Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[The39thStep]

Perhaps they didn't think they needed to join, given the Budapest Memorandum.

Actually, Yushenko did want to join and in 2008 Bush invited Ukraine to join the next NATO summit and start the MAP process.

 

[nogojones]

Well it looks like they might be joining if they hang it out

NATO allies 'agree Ukraine will become member'

Jens Stoltenberg has repeatedly promised that Ukraine would join NATO throughout the war. Meanwhile, the Kremlin maintains that preventing this from happening is one of the goals of its war in Ukraine.

news.sky.com

 

[Artaxerxes]

Back to actual news

Bit of an own goal ...

SU-34 'accidentally' bombed Belgorod last night, very lucky that no-one was actually killed.
That'll definitely be an interview without tea / biscuits and probably other consequences.
As Belgorod is a waypoint on trips to bomb Ukraine, I'm very surprised if this will be the only occurrence.

Ukraine war: Russian warplane accidentally bombs own city

A dramatic blast which shook residents of Belgorod is being blamed on an accidental air strike.

www.bbc.co.uk

Good to see Tesla is helping Russia fly.

 

[tim]

What were the reasons that Ukraine didn't manage to join NATO at any point before 2014?

They wouldn't have been welcome.

 

[Fez909]

Actually, Yushenko did want to join and in 2008 Bush invited Ukraine to join the next NATO summit and start the MAP process.

Right. So, a bit of research shows that it was the French and Germans who vetoed that, with support from Italy, Hungary and the Benelux countries. They didn't want to upset Russia, and Russia "lashed out" at the thought.

source

 

[editor]

No.

Yet the people who actually live there have democratically made it overwhelmingly clear that they want to join NATO, switching from their earlier position of not wanting to join.

Why do you think that is?

 

[The39thStep]

Right. So, a bit of research shows that it was the French and Germans who vetoed that, with support from Italy, Hungary and the Benelux countries. They didn't want to upset Russia, and Russia "lashed out" at the thought.

source

Bush’s ( the US Presidents at the time ) advocacy was resented by the leadership of a number of European states .
The biggest hurdle , and the one that pulled Yushenko’s administration back was the fact that support for NATO was low and there had been demonstrations against NATO in Ukraine including Crimea.

Polls in support of joining NATO improved after 2014 but still never reached a majority untill much later and showed a regional variation in support ie West v East/South .

 

[krtek a houby]

No.

Fair enough.

If your country was attacked, what would your response be?

 

[Pickman's model]

Yet the people who actually live there have democratically made it overwhelmingly clear that they want to join NATO, switching from their earlier position of not wanting to join.

Why do you think that is?

have they? how? do tell me when these referenda took place in finland and sweden

 

[The39thStep]

They wouldn't have been welcome.

Part of the process is providing evidence that a) there is a parliamentary democracy and a functioning market economy b) that minorities are protected .

 

[Artaxerxes]

Fair enough.

If your country was attacked, what would your response be?

Trick question, none of us gives a shit about Britain

 

[Pickman's model]

Fair enough.

If your country was attacked, what would your response be?

Depends who doesn't it. If as the tories aver we're being invaded by immigrants then nothing. Let's wait for your hypothetical to become real and see

 

[Chz]

have they? how? do tell me when these referenda took place in finland and sweden

Referenda are not the ultimate tool of democracy. Otherwise Switzerland would be paradise on Earth. Approximately 15% of the Swedish parliament voted against, which you can extrapolate fairly well into electoral terms. Finland just had an election where all the largest parties campaigned on NATO membership as a manifesto plank.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Referendums are only allowed when the ruling government expects to win them.

That Cameron called the brexit one tells you more about his hubris than anything else.

 

[maomao]

Finland just had an election where all the largest parties campaigned on NATO membership as a manifesto plank.

So like the Brexit that less than 38% of the electorate voted for then.

 

[Pickman's model]

Referenda are not the ultimate tool of democracy. Otherwise Switzerland would be paradise on Earth. Approximately 15% of the Swedish parliament voted against, which you can extrapolate fairly well into electoral terms. Finland just had an election where all the largest parties campaigned on NATO membership as a manifesto plank.

your second sentence doesn't follow from your first - the problem with 'democracy' is that as currently constituted it encourages parties and politicians, both of which are inimical to the interests of good governance. the wikipedia article on the last finnish election suggests that nato membership was not one of the major issues of the campaign, and opponents of membership seem to have had either the choice of not voting, or voting while holding their noses - i don't think the election can be held up as a popular vote for nato.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Referendums are only allowed when the ruling government expects to win them.

That Cameron called the brexit one tells you more about his hubris than anything else.

Unfortunately he lost...

 

[Rob Ray]

it hasn't embraced western liberal democratic capitalism, much to the west's dismay.

The West is generally very relaxed about whether a given country has Western-style capitalism, as long as it can make profitable deals with whoever is in charge. Which is why Germany, for example, was willing to tie its grid to Russian energy supply chains, and why China was able to become the world's workshop, Ivory Coast its chocolate shop, etc etc. It also doesn't care in the least about liberalism even within its own house, indeed half of Europe is currently either run by or on its way to being run by right/far-right governments.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Unfortunately he lost...

“It’s only hubris if I fail”

 

[StoneRoad]

Some more on bombing Belgorod

Watch the moment Russian warplane bombs its own city

CCTV video captured the explosion at an intersection in Belgorod.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[editor]

If anyone can provide any credible evidence that the majority of Swedish and Finnish citizens are against their countries joining NATO, I'd love to see it.

 

[The39thStep]

The West is generally very relaxed about whether a given country has Western-style capitalism, as long as it can make profitable deals with whoever is in charge. Which is why Germany, for example, was willing to tie its grid to Russian energy supply chains, and why China was able to become the world's workshop, Ivory Coast its chocolate shop, etc etc. It also doesn't care in the least about liberalism even within its own house, indeed half of Europe is currently either run by or on its way to being run by right/far-right governments.

The oligarch and political class system in the former Soviet space does present severe challenges though for Western capitalism to reap what it desires and very often what it thinks it is entitled to . The recent American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine conference ( the ACC is the largest in Ukraine) not only had key US and Ukrainian government and banking representatives but also engaged over 20 finance ministers across the world. Speaker after speaker, after of course detailing what 'investment' and assistance they had made and how they had listened, were adamant that the key to the reconstruction of Ukraine was private sector investment and that the biggest barrier to unlocking it was transparency , reform and the pace of reform. All code of course for the 'anti corruption' programs that reduce the clout of the oligarchs and open up the market that the US and EU need to achieve their business outcomes.

 

[Pickman's model]

The oligarch and political class system in the former Soviet space does present severe challenges though for Western capitalism to reap what it desires and very often what it thinks it is entitled to . The recent American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine conference ( the ACC is the largest in Ukraine) not only had key US and Ukrainian government and banking representatives but also engaged over 20 finance ministers across the world. Speaker after speaker, after of course detailing what 'investment' and assistance they had made and how they had listened, were adamant that the key to the reconstruction of Ukraine was private sector investment and that the biggest barrier to unlocking it was transparency , reform and the pace of reform. All code of course for the 'anti corruption' programs that reduce the clout of the oligarchs and open up the market that the US and EU need to achieve their business outcomes.

ie shipping money out of ukraine

 

[Dogsauce]

Ukrainian has its own plundering elites too. The primary reason for the invasion was that it was a populist move that the regime assumed they would get away with as they did in 2014.

I saw it mentioned somewhere around the start of the war that Putin had lost a lot of approval due to poor handling of Covid matters, and that the invasion was in part an attempt to improve his public standing.

 

[CNT36]

Referenda are not the ultimate tool of democracy. Otherwise Switzerland would be paradise on Earth. Approximately 15% of the Swedish parliament voted against, which you can extrapolate fairly well into electoral terms. Finland just had an election where all the largest parties campaigned on NATO membership as a manifesto plank.

Referenda are not the ultimate tool of democracy but general elections where every major party manifesto reads the same on an issue are?

 

[Rob Ray]

Sure, this being the difference between a stable (exploitable) business environment with prospects for growth, and one where such prospects are curtailed or interfered with in unpredictable or (what would be regarded as) stifling ways. Putinism, in which the business class is regarded as a supplicant to the ruling elite, bad. Pinochet's Chile, in which the ruling elite is dictatorial on behalf of the business class, fine. Chinese oligarchy in which the business class is allowed room to make lots and lots of money, fine. Chinese oligarchy in which the State is increasingly intruding on business to prop up its political base, bad.

The alliance of interests that comprises "the West" has an ideology, of sorts, albeit one semi-emerging from a chaotic assortment of semi-conflictual power loci, but liberalism and democracy are at best an afterthought in that set of ideals and certainly not in a way that would disrupt business as usual. A dictator who can tackle mid-level corruption and play ball on big deals always out-sells an elected leader with big ideas about economic redistribution.

 

[CNT36]

I'm sure there used to be one . As I recall, it was a thread where it was possible to show an interest in what was going on without having all kinds of aspersions cast about one's motivations for being interested.

What board was this on?

Isn't there an element of truth in NATO expanding up to Russia's borders, though? Certainly from Russia's point of view. I saw a map one time showing the American nuclear weapons in countries surrounding Russia and there were quite a few of them. Something Chomsky's remarked upon, too as I recall.

I think you may be misremembering. The map was more likely showing locations of missiles used in missile defence systems. Chomsky has spoken/written about this and Putin was vocally opposed to their installation.

Russia's probably ensured that no other country will give up its nuclear weapons -

I think that process was well underway beforehand with various countries disarming to some extent before an "intervention".

 

[Yossarian]

I saw it mentioned somewhere around the start of the war that Putin had lost a lot of approval due to poor handling of Covid matters, and that the invasion was in part an attempt to improve his public standing.

And now it's hard to find anybody with a word against him, though I'm sure the FSB are trying their best

 

[The39thStep]

I saw it mentioned somewhere around the start of the war that Putin had lost a lot of approval due to poor handling of Covid matters, and that the invasion was in part an attempt to improve his public standing.

Certainly true that polls showed that his popularity had declined, there was also some labour unrest and his popularity was lowest amongst the younger voters. However for me ( from an attempt at class perspective rather than the badman of history view) Russia is a capitalist and there has to be some agreement/shared interest in going to war by at least the dominant sections of the ruling class, in Russia case its political class. Some of the article I posted about sanctions on the sanctions thread mentions some of the economic issues/benefits of the war and sanctions to the Russian ruling class.

I think the survival of the Russian ruling class is the ultimate issue rather than the survival of Putin although his departure could well cause a crisis or at least an adjustment for the ruling class.

 

[Chz]

your second sentence doesn't follow from your first - the problem with 'democracy' is that as currently constituted it encourages parties and politicians, both of which are inimical to the interests of good governance. the wikipedia article on the last finnish election suggests that nato membership was not one of the major issues of the campaign, and opponents of membership seem to have had either the choice of not voting, or voting while holding their noses - i don't think the election can be held up as a popular vote for nato.

It wasn't a major issue in the campaign because all the major parties were in favour and public opinion polls showed a supermajority in favour. If you can't vote while holding your nose on an issue then it simply isn't that important an issue to you, is it? Unless the party in question is campaigning on torturing babies or something, but I rather suspect that's not the case. If your view is fringe enough, you have to vote for fringe parties - that is how the system works! If you can't manage to vote for an antivax party, perhaps vaccine denial isn't that important to you. If you don't like the way the system works, that's an entirely different discussion, but people in those countries seem contented with it.

If you've a shred of evidence that suggests the parties in Sweden and Finland are thwarting the will of the electorate, please present it. I actually enjoy having my opinions overturned by facts, makes me feel like I've actually learned something instead of shouting at a wall.