Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Ludicus]

... to side with it on something entirely unrelated.

Only God knows. Sounds too far-fetched?

Zelinski is a big embarrassment to NATO.
Ukraine stand-off stokes friction between Biden and Zelensky-Financial Times

Joe Biden has tried to ensure that the US and its partners remain united in responding to the threat to Ukraine from Russia’s military build-up, but one source of discord has come from an unlikely source: Ukraine’s own leader.

Last month, President Volodymyr Zelensky rebuked Biden on Twitter for suggesting that a “minor incursion” by Russia might not prompt a severe response from the west — forcing Washington to row back on the comments.

No obligation to defend Ukraine from Russia, Nato chief says

Then why is Biden sending more troops to Europe?

[Heathen Hammer]

Only God knows. Sounds too far-fetched?

Probably to do with China.

Then why is Biden sending more troops to Europe?

What else can he do, other then that? Those troops won't see combat and its nothing more then expensive sabre-rattling. Then again, Raytheon won't invest into itself and Biden's government consists of glowing military-industrial complex officials almost to the brim.

Now here's for something really funny:

State Department talking head: we have evidence Russian will stage false flag to attack Ukraine
Journalist: what evidence?
State Department talking head: I just said it
Journalist: no, you made an allegation, what is your source?
State Department talking head: We just know, it, okay? Just trust me bro.

Kinda goes to show why American government can't be trusted. As the time goes on, standards for truth evaporate and we deal with literally government spouting falsehoods to justify more military spending.

P.S. my apologies for posting a *wretches * CNN link.

[dogukan]

The earlier these regimes are exposed for what they are, targetted for what they are, the better.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-china-tell-nato-stop-expansion-moscow-backs-beijing-taiwan-2022-02-04/

[Heathen Hammer]

Its funny, because in 1990s Russia led an unconditionally pro-Western policy, which resulted with West... being just as hostile to pro-Western liberal Russia as it is to modern Putin's Russia.
What one needs to understand is that Western ruling class doesn't care about democracy, human rights of freedoms (just like CCP doesn't truly care about the ideas of Mao's corpse), to them its nothing but cheap buzzwords to be used to justify more aggressive policy against both foreign nations and their own people.

[Sir Adrian]

which resulted with West... being just as hostile to pro-Western liberal Russia as it is to modern Putin's Russia.

This is not true.

[Prodromos]

Myths and misconceptions in the debate on Russia

Mithridates posted this a while ago. I highly recommend everyone read it.

This report deconstructs 16 of the most prevalent myths and misconceptions that shape contemporary Western thinking on Russia. It explains their detrimental impact on the design and execution of policy, and in each case outlines how Western positions need critical re-examination to ensure more rational and effective responses to Russian actions.

[antaeus]

Its funny, because in 1990s Russia led an unconditionally pro-Western policy, which resulted with West... being just as hostile to pro-Western liberal Russia as it is to modern Putin's Russia. .

Russia is/as apart of the same Partnership for Peace group that Ukraine was - which was designed as a pathway towards NATO membership. Putin could have easily been a part of NATO by now, but he didn't want to. Western hostility towards Russia has tended to progress in stages, as Russia invades it's neighbours, or stokes separatists puppet state formation. As of now, no NATO member has invaded any of Russia's neighbours. The closest to doing so has been Turkey's involvement in the Armenian/Azerbaijan conflict - where Russia has legitimate concerns.

[dogukan]

Russia's hostile behaviour comes from the fact that people in it's sphere of influence started to demand a life more like in the West, and then they ended up being beaten, tortured or assasinated.

HH's attitude here somewhat represents the typical Russian media operations. Acting like they are the victim, struggling against a global elite that is undermining the simple people with their degenerate ideologies, while they are protecting the world against this imperial onslought.
Russia and Russian allied groups have been selling this idea all over the world, including in the West.

It is quiet ironic that West is being declared as the enemies of freedom and rights while HH (and people who aligns with Russian propoganda mindset) blatantly support authoritarian-oligarch regimes like in Russia.
This is clearly highly hypocritical and shows that the whole purpose is to create an environment of disinformation. The biggest weapon of the KGB and the Moscow regime. Any opposition in these authoritarian oligarch regimes are "agents of WEst" and thus they deserve the extremely harsh treatment, and yet when a protest in West get a police barricade, it is because the global elite are there to destroy the rights of the common folk. Russian "media" and recently their social media had been milking this so well.

We have the same mindset in Turkey. It is no suprise that people who back this mindset are pro-Russian here. We repress (repress as in highly violent repression, 10000x times the repression these pro-Russians would cry about happening in West with things like Covid hese days) Kurds and liberals because they are agents of West. And yet we are struggling against imperialism and the violent exploitation of the "West". It is extremely hypocritical and yet it still sells.

[antaeus]

Russia's hostile behaviour comes from the fact that people in it's sphere of influence started to demand a life more like in the West, and then they ended up being beaten, tortured or assasinated.

It's probably one of the most important facets of this conflict... Putin has tied Ukraine to Russia in his world view. As noted in the thread... Ukraine succeeding as arelatively democratic state is a direct challenge to Putin's "only a strong man can successfully rule Russia" ethos. It is an example to ordinary Russians of how achievable democracy actually is within their cultural context.

Although, my feeling is that Putin probably expected NATO and the Euros to buckle over this, and they haven't, so he's probably looking for an offramp... Something will end up being discussed that he can shape into a victory. Something minor or meaningless like a NATO commitment to not station nukes in Latvia or somesuch that Putin can sell as a diplomatic victory and de-escalate. All those troops are expensive to keep on station, and they have to be kept there at least until the Olympics are over (wouldn't want to steal Chinese limelight)

[Heathen Hammer]

Putin could have easily been a part of NATO by now, but he didn't want to.

Wrong: Russia applied for NATO membership in early 2000s, back when Russia was very pro-Western, which was denied due to psychotic Rusophbobia of Western ruling elites.
Western hatred of Russia is due to the fact that corrupt banker oligarchy that rules most Western nations is mentally stuck in past century, hence it irrational hostility to initially-friendly Russia, hence the violent West-orchestrated coups of democratic governments that were pro-Russian, most notables ones being the ones in Georgia and Ukraine. While regimes that stemmed from those "colored revolutions" were tyrannical and undemocratic in nature, they did show that Western oligarchs are obsessed with power and wealth and care for neither "democracy" nor "sovereignty".
At the end of the day, only difference between authoritarian tyrannical rulers like Biden, Trudeau and Putin is that the latter doesn't have that weird hatred of his own country's working class.

[Ludicus]

We just know, it, okay? Just trust me bro.

"Just trust me bro".

It suddenly occurred to me ,
Trust me on Iraqi WMD: Tony Blair
Trust Me, He Says -Bush

----
Ukraine latest updates: US troops arrive in Germany

Meanwhile, Ukraine Loses 2-3 to Russia in UEFA Indoor Soccer Semi-Final.No one died. While we wait for the Huns to invade Europe,I recommend this movie that’ill cure your boredom in no time at all.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

At the end of the day, only difference between authoritarian tyrannical rulers like Biden, Trudeau and Putin is that the latter doesn't have that weird hatred of his own country's working class.

Don't exaggerate. Simply not true. Now, if you talking about the global hypercapitalism, then you have a point. Guess who wrote,

The characteristic of Putin’s Russia is an unbounded drift into kleptocracy. Between 1993 and 2018, Russia had massive trade surpluses: approximately 10% of GDP per annum on average for 25 years, or a total in the rage of 250% of GDP (two and a half years of national production). In principle that should have enabled the accumulation of the equivalent in financial reserves. This is almost the size of the sovereign public fund accumulated by Norway under the watchful gaze of the voters. The official Russian reserves are ten times lower – barely 25% of GDP.
Where has the money gone? According to our estimates, the offshore assets alone held by wealthy Russians exceed one year of GDP, or the equivalent of the entirety of the official financial assets held by Russian households.

In other words, the natural wealth of the country, (which, let it be said in passing, would have done better to remain in the ground to limit global warming) has been massively exported abroad to sustain opaque structures enabling a minority to hold huge Russian and international financial assets.

These rich Russians live between London, Monaco and Moscow: some have never left Russia and control their country via offshore entities. Numerous intermediaries and Western firms have also recouped large crumbs on the way and continue to do so today in sport and the media (sometimes this is referred to as philanthropy). The extent of the misappropriation of funds has no equal in history.

Rather than apply commercial sanctions, Europe would do better to finally go for these assets and to address Russian public opinion. Today post-Communism has become the worst ally of hyper-capitalism: Marx would have appreciated the irony but this is not a reason for putting up with it.

Edit, fresh news. Just a few hours ago, Bloomberg said that it had accidentally posted a pre-written headline.
Bloomberg accidentally reports that Russia invaded Ukraine

[dogukan]

It's probably one of the most important facets of this conflict... Putin has tied Ukraine to Russia in his world view. As noted in the thread... Ukraine succeeding as arelatively democratic state is a direct challenge to Putin's "only a strong man can successfully rule Russia" ethos. It is an example to ordinary Russians of how achievable democracy actually is within their cultural context.

Indeed this is a very important detail.
Same applies to China's nightmare: Hong Kong and Taiwan; both representing a potentially "liberal" alternative to Chinese civilization mindset. They exist in complete opposition to the image of an ideal Chinese society CCP tries to show. The more the internet expands and penetrates deep into China or Russia, newer geneartions imagine a new life beyond what has been given to them. Hundreds of millions of Chinese look at HK or Taiwan and realize that things CAN be different in a positive way. That is precisely why it is so important for China to eradicate the liberal regimes, but more importantly the liberal Chinese cultures that thrive in these locations.

Same with Russia. Ukraine and Belarus are tooooo close to the Muscovite cultural realm. Their success with Western liberalism would create an irreversible increase in demand of a different life. Ukraine has to be stopped NOW for Putin or more and more will demand something else.

I love Kotkin's analyses on USSR and Russia (as well as China): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul1gsIdlJFs
These regimes cannot just "reform" for a bit because the demands then come endlessly. THey have to stop it and end it. And yet, Western influence easily goes across borders into these countries. The most these regimes can do is to declare these influencs as "agents of imperialism". And since this is inadequate, they have to actually make the West and global liberalism fail. They have to show their public a failure. Hence the extreme Russian involvement through normal and social media to sow disinformation and polarization.

Although, my feeling is that Putin probably expected NATO and the Euros to buckle over this, and they haven't, so he's probably looking for an offramp... Something will end up being discussed that he can shape into a victory. Something minor or meaningless like a NATO commitment to not station nukes in Latvia or somesuch that Putin can sell as a diplomatic victory and de-escalate. All those troops are expensive to keep on station, and they have to be kept there at least until the Olympics are over (wouldn't want to steal Chinese limelight)

Yeah, this became obvious. He placed himself into a corner. He is both running out of time with Ukraine and was thinking he could bank on a divided West. Ukrainian liberal alternative has to end now, so the rush has likely finally pushed him to make a mistake. He actually said "USA is trying to pull Russia into a war" a couple days ago, which is pretty hilarious thing to complain about after fielding 100k+ troops on Ukranian border.
The sudden China reference and praisal of Orban is also no coincidence. Russian regime has succeded greatly in sowing dissent in the West and a general resentment towards the existing global order, but they are still far from where they need to be. And they are running out of time. Because the mechanisms that keep the Russian regime in power is also on a tight schedule.

[Ludicus]

Ukraine and Belarus are tooooo close to the Muscovite cultural realm

And Europe is tooooo close to Ukraine. And the US is very faaaaar away from Ukraine.
----
Olaf Scholz confirms meeting with Vladimir Putin on February 15

...Amid fierce criticism aimed at Germany’s refusal to send weapons to Ukraine.

Two more weeks without war, what a bummer.
“For the United States and President Biden, who on Wednesday formally approved a deployment of American troops to Eastern Europe, a Russian invasion led by President Vladimir Putin is a “distinct possibility.” For Europe, not so much”, Europe Thinks Putin Is Planning Something Even Worse NYTimes

Europe: “even worse, yah. I’m a 14 years old and I have a huge imagination”. In the end,the writer seems disappointed with Europe's lack of interest in a war,

Perhaps that’s to be expected. After all, full-scale war is generally as unimaginable for a Western European public as an alien invasion. Europeans are right to believe that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is not inevitable — and may even be correct that it’s not the most likely scenario.

Wait a minute,not so fast. We love aliens. Everyone loves aliens. And vampires. Rasputin was a vampire.Putin is a vampire.The Hunt for an Eternal Legacy: Putin and the Vampire Legend in Modern RussiaView of The Hunt for an Eternal Legacy
50 pages,beautifully illustrated.No joke.
--

Hong Kong and Taiwan; both representing a potentially "liberal" alternative to Chinese civilization mindset

Hmm, for the billionaires of this world, the best alternative to Hong Kong is Hong Kong itself.Someone wrote,

Today Hong Kong’s very top wealth share (top 0.001%) is ranked at very top in the world. Finally, we find that the top income earners and high-income professions (such as executives and managers) are more likely to vote for pro-Beijing camp, while the bottom 85% income group, students and lower-income professionals are more likely to be pro-democratic.

Ah, those billionaires... Taiwan tycoon says he does not support independence after after Beijing fined his company ...

Like most Taiwanese, I hope that cross-strait relations 'maintain the status quo.' I have always opposed Taiwan independence"

[Love Mountain]

Myths and misconceptions in the debate on Russia

Mithridates posted this a while ago. I highly recommend everyone read it.

It's incredibly stupid to be relying on Chatham House for objective evaluation of Russia's position on international law, European security, or history. Chatham House is neoliberal think tank (which is an ideology of my choice). It has an ideological mission. This is exemplified by the very rebuttal that they've typed to Myth #01.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The foreign policy of Russia is open to criticism, even to censure. But Russia behaves as great powers behave. The West has been no more observant than Russia of international law, and has flouted its own professed normative standards. Since the disappearance of the USSR, the US has viewed a unipolar world as an entitlement. Not only does the US violate international law, it regards itself as above it. NATO’s military intervention in Yugoslavia was no different in nature from that of Russia in Ukraine. A US still guided by the Monroe Doctrine – which defined the intervention of outside powers in the Americas as a threat to the US – has no business lecturing Russia about a sphere of influence in the former USSR. The EU is an empire in all but name.

Note that the "rebuttal" they've written does not even address the core assertions made by the myth, because it is impossible to rebut them. United States is in fact, in a privileged position in the global system. It is not beholden to the ICJ, to UNCLOS, or OPCAT. Yet it enjoys widespread support of international institutions (many of which are based in Western Europe or United States) despite repeated violations of international law. I have no issue with this, as American supremacy is in the interest of global stability and human welfare, but what many pundits want, is to have their cake and eat it too. It's cognitive dissonance at best, malicious hypocrisy at worst. You're free to read and defend the worst so often repeated by Western pundits, and I'm happy if it makes you feel good and righteous inside. However, it is intellectual dishonesty to paint such perspectives as an objective truth, when it is anything but.

At the end of the day, such debates over which facts are relevant, whose account is more accurate, are utterly irrelevant. We cannot continue to maintain European security if we continue to pretend that we still live in 1992. We don't. Both NATO and United States have failed to adapt and adequately respond to a resurgent Russia and the collapse of unipolarity. Our inability to meaningfully influence the events in Ukraine is the cost of two decades of inaction and irresponsible foreign policy.

[antaeus]

While myth 15 challenges as to whether it is all about Putin, it doesn't actually disprove this. It suggests that there are a list of enablers and stakeholders and the usual levels of bureaucracy involved and attempts to show that Russia is a complex place. Well duh.

No country can hinge entirely on one person. Castro tried, and failed. The failure of this rebuttal is to assume this is a literal argument. That Putin micromanages the state. But the nature of absolutism places the leader at the confluence point of all these competing interests and decisions, it doesn't remove them. They stay on top by managing and directing these competing interests. Normal distribution of authority and decision making down the chain still occurs. Thus like a CEO of a company is unlikely to select the brand of pen they use, Putin disseminates the majority of decisions down the chain. Putin sets direction, and makes high level decisions. Thus the absolutist state is still the embodiment of the leader's desires, irrespective of how many people compete for influence in the pyramid underneath them.

[Sir Adrian]

Wrong: Russia applied for NATO membership in early 2000s, back when Russia was very pro-Western

This is not true.

[Heathen Hammer]

This is not true.

No, it is true. Especially in early 2000s, Russia made attempts to even join NATO, which was obviously rejected by the Western ruling oligarchy.
You can't blame Russia for opposing Western aggressions, especially when Russia made a good faith attempt to reconcile with it.
it appears that Western ruling classes don't understand "soft power" and only understand language of force, which is a harsh lesson Russia had to learn in 2000s and learn it did. Anything that happens in the future is due to greed and stupidity of the Western ruling elites.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Ukraine is a special fixation for Putin the way Taiwan is for Xi, because they’ve staked their personal legacies on it. However, there are key differences:

When the Europeans stumbled across Taiwan in the 17th century, Chinese fishermen and traders living there numbered in the hundreds. Taiwanese aboriginal people are not Han Chinese, and in fact Chinese states dealt with the island as a foreign land for centuries. The narrative of Taiwan having been wrested from the motherland is nationalist mythology, and is a function of politics. Even when the Qing incorporated Taiwan into the empire, it was to destroy the remnants of the Ming who had escaped there, not because the Emperor felt it was his manifest destiny to conquer the land. In fact he’s recorded as calling it worthless, and Chinese authorities restricted emigration to Taiwan from the mainland until the late 18th century. It wasn’t until the late 19th century, after Taiwanese natives successfully fended off a series of invasions by Japanese and European explorers, that the Qing began to consider the strategic value of the island to Chinese defense and foreign policy, a few years before they signed it over to the Japanese anyway. It wasn’t until the 20th century that the concept of Taiwan as Chinese national territory was born. The CCP must destroy Taiwan to fulfill their own narrative of rightful rule vs the ROC, much like the Qing snuffing out the last of the Ming.

By contrast, if I’m not mistaken, Russians and Ukrainians have always feuded about which are the true heirs to the Kievan Rus, and territory has traded hands between the two under rival pretexts for centuries. The two countries share a national founding mythology that isn’t going anywhere. So while one could argue the timing and commitment is all Putin’s, the general notion of Ukraine as Russian clay is integral to the Russian state and will not simply go away when Putin dies. Beijing’s obsession with Taiwan will likely go the way of the CCP even if the issue outlasts Xi, for better or worse.

[Heathen Hammer]

The contexts of Taiwan and Ukraine are entirely different.
Taiwan is the remaining part of China, that didn't fall under Maoist rule (kinda like if Red Army would have failed to take Siberia or Crimea from White Army).
Proxy Ukrainian state was originally created by German Empire during WW1, which was an entirely artificial thing, and it was rather short-lived to be considered to be an equal part to genuinely organic genesis in which Russian nation formed itself from remains of Kievan Rus, while modern Ukraine is the state that was created by Lenin as a "socialist republic", with an entirely artificial culture and rather wacky outlook on history, where Ukrainian claims on Kievan Rus have the same sanity as American evangelical claims that Jesus was a red-blooded American lol.

[Sir Adrian]

No, it is true. Especially in early 2000s, Russia made attempts to even join NATO, which was obviously rejected by the Western ruling oligarchy.
You can't blame Russia for opposing Western aggressions, especially when Russia made a good faith attempt to reconcile with it.
it appears that Western ruling classes don't understand "soft power" and only understand language of force, which is a harsh lesson Russia had to learn in 2000s and learn it did. Anything that happens in the future is due to greed and stupidity of the Western ruling elites.

More lies. Russia never had any intention of joining NATO, in fact they even refused to allow transit flights across southern Russia when the war in Afghanistan was going on. Russia is the aggressor in Europe and has been the aggressor for 250 years. If Russia wanted peace in good faith it would not have fought a war against Romania and Moldova in 1992, it would not have invaded Georgia, it would not have invaded Crimea and it would not be funding terrorists in Ukraine, it would have constantly and consistently tried to provoke a war by breaching neighboring countries air-space.

But hey, maybe this is Romanian propaganda, maybe you have sources to back up all that you've said.

By contrast, if I’m not mistaken, Russians and Ukrainians have always feuded about which are the true heirs to the Kievan Rus, and territory has traded hands between the two under rival pretexts for centuries. The two countries share a national founding mythology that isn’t going anywhere. So while one could argue the timing and commitment is all Putin’s, the general notion of Ukraine as Russian clay is integral to the Russian state and will not simply go away when Putin dies. Beijing’s obsession with Taiwan will likely go the way of the CCP even if the issue outlasts Xi, for better or worse.

The fun part is that both are lying through their teeth.