just not happening. Unless maybe where one is a complete client state of the other. And in terms of commercial relationship, oil and weapons, they are already doing that. Appeasing Russia in Europe doesn't massively pull them away from China and Iran. Sure maybe they sell slightly less oil in that direction, but the relationships aren't effected that much. At the end of the day, these 3 regimes, have one thing in common, they don't want Western values based system of values and worst of all democracy. So they will always cooperate along that line. PS: > The attempt to Balkanize and neuter Russia looks like an abject failure. Overall, its not except its not a failure at all. Finland, Baltics, Poland and all the others are now well integrated into Europe and will never go back to being Russian in any sense.

by ctrlp 2y ago

ctrlp 2y ago

Before the negative reviews come pouring, consider that the rise of China was the result of exactly this strategy in reverse. At the time "Nixon in China" was an attempt to support a largely agrarian Chinese communist state to give Russia (the stronger competitor) something to worry about on its eastern flank. Strengthening and emboldening the communist "little brother" was a deliberate foreign policy goal during the Cold War. This strategy was what the protean Henry Kissinger was most famous for at the time. Talk about unforeseen consequences. Maybe we bet on the wrong horse. China in 2025 seems like a much more serious global competitor than Russia. Ask yourself, who would you rather compete with?

stephen_g 2y ago
I mean, the US is also sort of responsible for what happened in Russia too, with the oligarch class being born out of the 'shock therapy' that US-based institutions and economists pushed for... Russia might be a much more democratic place today if not for the massive economic problems that caused...
- ctrlp 2y ago
  That is true and also deliberate US policy to ensure there would never be a strong Russia again. Russia has always loomed large over Europe since probably the Huns. There have been times when the Russian state was Europhilic (e.g., Peter the Great or when the language of the Russian court was French). And times when the Slavic and Eastern impulses have reigned. The claims that Putin is trying to rebuild the Soviet Empire is probably mostly propaganda. But something can be literally false, but spiritually true. Given its geographic perch across Eurasia, Russia's spiritual destiny may demand Empire or Death. It's an open question whether the Russian Federation can accept a subordinate role on the world stage. They will likely continue to aspire to being a sovereign pole in proposed multipolar world order.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    "The claims that Putin is trying to rebuild the Soviet Empire is probably mostly propaganda" is correct by Putin's own he words. He just wants control of everywhere in the ex-Soviet where Russian speakers live.
    - ctrlp 2y ago
      Russian speakers live everywhere. Russian majority states are a smaller set than the old USSR.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  US experts also came up with the voucher system that allowed Oligarchs to buy everything up.

hobs 2y ago

You do realize nobody wanted to do that, and Putin's aggressive thuggery is 100% the reason why Russia has been isolated. Cultivating an invader doesn't make sense for anyone.

ctrlp 2y ago
Respectfully, you clearly don't know much about the history or about geopolitics if you believe such things.
- panick21_ 2y ago
  Its seems you have bought into the Russian propaganda about how they were victimized with NATO. The reality is Russia got everything it needed, its economy was doing comparatively well, its elites were welcome all over Europe. Europe ignored all the shade stuff they continue to do all the time. The Russian elite enriched itself buying all the luxury products of Europe and going to St.Moriz and living in London.
  - ctrlp 2y ago
    I have only bought into my readings in history. The events I credit are: - The 1970s opening of China by Nixon and the documented policy goals contra the USSR. - The waning years of the Cold War when the Soviet Union was weakened and falling apart leading to 1989 and the aftermath in Eastern Europe and Russia. - The documented US policy of economic warfare against the remnant of the Soviet Union as written about by George Kennan and others that destroyed the Russian economy and handed key industries individual gangsters (the "oligarchs"). - The documented US policy of color revolutions in Ukraine to undermine democratically elected but "pro-Russian" leadership. - The placing of bioweapons labs and other military installations in Ukraine, intentionally provoking Putin and creating internal pressure on Putin vis a vis Russia's own military hawks. - Using Ukraine as a poison pawn in a documented policy to provoke Russia into an "unwinnable" war intended to bankrupt the country, isolate it via sanctions, deplete Russia's military, and ultimately, depose achieve regime change to a more pliable Western allied Russian leadership (essentially to do to Russia what was done in Ukraine). The ultimate policy goal being to "balkanize" (weaken) the Russian Federation to achieve Western dominance over Russian policy and resources. I'm not terribly concerned with whether this was sound policy or not. Or what corrupt "elites" do with their ill-gotten gains. I'm just interested in the facts of history. This doesn't say that Putin is blameless or even a "good leader". Takes that say something is 100% clearly one side's fault are just stupid. Germans may be the biggest dupes of all in this whole mess. I get that Russia has traditional regional enemies who want Europe and the US to make this about good vs evil, and Russia being a local thug antagonizing smaller countries "for no reasons whatsoever", but that's a story for children.

panick21_ 2y ago

That's EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID. Literally all of Europe and the US bent over backwards for Russia. German made it one of there central geopolitical missions to integrate Russia. They invaded Georgia and did many other questionable things, then took Crimea and still most countries were willing to basically not upset the Apple cart. So they did 'cultivate' Russia. Russia always loves to only talk about NATO and how bad it is. But NATO actually helped Russia because it let the Eastern European feel save and that convinced them that economic collaboration with Russia was in their benefit. And it also passivized these countries, making them far less militarist. Without NATO, these countries would have invested far more in conventional defense for the last 30 years and would have refused any Russian integration. But at some point cultivation goes to far and you can't just forever say 'well we need Russia against China so they can have Ukraine', 'well we need Russia against China so the can have Georgia', 'well we need Russia against China so they can have the Baltics'. Like at some point 'cultivating' only works if you have a partner on the other side that has even the slightest interest in cooperation. Russia elites care about their own power, and that power is threatened by justice and democracy, not China. They will not switch and view China as their enemy unless China want to start to be an enforcer of democracy or actively take Russian land. China knows this and is prepared to wait to get back their Russian territory (and maybe more). China is well aware that Russia is a massively declining power, suffering from massive brain-drain, bad demographics, surviving off left over Soviet industry and massive amount of natural resources (that China can already acquire). So China, despite Russia owning a lot of land that China absolutely believes is theirs, will focus on the US because the West, is a much bigger economic, political and ideological competitor. So the simply reality is, as long as China has major 'Western' allies close to its borders, you will simply not get Russia and China to really go at each other as they did during the Communist competition days. No matter what day dreaming old Cold Wars have about doing the Sino-Soviet split again. > Throwing more arms and Ukrainian youth into that meat grinder is a very cynical way to proceed. Its not cynical if the population there actually wants that. This is not a case where Ukraine has some dictator who is doing some vanity invasion of foreign territory. Its not even like Afghanistan. Because in Ukraine you actually have a pontifical system that can be converted into a long time useful ally. > driven Russia further into alliance with China and Iran This is always the fear mongering people use. But this has a number of limitations. First, non of these countries actually like each other. Russia and Iran work together but don't like each other. Russia and China are the same. Russia know well that China really wants to own 80% of Russia, even if this isn't their primary focus right now. They will never be true allies as the US is in NATO, its just not happening. Unless maybe where one is a complete client state of the other. And in terms of commercial relationship, oil and weapons, they are already doing that. Appeasing Russia in Europe doesn't massively pull them away from China and Iran. Sure maybe they sell slightly less oil in that direction, but the relationships aren't effected that much. At the end of the day, these 3 regimes, have one thing in common, they don't want Western values based system of values and worst of all democracy. So they will always cooperate along that line. PS: > The attempt to Balkanize and neuter Russia looks like an abject failure. Overall, its not except its not a failure at all. Finland, Baltics, Poland and all the others are now well integrated into Europe and will never go back to being Russian in any sense.