Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   kravietz 🦇 (kravietz@agora.echelon.pl)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 02:21:08 JST kravietz 🦇

   in reply to

   • kmetz
   • Scubyw

   @kmetz

   Your analysis is correct, which doesn’t change the fact that Russia’s “right to have be concerned” ends on other countries’ borders.

   As a reminder, Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014 when it had neutrality and non-NATO status enshrined in its constitution and Finland and Sweden weren’t in NATO, something that Russia will never get again! And the first small-scale war was actually triggered by Ukraine trying to join EU, not NATO.

   This in my opinion entirely deconstructs the Russian narrative about its concerns - they are just another pretext of many, which Russia has mastered over the years. One reason why it mastered was that every new concern it raised was empathically picked up by the West and discussed ad nauseam as if the only thing that mattered in the world is what Russia is concerned about, and nobody else.

   As another reminder, since 2000 Russia has invaded several countries and committed several genocides (Chechnya, Georgia, Moldova, Armenia, Syria), bullied all of its neighbours, telling them how to name and how not to name their streets or villages, arbitrarily stopped contracted fuel supplies as part of political blackmail in such trivial matters, interfered with media and elections and assassinated random people on their territories. But it was always “Russia’s concerns” that concerned everyone in Europe and USA :)

   When Germany started to invest into Nord Stream 2 countries like Poland, Ukraine and Baltics raised their concerns, that moving fuel transfers to the extraterritorial pipeline will only encourage Russia to more aggressive behaviour against these countries. These concerns were dismissed… and that was exactly what happened.

   @Scubyw

   • NeonPurpleStar :heart_bi: likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     kmetz (kmetz@chaos.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 02:21:10 JST kmetz

     in reply to

     • Scubyw

     @Scubyw @kravietz What I gathered over the years what a few of those misconceptions could be is

     1) The West seldomly understands Ru. fears (of the West), that they are irrational but real, that they actually feel an urge and „right“ to „defend“ by conquer, and see no peaceful way out. Maybe caused by a disbelieve in trust, that sticking to rules out of common interests couldn‘t be a trick. An assumption that every other player must be equally evil as the current regime there (for centuries).
     …

   • Embed this notice
     kmetz (kmetz@chaos.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 02:21:12 JST kmetz

     in reply to

     • Scubyw

     @Scubyw @kravietz That can‘t be the answer.

     I think real (≠ fake) diplomacy could be, and that both Ru. and the West carry around a set of core misconceptions of one another.

   • Embed this notice
     Scubyw (scubyw@mastodon.nz)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 02:21:19 JST Scubyw

     in reply to

     @kravietz The 'west' still thinks they can work out a deal with Putin and everything will just be 'back to normal'. It's not going to happen. The only way forward is hitting Russia very hard where it hurts. The centre of Moscow, hitting everything that has a direct or indirect impact on the political and military powers. If civilians get hit, unfortunate collateral damage, but that will bring the message home. (I hope). Just flatten the centre of Moscow.

   • Embed this notice
     kravietz 🦇 (kravietz@agora.echelon.pl)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 02:21:20 JST kravietz 🦇

     As many people express their outrage about #Russia attacks on civilian areas of towns and describe them in terms of “irrational cruelty”, I’m afraid it is very much rational within the framework of Russia’s strategic goal. Which, after many iterations, now boils down to not losing the war.

     It’s mostly us, the Western society, who notoriously don’t get it and still assume Putin’s Russia is after some kind of “deal” here. If he was, then yes, it would be irrational. But he isn’t.

     Most interestingly, Russian propagandists voice this quite openly. It’s just that we are in some kind of denial, just as when Bolsheviks were talking about “eradication of bourgeoisie as a class” the West imagined they’re using the word “eradication” somehow “figuratively”.

     The purpose of these attacks is to sow the sense of insecurity, depression and terror among Ukrainian society so that it stops resisting and just gives up, agreeing to whatever terms Russia is ready to offer now.

     Unfortunately, these attacks will only intensify before and during the winter as Russian leadership apparently started to grasp that they may not be able to afford yet another year of war and Ukraine’s fall in military terms is not at all imminent, as they lulled themselves for the last two years.

     Putin’s increasing cruelty is likely a direct consequence of his own increasing insecurity, based on the processes visible publicly (Russia’s economic decline, Kursk offensive) and those which we don’t see (secret public opinion polls).

     So today’s attack on Lviv was entirely planned to hit civilian quarters, just as the “Okhmatdit” hospital attack. Emotional reactions are natural, but they’re not going to change anything - there will be more.

     If you can, the best thing to do is to donate to the #Ukraine army or humanitarian funds, because they are what actually do change situation on the ground. One Russian strategic bomber destroyed in Russia one less delivery vehicle for the rockets such as those that hit Lviv houses or hospital in Kyiv.