Posted on 09/28/2023 7:45:42 AM PDT by marktwain
We asked UC Riverside Professor Paul D’Anieri to provide context on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. D’Anieri, a professor of political science and public policy, is an expert on Eastern European and post-Soviet politics, and wrote a 2019 book titled “Ukraine and Russia,” and a 2007 book, “Understanding Ukrainian Politics: Power, Politics and Institutional Design.” For the 2017-18 academic year, he served as a fellow in the Harvard University Ukrainian Research Institution.
A: NATO’s strategy has expanded beyond sanctions. Several countries have announced that they will be sending weaponry to Ukraine. That is very significant. The sanctions that NATO and the European Union have enacted go well beyond what most people anticipated before the war. The West’s response focused on economic sanctions and supplying Ukraine because there is little appetite for putting their own soldiers in harm's way or to risk escalating the war. Economic sanctions are unlikely, in the short term, to compel Russia to withdraw, but the strength of the sanctions and the breadth of countries that have applied them show that the West has united, not divided, as many feared and as Putin undoubtedly hoped. The fact that historically neutral Switzerland is participating in economic sanctions shows the extent of outrage and signals Russia’s total isolation from the West. While the sanctions are unlikely to compel Putin, their immediate impact on the value of the Ruble means that Russian consumers will feel economic pain very soon.
A: This question has generated a lot of discussion among scholars of Russia. One can only speculate on the extent to which Putin is constrained by the oligarchs. The oligarchs are heavily dependent on the system that Putin has created for their position—if the system collapses, they will likely lose their privileges. Moreover, they are hurt by the sanctions. So they may have some interest in urging Putin to change policy. Whether they can put any pressure on Putin is another matter. Paradoxically, the sanctions that freeze the assets of oligarchs may make them more dependent on Putin. Ultimately, it is the “siloviki” the people who control the coercive forces, such as the military, the security services (former KGB), and the Interior Ministry, who can either protect Putin or remove him. I do not anticipate that happening any time soon.
A: Germany’s announcement that it will immediately increase its defense spending and will begin spending 2% of GDP signals a dramatic change in German policy. Putin has managed to get Germany to do something that the U.S. has been trying, unsuccessfully, to get Germany to do for four decades. As an alliance, NATO will continue to beef up its presence on its eastern flank, both to reassure the allies and to protect them from any possible attack by Russia. Lastly, we may see a discussion of admitting Sweden and Finland, two historically neutral countries.
A: Yes. While NATO was divided prior to the invasion, the extent of Russia’s aggression has convinced even the hesitant states that Russia’s behavior was outrageous and had to be opposed. Again, Putin seems to have contributed to exactly the outcome he says he opposes. Italy, for example, dropped its opposition to excluding Russia from the SWIFT system. Moreover, several member states have announced plans to deliver weapons to Ukraine, and Germany has, after many years, agreed to meet the NATO standard of spending 2% of its GDP on defense. Biden’s patience regarding sanctions has paid off. Biden sought to ramp up sanctions rapidly, but until Russia invaded Ukraine, some of the Europeans were hesitant. By waiting, rather than pushing forward alone, Biden has managed both to keep the alliance unified and to obtain a strong set of sanctions. Overall, NATO is doing a great deal more than most anticipated, and is doing most of what Ukraine has requested.
A: Ukraine’s desire for a “no-fly” zone makes sense, because Ukraine is holding its own on the ground but is very vulnerable to Russian airpower. However, there is no way that NATO is going to have its air forces engage Russia directly. That could escalate to World War III. Instead, NATO has enacted close to the maximum of the contemplated sanctions and several members are arming Ukraine. If NATO members can rapidly supply Ukraine with anti-aircraft weapons, some of the effect of the no-fly zone might be achieved.
A: I am not sure that there is a lot that NATO should be doing that it is not. The key will be how quickly it can actually get arms to Ukraine and provide the necessary training to use them. A substantial deployment of anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons would reduce Russia’s advantage in weaponry.
A: Much of the Russia elite, including Putin, rejected Ukraine’s independence from the very moment it happened back in 1991. That is the underlying cause of this trouble. Several events over the intervening three decades have served to increase Putin’s anger at Ukraine and at the West. These include policy over Yugoslavia, the U.S. invasion of Iraq, NATO expansion, and Ukraine’s overturning of authoritarian rulers in 2004 and 2014. Putin thought he would be able to bring Ukraine back under Russian control peacefully, as he has with Belarus. With that having failed, he is now resorting to force.
A: The root of the problem is that Russia does not accept Ukraine’s independence. The fact that Ukraine has turned toward Europe, while Putin’s embrace of authoritarianism has taken Russia away from Europe, makes the matter worse. Twice, in 2004 and after 2010, Russia thought it had put reliable pro-Russian leaders in place in Kyiv, and the fact that they were ejected through street protests angered Putin immensely. He not only sees this as illegitimate, but he fears the same thing happening in Russia. That is why he has repressed protests against him and increasingly cracked down on civil society.
A: There is a lot of discussion on this question among specialists. My view is that Putin’s perspective on Ukraine and on NATO is widely shared among Russian elites and the Russian public. However, very few would actually wage war to win back Ukraine. The war must be attributed more directly to Putin.
A: The goal is to deter the West from supporting Ukraine, and in particular from supplying it with weapons. The idea is to get us thinking that this could escalate to nuclear conflict, and therefore get us to hesitate in supporting Ukraine. My sense is that it’s unnecessary in the sense that the West is already aware of that danger and is being quite cautious, and is irresponsible in the sense that anything that moves closer to a nuclear strike increases the likelihood that it will happen accidentally.
A: The Russian people appear to have mixed opinions. While the seizure of Crimea was very popular, polls indicated less enthusiasm for the conflict in eastern Ukraine that also began in 2014. As is the case in most countries, we can expect a “rally around the flag” effect if Russia goes to war, but support can ebb quickly if war drags on and casualties mount. Over the longer term, the impact of sanctions may also undermine enthusiasm for the conflict.
A: Putin has staged a massive propaganda blitz to convince Russians that their country is in danger and that attacking Ukraine is necessary and justified, but it is unclear to what extent people believe him at this point. Russians have some access to alternate opinions via the internet, but this is increasingly under control, and the TV stations through which most Russians get their news are all controlled by Putin and his allies.
A: “False flag” operations, misinformation and disinformation are standard Soviet/Russian tactics that were honed during the Cold War and adopted seamlessly by post-Soviet Russia. Bogus claims have been made about Ukraine and its leadership for many years now. The strategy is aimed at Western media as well as at the Russian people. Very similar tactics were used to justify Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, as well as its invasion of Ukraine in 2010. Some of Putin’s claims are laughable, but “the big lie” is a time-tested strategy.
A: I have a lot of friends and colleagues in Ukraine, and their uniform attitude is defiance. They are afraid of what is coming, but determined to resist come what may. Their messages to me have stressed that they will fight, but they need weapons to do so. Ukraine suffered immensely in the 20th century: World War I, famine, Stalinist repression and another famine that starved five million; Word War II, including occupation by Nazi Germany and the Holocaust; and then reoccupation by the Soviet Union. Ukrainians have endured incredible violence at the hands of outsiders, and their resilience has been, in my opinion, astonishing.
A: One consequence of the war is that Belarus is now firmly under Russia’s control. For many years, it had struck a more conciliatory posture, but still rejected integration with Russia. That is now over. Many of the Russian troops in Belarus will remain indefinitely, and the country will increasingly be ruled, de facto, from Moscow. Equally worrying is that Putin’s Feb. 21 speech referred quite explicitly to restoring not the Soviet Union, which he criticized in various ways, but the Russian empire as it existed prior to 1917. That not only calls into question all of the former Soviet states, but also a large part of Poland, including Warsaw, which was part of the Russian empire. How far he intends to go is unknown, and may depend on how things go in Ukraine. But after this week’s events, Russia’s neighbors cannot simply assume that they won’t be targeted.
Funny how the rest of the world is more concerned about the American empire and it’s LGBTQ crusade against humanity
All this concern has some validity. One does not cancels out another.
Been trying to get this across to Freepers for weeks, and have been savaged by the Moscophile brigade. Let’s see where this thread goes.
Ask him how many genders there are before you listen to him.
Psycho Tsar Pooty is on a dreamy bender. There are not enough actual real ethnic Russians to pull this off. And their numbers are declining due to low birth rates.
Real Russians is what glues the Russian Federation together. Other ethnics cannot wait until Pooty-Clown croaks, to break away from the stupid vodka swilling Russians domination. The Chechens lead this pack.
“Funny how the rest of the world is more concerned with Chinese aggression and domination.”
Um LOL no they are not, what nation has China invaded since Tibet in the 1950’s?
The transsexual loving Ukraine says hi
“Funny how the rest of the world is more concerned about the American empire and it’s LGBTQ crusade against humanity”
Agree, they don’t seem all that worried about Putin, but then again their leaders, unlike those in the US, Canada, and much of Europe aren’t still trying to get revenge for Stalin.
Perhaps the rest of the world also knows that if Putin wanted Ukraine, it was there for the taking in 2014, if not earlier - due to essentially not having a military. After all, it was only after the Neocons armed-up Ukraine that Russia responded to the threat on their border (unlike another country that I’m quite familiar with, by the way).
“Funny how the rest of the world is more concerned about the American empire and it’s LGBTQ crusade against humanity”
Put on yer tin foil jock strap because this is where GloboHomo is going to bite you, during your dinner of toasted grasshoppers. And you will like it.
Its all BS and fear-mongering, of course.
At present, the US deep-state is in a PR and subversion war against Hungary, and particularly its President, Victor Orban.
We poked them in their Traditional Christian eyes by specifically appointing a “married” homosexual man as Ambassador to Budapest. The US embassy sponsors gay-pride parades, and this Ambassador constantly meets and hosts Hungarian opposition parties. USAID (read CIA) sent Samantha Power to spend $300 million on “democracy initiatives” with “independent” anti-government media in Hungary. Brussels and the EU call Orban a “dictator” even though he had a huge margin of electoral victory.
Orban probably would love to kick all their asses out of Hungary, but can’t, because like all of Eastern Europe, they have always been surrounded by opposing forces and must walk a fine line.
So in fact, the DC deep-state are the (neo) Marxists now, spreading a perverse, post-modern ideology across the globe and sowing chaos in small nations everywhere in its service.
UC Riverside.
‘nuff said.
Relished by their fellow travelers her on FR.
That is good advise for everyone. I have been tempted to ask my Doctors while directly looking them in the eye. I have resisted that urge so far, but...
“The transsexual loving Ukraine says hi”
Every single Ukrainian guy is at least 10x more Alpha than you. They fight against Russians for their nation. While you grovel on the down low, to your Uncle Klaus.
In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled Putin’s dark designs: Restore the pre-1917 Russian empire, marktwain wrote: An interesting perspective by a academic who studies Russia and Ukraine, from shortly after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. He's pushing the false narrative that Russia started this war and will try to take over the world. He should spend time focusing on Russia's documentation for their request for UN investigations of US bio warfare labs in the Ukraine instead. He could discover Joe Biden owns on of the 49 US bio labs in the Ukraine and we know Joe is always honest, amIright? The professor might wonder why Zelensky ordered all Metabiota documents destroyed the day Russia began its invasion.
He could look at NATO's ambitions to take over the world and their frustration that Putin won't get out of the way so they can install their puppet. He could analyze why NATO threatens to have the Ukraine join NATO after promising they would never do that. The professor might pause over the information that NATO is using the Ukraine as a proxy to fight a war with Russia, treating the Ukrainians as disposable toilet paper.
Unfortunately, academics are often useful idiots.
Am I the only one who has noticed that Russia did not invade Ukraine when oil was cheap? Wars are expensive.
Blood is a big expense.
Just remember, if the facts were on their side, they could argue calmly and reasonably and make their case.
The fact that they so quickly resort to anger, vitriol, name-calling, etc, just shows a lack of conviction they are trying to compensate for.
Agree.
And ask doctors, “if you knew everything about the vaxx then, that you know today, would you have still recommended it?
“Why?”
“And their numbers are declining due to low birth rates.”
And emigration. Lots of Russians who could leave Russia were leaving Russia, even before the war. It’s not gotten better since.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.