Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Duque de Bragança]

Also the Great Game - and that was very much active again in Central Asia in the interwar period. I think the allied intervention in the civil war is something that is largely forgotten now but I thinkk the British sent something like 60,000 troops (I imagine from the Indian Army) against the Soviets which I'd guess was the largest intervention by the allies and a fairly good reason why early Stalin might be paranoid.

I suppose the UK did not send the Indian Army in Arkhangelsk/Murmansk to fight the Bolsheviks but in the Black Sea, the Caucasus, plus Trans-Caspian area (Great Game area) following the German and Ottoman collapse?

The Maisky diaries of the Soviet ambassador to London from 1932-43 are really fascinating on the manoeuvres between London, Paris and Moscow in the 30s - as is Stephen Kotkin in Waiting for Hitler.

Plus I think very different experiences of some shared major wars - which from a Russian perspective very much look like the Brits sitting it out and letting the Russians take a beating/win it for them

Also I don't think there's really any British romanticism about Russia and the steppe in the way you get in German or French culture. And I think that goes both ways I always get the sense (from just reading) that Russia always looked to Paris and Berlin, not London. It's a generalisation but I think there is something to, I think, a French diplomat's comment that France is always naive and overly hopeful about Russia and Britain is about Turkey (both in the past and present)

Not sure it's about romanticism in the French case, just a counter-weight or reversal alliance, so Realpolitik. Even Laval tried to court Bolsheviks, but then started on the very left.

After all, that was the reason for the François I or Louis XIV moves towards the Ottomans as well.

[Sheilbh]

I suppose the UK did not send the Indian Army in Arkhangelsk/Murmansk for fight the Bolsheviks but in the Black Sea, the Caucasus, plus Trans-Caspian area (Great Game area) following the German and Ottoman collapse?

Yeah - that'd be my guess. I'd also suspect the deployments in Siberia also probably went from India.

[Legbiter]

Genuinely feel an official target in Whitehall should be for the British state to be half as capable as the Russians (and Iranians) think it is

Yeah. 

[Valmy]

I suppose the UK did not send the Indian Army in Arkhangelsk/Murmansk for fight the Bolsheviks but in the Black Sea, the Caucasus, plus Trans-Caspian area (Great Game area) following the German and Ottoman collapse?

Yeah but they even joked at the time that the main impact of the British intervention was to send huge amounts of weapons and money in the hands of the Whites who almost immediately turned it over to the Red Army through incompetence and corruption.

And IIRC the Brits were one of the first countries to then sign a trade agreement with the USSR.

[HVC]

If it's a legacy from the Russian civil war then they should be eyeing Japan, they sent the most soldiers

[Admiral Yi]

The Brits sent like 40 guys and a couple armored cars up into Central Asia I think.

[Duque de Bragança]

I suppose the UK did not send the Indian Army in Arkhangelsk/Murmansk for fight the Bolsheviks but in the Black Sea, the Caucasus, plus Trans-Caspian area (Great Game area) following the German and Ottoman collapse?

Yeah but they even joked at the time that the main impact of the British intervention was to send huge amounts of weapons and money in the hands of the Whites who almost immediately turned it over to the Red Army through incompetence and corruption.

And IIRC the Brits were one of the first countries to then sign a trade agreement with the USSR.

Wasn't Lloyd George who famously said they were trading with cannibals.  So why not Bolsheviks? 

[Sheilbh]

If it's a legacy from the Russian civil war then they should be eyeing Japan, they sent the most soldiers

I think the civil war bit impacted Stalin's paranoia - and that certainly included Japan. Again Kotkin is really good on how much of Stalin's fears and concerns in foreign policy in the 30s were actually about Japan (with some reason). On the other hand the USSR was a revisionist power so structurally maybe it was always going to be difficult to reach an agreement with pro-treaty powers like the British or the French.

I think more broadly with the British is the great game followed by intervention in the civil war - it's the context in which both British and Russian foreign espionage/secret states develop. Especially as the Russian fear was that the British were provoking revolts and unrest with local leaders in peripheral parts of their empire.

I think that history of (often fairly justified) paranoia about the British Empire in the Tsarist period and the Soviet Union probably help shape the perception of Britain as a continuing and, perhaps, particularly perfidious opponent - and one that operates in the shadows (not unlike British perceptions of Russia it has to be said). Particularly given that the context of this war is a specific Russian interpretation of history, that there is enough history to help explain the Russian suspicion of Britain even if it is objectively mad (see also: the war).

Wasn't Lloyd George who famouslay said they were trading with cannibals.  So why not Bolsheviks? 

I'm not convinced that British opportunism would reduce Russian suspicions

Although I believe Lloyd George consistently opposed intervention and wanted peaceful recognition of the Bolsheviks (and recognition/repayment of Britain's loans to the Tsars). His (majority) Conservative coalition partners were more intransigent, they supported ongoing full intervention/invasion and Lloyd George managed to pivot to supplying the Whites.

On the other hand and contrary to what I said about British and French views of Turkey, Lloyd George really wanted to invade Turkey and enforce the Megali Idea/crush Ataturk which was partly what caused his downfall.

[Josquius]

I guess there's the manner of the intervention to consider. The far east is the Russian empire. Oh sure its just as much part of Russia as Moscow but.... Its not really.
If we imagine it was Britain having the civil war, Japan seizing Vladivostok was like the US taking Canada. Aye. Sucks. But not quite in the same league as the French garrison on the Isle of Wight which is what the Euro intervention came closer to.

[Duque de Bragança]

Wasn't Lloyd George who famouslay said they were trading with cannibals.  So why not Bolsheviks? 

I'm not convinced that British opportunism would reduce Russian suspicions

Obviously. I would never claim that. 

Although I believe Lloyd George consistently opposed intervention and wanted peaceful recognition of the Bolsheviks (and recognition/repayment of Britain's loans to the Tsars). His (majority) Conservative coalition partners were more intransigent, they supported ongoing full intervention/invasion and Lloyd George managed to pivot to supplying the Whites.

AFAIK, it's true.

On the other hand and contrary to what I said about British and French views of Turkey, Lloyd George really wanted to invade Turkey and enforce the Megali Idea/crush Ataturk which was partly what caused his downfall.

The tragicomedic part is the monkey biting the Greek King, dying quickly from sepsis, leading eventually to the fall of Venizelist régime.
From Megali Idea to Megali Katastrophi (sorry for the Modern Greek approximative translitteration). Or Micrasiatic (Asia Minor) catastrophe, another translation from Greek.

[Valmy]

Of course there is also the fact that the west supplied HUGE amounts of food which staved off complete catastrophe for the Soviets. Which the Bolsheviks specifically asked for, via Maxim Gorki IIRC.

[Duque de Bragança]

Bolsheviks and food shortages/famines...

[Sheilbh]

Starting to get worried about that nuclear site now.

Zelenskiy's issued a warning about the Russians placing explosives on the roof possibly to stimulate an attack. Earlier today Russian Telegram was citing Russian intelligence claiming the Ukrainians were getting ready to launch an attack.

Separately there's been (very unfounded) reports on Ukrainian Telegram about Russian troops withdrawing from Enerhodar. I've also seen some stuff about the reserve power connection being switched back on after being disabled for some weeks while the main power connection has gone down.

Obviously the main thing is Zelenskiy's warning, but lots of other little details that makes it seem like Russia may be preparing something. And as with the dam, if it does set off those explosives it gives a very clear indication of precisely how Russia will behave as they're being forced back by Ukrainian forces.

[Josquius]

Yep. Seems almost certain they're going to blow it and play their usual games.
They've been evacuating/kidnapping the staff to crimea I believe too.

[Legbiter]

Yeah looks like they'll blow it up in the next few days.