Russia

[Purple]

There is a very interesting piece in the Economist magazine this month about Russia and Putin's expansionist strategy.
They are of the opinion that we are closer to a Third World War than at any time during the Cold War, including the Cuban missile crisis. Interesting and very worrying.

 

[michaelm]

The are of the opinion that we are closer to a Third World War than at any time during the Cold War, including the Cuban missile crisis.

Well we came within a hair's breath then and but for Vasili Arkhipov the Third World War may have kicked off.

 

[demoivre]

More provocation yesterday with Russian bombers flying near Cornwall with transponders switched off?

 

[Purple]

More provocation yesterday with Russian bombers flying near Cornwall with transponders switched off?

Russian Air force planes always fly with their transponders turned off. There have been a few near misses with civilian airliners over the last year or so.

 

[Purple]

Well we came within a hair's breath then and but for Vasili Arkhipov the Third World War may have kicked off.

I remember reading about him a good few years ago.
The fact that the Russians won the standoff and the USA withdrew it's missiles from Turkey is always ignored by most in the West.
Putin's Russia is far more dangerous than the USSR was as it's a police state, run by a dictator and a cabal of his fellow former KGB officers.

 

[michaelm]

Putin's Russia is far more dangerous than the USSR was as it's a police state, run by a dictator and a cabal of his fellow former KGB officers.

It doesn't help that Obama is more show than substance.

 

[Purple]

More from the Economist on this issue.

 

[michaelm]

Both links seem to be the same one.

 

[Purple]

Both links seem to be the same one.

Should be fixed now

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

There is a very interesting piece in the Economist magazine this month about Russia and Putin's expansionist strategy.
The are of the opinion that we are closer to a Third World War than at any time during the Cold War, including the Cuban missile crisis. Interesting and very worrying.

Purple if Russia starts WWIII it will be a first in more ways than one. It will be the first time anyone went to war knowing they had zero chance of a win and 100% certainty of total loss. The US won't start WWIII either in that whilst they will certainly "win" it, the end result would not be worth winning.

Undoubtedly there will be WWIII some day (40 years time? 400 years time? 4,000 years time?) but it will be started by someone who doesn't care that they won't win, some religious fanatic like Iran or ISIS who would deem it to be God's plan for us all.

 

[Purple]

Purple if Russia starts WWIII it will be a first in more ways than one. It will be the first time anyone went to war knowing they had zero chance of a win and 100% certainty of total loss. The US won't start WWIII either in that whilst they will certainly "win" it, the end result would not be worth winning.

They certainly won't start it in one grand sweep but conflicts have a habit of escalating and leaders whose legitimacy is questionable and is based on an extremist doctrine, be it religion, communism, fascism or ultra-nationalism, tend to be far less pragmatic than others. Putin has nailed his colours to ultra-nationalism and is philosophically opposed to Western liberal democracy. He is also very wealthy and, along with his former KGB ministers and broader cabal, controls most of Russia's wealth and media.

He is looking to create buffer states around Russia that he can dominate and control. The will of the people in those countries is of no consequence to him. He has called the West's bluff in Georgia and Crimea and now in Ukraine proper and each time he's been right and each time he's been emboldened. The next step with be a Baltic state which is a member of NATO. Russian tanks won't roll in but the country will be destabilised and "little green men", the same Russian special forces without insignia that invaded Crimea, will pop up to support popular uprisings by the significant Russian minorities in one of those countries.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Purple WWIII will happen some day, for sure, possibly by some power having first strike capability - that would be the rational cause, but more likely it will be caused by some Islamist fanatic who sees glory at the other end.

Putin belongs in neither bracket. His very wealth and that of his family are guarantees that he is not going to throw that all away.

As far as I am concerned the jury is out on whether Putin is the land grabbing aggressor you portray. Many of the adventures you quote actually came upon him and he could be seen as more the reactive defender of his own people. Certainly a year ago Ukraine became a very cold place for Russian speakers - the first move following the coup was to demote Russian as an official language. Let's face it, Crimea is the centre of the Russian fleet and was only "given" by Russia to Ukraine recently. I don't think that is quite comparable with the Sudetenland.

 

[Gerry Canning]

Mr Putin appears hell-bent on creating a buffer zone around Russia.
Russian history would hint that these buffer countries were historically within the sway of Greater Russia.
I havn,t heard of Russia invading countreys that fell outside their influence, eg East Germany,Poland,Czechslovakia,Romania, Latvia,Estonia,Hungary, Poland.
I wonder how USA would react if Mexico ,Canada moved towards Russia?
I think USA would (probably correctly) move to protect their (buffer) border states.

Russia has not (invaded) outside of their buffer states and I can easily see how Russia would feel threatened by the eastward March of the West.
Today requires cool heads and a clear understanding of world politics.

In West , particularly USA & GB , invaded Iraq and Grenada and fomented regime change in South America and Iran.
So it is easy to envisage Russia feeling (squeezed).

We have a present issue re Mr Putin and the West, but I do not see Mr Putin doing more than (in his view) protecting his borders.

 

[Purple]

Mr Putin appears hell-bent on creating a buffer zone around Russia.
Russian history would hint that these buffer countries were historically within the sway of Greater Russia.
I havn,t heard of Russia invading countreys that fell outside their influence, eg East Germany,Poland,Czechslovakia,Romania, Latvia,Estonia,Hungary, Poland.
I wonder how USA would react if Mexico ,Canada moved towards Russia?
I think USA would (probably correctly) move to protect their (buffer) border states.

Russia has not (invaded) outside of their buffer states and I can easily see how Russia would feel threatened by the eastward March of the West.
Today requires cool heads and a clear understanding of world politics.

In West , particularly USA & GB , invaded Iraq and Grenada and fomented regime change in South America and Iran.
So it is easy to envisage Russia feeling (squeezed).

We have a present issue re Mr Putin and the West, but I do not see Mr Putin doing more than (in his view) protecting his borders.

Countries are entitled to self determination. Russian dominance of its neighbours through the subversion of their democratic processes and institutions cannot be excused because of similar transgressions by the USA and GB (and others in the West). They are entitled to security but they are not entitled to enslave their neighbours to get it.
We can see what such destabilisation has done in the Middle East. We should do everything we can to avoid the same thing happening in Europe where there are more people, more weapons and more Nukes.

When the people of Ukraine made a democratic choice to move away from the totalitarianism and police state government of Russia and towards the liberal freedom and rule of law which is the foundation of the EU the Russians invaded. That is utterly wrong.
Russia has a strong and legitimate claim on the Crimean peninsula but it signed treaties guaranteeing the sovereignty of Ukraine, including Crimea, less than 20 years ago when Ukraine gave up its Soviet era ballistic missiles and the nukes they carried.
There is no reason why Russia could not have maintained its Black Sea Fleet in Crimea through a long term treaty, just as the USA, France, Britain, Spain etc do in their former colonies and protectorates.

Most of the countries you list above didn't fall under recent Russian influence until they occupied them and installed puppet governments after the Second World War. Poland being a particular exception as they have a long history of being invaded by Russia (and occasionally doing the invading themselves). In the context you mentioned Russia has a stronger claim on Sweden and Turkey!

 

[Delboy]

Russia has not (invaded) outside of their buffer states and I can easily see how Russia would feel threatened by the eastward March of the West.
Today requires cool heads and a clear understanding of world politics.

Tough luck for those in the Crimea, Ukraine and possibly the Baltic nations, wha!
Lets hope, by your logic, that the Brits don't look to go back to putting their buffer zone in place!!!

 

[Gerry Canning]

Tough luck for those in the Crimea, Ukraine and possibly the Baltic nations, wha!
Lets hope, by your logic, that the Brits don't look to go back to putting their buffer zone in place!!!

Delboy/Purple.

In NO way do I atall disagree with your postings.

What I am saying is that these issues need to be viewed from all sides.
I have no doubt that Russia genuinely believes (wrongly I think) that they are being squeezed by a Western Axis.
The West (correctly I think) believe Russia far from acting in defensive mode is acting in a belligerent mode.

When both sides claim right , I would worry the answer is judged by might? or maybe which side pushes things further?

Hopefully cool heads will always win.

 

[Delboy]

I'm not absolving the West of all the blame here either....pushing NATO up to the Russian borders was provocative and not necessary IMO

 

[Purple]

Delboy/Purple.

In NO way do I atall disagree with your postings.

What I am saying is that these issues need to be viewed from all sides.
I have no doubt that Russia genuinely believes (wrongly I think) that they are being squeezed by a Western Axis.
The West (correctly I think) believe Russia far from acting in defensive mode is acting in a belligerent mode.

When both sides claim right , I would worry the answer is judged by might? or maybe which side pushes things further?

Hopefully cool heads will always win.

I'd accept that if it wasn't for the fact that all of this "wolf at the door" threat posturing by Putin only really kicked off after the pro-democracy protests by activists including Gary Kasparov in 2012.
Since then the leaders have been arrested, murdered, beaten and threatened by Putin's police. A number of sympathetic journalists have also been murdered.
Russia is a police state and Putin is the dictator at the top. The Russian parliament is only slightly less pointless than the Iraqi parliament under Saddam. It is less democratic now than at any state since the fall of communism. In many ways it is less democratic than it was under communism.
This is a very powerful nuclear power which has tripled its military spending over the last few years.

Putin wants their empire back.

 

[Purple]

Delboy/Purple.

In NO way do I atall disagree with your postings.

What I am saying is that these issues need to be viewed from all sides.
I have no doubt that Russia genuinely believes (wrongly I think) that they are being squeezed by a Western Axis.
The West (correctly I think) believe Russia far from acting in defensive mode is acting in a belligerent mode.

When both sides claim right , I would worry the answer is judged by might? or maybe which side pushes things further?

Hopefully cool heads will always win.

If a democratic state requests NATO membership because it fears invasion by an undemocratic and aggressive neighbour should the democratic states in NATO refuse?

 

[Gerry Canning]

If a democratic state requests NATO membership because it fears invasion by an undemocratic and aggressive neighbour should the democratic states in NATO refuse?

.....................
Russia has tripled its military spending, but Russias expenditure is largely based on upgrading, not a major expansion . (courtesy of articles in Economist Magazine). Compared to Usa expenditure Russias expenditure is small.So maybe Russia feels threatened.
It can be argued Russias expenditure is defensive.
......................
Putin may well want his (empire) back but for now it appears to be he wants his (near) borders secure.
....................................................
Democratic states should of course be allowed to join NATO.But if you were Russia could you not see this as a pincer aggressive move to encircle Russia.
Historically it was Russia who suffered most from fascism. And with USA , was it not USA who recently supported the Taliban when Russia was in Afghanistan.(look what that meddling inspired ,so then Usa,Britain invade and we end up with (Al Quieda and now Islamic State) Mess in other countries and unexpected consequences arise.
...............................................................................................
I can understand Russias concerns, I can understand Polands,Latvia,Lithuanian,Ukrainian concerns etc.

As I said cool heads are needed and if all countries could get to trust and try to really understand their neighbours concerns and not judge too harshly wouldn,t it be a grand world?
I am very slow to react to pat quotes about Democracy, Dictatorship etc as normally both Democracies and Dictatorships get their subtle and not so subtle spins in !