The War in Ukraine

[fishbowlhead]

This is why Ukraine is better off long term breaking Russia completely and get rid of the problem once and for all. Ukraine has shown Russia to be militarily and financially weak now and certainly not a super power like they used to be.

However the hard road is going to cost more innocent lives and soldiers.

On the other hand I can’t see Russia sticking to anything they agree on in any talks anyway, so Ukraine may as well keep fighting.

[Protocol Penguin]

So Russia’s current aim seems to be Finlandization of Ukraine. Not liking the precedent of Russia being able to bully (via causing thousands of civilian deaths) a nation into neutrality. Particularly if that ‘neutrality’ eventually ends up becoming puppet-state status.

[Asura]

So Russia’s current aim seems to be Finlandization of Ukraine. Not liking the precedent of Russia being able to bully (via causing thousands of civilian deaths) a nation into neutrality. Particularly if that ‘neutrality’ eventually ends up becoming puppet-state status.

I have a Scandinavian guy at my workplace who honestly laughs when people joke about Russia attacking Finland. He says the regional perception of Finnish people is that they don't know what fear is.

[fishbowlhead]

I don’t get it, we don’t?, Russia doesn’t? or Finland doesn’t?

[MartyG]

Of course it is. And yet they still invaded a country and are expecting to bargain to make it easier for them to do this again. There is purpose here.

Why does it have to be anything more complicated than not wanting Ukraine in NATO? The concern from Russia's side is something (the expansion of NATO into the Eastern block) that goes back prior to Putin. There was an agreement during the discussions over the reunification of Germany that NATO wouldn't expand to Russia's borders.

The expansion of NATO is seen as an existential threat to Russia (whether real or imagined), but the off-ramp of Ukraine being a neutral state is a deescalation and that's a good thing.

[Asura]

I don’t get it, we don’t?, Russia doesn’t? or Finland doesn’t?

He just means that in the region, Finnish people are perceived to be indomitable. I don't know exactly why.

[Dogg Thang]

Why does it have to be anything more complicated than not wanting Ukraine in NATO? The concern from Russia's side is something (the expansion of NATO into the Eastern block) that goes back prior to Putin. There was an agreement during the discussions over the reunification of Germany that NATO wouldn't expand to Russia's borders.

The expansion of NATO is seen as an existential threat to Russia (whether real or imagined), but the off-ramp of Ukraine being a neutral state is a deescalation and that's a good thing.

Is this another "this is fine" situation? That invading a country and pushing it into neutrality (which as you say is a step down) is, again as you say, a good thing? Honestly, I can't even understand how you could get there mentally. They have literally invaded a country. They are bombing it and killing people.

[Asura]

Gotta agree with @Dogg_Thang on this; this is 2022, we can't tolerate allowing people to rewrite the policies of other nations through force. That leads to a very bad place.

[Cassius_Smoke]

I have a feeling Ukraine always wanted to be neutral anyway. Being in NATO requires a level of military investment that they perhaps don't want to be part of.
Their original request to join NATO was probably because they had RUSSIA drumming their chest just over the border.

[MartyG]

Is this another "this is fine" situation? That invading a country and pushing it into neutrality (which as you say is a step down) is, again as you say, a good thing? Honestly, I can't even understand how you could get there mentally. They have literally invaded a country. They are bombing it and killing people.

What do you suggest the alternative is? Invading Russia and confirming its fears that NATO is a threatening force? That would be a very very short escalation ladder. This isn't a new thing, as I said, it goes back decades and to an agreement that hasn't been kept by NATO (albeit one that was never properly formalised).

[Dogg Thang]

Yes Marty. That is literally the only option, clearly. Let’s put all the straw men on the table.

I have no idea how you became such a staunch defender of the status quo, even when the status quo is an invasion. But it’s clearly not something I can reason against with you.

[Neon Ignition]

I presume, and may be well wrong here, that:

Zelensky knows he can't agree to Ukraine never joining Nato because it's a stupid request anyway, even Putin can't enshrine that even Russia itself will never join it. The move in front of Zelensky is whether he wants to continue a long bloodied battle that is primarily seeing civilians killed in a genocide if he has the option to bring it to a quick end. Nato is off the table for years anyway so the potential outlook is to save lives and infrastructure now by agreeing to terms that Ukraine was never going accomplish anyway and then rely on the position that Russia has put itself in.

Putin has blown his position so much that rolling forward this 70yr war criminal is going to progressively face the frustration of his own people, a desperate push to retain power, avoiding international war crime cases, the multi-generational collapse of Russia's economy, it's fall from being a world power and the unification of every 'evil' he has painted at his own hand. Zelensky may be thinking he can save lives now and Ukraine can reapproach things like Nato once Putin is neutralised down the line because Russia's ability to successfully mobilise itself down the line in this way is highly unlikely.

[Dogg Thang]

Putin clearly bit off way more than he could chew with Ukraine but it’s important to keep in mind that there are many countries on a potential Russian hit list with far fewer resources when it comes to defence. Losing in Ukraine does not necessarily mean the end of it, especially if the outcome is that he comes out with some sort of victory. He was emboldened by getting away with Crimea and he would be emboldened by this too, even with a bloody nose. So while he is going to need some way to save face so that he can end this without looking totally defeated, every country needs to be very, very careful about what it is he is actually given.

But Ukraine’s focus will have to be on keeping their own people safe.

[MartyG]

The status quo is Ukraine not joining NATO and that is likely to be the best outcome we can hope for through negotiation.

Russia will never accept the further expansion of NATO to its borders. Ever. Any more than the West would accept the expansion of a military force surrounding its borders (I mean we nearly went to war with Russia for putting nukes into Cuba - very close indeed).

So then you either need to negotiate a treaty in the middle-ground between Russia's and Ukraine's wants and needs, or you need to drive Russia back militarily and defeat them (and thus play into their narrative that there is a threat to Russia's existence which would very well end up crossing the nuclear threshold, meeting Russia's military doctrine) - as much as we'd like to believe Ukraine can do that on their own, that's unlikely to be the case and sanctions alone are unlikely to be enough, leading to a Syria like deadlock that goes on for years.

Ukraine remaining neutral is likely to be the most pragmatic solution for ongoing regional security and stability.

[Hirst]

No agreement is permanent. Whatever happens now in the name of peace and the removal of sanctions, Russia is screwed in the medium to long-term. Anything they export will be tainted as many consumers won't want Russian products. Russian investment in overseas businesses by shady sorts linked to the Kremlin will not be happily accepted like it once was and will actually be checked out like it should have been. Most western businesses still operating in Russia will probably be looking at an exit strategy - moral standards is one thing, but state-sanctioned seizure of businesses and assets is another. Perhaps they'll find investment and buyers from elsewhere, but less reliable and lucrative.

Maybe after a decade of recession and probably a change of leadership, they might decide finally that the Soviet Union isn't ever coming back and they'll relinquish control of whatever Ukraine has had taken off them in exchange for an opportunity to sit back at the table with the developed world.