European leaders travel to Kyiv

Post Reply New Topic

I mean Kirill's "metaphysical dimension" of the "special operation" to save Rus' from evil West that makes people organize gay parades... I'll look for the full text in English for you.

I have deduced that British foreign policy is to rebuild the Empire. My source? An out of context headline from the Guardian, some local inebriates in the pub oh and also one guy on a train once said we should re-establish the Raj.



I know some history of Russia, and I know about international relations and geopolitics, this Empire building narrative is neither logical or sane in any way nor congruent with recent history and Russian actions. It's just war propaganda. If you believe that, you are the sort who would have fallen for the news that German soldiers advanced across Europe with babies impaled on their bayonets.

Putin wants to return to the "glory" of the USSR.....maybe even back to the "glory" of the Tsars.

He believes in a Pan-Russian ethnicity......that Ukrainians are actually breakaway Russians.

It seems as if, at least in urban areas, people want to move on from what, to them, is anachronistic stuff.

Really? Georgia 2008? Ukraine 2014? Ukraine 2022? Blaming neighbouring countries for "provoking them" when they tried to join NATO? Because what? Because Russia does not accept other countries to choose other than they want to?
Coming with an army to Belarus and de facto quietly removing their independence?
Claims that Ukraine is "no real nation" and denying their souvereignty? Then launching a full scale invasion?
All that "inconsistent with rebuilding empire"?

The Russian Orthodox Church has always been resistant to innovation.

Putin wants to backslide into bygone eras.

Yes. These are all more consistent with "neutralising threats to Russian security" than empire building. These interventions have been relatively small, restrained and importantly fairly relaxed about the situation afterwards, as long as those initial concerns remain met. Empire building is much more involved and requires a great deal more control over those territories than the Russians have ever sought in modern times. Even if they wanted to do it, they do not have the capability and they know it.



If you knew Russian history as well as you claim, you'd know why this is such a hot button for them. If Chinese history is sometimes said to be the history of famine, then Russian history might well be described as the history of being invaded. Plonking weapons and troops (or threatening to) along their borders is a provocation for any country, but doubly so for Russia.

"Patriarch Kirill (Ciril) has backed the expansion of Russian power into Crimea and eastern Ukraine.  Despite calling for the 'speedy restoration of peace', Patriarch Kirill also referred to Moscow's opponents in Ukraine as 'evil forces', stating 'we must not allow dark and hostile external forces to laugh at us' . . . Patriarch Kirill approves of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, 2022, and has blessed the Russian soldiers fighting there. As a consequence, several priests of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine have stopped mentioning Kirill's name during the divine service." -- Wikipedia

Polish history is a history of being invaded to non-existence and yet we don't behave the way Russia does.
That's a poor exceuse.
Especially that the very mechanics of NATO is "if you're invaded, we're all with you - but if you invade, you're on your own".
The only real "threat" NATO poses to Russia is threat of losing control over other states and being unable to do more of what they're doing right now.

Because you can't. If you ever had such power over your own destiny, you've lost it, much like the UK has. Russia doesn't want to lose what little of that they have left.



There is precedent for NATO getting involved beyond strict article 5 situations, e.g Kosovo and there was a lot of talk about NATO sticking its tentacles into Syria, where the Russians were involved. The defensive nature of NATO is not an absolute rule, whatever they might say. Having NATO forces parked in Ukraine, right next to Russia means Russia is essentially defeated before a war with NATO even begins, however that might come about.

You describe exactly "not being an empire".
If Russians have no idea how to live while not being an empire, it's their problem, not Georgian, Ukrainian, Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Belarussian nor of anyone else who may not want to be in Russian "zone of influence" and seek other alliances for protection.

Being concerned with borders, security, potential invasion scenarios and what is going on in your neighbouring countries is not being an Empire. Or Poland is guilty of this too for all its pants-wetting about potential Russian invasion.

Not invading other states when you don't like their politics (or, I can use your words: when you're "concerned with borders, security, potential invasion scenarios and what is going on") is not being an empire.

Ah yes, the magical line again. CIA coups fine, foreign money capturing journalists, opposition politicians and training a fifth column of activists and protestors also fine, while military action is an abomination.

Edit: the terrible irony of this portrayal of Putin, is that if anything Russia is acting in an anti-Imperialist fashion, Russia is fighting the Empire of the day, not Ukraine as such. But those within the Empire cannot see what they are, so well fed are they on internal propaganda.

Last edited by Mikah on 18 Mar 2022, 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Indeed.
Supporting a party you like in another country is fine.
Deploying troops at a party you don't like is not.
Especially, targeting civilians and creating a humanitarian crisis when the population don't want you is very not fine.

Russia could have remained a "true member" in the community of nations---if Putin didn't pull the stunts he is now pulling in Ukraine.

Even when he annexed the Crimea in 2014, the sanctions that were imposed were not really severe. Obviously, it was an extremely aggressive move by Putin--but, for the most part, the "western" nations sort of "let it happen," sort of practiced appeasement.

Ukraine might be said to be "the straw that broke the camel's back."

He has gone back to an anachronistic form of warfare, and has killed thousands of his soldiers, as well as thousands of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians.

I bet he is lying, like always:

https://english.alarabiya.net/amp/News/ ... n-invasion