Navigating the Tensions in Ukraine: A Scientific Perspective

[valenumr]

If he really wanted that, he would attack a NATO country. It's not technically that hard to make this war happen.

No disagreement here. I just meant it creates a very dangerous situation if NATO directly engages Russia. But I am worried that history is soon to repeat itself, but in a much worse way, if Putin continues to escalate things over time.

 

[valenumr]

We are living history right now.

I didn't really need another "once in a lifetime" world crisis in my lifetime

 

[valenumr]

I've read China is staunchly against violation of state sovereignty in principle. So Russia's fueling of the separatists in East Ukraine, declaration of their independence, and now invasion, are all behaviors they condemn implicitly, in principle at least. But they have strategic interests depending on a good relationship with Russia. So apparently they are in an awkward position geopolitically. Note, they view Taiwan as part of China already.

In terms of Russia's invasion emboldening them to possibly invade Taiwan. I'm not sure it should have that effect, because it is unlikely for Russia to have a net benefit from this. The economic effects, diplomatic effects, deaths, etc. will more likely be a sobering example of how nobody will benefit from that kind of aggression. At least that's my guess, but I may be totally wrong.

China is kind of on a knifes edge wrt to Taiwan. They certainly don't want an outside nation declaring Taiwan independence and moving into "protect the people".

 

[Mike S.]

I don't know much about this, but some of the commentary here seems too simple. After all, the Russian side isn't all balderdash. Putin's speech claims the U.S. staged a 'coup' in 2014, and while it is unreasonable to claim the U.S. just made the Ukranians reject Russia, there were some hints of influence, against which they still claim to be defending themselves. The Azov Battalion is real, though the degree of 'Nazi' taint, as Zelensky recently pointed out, is highly exaggerated. Putin cited some bright ideas like the invasions of Libya and Iraq, and there he has us: yes, this is just as bad an idea!

What gobsmacks me is just how little effort has been made to deter the invasion. Eight years after 2014, I've read Ukraine just recently proposed allowing private gun ownership ... I doubt the rumored insurgency will have a deep network of hidden caches. Their roads aren't blocked, their bridges haven't been blown up. Chernobyl was captured intact. The Ukrainian government isn't passing out copies of Uncle Fester's Silent Death. None of their militias are posting pictures of Covid ferrets in a cage, rabbits dying of RHDV2, vials of molnupiravir. So the people talking about the U.S. getting into nuclear war are picturing a reaction from outsiders vastly more extreme than anything happening inside Ukraine itself.

The Western reaction seems similarly muted. I see much agonized discussion of the economic pain of sanctions, but the consensus seems to be they aren't really that interested in severely hindering the Russian upper class lifestyle in London or Florida. Even at the time of the Skripal affair, with assassins issued false papers for flight, Western countries could have decided that passports and other official papers from Russia were no different legally than something you scribbled on a cocktail napkin. They could copy North Korea's successful policies regarding counterfeiting of foreign currency. They could take a scorched-earth policy toward Russian gas and mobilize for an all-out program of solar panels on every rooftop. If no one is doing anything you can think of, it's hard not to think they don't really care that much after all. Isn't this just another Panama ... one that looks different from the other end of the gun?

 

[valenumr]

Well how would you classify a president who invaded Iraq . And invading Iraq after 9/11 would be like invading Argentina after Pearl Harbor.

I think any reasonable person would agree that was an unreasonable aggression. But there was a very large international consensus that action was justified, including Russia. In this case, Russia's only friend at the moment is puppet state Belarus.

 

[russ_watters]

After all, the Russian side isn't all balderdash. Putin's speech claims the U.S. staged a 'coup' in 2014, and while it is unreasonable to claim the U.S. just made the Ukranians reject Russia, there were some hints of influence, against which they still claim to be defending themselves.

I mean, it kinda is all balderdash. If I say: "The US wants to invade Russia and the moon orbits the Earth" throwing in the pointless fact doesn't make it half true. One claim of fact is relevant to the conversation and the other is a pointless distraction.

Putin isn't an idiot. He said he didn't want NATO on his doorstep because that would be a threat to Russia, but he knows that's nonsense. NATO/the US has never had imperialistic territorial aspirations in Eastern Europe, and NATO is a strictly defensive treaty (and; "don't defend against us or we'll attack"? Really?). I don't buy that Russia is still afraid of Napoleon or even Hitler, and it's never been subject to a direct assault from the US. He's not defending himself, he's the threat. He knows this. Even when he says NATO on his doorstep would be a threat.

What gobsmacks me is just how little effort has been made to deter the invasion.

Agreed. We've drawn-down a long way since 1991 and we're just not paying attention while Russia is turning back the clock. Maybe this will finally wake us up.

They could take a scorched-earth policy toward Russian gas and mobilize for an all-out program of solar panels on every rooftop. If no one is doing anything you can think of, it's hard not to think they don't really care that much after all.

Germany's last three nuclear plants are closing this year. No nukes is far more important than either climate change or avoiding Russian handcuffs.

 

[morrobay]

I think any reasonable person would agree that was an unreasonable aggression. But there was a very large international consensus that action was justified, including Russia. In this case, Russia's only friend at the moment is puppet state Belarus.

Sure that action was justified just ask VP Cheney / Halliburton & CO. Who made billions on the war . Then there was Afghanistan. Now Ill let you do the search on U.S lives lost and the cost . Meanwhile back on topic. Again the West is going to have to give Putin something here.

 

[PeroK]

Again the West is going to have to give Putin something here.

What do you suggest? What about Poland and the UK (now that we are not in the EU). What about offering Putin those and hope that he's satisfied?

 

[Rive]

How could Finland threaten a country with a population of 147 million to Finland's 5.5 million?

Cuba was ~ around the same when that missile-issue hit in way back and still could provoke overwhelming reaction.

Regarding the actual situation, the troops stationed around Ukraine ~ equals with the whole troop count of Ukraine. And it's around ~ 10% of the troops available in Russia.
The Russian troops already deployed is estimated as 30-60k. That my be still manageable for some time, but if nothing changes this will end within a week or so
No time for any economics stuff to take effect, only clearly displayed intent could make any difference.

The reaction from 'West' feels rather disappointing so far. This will not be stopped with talk only. I thought Russia would be out of SWIFT, and an official offer about fast NATO membership delivered to every country around Russian borders by now.

 

[artis]

If he attacks a NATO country with US/German/etc troops in it, he's directly starting a war against us. That's a much bigger deal, and we successfully avoided war with the USSR for 40 years (and defeated it) this way.

Before I give you insights on what is going on (I'm from Baltics) I just want to clear out this one but very popular misconception that is mostly in the west, @russ_watters please don't be upset about this, it was not the US that defeated the USSR , the USSR defeated itself , it simply died because the hard core communists refused to change the country to a more capitalistic system, meanwhile people living in the USSR began to think differently you know generations change etc) and there was a growing anger from within and a will to change things. Then in the late 80's Gorbahcev tried to implement the changes that the people were asking for "perestroika policy" (perestroika - a Russian word for rebuilding, a new unfinished building) but he encountered opposition from the more hard line communists and many of the countries intelligence forces (KGB, GRU, etc) This all lead up to the 1991 coup
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_coup_d'état_attempt
Before the coup there were many protest actions from civilians within the USSR, one of the most famous one was the "Baltic way" a huge live chain of people stretching from the capital of what was then Lithuanian Soviet Socialist republic through Latvian Soviet Socialist republic to Estonian Soviet socialist republic (nowaday Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia)
The chain of people was about 420 miles long, there were up to 2 million people who joined hands while standing on the major highways linking the countries.
It was the "March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom" for the USSR, in it's size ad scope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltic_Way
Here is a video about it, there are more on youtube you can check them out by writing (baltijas cels) or Baltic way


It is also somewhat personal to me as my father was standing there.
Then came the troubling events of 1991, a year before on 1990, we declared our independence from the USSR , but physically we still had Red army forces here and nuclear bombs etc.

Basically the reason the USSR fell began some time before due to mainly social unrest and the economy that wasn't working as people wished. Then in 1991 august when the coup was under way in Moscow it was luck and miscalculation that resulted in the hardline USSR communist stance to lose and the liberal for change oriented side to win, as the republics declared independence and Moscow in turmoil when the coup was over so was the USSR.
We almost had a bloody civil war here but it ended with just a handful of lives lost, the overall stance of the Russian people was for change and so they stood against the tanks and army who had been dispatched to Moscow as well as other capitals of former Republics of the USSR to stop the disintegration.
Here is a really good and short Radio free Europe recount of the events for those that don't know

 

[morrobay]

What do you suggest? What about Poland and the UK (now that we are not in the EU). What about offering Putin those and hope that he's satisfied?

Don't make a straw man on this. I would suggest asking Putin what he wants for starters. Maybe lifting sanctions and some sort of complex compromises in the area would end this without major war. That's what diplomats are for.

 

[PeroK]

Don't make a straw man on this. I would suggest asking Putin what he wants for starters. Maybe lifting sanctions and some sort of complex compromises in the area would end this without major war. That's what diplomats are for.

More than appeasement, then? Total capitulation?

 

[artis]

Folks I feel like we are beginning to get into a little war here with one another ourselves, soon we'll need some troops in this forums for peacekeeping...

If I may I just want to express some opinions (my own) and facts regarding the situation given I'm well versed in the history of this part of the world , I also live here (Latvia) and it's rather hard to not know ones history when you live in eastern Europe...

First and foremost, Russia has a long long history of imperialism, the same can be said about Germany and other European countries , we Latvians were under German rule in the Middle ages for centuries, then we were under Russian empire aka the Czar up until 1917, when ofcourse the October revolution happened and the world changed forever.
There is one major difference that helps the Baltic states that doesn't help Ukraine. We were independent established countries before the 1940 Soviet invasion during WW2 and the subsequent Soviet rule from 1945 to 1991.
Latvia as well as other Baltic states established it's freedom in 1918, right after the end of WW1 and while Lenin was busy fighting the opposition within the newly formed USSR.
We here had our own civil war from 1918 to 1921, our newly established government had to fight against both German troops retreating and Soviet staged coup attempts, the Soviets actually set up a government that tried to incorporate us into the USSR as long back as 1919 and 1920, luckily our freedom forces won and the Soviet staged government was sent in exile.
This is just scratching the surface, the real history is much more complex and longer and would require a book.

One of the reasons Putin is so assured of his actions is that Ukraine first emerged as a country only after the fall of he USSR in 1991.
Second reason is that Ukraine and Russia have deep roots , basically they are both ethnically similar as well as historically share much in common. I in no way agree with this as being a basis for invasion but it seems this is partly what Putin bases his ideas on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ukraine

Third of all, Putin was really angered back in 2014 when he saw that the Ukrainians ousted his loyal president and government. I think he saw that as Ukraine's move towards the west , which by the way Ukraine itself (their government after 2014) said they would want to do.
Ukraine being a strategic point from a geopolitical view, I think Putin decided that he will take it back and reverse the European (possible NATO?) course on Ukraine.

I don't agree with the assessments some here have made that Putin shares some psychological problems, If there is one thing about the KGB , especially back at their peak of being the worlds most feared and effective intelligence agency, then it's safe to say they did not recruit mentally ill people or psychologically weak minds to run their business.
This is all just a cold blooded calculation and chess. Human lives mean nothing to the security forces both of the historical Czar regime as well as the following NKVD, Stalin and later KGB people.
I know this history well, I have read books and even talked to former agents, around here every family had at least someone who was an agent in the KGB.

 

[artis]

As to the physical situation at hand, well Ukraine really doesn't stand a chance, without a major military intervention from the west, which at this point seems unlikely.
Many parts of Ukraine have already fallen into Russian rule.
For one, the famous Chernobyl nuclear power plant and it's exclusion zone has been captured by Russian forces,


I have also a person whom I know who works there, he confirmed me this morning on FB all of Chernobyl is invaded with Russian troops. Luckily so far they have given up Chernobyl without a fight. Fighting in that part might be dangerous as it could stir up radioactive sediments and dust or worse bombing could destroy the fuel containers stored etc which could release a fallout, I think both Russian and Ukrainian military does not want this scenario as that would affect them, so far it's peaceful there, just tanks rolling around.Russian troops have entered Ukraine from all sides, they are advancing from east, where the separatist regions are, they are coming from below (south) from the Crimea and Black sea, they are also advancing from North which is where Chernobyl is and the Belarusian border, since Belorussia has Russian troops within it.
Chernobyl is only about 100 miles from Kyiv, the full invasion of Ukraine to my mind is days away.
The only somewhat safe zone is left in the west near the border with Poland.From what I can and have gathered so far from persons I know who are either close or live in Ukraine, the country is besieged from within and very few places are left "neutral".
All major airfields are blown up in order to not allow escape via air, .
Russian helicopters are flying near Kyiv

 

[morrobay]

Thanks for your knowledge here . Then what does Putin want now. He has Ukraine , is that going to be enough?

 

[artis]

Thanks for your knowledge here . Then what does Putin want now. He has Ukraine , is that going to be enough?

AS of now , again this is my opinion, Putin will just take Ukraine, most likely there will be casualties, Ukrainians will probably make some guerilla warfare type of resistance to capital Kyiv which will only last, well for not that long because the military power balance is something like 1:100,and Ukraine is mostly flat ground, apart from the Carpathian mountains, so it's not as easy to hide as it is in Afghanistan which is partly why the Soviets and the US had such a hard time there.
then there will most likely be a puppet government installed or the worst case scenario Russia will fully annex Ukraine and simply expand it's borders. Hard to say as of now, I myself would bet on the first case.
Although given Ukraine already has and will have Russian troops within it I really don't see the difference between a puppet government and keeping the flag VS just full scale incorporation within Russia, well the first part makes Putin look less evil and is a bit better for PR so I think he will go for the 1st.
The other likely scenario is that Ukraine will be left in a divided state where Ukrainian army troops will try to fight and hold off certain parts and strategic points, with fighting going into a prolonged period much like it was for these years in the separatist regions, only now in almost all country.

As of now I am almost certain that Putin won't attack Europe further, and definitely not any NATO country. That is my assessment given current details and the history I know.
Long term strategy is different talk.

I don't agree with the posters who said this is exactly like 1938. It is similar yes but not exactly like, I don't see a viable way by which he takes Ukraine today and then just a year later starts to overtake Europe, at least not as long as NATO still stands and the US can get their sh!* together and not be divided and be strong.

To expand more, a lot is also on stake with China, make no mistake China is just as brutal and cold blooded as Russia, mind you China is a country that has concentration camps in the year 2022, well pardon I meant to say "re-education camps" , US and NATO can fight one opponent at a time, if China at some point decides to start doing with Taiwan what Russia is doing to Ukraine then things might get nasty real fast.
I am sure that US+Europe (NATO) can keep Russia from attacking Europe, but if China ever decides to sway in Russian favor then run for your lives. At least I will, but hey let's not entertain that idea for now, it doesn't seem likely. One good thing about globalization is that everybody depends on everybody else a lot more, so simply destroying half the world is not a good business strategy for either Russia or China.

 

[artis]

Here is a map of the approximate current invasion geographically, although this map shows mostly ground troop advancement, remember that due to Ukraine having no effective air power Russian fighter aircraft are flying all over the country bombing military targets and cities.

Here is more of the same from "nytimes" reporting
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/world/europe/ukraine-maps.htmlThis is the current situation as of last 24hours, invasion is happening from basically all side except western side aka the border with Poland, and also not from the border of Moldova.

Here is a video from just one border point where CCTV cams show Russian tank and ground artillery starting the invasion, this happened already more than a day ago.
Here is a good summation of what has been going for up until yesterday
A video of attacks on Ukraine including capital, people taking shelter in metro underground stations.


Another good short clip on Kyiv bombing and people fleeing

Some more war and attacks
The good news is that it seems from at least some of the video footage that Ukrainian military is being able to put up at least some fighting and some Russian missiles and a few aircraft have been downed in the process but there is no clear information on the figures so one can only speculate.

 

[fresh_42]

One thing that I don't understand is that a lot of the reported damage so far (aside from airports, which is logical) was to neighborhoods and apartment buildings. Is this misinformation from the Ukraine folks (seems unlikely given all the media boots on the ground there), or are the Russian missles and bombs mistargeting civilian targets? So far that part seems especially clumsy to me.

According to CNN (Reporter on the Russian side of the border (15 miles), ex-general explaining the weaponry), the Russians used a weapon that has a reach of 50 miles and could thus be used outside the range of the Ukrainian artillery to the cost of a loss of precision. This may be one reason. Another one could be, that some military or governmental targets are not isolated.

 

[fresh_42]

Hopefully our intelligence agencies saw this coming, but then why did they not do a better job in the chess game...?

A journalist here put it that way: "I and all my friends couldn't actually believe he would do it. We got used to the fact that politicians meanwhile negotiate like we discuss the import of tomatoes or bananas from the Netherlands."

Thirty years is quite some time and humans tend to forget the bad things. There are 26,000+ Russians living in Berlin. Russia is a neighbor, and people from both sides live together. I remember my thought on my first step on Russian soil: "Wonderful, I am actually in Russia and I do not carry a gun! This is so much better!"

I guess, Putin simply didn't make this development.

 

[fresh_42]

I'm feeling some concern for Moldova as well. They have a small pro-russian breakaway that borders ukraine.

No worries. There are already Russian troops in Transnistria.

 

[fresh_42]

The Azov Battalion is real, though the degree of 'Nazi' taint, as Zelensky recently pointed out, is highly exaggerated.

The more as Zelensky is Jewish.

 

[russ_watters]

I would suggest asking Putin what he wants for starters.

He's told us what he wants.

Maybe lifting sanctions and some sort of complex compromises in the area would end this without major war. That's what diplomats are for.

Historians are calling this the biggest war (or at least invasion) in Europe since WWII. And since for now he doesn't want a war against anyone else, we don't need to offer him anything for that. But sure, I'm sure he'd be delighted if the sanctions were dropped and there were zero consequences.

 

[aguarneri]

I wonder who is really hiding behind Putin? I guess he does not weigh much against Gasprom and the military industry. In the USA, the late President Eisenhower warned his country against the power of the US military (and energy?) industry over the people's elected Congress. A few centuries ago, the East India Company was the real ruler of the United Kingdom. Even in China, the Communist Party and the president sh*t their pants when certain chinese companies raise their voices...

 

[artis]

I wonder who is really hiding behind Putin?

Behind the aluminum foil there is chocolate inside (for edible matryoshka versions) , for non edible ones there is simply a painted image on clay structure...

 

[Astronuc]

Some history

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Turkic_Khaganate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars

Borders have been relatively nonexistent until recent centuries, and then the borders were rather fluid until . . . . Well it seems the border with Russia is still fluid.

Then what does Putin want now. He has Ukraine , is that going to be enough?

I would expect Putin and his regime will continue to undermine western democracies to the extent possible. Meanwhile, he'll support authoritarian regimes like Lukashenko's regime in Belarus.

 

[Mike S.]

Luckily so far they have given up Chernobyl without a fight. Fighting in that part might be dangerous as it could stir up radioactive sediments and dust or worse bombing could destroy the fuel containers stored etc which could release a fallout, I think both Russian and Ukrainian military does not want this scenario as that would affect them

Recently some sources have started to question whether Ukraine giving up the last of their nuclear weapons in 1996 was really a winning move. But to my eye it looks like this was the last of their nuclear weapons. What would have happened had they loaded up those sites with explosives and blown them up to match the Parthenon? If the Ukrainians were willing to pay the cost of deterrence, their country (and Belarus also) might have been much less desirable territories for conquest. That idea may seem extreme, but any nuclear armed country including the U.S. and Russia has made a large financial commitment to do much more!

 

[artis]

Recently some sources have started to question whether Ukraine giving up the last of their nuclear weapons in 1996 was really a winning move. But to my eye it looks like this was the last of their nuclear weapons. What would have happened had they loaded up those sites with explosives and blown them up to match the Parthenon? If the Ukrainians were willing to pay the cost of deterrence, their country (and Belarus also) might have been much less desirable territories for conquest. That idea may seem extreme, but any nuclear armed country including the U.S. and Russia has made a large financial commitment to do much more!

I'm not sure I understand what you just wrote or meant? Do you mean Ukraine loading up Chernobyl with explosives and blowing it up to create a kind of "dirty nuclear weapon"?
I think that would be a really dumb idea that not even Russian/Ukrainian troops would want to consider.

Well it seems the border with Russia is still fluid.

The same way peace in middle east is "fluid", I hope not to offend anyone but there simply are some unwritten rules known to be true by almost anyone.
There are certain parts of the world where due to multiple complex and interrelated issues matters like "lasting peace" or "democracy" really never become a reality.

Russia is a nuclear bomb with a timer, always has been always will be, I recall this was told to me by an ethnic Russian , we were "comrades" back in University both studied political science.
He was a really smart guy, (alot of Russians are in fact) he was also very honest with me, he agreed that there is something about Russian sentiment that always creates political turmoil in the long term.
If you don't believe me, check Russian history, literally every form of government has been tried out there in some form for some time at some point, everything from theocracy to autocracy to monarchy to pure tyranny to socialism to anarchy at some point and pure chaos in between. Right now it's a weird mix of capitalist driven, autocracy with the facade of a democracy and some minor democratic form (basic elections etc) (although for those that don't know back in the USSR they also held elections, there was one ballot and one party on it...but they were free ), divided between ideological communist fanboys, oligarchs of great wealth and rationally thinking moderates who are patriots but share no illusions for the bloody and imperial past nor it's ideology.
I hope the latter ones prevail, otherwise "Houston we have a problem"

 

[fresh_42]

Russia is a nuclear bomb with a timer, always has been always will be, I recall this was told to me by an ethnic Russian , we were "comrades" back in University both studied political science.
He was a really smart guy, (alot of Russians are in fact) he was also very honest with me, he agreed that there is something about Russian sentiment that always creates political turmoil in the long term.
If you don't believe me, check Russian history, literally every form of government has been tried out there in some form for some time at some point, everything from theocracy to autocracy to monarchy to pure tyranny to socialism to anarchy at some point and pure chaos in between.

I think this is a bit too much simplification. It is probably harder for a nation to overcome the mental structure established over nearly a hundred years of socialism than it is for people who weren't exposed for as long, or to even understand for people who never have been exposed.

Single statements of some Russians don't mean a lot. One Russian once told me that Hitler's occupation wasn't that bad after all, because crime rates were low. Does this mean anything? It is as it is in any nation: people just want to get along and are mostly friendly and nice. Politics is something different. I am pretty sure that a poll four weeks ago asking "Should we declare war on Ukraine?" would have resulted in "Hell, no!".

However, there is still the dream of being a superpower in the heads, or the grief about its loss. I mean, look at the UK. In my opinion, was the lost empire - to some extent subconsciously - the primary motivation for the Brexit: "Who is the EU to tell us what to do?" (@PeroK: just my opinion.) I think that political decisions, e.g. about the expansion of NATO, have to be seen in this light.

 

[phinds]

Even in China, the Communist Party and the president sh*t their pants when certain chinese companies raise their voices...

SERIOUSLY ? You really have that exactly backwards

 

[artis]

Even in China, the Communist Party and the president sh*t their pants when certain chinese companies raise their voices...

In China corporations are the party and the party are the corporations, they merge into one giant octopus
This was the same in the USSR, all major factories were not only government controlled but had government spies within them. In modern China the factories are not entirely government owned but they do have a government "blessing" on top.

 

[artis]

I think this is a bit too much simplification. It is probably harder for a nation to overcome the mental structure established over nearly a hundred years of socialism than it is for people who weren't exposed for as long, or to even understand for people who never have been exposed.

Single statements of some Russians don't mean a lot. One Russian once told me that Hitler's occupation wasn't that bad after all, because crime rates were low. Does this mean anything? It is as it is in any nation: people just want to get along and are mostly friendly and nice. Politics is something different. I am pretty sure that a poll four weeks ago asking "Should we declare war on Ukraine?" would have resulted in "Hell, no!".

However, there is still the dream of being a superpower in the heads, or the grief about its loss. I mean, look at the UK. In my opinion, was the lost empire - to some extent subconsciously - the primary motivation for the Brexit: "Who is the EU to tell us what to do?" (@PeroK: just my opinion.) I think that political decisions, e.g. about the expansion of NATO, have to be seen in this light.

I agree it is simplification but based on reality, after all squeezing thousands of years of history of a whole continent in a post is impossible. All summaries have some drawbacks.

 

[fresh_42]

"What is taken by force can only be kept by force." (Mahatma Gandhi)

 

[artis]

"What is taken by force can only be kept by force." (Mahatma Gandhi)

True but if the "taker" has a lot of force, he can essentially keep whatever he took indefinitely...
Ancient Rome conquered Greece and Greece was then for couple of hundred years under Roman rule, after Roman empire fell Greece was never the same as it was before.

It's somewhat like taking hostages, sure they may be set free some point afterwards, but the damage done will linger for the rest of their lives.

 

[russ_watters]

Before I give you insights on what is going on (I'm from Baltics) I just want to clear out this one but very popular misconception that is mostly in the west, @russ_watters please don't be upset about this, it was not the US that defeated the USSR , the USSR defeated itself , it simply died because the hard core communists refused to change the country to a more capitalistic system, meanwhile people living in the USSR began to think differently you know generations change etc) and there was a growing anger from within and a will to change things. Then in the late 80's Gorbahcev tried to implement the changes that the people were asking for "perestroika policy" (perestroika - a Russian word for rebuilding, a new unfinished building)...

It is also somewhat personal to me as my father was standing there.
Then came the troubling events of 1991, a year before on 1990, we declared our independence from the USSR , but physically we still had Red army forces here and nuclear bombs etc.

Basically the reason the USSR fell began some time before due to mainly social unrest and the economy that wasn't working as people wished.

I don't mean to minimize the people in the Soviet Union who ultimately made/were the collapse. The most difficult and important part of a revolution is the revolution. But this all happened as soon as Gorbachev loosened the USSR's grip (Glasnost and Perestroika were adopted in 1986). He loosened his grip because of the economic problems associated with communism and in particular the USSR's relationship with the West/US. The cold war related economic problems were the fertile ground, and the loosening of the restrictions was the seeds. In his words, when he stepped down:
"We’re now living in a new world. An end has been put to the Cold War and to the arms race, as well as to the mad militarization of the country, which has crippled our economy, public attitudes and morals."
https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/fall-of-soviet-union

 

[WWGD]

I was under the illusion, hope, that Russia would slowly develop the needed institutions to the point these would be strong-enough to allow for more of a conventional , healthy, democracy. That it was a matter of time and a bit of luck. So much for that.

 

[russ_watters]

A journalist here put it that way: "I and all my friends couldn't actually believe he would do it. We got used to the fact that politicians meanwhile negotiate like we discuss the import of tomatoes or bananas from the Netherlands."

Thirty years is quite some time and humans tend to forget the bad things...

I guess, Putin simply didn't make this development.

The reaction from 'West' feels rather disappointing so far. This will not be stopped with talk only. I thought Russia would be out of SWIFT, and an official offer about fast NATO membership delivered to every country around Russian borders by now.

Agreed, I am very disappointed in our preparation and response. Yes, Putin never got the memo that the USSR was dead and the cold war over. But I thought we all knew that a decade ago? I guess there's a difference between knowing and believing and doing something about it. We've finally achieved stage 2.

So does Garry Kasparov (whom I consider a real hero of democracy) who also has a lot to say about Putin.
https://www.kasparov.com/putin-cont...individual-in-history-msnbc-february-24-2022/

A whole lot to say:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1610397193/?tag=pfamazon01-20

The ascension of Vladimir Putin-a former lieutenant colonel of the KGB-to the presidency of Russia in 1999 was a strong signal that the country was headed away from democracy. Yet in the intervening years-as America and the world's other leading powers have continued to appease him-Putin has grown not only into a dictator but an international threat. With his vast resources and nuclear arsenal, Putin is at the center of a worldwide assault on political liberty and the modern world order.

 

[WWGD]

How long could Russia occupy Ukraine without the consent of the Ukrainians ( my assessment is that a majority disapprove)? Specially with the upcoming sanctions.

 

[fresh_42]

How long could Russia occupy Ukraine without the consent of the Ukrainians ( my assessment is that a majority disapprove)? Specially with the upcoming sanctions.

Interesting question. Ukraine started to arm civilians and men are requested (forbidden?) not to leave the country. The Ukrainian ambassador in Germany reported some impressive figures about Russian losses already on TV. He spoke of 2,800 dead Russian soldiers and dozens of destroyed vehicles of all kinds. If he was right, then this war will be not as smooth as Putin might have thought it will.

 

[WWGD]

Interesting question. Ukraine started to arm civilians and men are requested (forbidden?) not to leave the country. The Ukrainian ambassador in Germany reported some impressive figures about Russian losses already on TV. He spoke of 2,800 dead Russian soldiers and dozens of destroyed vehicles of all kinds. If he was right, then this war will be not as smooth as Putin might have thought it will.

I've read Russian weapon performance has been subpar , so far. And there have been large antiwsr demonstrations in Moscow, so even at home, support for him, the war is suspect.

 

[artis]

Interesting question. Ukraine started to arm civilians and men are requested (forbidden?) not to leave the country. The Ukrainian ambassador in Germany reported some impressive figures about Russian losses already on TV. He spoke of 2,800 dead Russian soldiers and dozens of destroyed vehicles of all kinds. If he was right, then this war will be not as smooth as Putin might have thought it will.

I would be cautious myself to as of yet speculate on the outcomes in terms of numbers, both sides are known to lie for different reasons, Ukrainians have to keep their spirits up they too would have a reason to overestimate.
I am somewhat in the dark as to why major news channels have very little actual footage. I am getting half my info from those I know there on ground the other half from local news.

So far I can definitely say there have been instances of Ukrainian opposition carrying out some successful attacks and counterattacks. A bunch of guys used the chance and got onto a slow moving tank or armored vehicle and dropped a gasoline filled molotov inside (the hatch wasnt properly closed), then shot the escaping crew to death, I have a video of that but it's so graphic I think I will refrain from posting it here.

 

[PeroK]

I've read Russian weapon performance has been subpar , so far. And there have been large antiwsr demonstrations in Moscow, so even at home, support for him, the war is suspect.

That's why I honestly believe if the West could accept an economic sacrifice and pile the pressure on, this invasion could fail. If his backers are seeing their fortunes at risk, the army is not having it all its own way in Ukraine and there are protests at home. Putin cannot be invincible.

I must confess I fear the EU in particular has no backbone; no stomach for a fight. Donald Tusk seems to agree.

 

[fresh_42]

I would be cautious myself to as of yet speculate on the outcomes in terms of numbers

I do not speculate. I quoted the Ukrainian ambassador.

 

[Mike S.]

Their roads aren't blocked, their bridges haven't been blown up.

In recognition of Skakun Vitaliy, I should note this impression of mine was in error, due to my lack of information. See https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress .

 

[artis]

I do not speculate. I quoted the Ukrainian ambassador

I did not mean that in the usual context just meant to say that at this point it's he said she said.

I don't mean to minimize the people in the Soviet Union who ultimately made/were the collapse. The most difficult and important part of a revolution is the revolution. But this all happened as soon as Gorbachev loosened the USSR's grip (Glasnost and Perestroika were adopted in 1986). He loosened his grip because of the economic problems associated with communism and in particular the USSR's relationship with the West/US. The cold war related economic problems were the fertile ground, and the loosening of the restrictions was the seeds. In his words, when he stepped down:
"We’re now living in a new world. An end has been put to the Cold War and to the arms race, as well as to the mad militarization of the country, which has crippled our economy, public attitudes and morals."
https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/fall-of-soviet-union

Yes true but it's in fact a much slower and longer process, somewhat like a cancer, those changes took about 2 decades to come, with slow pivots here and there. I can understand Gorbachev somewhat taking the victory of defeating communism onto himself and the Americans feeling like they were the ones pulling the strings but in all honesty it was just the system itself, it was like a bomb it had to go off at some point, either with WW3 like back in the Cuban missile crisis or with slow agonizing economic change that eventually pitted the hardline "bolsheviks" aka the "old guard" VS the newer more rational people.
This is I think why China survived, they saw the "writing on the wall" and understood that you cannot simply murder millions and pile them up in a gulag like both had done before, so they did what is known to work - they gave people more money through accepting capitalism to an extent.

Truth be told if you asked someone here or outside in say 1987 whether the USSR will break apart in an almost miraculously peaceful way just 4 years on, people would tell you you are nuts, even experts did not believe this, apart from some who advocated such position long ago.
Here is an interesting summary
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_the_collapse_of_the_Soviet_Union

Large empires especially ones that are ethnically diverse (arguably all of them) are very tough from an outside attack perspective but very fragile from within, in terms of socioeconomic factors, it's like thick glass with internal stresses, you might not brake it with a bullet but release that stress and it will shatter.
USSR had a major stress factor and that was the stubborn ideology to try to make everybody equal with planned economy. China went smarter and somewhat minimized this stress factor by allowing huge capital to flow in and kind of "disrespecting" the old Mao Zedong and his Karl Marx textbook on economy.

In a symposium launched to review Michel Garder's French book: L'Agonie du Regime en Russie Sovietique (The Death Struggle of the Regime in Soviet Russia), which also predicted the collapse of the USSR, Yale Professor Frederick C. Barghoorn dismissed Garder's book as "the latest in a long line of apocalyptic predictions of the collapse of communism." He warns that "great revolutions are most infrequent and that successful political systems are tenacious and adaptive." In addition, the reviewer of the book, Michael Tatu, disapproved of the "apocalyptic character" of such a forecast and is almost apologetic for treating it seriously

Now looking back one could say he was partly right, some of those systems are adaptive some are not, the USSR did not adapt, China did, Putin is now doing the same , question is how much can he adapt and still keep his way before he unleashes some deadly inside forces that will tear him apart.

Putin's personal villa , one of many, more like a palace, was placed on youtube some time ago by some Russian activists. It's not like Russians are that easy with someone stealing from them, it's just a question of how much one has to anger and how large of a crowd before the pendulum swings.Ironically enough US faces some of the same inner stability problems but for different reasons, it seems to me US could be the first major empire/country in history to risk stability/existential issues for reasons that are effectively "minority issues" aka issues that concern a small minority of population but get amplified with time within a larger population group.
My personal opinion is that this fact just goes to show how well off on average the US people have been for the past say 50 years (living standard, freedom etc all things considered) as compared to the rest of the world with maybe few exceptions like Switzerland or Norway, but those are totally different cases, small homogeneous societies.
Because minority issues only become a "thing" in big countries if the majority of the population has enough free time on their hands to actually care about all those issues VS being hard at work to fight for their own matters.

Anyway pardon for my not entirely on topic post, I hope someone finds it interesting.

 

[artis]

And without diving too deep into politics (the forbidden fruit of the garden of Physics forums)
The folks saying that it's just Putin that has gone "off the rails" , well did you know (I forgot to mention earlier)
that the Russian parliament actually gave Putin the "A ok" green light to use the military outside of Russia ?

https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/russia-moves-cement-ties-ukraines-rebels-83036990

Members of Russia's upper house, the Federation Council, voted unanimously to allow Putin to use military force outside the country

Putin also said this

Putin said the crisis could be resolved if Kyiv recognizes Russia's sovereignty over Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula that Moscow annexed from Ukraine in 2014, renounces its bid to join NATO and partially demilitarizes. The West has decried the annexation of Crimea as a violation of international law and has previously flatly rejected permanently barring Ukraine from NATO.

Which I think is not a flat out lie since he first and foremost wants Ukraine to be a buffer zone against the west, he saw this change with the ousting of his loyal government back in 2014.

This is somewhat similar as with USA and Cuba, only Ukraine is much closer to Russia than Cuba is to US but we cannot say US did not try to overthrow the communists in Cuba, just unsuccessfully

Before the Castro Soviet backed Cuban revolution Cuba also enjoyed large US influence being a "buffer zone" , all large countries have these zones, the same with China and their dispute over the territories close to them.
In the end of the day it is the question of geopolitical strategy VS ordinary people wanting democracy and prosperity irrespective of where they live, be it Taiwan, Ukraine or Cuba

 

[fresh_42]

Which I think is not a flat out lie since he first and foremost wants Ukraine to be a buffer zone against the west, he saw this change with the ousting of his loyal government back in 2014.

This is exactly the old way of thinking. You cannot demand from a sovereign country what to do and what not to do. Ukraine isn't the buffer for anyone. What about the buffer between Königsberg and Petersburg?

P.S.: I am under the impression these days that Ukraine had a first-class reason to seek protection by NATO.

 

[artis]

This is exactly the old way of thinking. You cannot demand from a sovereign country what to do and what not to do. Ukraine isn't the buffer for anyone. What about the buffer between Königsberg and Petersburg?

I agree personally, but I hope your not taking any of this personally because how could I know what the worlds richest and most powerful autocrat thinks, I can only guess based on knowledge and that's what I do.

All I see is that no big country has yet to give up this stance on having buffer zones, not US, not China, not Russia. To prove this, one just has to ask a simple question to one's self, what would US do if Mexico decided to join a Russian coalition of states (there actually exists one,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Independent_States) ? On top of that add the possibility of Mexico considering buying Russian military gear. Something like Mig 35 and so on... I doubt that would go over well.

But please I wish we don't get emotional over this, I'm just stating facts and expressing my own opinion but when I do so I always try to warn beforehand.

Given my geographical location I would much rather prefer to jump in a DeLorean and travel at 88 miles per hour to somewhere else...
But I only have a LADA and it goes just half that speed...

 

[fresh_42]

All I see is that no big country has yet to give up this stance on having buffer zones, not US, not China, not Russia.

I'm afraid this is correct. Not right, but correct. Sigh.

 

[artis]

A side note , I think the famous Beatles song "Back in the USSR" has a totally different meaning in Ukraine now... and not in a good way
especially given the song has chorus lyrics that go like

I'm back in the U.S.S.R.
You don't know how lucky you are, boy
Back in the U.S.S.R. (Yeah!)

 

[fresh_42]

I'm not the only one who draws the parallels!