Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Admiral Yi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNkz6AJbEww&ab_channel=ReportingfromUkraine

if correct the Russians are in the process of being dealt another kick in the nuts.

Do you know what the black dots represent?

[Barrister]

IMO Ford was treated a little unfairly.

The underlying issue was the wisdom of the Helsinki Accords, an issue on which Carter took a politically driven public position in opposition (rather ironically given his subsequent political evolution and career).  The point I think that Ford was trying to make is that the there was no de jure Soviet domination and the Helsinki framework was trying to reinforce those de jure norms, although obviously it came out in poor way the way he said it.  History suggests that the Ford side of the larger argument had substantial merit, as the Helsinki/CSCE process arguably played a meaningful role in successful conclusion of the Cold War.

Yeah, we're talking about the difference between de jure and de facto.

In the 19th century spheres of influence were very de jure legal and real.  European powers would sit up and divide Africa, or China, into various spheres of influence.  The Europeans would then walk in under no more justification than that.

By the post-war era that was no longer good enough.  Every nation was to be considered sovereign, and while countries may well influence those other countries, they always had to do so in the language of sovereignty.

That's why Russia's invasion of Ukraine is such a break of the norms.  Putin invaded Ukraine because he can, because it's "historic Russian land" aka it's Russia's sphere of influence.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNkz6AJbEww&ab_channel=ReportingfromUkraine

if correct the Russians are in the process of being dealt another kick in the nuts.

Do you know what the black dots represent?

settlements I think

[Barrister]

Reports some of the first mobilized Russian troops are hitting the front line.

It's been a week since Putin announced the "partial mobilization".  These guys are going to get slaughtered, with absolutely no training.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Reports some of the first mobilized Russian troops are hitting the front line.

It's been a week since Putin announced the "partial mobilization".  These guys are going to get slaughtered, with absolutely no training.

some of those reports are reports of the capture of some of those people

[alfred russel]

They didn't let the Soviets get away with literal murder 'because it's their sphere of influence'.

"Literal murder" applied to states is a bit ambiguous of a phrase considering it is applying an individual crime to entities that are not individual, but I'd point out that they did let the Soviets get away with stuff in their sphere of influence that certainly approached "literal murder" if the term has any relevance to interstate relations.

Soviet actions in its sphere of influence such as Czechoslovakia would not have been tolerated in neutral european states like Austria or Finland. Self determination was allowed to be snuffed out in places like Poland, Hungary and East Germany...obviously that would not have been allowed outside the bloc.

[Barrister]

They didn't let the Soviets get away with literal murder 'because it's their sphere of influence'.

"Literal murder" applied to states is a bit ambiguous of a phrase considering it is applying an individual crime to entities that are not individual, but I'd point out that they did let the Soviets get away with stuff in their sphere of influence that certainly approached "literal murder" if the term has any relevance to interstate relations.

Soviet actions in its sphere of influence such as Czechoslovakia would not have been tolerated in neutral european states like Austria or Finland. Self determination was allowed to be snuffed out in places like Poland, Hungary and East Germany...obviously that would not have been allowed outside the bloc.

As I understand it the US was A: kind of tied up in it's own internal drama in 1968, B: tied up in Vietnam, and C: felt like they had tried to intervene in Hungary 12 years earlier only to see it not work.

This inaction was seen as something of a failure later on, so when 1980 rolled around in Poland the US was much more vocal in support of solidarity and in giving support.

And again - US intervention in Czechoslovakia was against the sovereignty-based rules of international law because the government of CZ was voluntarily a member of the Warsaw Pact, and therefore a violation of CZ's sovereignty - not the USSR's sphere of influence.

[OttoVonBismarck]

The wikipedia article on "sphere of influence" has a section on the cold war and another on contemporary russia:

And? The wikipedia article is simply describing "areas in which powerful countries exerted influence", i.e. stating well known facts. What isn't supported is your premise that the Cold War had mutually accepted spheres of influence that were respected by both sides. That just is not reality.

[mongers]

The permanent damage to the two pipelines fits in with some of Putin's behaviour, it's dramatic, even cinematic and he may think when W.Europe comes back to him begging for gas, he can say sorry but you should have thought of that before the pipelines were made unservicable.

He may think it doesn't matter with his 'pivot' towards Asia/China and so the Nordstreams are surplus to requirements.

Also maybe there's an implied threat to some of Western Europe's offshore pipeline instratcture over the coming Winter. Hence perhaps why Norway has announced a tightening of security around their hydrocarbon distribution system.

[HisMajestyBOB]

Then there's the theory that it was Macron: https://twitter.com/AmiDeMaurice/status/1574883311519932424
 

[Admiral Yi]

Maybe ecoterrorists.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Soviet actions in its sphere of influence such as Czechoslovakia would not have been tolerated in neutral european states like Austria or Finland. Self determination was allowed to be snuffed out in places like Poland, Hungary and East Germany...obviously that would not have been allowed outside the bloc.

I think you are simply wrong about how they would have been tolerated in a "typical" neutral country. While atypical, the Czechoslovakia situation was one of the few outright violations of the post war order by the USSR in the Cold War, however it avoided going as far as Putin has--it was never portrayed as a territorial aggression by the Soviets. Brezhnev said it was a "fraternal" activity to protect an allied country from socially destabilizing forces inside their country.

Where it was an obvious violation of the post war order is in the fact that it was opposed by the Czech leader, and the Czech ambassador at the UN. Geopolitically the most important outcome of Brezhnev's behavior was it permanently shattered the PRC/USSR relationship as Mao saw the pretext of it as an assertion that the Kremlin was the final arbiter of "true" Communism, with right to invade Communist countries who did not live up to it. That obliteration of Russian and Chinese relations was not repaired until after the Cold War ended and the USSR had fallen apart.

That being said, both the USSR and the USA militarily or clandestinely intervened in a number of neutral countries during the Cold War. The lack of it turning into an outright war between the USSR and USA, as far as I can tell, has nothing at all to do with spheres of influence. NATO was an explicit mutual defense treaty, so it deterred Soviet aggression because it was an open commitment to declare and wage war against anyone invading a NATO country. The Warsaw Pact had a similar provision. A big practical reason the West couldn't intervene in Czechoslovakia is that it would literally be a violation of Czechoslovakia's sovereignty, activating the WTO's mutual defense provisions and generally "causing World War III." The Czechs never petitioned for American military involvement, and even if they had it would have been dangerous due to the escalation potential--the entire rest of the WTO activated to join in with the Soviet invasion with the exception of Albania and Romania, so any sort of military incursion would be tantamount to a declaration of war against the entire WTO.

There was also a specific treaty on Austrian permanent neutrality signed by both the Soviets and the United States, so lumping Austria in as if it is a generic neutral country during the Cold War is disingenuous. We had a specific agreement on Austria, if the Soviets had broken it, there may have been consequences. We did not have such an agreement on Czechoslovakia in 1968, just as there was no agreement on Vietnam or Grenada or Afghanistan. In such countries the two powers were largely free to act how they wanted, but it is telling that in none of these situations did the Soviets or Americans just blatantly say they were invading a country to take territory. It was always portrayed as being to the benefit of the country they were going into, and never involved territorial claims. This is because for various geopolitical reasons both the Soviets and the Americans respected the post war order--and so did China.

Essentially everyone still does today, other than Russia, which is why Russia's behavior has created such strong consequences. The specific reason this invasion has engendered more serious consequences than the Crimean annexation is because Putin abandoned many of the pretexts he used to justify that invasion--and he also was striking when the "iron was hot" with Crimea--Ukraine had factually just had a coup, and was in a state of disarray, which means its own sovereignty was a tad unclear since the previously internationally recognized government of Ukraine had fled in a limo into Russian hands.

[Razgovory]

Blowing up the pipeline doesn't make a lot of sense for Russia.  They could just turn it off.

[PDH]

Blowing up the pipeline doesn't make a lot of sense for Russia.  They could just turn it off.

Sending conscripts directly to the front lines doesn't make a lot of sense either, but here we are.

[Jacob]

Blowing up the pipeline doesn't make a lot of sense for Russia.  They could just turn it off.

It doesn't make a lot of sense for anyone, to be honest.