Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

[Magnus McGinty]

In this scenario (and in the NATO/Ukraine one) Warsaw Pact refuses to allow Ireland to join for fear of provoking the UK government. It is Ireland/Ukraine who is the active agent in moving away from UK/Russia. Whether the former colonial master considers this impudence to be aggression doesn't mean that it is so.

Clearly it is a factor in the invasion to some extent, but I'd say it falls under imperialist entitlement rather than a legitimate security interest.

It’s difficult to factor in Estonia and Latvia into this scenario although I suppose their shared borders aren’t quite as extensive.

 

[Flavour]

Well Estonia and Latvia account for a miniscule % of Russia's land borders with other countries, where as the UK/RoI border in the 6 countries is the only land border the UK has.

 

[Rimbaud]

It’s difficult to factor in Estonia and Latvia into this scenario although I suppose their shared borders aren’t quite as extensive.

There is no perfect analogy really.

I look at this as arguably the last European Empire struggling to come to terms with not being an Empire anymore.

Russia is cosying up to China out of convenience but they won't do so for long as China is also eating away at their sphere of influence in Central Asia.

The fact is that Russia believes it has a right to a vast sphere of influence in Eastern Europe and Central Asia containing many more people than live within Russia itself, and in many or even most cases are more economically vibrant than Russia and hold justified historical enmity towards Russia which Russia has done little to dispel.

This is more like Portugal in Angola and Mozambique or France in Algeria, or Britain in Suez. All examples of powers trying to retain relevance when they no longer held the economic foundation and technological advantages to maintain such influence beyond their borders.

The Russian situation is unique because it is obscured by the Soviet history and the fact that it is a continental land Empire rather than an overseas Empire, which is probably also why Russia hasn't got over Empire like other European countries as they don't see themselves in those terms. But their neighbours do see them in those terms.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

There is no perfect analogy really.

I look at this as arguably the last European Empire struggling to come to terms with not being an Empire anymore.

Russia is cosying up to China out of convenience but they won't do so for long as China is also eating away at their sphere of influence in Central Asia.

The fact is that Russia believes it has a right to a vast sphere of influence in Eastern Europe and Central Asia containing many more people than live within Russia itself, and in many or even most cases are more economically vibrant than Russia and hold justified historical enmity towards Russia which Russia has done little to dispel.

This is more like Portugal in Angola and Mozambique or France in Algeria, or Britain in Suez. All examples of powers trying to retain relevance when they no longer held the economic foundation and technological advantages to maintain such influence beyond their borders.

The Russian situation is unique because it is obscured by the Soviet history and the fact that it is a continental land Empire rather than an overseas Empire, which is probably also why Russia hasn't got over Empire like other European countries as they don't see themselves in those terms. But their neighbours do see them in those terms.

I do agree with this. But also that US neo-cons have their own agenda in ensuring this doesn’t happen and wouldn’t mind Russia breaking up entirely.

 

[Pickman's model]

There is no perfect analogy really.

I look at this as arguably the last European Empire struggling to come to terms with not being an Empire anymore.

Russia is cosying up to China out of convenience but they won't do so for long as China is also eating away at their sphere of influence in Central Asia.

The fact is that Russia believes it has a right to a vast sphere of influence in Eastern Europe and Central Asia containing many more people than live within Russia itself, and in many or even most cases are more economically vibrant than Russia and hold justified historical enmity towards Russia which Russia has done little to dispel.

This is more like Portugal in Angola and Mozambique or France in Algeria, or Britain in Suez. All examples of powers trying to retain relevance when they no longer held the economic foundation and technological advantages to maintain such influence beyond their borders.

The Russian situation is unique because it is obscured by the Soviet history and the fact that it is a continental land Empire rather than an overseas Empire, which is probably also why Russia hasn't got over Empire like other European countries as they don't see themselves in those terms. But their neighbours do see them in those terms.

I don't think our ruling class has got over empire

 

[Rimbaud]

I don't think our ruling class has got over empire

Very true

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I don't think our ruling class has got over empire

Commonwealth looking a bit shaky also.

 

[andysays]

I agree Putin is a gangster and a thug, but having

Granted that Putin is a gangster and a thug, my reading of the likes of John Mearscheimer and Benjamin Abelow is that longstanding NATO expansion Eastwards (contrary to what was said when the Cold War ended) has pushed Russia into a situation where from their perspective a preemptive strike seemed unavoidable.

Whereas Zelensky seems to have no understanding of the threat of nuclearcwar and/or doesnt care, just demanding Russia be annihilated, and ever more Western resources be sent to Ukraine

This does not mean I approve of the invasion, just that I understand it, and this understanding is very different than the incessant pro-war propaganda pumped out by the BBC. And the likes of Chatham House, which seemingly most posters on this thread adhere to.

You are entitled to disagree with me/Abelow/Mearscheimer, but if precedent is anything to go by, this post will not be met in general by a reasoned response, but vile abuse and name-calling. Whatever…Way beyond caring actually

I have certainly read comments from Zelensky suggesting he would be happy to see Putin deposed, but I don't recall anything I would categorise as "demanding Russia be annihilated".

Maybe you can provide some quotes which back this up.

 

[Raheem]

I didn’t say they had moved into Ireland. The question was whether folk thought that such a move would be aggressive?

It would presumably have "moved into" the UK first, so we'd all be deliriously happy and enthusiastically waving our new flags.

 

[kebabking]

I do agree with this. But also that US neo-cons have their own agenda in ensuring this doesn’t happen and wouldn’t mind Russia breaking up entirely.

There are lots of people who wouldn't mind Russia breaking up into versions of its (many) constituent polities - many of them inside what Moscow considers to be Russia, and most of the people who border Russia.

In Europe, the Caucasus and in Central Asia it's because if Russia disintegrated, the places/polities formerly known as Russia would be far less able to bring huge masses of tanks to their doorsteps, and in China, it's because the sweetshop would be open, and having and all-you-can-eat-for-free day.

The problem that pretty much everyone recognises, is that the 'wouldn't it be nice if Russia fell under a bus' thing involves the disintegration of a polity with 6,000 nukes, and there's very little appetite to watch how that goes from ringside seats.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

It would presumably have "moved into" the UK first, so we'd all be deliriously happy and enthusiastically waving our new flags.

I more meant putting yourself into the shoes of the UK security apparatus, which, by extension, is putting yourself in the shoes of the Russian security apparatus.

 

[gosub]

Had Ireland requested Warsaw Pact help in freeing it from oppressive English imperialist interference in internal affairs?

Hope so. Lot of tractors in Ireland

 

[Magnus McGinty]

There are lots of people who wouldn't mind Russia breaking up into versions of its (many) constituent polities - many of them inside what Moscow considers to be Russia, and most of the people who border Russia.

In Europe, the Caucasus and in Central Asia it's because if Russia disintegrated, the places/polities formerly known as Russia would be far less able to bring huge masses of tanks to their doorsteps, and in China, it's because the sweetshop would be open, and having and all-you-can-eat-for-free day.

The problem that pretty much everyone recognises, is that the 'wouldn't it be nice if Russia fell under a bus' thing involves the disintegration of a polity with 6,000 nukes, and there's very little appetite to watch how that goes from ringside seats.

Good point. And possibly why Russia desires having so many nukes if they ensure it’s survival for the reasons given.

 

[The39thStep]

Commonwealth looking a bit shaky also.

Free the North

 

[tim]

.

I wonder if things turned out differently, whether folk would see the Warsaw Pact moving into Ireland as an aggressive manoeuvre or not.

The Warsaw Pact would never have "moved into" the Irish Republic; the Irish Republic would have joined the Warsaw Pact. The Pact was never that cohesive anyway the Albanians and Yugoslavs peeled off very early on, and by the late 70s and 80s Romania and Hungary were doing there own thing with little regard to Moscow. Obviously, Poland was very nonconformist even after the Jaruselski coup.

As to NATO Tankies hate it and self-appointed experts on Spookland think it's important, but the Russian probably don't care that much. They may care more about the particular policies of militarily significant members of NATO. Russia invaded Ukraine because they thought they could get away with it as they did in 2014 when they occupied Crimes and the Eastern fringes. Their problem was that they miscalculated their ability. Russia has a big appetite but bad teeth.

 

[kebabking]

I more meant putting yourself into the shoes of the UK security apparatus, which, by extension, is putting yourself in the shoes of the Russian security apparatus.

Ok, that's easy - if Ireland of (for example) 1972 decided that it's fundamental interests were best served by joining the Warsaw Pact, then that would be it's right as a sovereign state.

The UK would seek to persuade it otherwise - Ireland of course would have the right not to be persuaded, or indeed to to listen - and the UK would have the the right to decide what it's economic/social relationship with Ireland would look like. The EEC application/membership would go in the bin, and the close relationship that Ireland undoubtedly enjoys with the US would go to icy hostility in the blink of an eye.

The UK would undoubtedly seek to influence the debate, both openly and covertly, but that can only be effective if there are Irish political/societal actors who thinks it's a bad idea, or who are for sale, or who've been caught balls deep in people who aren't their wives, and who don't fancy the pictures going on RTE.

In the end however, it would be a decision for Ireland to take - it wouldn't justify an invasion to stop it, and it would be just another thing that would have to be managed.

 

[The39thStep]

Was it on here , or Twitter or another site that there was a map showing how the USA could be divided up so as to prevent it from invading or regime changing other countries ?

 

[MickiQ]

Well the Warsaw Pact has been consigned to the dustbin of history for more than 30 years and given every member (bar one) is now a member of NATO it wasn't so much a mutual defence pact as a PR exercise.
Ireland has no enemies, other than the odd bit of UN peacekeeping all their wars have been fighting us or each other. Whilst it may not be a member of NATO I would lay good money that an invasion of Ireland by a third nation such as Russia would rapidly draw in the UK and by extension NATO.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Thanks for answering the question kebabking and tim instead of accusing me of whataboutery.

 

[TopCat]

"NATO fans"

Right there is where you lost what little credibility you ever had in this debate.

You have less for the reasons I explained and you fail to address.

 

[Dogsauce]

A dirty bomb would have very little long term effect, and the radiation dose from the initial blast would be so low, that wouldn't have an effect, either.

The whole concept of a dirty bomb is a bit silly, and sounds much worse than it actually is, purely becaus it involves radioactivity, which people have been conditioned to fear.

I can’t foresee any nuclear use in this conflict due to the likely escalation it would cause. Proper madman stuff.

However, the ‘dirty bomb’ of asbestos fragments flying in the air every time an artillery shell hits a shack or warehouse should really be worrying people more than it is. I know most of it will be bonded stuff which they’re pretty relaxed about in the east (hence why so many things are still made out of it), but they’ll never get it all cleaned up, and it will be killing for decades.

 

[tim]

It would presumably have "moved into" the UK first, so we'd all be deliriously happy and enthusiastically waving our new flags.

If only!

 

[The39thStep]

If only.

Forgot all about that

 

[Dystopiary]

11 people have been killed by a Russian rocket attack on a packed pizza restaurant in Kramatorsk last night, including 4 children. At least 56 people were injured.

 

[editor]

11 people have been killed by a Russian rocket attack on a packed pizza restaurant in Kramatorsk last night, including 4 children. At least 56 people were injured.

It's just fucking obscene.

 

[kebabking]

In terms of the dirty bomb idea, worth noting this from last week...

US senators Graham and Blumenthal (R&D) put a resolution to the Senate stating that an attack on Ukraine, which produced radiological pollution in a NATO state, would be considered by the US as an attack on that NATO state, and that the US would respond with conventional munitions in overwhelming force.



Both are very close to Biden on Ukraine, and it's clear that the WH approves of the motion.

While we in the west often get out knickers in a twist about how we don't arm Ukraine above X or Y capability because we're concerned about Russian escalation/retaliation, we don't really think about how remarkably supine Russia has been about not escalting/responding to NATO efforts to support/arm Ukraine because they don't fancy their chances in a fight. Perhaps NATO red lines are wide, and bright, while Russian ones are thinner, with a more watercolour feel...

 

[jeff_leigh]

Was it on here , or Twitter or another site that there was a map showing how the USA could be divided up so as to prevent it from invading or regime changing other countries ?

I think for these reasons I’d rather have America broken up than Russia

 

[The39thStep]

11 people have been killed by a Russian rocket attack on a packed pizza restaurant in Kramatorsk last night, including 4 children. At least 56 people were injured.

I saw some wild speculation about who may have been eating in there as an attempt to justify it but for me even if it’s true the civilian collateral is just too high . Ghastly .

 

[UnderOpenSky]

I think for these reasons I’d rather have America broken up than Russia

How many nukes does Texas and Florida get?

 

[The39thStep]

How many nukes does Texas and Florida get?

Judge for yourself