The Russia-Ukraine War has begun

[Innula Zenovka]

History of the Donbas region

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Here's a different view upon what might be the real reasons for the Russian war in Ukraine: Volodymyr Ishchenko, a Ukrainian political sociologist, sees the Russian invasion as the consequence of a “crisis of hegemony” and failure of leadership both on the global level and inside Russia.

Ishchenko basically argues like this:

1. On global level it's the crisis of the US hegemony. That failure allowed Russia's elites to see themselves as somehow equal to Western elites and American and European capitalists.

After the collapse of the USSR these elites gained power through stealing of the state. They were viewed as illegitimate by the West and unequal, and inside their own nations as well.

So these elites are often still there, and try to stay in power by all means necessary.

2. On the level of Russia and its periphery it's a crisis of hegemony due to the fact that Russia was not able to present itself as an attractive soft power to former Soviet peripheries: the former republics, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Causian republics, Central Asia and so on.

Russia had 30 years long nothing comparable to the American and EU's soft power, the power of attraction. It failed.

The roots of war in Ukraine is the Euromaidan revolution, which escalated the inner tensions in Ukraine. So this invasion should be viewed as the severe lack of Russian soft power, the failure of anything like an attractive development project. Russia now resorts to hard power, because that's the only way it can force its neighbors under its influence. Even Belarus and Kazakhstan are sticking to Russia only because Russia was supporting the regimes in both countries during the recent revolutions.

3. On domestic level it's the crisis of hegemony. Russia is dealing with the problem who will suceed Putin, and Putin's system is very unstable („fundamentally unstable system based on paternalism and not on ideology“, „very non-ideological, […] relied on patronage networks, patron-clientelistic relations and […] discussed in concepts like clans, financial industrial groups“ ). Either Putin will make way for a new ruler, or he will get removed before his age comes to the end. This crisis of hegemony has reached a climax.

This is not only a threat, but also opportunity on global level depending who will be that new guy.

Ischenko rejects the idea that Putin is a new version of Hitler, and that NATO expansion is the reason for the war as well. A defining characteristic of post-Soviet regimes is lack of ideology.

He thinks that the invasion makes sense from a domestic view on politics: the Russian regime could become stronger, more stable, ideological. With the West banning all things Russian people might gather behind Putin, making him stronger.

Also many protesting people fled the country, and protests in Russia are weak, meaning the remaining people are as group more supportive to their government because many protesters are gone.

“No, the war is in the rational interests of the Russian ruling class. A stronger ideological regime might be an outcome of the war, not the other way round.”

He said Russian elites want to “assert their status globally, to empower themselves regionally and to consolidate their power on the domestic level.”

He continued: “They see this actually as an opportunity, not just as a risk. They see it as an opportunity to abandon Russian dependence on the West, to re-orient towards the global south markets – towards China, India, Africa – to start producing those products necessary for the Russian economy which were previously imported from the Western countries.”

Ukrainian political sociologist: This is a war of leadership failures at many levels

Volodymyr Ishchenko, a Ukrainian political sociologist, sees the Russian invasion as the consequence of a “crisis of hegemony” and failure of leadership both on the global level and inside Russia. He talks with Courthouse News.

www.courthousenews.com

 

[Innula Zenovka]

 

[Argent Stonecutter]

Nice job of operational security.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

 

[Govi]

"...Based on our premise that Ukraine is Russian land..." ~ Olga Skabeeva
"Don't you worry, everything will be fine." ~ Pyotr Tolstoy
There's clearly at least one thing the Russians still do really well: chauvinist propaganda.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

For sure Putin bought this missile from 45, "best rocket ever, a stable genius of a rocket I designed myself!"

 

[Innula Zenovka]

The writing, he suggests, is now on the wall for the Russian occupiers, as the strategic initiative passes to the Ukrainian armed forces

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Lithuania wants naval coalition to lift Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s grain

Britain supports in principle the call for a naval coalition ‘of the willing’ to restart exports through Black Sea

www.theguardian.com

Evernote link

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Russian state tv gets very upset about Timothy Snyder's NYT article and, in the process, pretty much makes his point for him.

Opinion | We Should Say It. Russia Is Fascist.

If Vladimir Putin prevails in Ukraine, fascists around the world will take comfort.

www.nytimes.com

Evernote link

Kremlin TV Betrays Darling Trump in Crazed Defense of Putin

Infuriated by an article labeling Russia as a fascist nation, a top Putin loyalist known for his admiration of Donald Trump seems to have turned on the former U.S. president.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Same day, another article: the Editorial Board of the NYT is saying that America must show Ukraine the limits of their support.

In the end, it is the Ukrainians who must make the hard decisions: They are the ones fighting, dying and losing their homes to Russian aggression, and it is they who must decide what an end to the war might look like. If the conflict does lead to real negotiations, it will be Ukrainian leaders who will have to make the painful territorial decisions that any compromise will demand.

The United States and NATO have demonstrated that they will support the Ukrainian fight with ample firepower and other means. And however the fighting ends, the United States and its allies must be prepared to help Ukraine rebuild.

But as the war continues, Mr. Biden should also make clear to President Volodymyr Zelensky and his people that there is a limit to how far the United States and NATO will go to confront Russia, and limits to the arms, money and political support they can muster. It is imperative that the Ukrainian government’s decisions be based on a realistic assessment of its means and how much more destruction Ukraine can sustain.

Opinion | The War in Ukraine Is Getting Complicated, and America Isn’t Ready

U.S. support for the war is not guaranteed.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Sid]

Don't underestimate the strategic importance of undermining the fighting spirits from the enemy troupes,
when you destroy their toilets on the beach!

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

98 year old Henry Kissinger held a speech right now at the WEF in Davos about Ukraine.

His key points, some of them for sure are controversial:

* the West should stop trying to inflict a crushing defeat on Russia, and Ukraine should give up territory (probably Donetzk/Donbass).
* Ukraine must begin negotiations before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome. The dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante. Pursuing the war beyong that point would be not about freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself.
* It would be also fatal it the West got swept up in the mood of the moment and forget Russia's position of power within Europe. Russia was an essential part of Europe for over four centuries, so that European leaders must not lose sight of the longer term relationship or otherwise risk putting Russia in a permanent alliance with China.
* "I hope the Ukrainians will match the heroism they have shown with wisdom."

Kissinger tells global elite Ukraine should give Russia territory

The former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger told the global elite that Ukraine should give Russia territory within the next two months and accept terms that fail to meet current war aims.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Sid]

98 year old Henry Kissinger held a speech right now at the WEF in Davos about Ukraine.

His key points, some of them for sure are controversial:

* the West should stop trying to inflict a crushing defeat on Russia, and Ukraine should give up territory (probably Donetzk/Donbass).
* Ukraine must begin negotiations before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome. The dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante.

So Ukraine has to give up land for the convenience of the western world and in the end reward Russia for its aggression?
I read an old man only concerned about how the western world (read America) comes best out of the situation.
What happens to Ukraine isn't really his concern, is it?

I think the west should support Ukraine all the way, until the last Russian soldier has left the country again.

 

[Free]

98 year old Henry Kissinger held a speech right now at the WEF in Davos about Ukraine.

He should be dead 20 times over.

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

Same day, another article: the Editorial Board of the NYT is saying that America must show Ukraine the limits of their support.

In the end, it is the Ukrainians who must make the hard decisions: They are the ones fighting, dying and losing their homes to Russian aggression, and it is they who must decide what an end to the war might look like. If the conflict does lead to real negotiations, it will be Ukrainian leaders who will have to make the painful territorial decisions that any compromise will demand.

The United States and NATO have demonstrated that they will support the Ukrainian fight with ample firepower and other means. And however the fighting ends, the United States and its allies must be prepared to help Ukraine rebuild.

But as the war continues, Mr. Biden should also make clear to President Volodymyr Zelensky and his people that there is a limit to how far the United States and NATO will go to confront Russia, and limits to the arms, money and political support they can muster. It is imperative that the Ukrainian government’s decisions be based on a realistic assessment of its means and how much more destruction Ukraine can sustain.

Opinion | The War in Ukraine Is Getting Complicated, and America Isn’t Ready

U.S. support for the war is not guaranteed.

www.nytimes.com

F*ck the NYT

98 year old Henry Kissinger held a speech right now at the WEF in Davos about Ukraine.

His key points, some of them for sure are controversial:

* the West should stop trying to inflict a crushing defeat on Russia, and Ukraine should give up territory (probably Donetzk/Donbass).
* Ukraine must begin negotiations before it creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome. The dividing line should be a return to the status quo ante. Pursuing the war beyong that point would be not about freedom of Ukraine, but a new war against Russia itself.
* It would be also fatal it the West got swept up in the mood of the moment and forget Russia's position of power within Europe. Russia was an essential part of Europe for over four centuries, so that European leaders must not lose sight of the longer term relationship or otherwise risk putting Russia in a permanent alliance with China.
* "I hope the Ukrainians will match the heroism they have shown with wisdom."

Kissinger tells global elite Ukraine should give Russia territory

The former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger told the global elite that Ukraine should give Russia territory within the next two months and accept terms that fail to meet current war aims.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Also, F*ck Kissinger - he's a war criminal, was under Nixon ffs.

So Ukraine has to give up land for the convenience of the western world and in the end reward Russia for its aggression?
I read an old man only concerned about how the western world (read America) comes best out of the situation.
What happens to Ukraine isn't really his concern, is it?

I think the west should support Ukraine all the way, until the last Russian soldier has left the country again.

Exactly. Its not like Ukraine is invading Russia. Also, if we do that, then we tell Putin and his elites that there is no penalty for this and it continues. All giving up land does is kick the can a little - and eventually, it WILL be a NATO country invaded. We should have done something years ago [also, the west should have done something the second Iraq war, or the US invasion of Afghanistan [though since everyone lost citizens in 9/11....]

 

[Aribeth Zelin]

Adding instead or editing - I'm CG on the D&D scale of things, but what are the points of good rules and laws if no one enforces them.

 

[Essence Lumin]

The New York Times editorial, “The War in Ukraine Is Getting Complicated, and America Isn’t Ready,” published on May 19, immediately caused an uproar in Ukraine.

A veiled manifesto of appeasement from a newspaper known for its stellar coverage of Russia’s horrific invasion has disappointed many.

In the editorial, the New York Times editorial board argues that it’s too dangerous to assume that Ukraine can win the war. It says “Russia is too strong,” that Ukraine should make a “painful compromise” and give up some territories to Russia. The U.S. must understand the futility and stop “taunting” Russia, the editorial says. Meaning: Ukraine will lose anyway, stop helping it so it’s over faster.

In short, the editorial attempts to pass off appeasement and betrayal of the free world’s values as pragmatic reasoning.

Dark times have always shed light on those willing to compromise their values to preserve their daily comforts. Neither a French president, a German intellectual, nor an award-winning American newspaper are exempt from being wrong.

As a newsroom witnessing the war from inside Ukraine, we want to set the record straight.

Which they proceed to do in this well written article.

Editorial: The Kyiv Independent’s response to the New York Times editorial board

 

[Argent Stonecutter]

The editorial in question is paywalled so I can't read it, but I hope this is one of those ratbag guest editorials that NYT is notorious for publishing.