Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[garbon]

It's been 70 years, they're Latvians now.

You know nothing Jon Snow. There were roughly 3 million Hungarians left on the other side of the border following the Versailles peace treaty. 96 years later there are still 1.5 millions of them, those who dared openly declaring themselves as such.

Are they also part of an occupation force?

Apparently you are part of an occupying force if you have the temerity to be born in a country that doesn't want you.

[Razgovory]

It does mean that we should understand the power and fear involved, and that it isn't as simple as we might think it is, or wish it to be.

  Besides this "existential threat" hasn't actually materialized.

Are you kidding me? Russia invaded and occupied Latvia for decades. That threat most certainly DID materialize.

There is no big crisis on whether or not Latvia should be allowed to exist.  This is nothing less then petty tribalism, nationalism and "getting even".

It is that, and more than that. Pretending it isn't won't help.

Understanding the fear involved doesn't excuse such actions.  And no Russia didn't invade, the Soviet Union did.  Then the Germans did.  Then the Latvians raised two SS divisions and killed most of the Jews.  If there were still Yiddish speaking Jews living there they would face same legal disabilities.  I think they still celebrate those SS divisions.  Keep in mind that Latvia was part of the Russian empire for a long time before the Soviet Union and it borders Russia so you are naturally going to lots of Russian speakers there as well.  In fact most Russian speakers live by the border.

[Valmy]

Understanding the fear involved doesn't excuse such actions.

Yep.  So?

[The Brain]

And no Russia didn't invade, the Soviet Union did.

FIAL

[Tamas]

If you guys think that I keep convincing you when you are obviously obtuse on purpose, you are mistaken.

[alfred russel]

Oh yes, I was wrong on all those things. Tell me more how I was wrong about "the Arab Spring in general" for example?

That the Arab Spring was a positive development for the Arab world, and that we should have been in there supporting it.

[alfred russel]

You do realize he's trolling you, right?

I was really searching for an opportunity to slight the Pac 12 in this thread. I'm not sure if that is me trolling him, or a sign that he effectively trolled me in the college football thread. 

[Sheilbh]

Those people, although I agree they probably haven't made that choice personally, are from the nation who forcefully occupied the Baltic States. In fact the only reason they could move there was that they were under the umbrella of their own occupying army and were considered the "same country". They are remnants of an occupation force.

So why do/should we sympathise with white Zimbabweans?

As I say for me the issue isn't what the Balts choose to do, but whether we should tolerate them in the EU. In my view European standards on human rights should apply fully for Russians in the Baltics and we shouldn't just turn a blind eye to the Baltics, as the Eurozone did to the Greeks or the EU did to Bulgarian corruption.

Similarly these laws date back to when the Baltics were joining NATO - so under a nuclear umbrella - and facing off against Boris Yeltsin's Russia. If, without extreme Euro-duress, they can't manage a liberal attitude then I'd suggest the problem is more than just realpolitik.

For that matter, what will Europe do?

Anything?

Anything?

Anything?

Anything at all?

Tighten sanctions further. Increase troop deployments to friendly Eastern European NATO nations. Try and get Germany to realise that collecting intelligence on Russia is more important than the NSA grabbing my Facebook's status updates.

There is no "Europe". There is the UK, France and Germany that make sweet deals with Putin and his oligarchs; Spain and Italy who couldn't care less; and Poland and the Baltics who are alternatively shitting their pants and rattling their sabers. (Un)surprisingly, the Scandies seem to be the most reasonable and principled in all of this, calling a spade a spade but telling Poles and the Balts to cool it for a while.

This is wrong. Italy's heavily intricated with Russia. The UK, of the big countries, pushed hardest for sanctions last time and, given the focus on sanctions, will be worst hit (which is right, I was worried Cameron was going to shout for sanctions but then not be willing to take a hit).

Aside from the City, where do Russian banks and companies normally go for finance? Dusseldorf? Dorpat?

1. More and tougher sanctions, of course. One thing about sanctions - they idea is to hurt the people you are sanctioning. But it is going to hurt you as well, by definition. Like all actions in conflict, the idea is to hurt the other guy more than yourself, and THEIR idea is to convince you that you will hurt yourself more than them. *If you enter into the sanctions discussion with the idea that anything that will hurt you at all is not acceptable, don't bother even talking about it!*.

Sure. But the problem from a European perspective is that we're not all Europeans. The countries who'll be most fucked by the current sanctions are the Baltic states. I don't think there'll be any EU mechanism (and certainly no adequate one) to help compensate them for that. Similarly the UK is going to be most affected of the big EU countries, that's possibly because we're the country with the least to lose.

I'd also say that Putin's approach isn't about convincing but escalating the situation (and, yet again, punishing oligarchs - I feel there's something Versailles-ish in his current policy). He's going back to the 70s in terms of trade, with the added bonus of becoming a Chinese satrapy. I've thought for a while that the way to punish Putin is through the elites and the corporate-mafia of Russia, but maybe that's wrong which is even more alarming because I don't think there's a way we can control him then. It's back to containment.

3. Apply more overt pressure or even threats. Start talking about the possibility of sending in direct support, perhaps air support or advisers.

Why? Are you willing to go nuclear over Lubyansk?

My view is you only send troops into an area where you're willing to tolerate their deaths and any consequences. Anything else is futile.

Oh spare us. For decades the US policy towards the EU (when there was a policy towards the EU) was to make sure it stays divided enough not to become a single political entity. That's why you supported countries like the UK and Poland.

Again, this is the opposite of the truth

The US has always pushed for more Europe but, historically, supported the UK and Germany (and Poland) because, historically, they've been the more Atlanticist EU countries. Even now the US has made clear they want the UK to stay in the EU if it comes to a UKIP vote. We're shit allies separately.

[Sheilbh]

Oh yes, I was wrong on all those things. Tell me more how I was wrong about "the Arab Spring in general" for example?

That the Arab Spring was a positive development for the Arab world, and that we should have been in there supporting it.

Right on both counts.

[Razgovory]

Understanding the fear involved doesn't excuse such actions.

Yep.  So?

It's not a factor then.  I don't care what the people there are scared of:  Russians, Jews, shaved armpits, Ventriloquist dolls whatever.  Passing laws to harass and disenfranchise a major portion of native population out of fear, spite or hatred should not be tolerated.  I am unimpressed by the needs to have a "pure" state and hostile to efforts to create one.

[Valmy]

It's not a factor then.  I don't care what the people there are scared of:  Russians, Jews, shaved armpits, Ventriloquist dolls whatever.  Passing laws to harass and disenfranchise a major portion of native population out of fear, spite or hatred should not be tolerated.  I am unimpressed by the needs to have a "pure" state and hostile to efforts to create one.

Ok but what lengths are we willing to go to get everybody to act in a pure and moral fashion?  We would have to use extremely coercive methods to get Latvia to act differently under the circumstances.  We are hardly paragons of virtue ourselves.

[Razgovory]

It's not a factor then.  I don't care what the people there are scared of:  Russians, Jews, shaved armpits, Ventriloquist dolls whatever.  Passing laws to harass and disenfranchise a major portion of native population out of fear, spite or hatred should not be tolerated.  I am unimpressed by the needs to have a "pure" state and hostile to efforts to create one.

Ok but what lengths are we willing to go to get everybody to act in a pure and moral fashion?  We would have to use extremely coercive methods to get Latvia to act differently under the circumstances.  We are hardly paragons of virtue ourselves.

We do our best. If we don't live up to our own standards perhaps it's because we try to reach for the stars and inevitably fall short. As members of NATO we need to pressure them, and we need to ask our EU friends to pressure them.  NATO is more then just an alliance to defend territory.  It is an alliance to defend ideas but, this is important for more then moral reasons.  We don't need to have ready made excuses for countries to hesitate to help out fellow NATO members if the Russian makes an effort there.  Russia has been able to fool some in the West with lies and exaggeration in Ukraine.  How much are they going to divide us when the truth is on their side?  This sort of petty tyranny makes them a political weak leak, and a risk to the whole alliance.

[alfred russel]

Oh yes, I was wrong on all those things. Tell me more how I was wrong about "the Arab Spring in general" for example?

That the Arab Spring was a positive development for the Arab world, and that we should have been in there supporting it.

Right on both counts.

I disagree, and most of the thousands of dead Syrians would also disagree if they were still around, but I don't have strong feelings either way.

Now if you start posting Pac 12 propaganda pieces, we will have to become enemies forever. Thankfully, I think the chances of that are small, and I think you are a good man. 

[Martinus]

So why do/should we sympathise with white Zimbabweans?

Well, it's a combination of many factors. For example, Zimbabwe does not neighbour a vastly more powerful white Zimbabwean country that is constantly making threatening noises against it.

(which is right, I was worried Cameron was going to shout for sanctions but then not be willing to take a hit).

Isn't that exactly what he has been doing?

[Martinus]

The problem Latvians (and for example, Ukrainians) have is that they are late to the party - the party being European nation states, which (at least the more stable ones, like France, Poland or Germany) were built to a degree on ethnic cleansing and forced deportations. We don't accept stuff like this in Europe any more but the fact is, it made these countries relatively peaceful and stable.

It's the same dilemma countries like China face when it comes to carbon gases' emmissions - sure, it is no longer acceptable to be pumping those into the air with abandon, like it used to be, but why the Western industrialised countries - who used to do that when it was still cool and got super rich on that - should get away with this, but the newcomers must be handicapped?

This dilemma makes the moral absolutism Sheilbh, garbon and Raz display somewhat unreasonable and/or hypocritical. We should either put pressure on these countries but then help them cope with the inherent instability of having a sizeable (and hostile) ethnic minority within their borders by offering some extra aid - or we should turn a blind eye to "soft" ethnic cleansing they are practising. Just telling them to shape up and offering nothing in return will not do.