Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 241 posts

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#191

Post by andy-x »

dnautics wrote: post #77
elcritch wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair Crimea does have a majority ethnic Russian inhabitants. Wikipedia lists Crimea's demographics as 65% while others were lower at 58% or thereabout. Given many of those Russians were there from the Soviet era or direct descendants, it doesn't seem too crazy of a claim. The US and NATO countries have done worse for less. Now invading Ukraine? Thats another thing altogether.

Without defending russia: the same argument does apply for selected parts of ukraine that still have not been yet annexed by russia. I wonder how long it will take for russia to get tired of subsidizing crimea and they will beg to go back to the ukraine.

Not going to happen, major reason for annexation was to keep Sebastopol as the major/only Russia navy base in the Black Sea. That reason will never vanish as there are no other suitable locations to relocate that base.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#192

Post by avmich »

nullifidian wrote: post #184
avmich wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia's recent demonstrations, like Admiral Kuznetsov's problems, leaving Armenia faced with Turkey and Azerbaijan, weak drone program shows that in reality Russian military isn't that strong against serious opponent. Even more importantly, a serious military operations will undermine the power within the country. It's doubtful Russia would go to fight Ukraine even now (it would be rather disastrous), but even more…

A situation that could be considered disastrous, i.e. poverty that would result from the western sanctions/isolation, the strife against the occupied Ukrainian nationalists, against internal dissent/opposition is beneficial to the silovik class -- more people to crush/imprison/destroy, more space to advance their careers, more power to wield, and it's them who Putin relies on to keep himself in power, not the populac…

The problem for Putin here is that as long as economy continues to deteriorate, it's harder and harder to pay those siloviks (police, national guard, army etc.) to remain in power - he has to have good reasons for why they can't just replace them. Putin can't really recreate the Stalin's level of closeness - too hard. Getting money from natural resources - which admittedly requires much less people - can be iffy if the West will put sanctions (and also world moves away from fossil fuels).

Unfortunately it's still possible that Putin will cling to power for a rather long time.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#193

Post by Ygg2 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #60
Ygg2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. But reverse positions. Mexico and Canada join Russian federation and Russia start building bases there. And this is despite Russia promising not to do that. I can't imagine USA acting in cool and peaceful manner when sword of Damocles hangs near them.

> Mexico and Canada join Russian federation and Russia start building bases there. And this is despite Russia promising not to do that. NATO members are not annexed by America. Ukraine isn't part of NATO, and has had no realistic path to membership for some time. And a good way to get American bases in Ukraine is to threaten to invade it.

From Russian POV there isn't much of a difference. You basically see your enemy build installation just outside of your backyard.

Sure analogy, ain't perfect, and it's too late to edit. But say they join Russian led pact and Russian build basses there. I'm pretty sure America would throw as big hissy fit as Russia did.

> And a good way to get American bases in Ukraine is to threaten to invade it.

It's a great deterrent as well. NATO members have a policy, attack one, you attack us all, yes. But they also prohibit members that have problematic borders with non-NATO powers.

Adding a member like Ukraine means essentially getting ready for (nuclear) war with Russia. And NATO is, and probably won't be ready.

Seeing list of NATO's recent "victories" seems like a compilation of US greatest fails (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya). So Russia is calling NATO/US bluff.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#194

Post by bigodbiel »

alkonaut wrote: post #136
VictorPath wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like bombing Libya?

In 2011? That was a UN sanctioned operation after United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.

Exactly and Russia (then Medvedev the “president” and Putin PM) abstained, hoping the intervention to have been circumscript. The aftermath of the intervention for the Kremlin was betrayal, which lead the “military tower” taking back control of the Kremlin from the “business tower”.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#195

Post by Ygg2 »

alkonaut wrote: post #106
Ygg2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. But reverse positions. Mexico and Canada join Russian federation and Russia start building bases there. And this is despite Russia promising not to do that. I can't imagine USA acting in cool and peaceful manner when sword of Damocles hangs near them.

But NATO already has land borders to Russia! In five (more?) countries. NATO has never made a formal “promise” or agreement not to expand. This is a myth that refuses to die it seems. But this is beside the point. Ukraine isn’t a member so can hardly be responsible for what NATO does. Nor is it offered membership. And they were invaded preemptively? This whole line of reasoning that NATO has anything to do with the i…

US made deal with Russia in wake of German unification, not to expand NATO/US into Russia's (USSR) sphere of influence. They violated that treaty repeatedly. Now Russia is betting stirring shit in Ukraine is enough for US to decline.

> or is it offered membership. And they were invaded preemptively?

Kinda. A member with existing border dispute has little chance of being admitted.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#196

Post by bigodbiel »

danjac wrote: post #10

The bigger question is "why now". Ukraine is not joining NATO or the EU any time soon. Russia has de facto annexed Crimea and its ongoing support for separatists in Donbas keeps the region unstable to its advantage. I suspect two reasons: Putin's flagging domestic support and Russia's (and to be honest, the world's) perception that America is currently so divided and weak it will be unable to offer much resistance th…

Many reasons!

Internationally; Merkel is out and the Greens (staunch anti-Russians) have the foreign affairs meanwhile Nord Stream still stuck, Ukraine is getting increasingly armed with Turkish drones and anti-tank missile systems plus its clamp down on pro-Russia politicians and oligarchs, Biden is probably the last democrat (or non-Trump Republican) willing to sit down with Putin

Domestically; inflation is soaring, purchasing power dwindling, and Kremlin popularity so low after continuous unpopular measures that the government is having second/third thoughts in passing vaccine passes.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#197

Post by bigodbiel »

democracy wrote: post #188
sleepysysadmin wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Putin doesn't want to lose power. All these propaganda, military moves are to give poor people something to take their eyes and minds off the reality - him robbing the country for 30 years. If you have absolute power for long time you know what happens. I dont see this as the answer. If it's really power, march to Kyiv and take it all. They could do it. Crimea is more or less the only annexation because that's all t…

I mean his only goal is to stay in power. If you "match to Kyiv" - you are guaranteed casualties and it's not going to help him with his ratings - now you have poor people with dead relatives. Russian army/people can fight well - but so can Ukrainians and Chechens - but there is zero motivation for the ordinary Russians to fight at the moment. He will always send private military groups but there is only that much yo…

Nazarbaev... and he’s gone! Ousted in a coup by his own protege, Tokaev during the recent Kazakh uprisings!

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#198

Post by rasz »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #99
remarkEon wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has controlled Crimea since the 18th century. It's not an artifact of Soviet Union. >All these regional problems are mainly due to the language. If Ukraine allowed Russian as it's second official (or at least regional) language, Donbas would return back in a blink. And Crimea might follow. What? History goes back farther than the 20th century.

> Russia has controlled Crimea since the 18th century. It's not an artifact of Soviet Union So Moscow should be handed back to Ukraine, the late seat of the Kievan Rus' [1]? Or perhaps the whole thing goes to Mongolia. Originalist interpretations of border disputes are infinitely flexible, and justification for constant warfare. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus%27

Why not Poland? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Lithuanian_occupation_o...

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#199

Post by nullifidian »

avmich wrote: post #192
nullifidian wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A situation that could be considered disastrous, i.e. poverty that would result from the western sanctions/isolation, the strife against the occupied Ukrainian nationalists, against internal dissent/opposition is beneficial to the silovik class -- more people to crush/imprison/destroy, more space to advance their careers, more power to wield, and it's them who Putin relies on to keep himself in power, not the populac…

The problem for Putin here is that as long as economy continues to deteriorate, it's harder and harder to pay those siloviks (police, national guard, army etc.) to remain in power - he has to have good reasons for why they can't just replace them. Putin can't really recreate the Stalin's level of closeness - too hard. Getting money from natural resources - which admittedly requires much less people - can be iffy if t…

>pay those siloviks (police, national guard, army etc.)

The fact that they (professionally) can't do anything else, and that a pro-democratic alternative to Putin would likely severely cut their numbers (Russia has one of the highest if not the highest number of siloviks per capita) or even conduct lustrations against them for protecting the autocracy, plays into Putin's hand. They are also not that demanding, higher ups known to "live of the land" (protection racket etc), and Russian economy even under sanctions still a capitalist economy, so it won't be as bad as in the 80ies.

Also Russia coming under isolating western sanctions would effectively make Russia a China's tributary state, since it's the only other power with manufacturing capability Russia would be able to trade with. So that adventure would be exchanging Putin's and silovik interests for Russian future BIG time.

Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war

#200

Post by rasz »

credit_guy wrote: post #179

Highly recommend "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics" by John Mearsheimer. For Russia, annexing (all or part of) Ukraine now is too good a deal to pass. Russia knows that invading with an overwhelming force will result in a virtually bloodless annexation, just like the Taliban took over Afghanistan in a matter of weeks, and just like they themselves took over Crimea. Ukraine claims they'll fight to the last drop of…

>Ukraine claims they'll fight to the last drop of blood, but theory and practice are a bit disconnected when you are a garrison in a city that's being approached by a few tens of thousands of soldiers and a few thousand tanks. Thinks looks different still if 50 other cities surrendered without a fight by the time it's your turn.

You have to be really insane. Poles did it at the start of WW2 resisting for a month https://origins.osu.edu/milestones/september-2014-nazis-take... https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/14/books/review/poland-1939-...

and again in 1944 for over two months https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Uprising

Twice with no direct outside help. So much for international security guarantees.

Btw Ukraine also had a toilet paper full of UK/US promises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit... how much good did that accomplish?

Post reply on HN