Russia's War Against Ukraine

[SirAndrewD]

Remember, Russians have NEVER been truly free in their entire history.

You hit the nail on the head as to exactly why Russian fatalism persists in every generation. 

I don't expect it to change any time soon because, well, studying Russia most of my adult life has shown a very long tradition of it never changing. 

Even great reformer leaders like Alexander II, which are aberrations in Russian history, end up being ironically killed by his own people after he spent a life trying to help them.

I'd gone over back earlier in this thread a fact that is lost on westerners that Detcord pointed out again.  Russia suffers, it has been invaded over and over again, it's had awful tyrannical leaders and governments time and again, its own leadership has killed itself in power struggles time and again. 

We in the west can't understand the deep, in some cases justified, paranoia that exists in Russia over the encroachment of NATO, the courting of Ukraine, the "dagger to the heart of Moscow" as I termed it before the war.  Is that NATO's intent?  No, I don't think it is.  Will the Russian people ever believe that?  No. 

They've had too much history built up in their collective psyche to ever trust their neighbors or respect anything except strength.  Just as was shown earlier, even reformers like Yeltsen felt the only safe route for Russia was for Russia to, frankly just be in charge. 

The US has had some similar pursuits.  The Monroe doctrine, the Banana Wars, the Cuban crisis, the 80's regime changes. 

This is all a long cycle that's been going on a long time and will keep going.  Again, it's no excuse for what Russia is doing to Ukraine, it doesn't mean the Russians have a legitimate cause to invade a neighbor with the intent of conquering it.  It's just never so black and white, and there's a deep national trauma in the hearts of Russians that make these types of wars of aggression justified in their minds.

It literally goes back to the Mongols.  They're a nation state built on violence only being countered with greater violence.  It's little wonder we're all back around to this again.

[Sir Slash]

I remember reading that in 1914 when Russia went to war, that many of the serfs thought that Czar Nicholas would now become the great Father-figure that would finally end Serfdom in Russia and give them their freedom. Disappointed once again, they became easy converts for the Bolsheviks later. 

[SirAndrewD]

^Indeed.  And the cycle of violence began again.  So far from the first time in Russia and so far not the last.

[Crossroads]

Remember, Russians have NEVER been truly free in their entire history.

You hit the nail on the head as to exactly why Russian fatalism persists in every generation. 

I don't expect it to change any time soon because, well, studying Russia most of my adult life has shown a very long tradition of it never changing. 

Even great reformer leaders like Alexander II, which are aberrations in Russian history, end up being ironically killed by his own people after he spent a life trying to help them.

I'd gone over back earlier in this thread a fact that is lost on westerners that Detcord pointed out again.  Russia suffers, it has been invaded over and over again, it's had awful tyrannical leaders and governments time and again, its own leadership has killed itself in power struggles time and again. 

We in the west can't understand the deep, in some cases justified, paranoia that exists in Russia over the encroachment of NATO, the courting of Ukraine, the "dagger to the heart of Moscow" as I termed it before the war.  Is that NATO's intent?  No, I don't think it is.  Will the Russian people ever believe that?  No. 

They've had too much history built up in their collective psyche to ever trust their neighbors or respect anything except strength.  Just as was shown earlier, even reformers like Yeltsen felt the only safe route for Russia was for Russia to, frankly just be in charge. 

The US has had some similar pursuits.  The Monroe doctrine, the Banana Wars, the Cuban crisis, the 80's regime changes. 

This is all a long cycle that's been going on a long time and will keep going.  Again, it's no excuse for what Russia is doing to Ukraine, it doesn't mean the Russians have a legitimate cause to invade a neighbor with the intent of conquering it.  It's just never so black and white, and there's a deep national trauma in the hearts of Russians that make these types of wars of aggression justified in their minds.

It literally goes back to the Mongols.  They're a nation state built on violence only being countered with greater violence.  It's little wonder we're all back around to this again.

I always enjoy reading your long well considered posts, Sir A. That is a very good summary of how Russians see it. So many western reporters and authors reporting on Russia get often so many basics wrong it is downright embarrassing.

The other side of the coin then from how Russia itself views their own history is how the history played along from say the pov of a neighbouring country. There's always the subjective bias, and it can mean a very different looking "history".

There's been good many posts here arguing regarding the war in Ukraine, there's Ukrainian propaganda too. They do it too, sure.

But going back to the long history of Russia from their point of view, since 15th to 16th century, Russian Empire started to write the history of Eastern Slavs as history of Russia.

Mongols caused a lot of suffering to Muscovy among other nations of the time, true. However Russian history would have us believe they alone suffered them so Europe did not have to. They saved Europe from Napoleon, then they saved them again from Hitler. What they would like us to forget (in addition to WW2 not starting in June 1941)  is their own violent empire building. It seems today marks the anniversary of the Circassian genocide, one of so (!) many such events from Russian history.

While Western history recognises the Western colonialization, it remains mostly quiet there's still a colonial empire builder in Europe today.

https://twitter.com/cem_oezdemir/status/1660166155405754368

Regarding Nato expansion, they (Kremlin) certainly are angered by that, as smaller nations joining Nato removes them from under their sphere of interest. While being able to say they are surrounded by an expansionist Nato makes for good propaganda, too. Being surrounded by former vassal states who now have a faster growing economy, less so. Can't have that.

With collapse of Soviet Union, the end of history that wasn't, Finland for instance was content to join EU while stating ok all previous agreements done with SU are now void. As for priorities of former WP nations, they were quick to first apply to Nato. Nato, or its member states rather, were very hesitant to allow for this, it took many years until the Nato enlargement was completed.

Why were they so insistent on this priority? I suppose everyone knows the answer now.

Poland, Baltics, in particular, were very open trying to communicate Russia is not becoming this democracy everyone was hoping for, and while I for one tended to agree to some point, especially during the 00's and 2010s it felt very awkward - and yes: russophobic - to say so in public.

Surely not, surely they've changed, at least a bit. Wandel durch handel, they see the benefit of existing amicably with EU and the collective West? Well, no, if your own priority is to fix the catastrophe that was the fall of Soviet Union.

I operate with a foreign language here and am trying to formulate a view from Eastern Europe, for sake of argumentation. At the end, I guess everyone's got their own version of history.

All this pains me a great deal, I've been to Russia a good many times, people there are so warm and wonderful as you get to know them, as are people everywhere once you get to know them.

Another thing that pains me a great deal too, talking about history, is afaik not once has there been a change of power in Russia because a popular rising of a sort. It's always been a palace coup hasn't it. I see no good options here. Bulldogs under the carpet seem to have become quite restless, though.

[GDS_Starfury]

its a weird thing to think or say but, it would seem that there are demographics on the planet that just seem to like being subjugated.  kinda like Cowboys/Jets fans but worse.

[GDS_Starfury]

btw Pratt thats how you space out a wall of text so its readable.

[Gusington]

Great post, D. I understand the Russian point of view.

And somehow the lowly Jets get dragged into another mess. Haven't we suffered enough?

[GDS_Starfury]

no, jets fans always suffer!

[SirAndrewD]

I'm a Cowboys fan.  At least we deserve our suffering.

[JasonPratt]

That reminds me, I haven't thrown out a wall of text in a while. I'm getting weak in my old age.

Please accept instead these videos I just ran across at Military History Visualized (which site many of us here are fans of, but for those who haven't seen them yet):

[SirAndrewD]

I always enjoy reading your long well considered posts, Sir A. That is a very good summary of how Russians see it. So many western reporters and authors reporting on Russia get often so many basics wrong it is downright embarrassing.

The other side of the coin then from how Russia itself views their own history is how the history played along from say the pov of a neighbouring country. There's always the subjective bias, and it can mean a very different looking "history".

Thanks Crossroads, I appreciate it and I appreciate your views as well.

And yes, you hit a great point I was alluding to.  Russia has become the colonial aggressor that it so often decries.

They feel it's justified because of their history.  Violence as an appropriate response to violence. 

It's why populism, Russia First, and strongmen appeal to the Russian psyche.  But you're right, they've become what they claim to behold.

It's the typical go to for Totalitarian thought.  Demonize the other, embrace legitimate historical concerns but enhance them with new bad guys. 

For Russia the new bad guy is the "Anglo-Saxon Hegemony" and historically, yes the British Empire has a lot to answer for in shaping the world order the way that benefited it.  The USA has followed the British lead.

Russia is historically far from blameless in any of what they accuse the west of doing.  It merely serves their political interests to point the finger. 

The West can be said to have similar issues.

[Sir Slash]

I'm an optimist. I believe come Thanksgiving Day, Jets Fans will have something to be thankful for. Maybe the Cowboys too. Russia will take a bit longer I think.

[GDS_Starfury]

Ukraine will win before either the Jets or Cowboys are relevant again.

ffs, NASA will have operational warp drive before the Jets are worth a shit.

[DetCord]

Remember, Russians have NEVER been truly free in their entire history.

You hit the nail on the head as to exactly why Russian fatalism persists in every generation. 

I don't expect it to change any time soon because, well, studying Russia most of my adult life has shown a very long tradition of it never changing. 

Even great reformer leaders like Alexander II, which are aberrations in Russian history, end up being ironically killed by his own people after he spent a life trying to help them.

I'd gone over back earlier in this thread a fact that is lost on westerners that Detcord pointed out again.  Russia suffers, it has been invaded over and over again, it's had awful tyrannical leaders and governments time and again, its own leadership has killed itself in power struggles time and again. 

We in the west can't understand the deep, in some cases justified, paranoia that exists in Russia over the encroachment of NATO, the courting of Ukraine, the "dagger to the heart of Moscow" as I termed it before the war.  Is that NATO's intent?  No, I don't think it is.  Will the Russian people ever believe that?  No. 

They've had too much history built up in their collective psyche to ever trust their neighbors or respect anything except strength.  Just as was shown earlier, even reformers like Yeltsen felt the only safe route for Russia was for Russia to, frankly just be in charge. 

The US has had some similar pursuits.  The Monroe doctrine, the Banana Wars, the Cuban crisis, the 80's regime changes. 

This is all a long cycle that's been going on a long time and will keep going.  Again, it's no excuse for what Russia is doing to Ukraine, it doesn't mean the Russians have a legitimate cause to invade a neighbor with the intent of conquering it.  It's just never so black and white, and there's a deep national trauma in the hearts of Russians that make these types of wars of aggression justified in their minds.

It literally goes back to the Mongols.  They're a nation state built on violence only being countered with greater violence.  It's little wonder we're all back around to this again.

Yep, exactly.

I think its also important to bring up the fact that when Putin came to power, initially that is (pre/post 9/11), he spent much of his diplomatic time abroad with then President G. W. Bush and other European leaders. He sought out and pressed home that Russia's future lay with not only Western Europe but the United States as well. His primary goal in those early years was to secure closer economic and military ties with Europe but also repeatedly floated a potential deep and lasting Russo-American Alliance. An alliance that transcended the economic and military but cultural as well, even making potential concessions when it came to democracy within Russia. Putin even pressed home his very real desire for NATO membership, something he pushed for both publicly and privately for half a decade.

Why? China. He was deeply concerned, and rightly so, that China would usurp from within (already happened) and would eventually invade Siberia for its resources, which are vast. And China's political leaders have stated over and over again over for the past 20 years that Siberia isn't Russian territory but Chinese. Putin being ever more isolated by the West has directly led him into a pseudo-alliance with China that undermines the Russian state at nearly every opportunity. The next decade will likely see Russia become nothing more than a resource colony for the Chinese hegemony.

If you haven't seen it then give it a watch - https://www.amazon.com/When-Siberia-Will-Be-Chinese/dp/B079C5JRKY

All of this makes me think what could've been. Russia as a direct partner or even member of the EU. Russia as a partner or even member within NATO. What could've been avoided or even achieved had our political leadership had the foresight to simply sit down, listen, and discuss.     

[JasonPratt]

I think we did sit down, listen, and discuss. A lot of the criticism thrown out about the current situation, is that we not only wanted but expected the post-Soviet kleptocracy to stop being a kleptocracy (somewhat how we always not only wanted but expected the CCP to stop being communist and start being more truly democratic), if we just played ball with them more.

What happened was that playing nice-ball with them more, made it easier for them to be more successful tyrants at home, over their own people -- and to infiltrate and subvert the governments who were trying to play nice with them.