Crimea is a good strategic resource, but Russia already has over 1000 km of Black Sea coastline...
So like the western-backed Euromaidan basically (without Victoria Nuland handing out cookies in Maidan square).
Ukrainians are the only ones who have the moral right to choose what they will be aligned with. Perhaps you can coach them or bribe them with trade (or lack of trade), but a violent invasion is absolutely not like that, it's not even comparable to what happened during Euromaidan.
Ukraine also has a corruption problem.
I think NATO will keep Ukraine on the cusp for 20 years like they did with Romania, before they allow them to join.
And madman though Putin may seem to be, he knows NATO isn't an offensive organization.
And I'm going to judge Putin by his own words. He says he's threatened by NATO on his borders? Then he shouldn't have 70% of his military on the border of Ukraine. It leaves him wide open to an invasion from NATO members Estonia and Latvia.
I think he may legit see it that way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOkl2XgZlw0
Sure, like the defensive bombing of Libya by NATO.
1) Russia. Russian power is waning, and at the same time Ukraine-NATO integration is approaching the point of irreversibility. Russia sees the potential for a NATO armed Ukraine with US tropps, missiles, and possibly nukes 5 minutes from Moscow as an unacceptable security risk. From the Russian perspective the window to stop Ukraine is closing, and they have to act before NATO armaments has made Ukraine is too strong, and Russia is too weak.
2) NATO. NATO and the US would like to have the additional leverage over Russia provided by bases in Ukraine in the long term. Each additional country in NATO adds to it's strength, and removes a potential threat in the future. NATO wont give Ukraine full membership today, because it does not have full control of it's territory and widespread corruption within Ukraine. NATO, is willing to provide a slow path to membership because it is a Win-win situation. If Russia doesn't act, NATO slowly gets more leverage over Russia (NATO win). If Russia invades Ukraine, Russian forces, economy, and relations are damaged (another NATO win).
3) Ukraine. Essentially stuck in the middle, with no good options. They can grow closer to Russia or the EU, and each has downsides. Russia is a waning power and offers less economically. EU is more prosperous but they must join a military alliance against Russia. If they ever get full NATO membership, the Russian threat is greatly reduced, but NATO application is an extremely long process during which the threat is greatly increased.
The narrator argues that it's largely about fossil fuels.
People saying this is mostly about NATO expansion are missing the real issue. NATO aspirations are symptom not the cause of the dispute. If a country is in NATO it limits the means Russia has to coerce them. ie: it takes military intervention off the table since they would not be picking a fight with only one country but the alliance.
Putin's Russia right now is less than 150 million people. The rest of the former Soviet states have about as much together. If he conquers Ukraine, then most of them will decide it's time to get back to the "Federation", if they know what's good for them (the exception would be the three Baltic states which are NATO members).
If Putin's gambit works out, he reconstitutes the Soviet Union (itself the reconstitution of the Tsarist Empire), and makes a country of close to 300 million people. For you and me the population is not a very relevant number, but for him it's the number of potential soldiers that he can use to bully Europe.
And number of consumers. Want a big economy? You need a big population.
A few things that contribute to Russian goals here:
A. "paypack" for the overthrow of the long standing pro Russian Ukrainian government in 2013. Putin would like the status quo returned to 2012 - weak buffer state reliant on Russia (Belarus 2.0)
B. historical significance of Ukraine joining the old western cold war army (nato) would be devastating. Russia may have calculated this is the last chance to stop that or at least delay it for a generation
C. finish the 2014 war. Get the land bridge to Crimea and unify the Russian speaking west and south western Ukrainian regions (imho this is goal number 1 since it give massive economic and political benefits.)
There's probably loads of other goals, but they are the first to come to mind.
Note: I'm not agreeing with any of them, just pointing out they are likely there and we would probably be aware of them.
At a very high level, Putin wants to maintain a buffer zone between Russia and NATO. Russia doesn't have the resources to occupy and/or annex Ukraine, at least not in the long term. Putin must know that. He can't hope to install a stable puppet government, because Ukrainians would overthrow the puppet in a revolution. He must know that as well.
Maybe Putin wants to cripple Ukraine permanently. Take Odesa, and Ukraine loses access to the sea. Take control of enough territory that it doesn't matter what NATO and the EU will do with the remaining Ukraine.
Or maybe Putin has become an idealist instead of the pragmatist he was. Maybe his actions are now guided by beliefs rather than expected consequences. If Putin believes that the former glory of Russia must be restored by any means necessary, he may drive Russia into ruin by pursuing that.
I have long thought Putin to be a mean but smart individual, but even if Russia eventually accomplishes the conquest of Ukraine, this looks like a blunder on his part, not only a moral error (although certainly also that).
a) The old one of Empires - Russia controls Ukraine, Belarus etc. It's threatened by Ukraine moving to the west.
b) The current one where countries are independent democracies with governments chosen by the people.
Putin's been reading too many history books about a) The west has to go with b) - we can't really say to the Ukranians you'll never be able to join the EU/nato in spite of your people wanting to because you are property of the Russian empire. Putin needs to get with the times really.
If you will skim through article, it's kinda becomes more clear. Opinion expressed there with regards to Ukraine are shared by many Russians, based on what I observed.
Well in Putin's own words, it seems obvious and clear. Ukraine's government are Nazis who are committing genocide over Russians in the new republics as Ukraine invaded the republics to reclaim the land.
“As I said in my previous address, one cannot look at what is happening there without compassion. It was simply impossible to endure all this. It was necessary to stop this nightmare immediately – the genocide against the millions of people living there, who rely only on Russia, hope only on us. It was these aspirations, feelings, pain of people that were for us the main motive for deciding to recognise the people’s republics of Donbas.”
“What I think is important to emphasise further. In order to achieve their own goals, the leading NATO countries support extreme nationalists and neo-Nazis in Ukraine in everything, who, in turn, will never forgive the Crimeans and Sevastopol residents for their free choice – reunification with Russia.”
While all this nazi crap is absurd. We can also discount the possibility that Putin has been misled. He's ex-KGB. They were actively trained to be able to avoid exactly that. Instead this is obvious propaganda. The president of ukraine is jewish and target #1. Obviously not a nazi, this was more to mislead the russian duma and russian people.
>What an absolute disgrace that we fight each other over BS orders. So many lives, especially of young people, lost for what?
We have to figure out the 'they didnt go into iraq for wmds, they went there for oil'. It's all pure speculation. Go to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Ukraine and throw a dart. Whatever you hit, that's it.
There is this: https://venturebeat.com/2022/02/24/ukraine-supplies-90-perce...
If you have been following... there's about a trillion $ of investment in new chip fabs. Everyone in the world is rushing to build chip fabs. Russia taking this neon production could give them the edge they need... To what end?
The thing for me? there's nothing in ukraine that makes it good there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon#Production It can basically be done anywhere.
And what's even the point? Russia has basically been excluded from ever making any value from this.
Now that you say that... if my memory is good(its not) midwest usa started doing this. I recall it being in reference to the automotive industry.
https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/anthropocene-reviewed/e...
My privileged perspective is different from that of many other people, but I must believe that the best path to success and happiness for all is coordination rather than force and might. I also know that someone in his position lacks for nothing by any external perspective. We cannot give him benefit of the doubt; he isn't interested in the betterment of his people, else he would not have allowed a few people to get ownership of major public assets, leaving the general population low while a few people became absurdely rich. Therefore, his motivations now are for his own appearance and self esteem. If he makes a more powerful Russia, then he is worthy of the photo of him proudly riding a horse bare-chested.
All too true
His actions over the decades towards potential electoral opposition have put him in a position where the full weight of Russian history is upon him personally. If Russia was democratic, there would be a deep bench of leaders to relieve the stress.
It now is too hard for him to tell the difference between a threat to his ego and a threat which could shatter Russia into civil war. Thus, tyranny.
What an absolute disgrace that we fight each other over BS orders. So many lives, especially of young people, lost for what?