Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Valmy]

Didn't take much effort from Trump and co. to make this an Americans vs. Europeans argument even here, did it? A year more of him and the dismantling of the 80-years old alliance will be complete and irreversible.

Raz has tons of contempt for every country stupid enough to be friendly with his.

[HVC]

Didn't take much effort from Trump and co. to make this an Americans vs. Europeans argument even here, did it? A year more of him and the dismantling of the 80-years old alliance will be complete and irreversible.

Raz has tons of contempt for every country stupid enough to be friendly with his.

And don't forget muslims.

[Tamas]

We are also getting some comments from US state secretary Marco Rubio who will be taking part in the US-Ukraine talks on Tuesday.

He is quoted by Reuters as saying that he hopes the meeting will go well, but it is important to "establish clearly Ukraine's intentions" on peace, and that Ukraine "is prepared to do difficult things, like the Russians will."

Further confirmation that the United States will be negotiating with Ukraine on behalf of Russia.

Absolute madness.

[Valmy]

I wonder what these difficult things are that the Russians are willing to do?

[Richard Hakluyt]

Well it might be difficult not to laugh in plain sight at the monumental stupidity of current US diplomacy.

[Jacob]

The big question here for me is whether this is an attempt at a more permanent realignment between Russia and the US - and if so, whether Russia will countenance it; or whether this is a semi-temporary aberration and the US will align itself against Russia again in the next however long - and if so, how much advantage Russia can take in the meanwhile.

[crazy canuck]

The big question here for me is whether this is an attempt at a more permanent realignment between Russia and the US - and if so, whether Russia will countenance it; or whether this is a semi-temporary aberration and the US will align itself against Russia again in the next however long - and if so, how much advantage Russia can take in the meanwhile.

Russia has been working toward this for a couple decades, at least.  I am pretty sure they will countenance it.

[PJL]

There was a piece I read and found really interesting from a Singaporean analyst (as ever bracingly realist and honest take) who basically said the strategy that makes sense for Europe if it feels America is an opponent is to reconcile with Russia and build closer ties with China. Obviously that fucks Ukraine (and any argument about values). If the priority is Ukraine and confronting Russia then I think that means working with the Americans and Chinese as best we can to try to sway them from Russia (again, not great from a values perspective).

I don't think that works; with an isolationist or hostile America, Russia will inevitably seek to destabilize the EU, dividing Europe, weakening the individual states, and picking off the stragglers on its periphery.

The realist play is to resist and contain Russia on the one hand, while aligning with the PRC on the other and trying to water down China's alignment with Russia.  The EU doesn't really have a dog to hunt in the Pacific fight.  And if Trump really does follow through on a US-Russia alignment, it reduces the value of Russia to China as a strategic partner that can distract US attention.

This is what I've been thinking too. For China the pre-Trump status quo with an isolated Russia in a quagmire in Ukraine and the Western countries not going all out for support to Ukraine suited them nicely. If a US that is more friendly to Russia then it gives them more options and China has less leverage over them which may not be to their interests. Conversely a Europe where Russia is their biggest threat and with an unreliable US, it make sense to at least mollify China, even to the extent of throwing Taiwan under the bus. We can't fight everyone all at once, but neither can anyone else, not even the US.

[The Brain]

The big question here for me is whether this is an attempt at a more permanent realignment between Russia and the US - and if so, whether Russia will countenance it; or whether this is a semi-temporary aberration and the US will align itself against Russia again in the next however long - and if so, how much advantage Russia can take in the meanwhile.

It wouldn't make sense for the US to burn all bridges just for a temporary fling. They're at least aiming for long term commitment to Russia's cause.

[HisMajestyBOB]

The big question here for me is whether this is an attempt at a more permanent realignment between Russia and the US - and if so, whether Russia will countenance it; or whether this is a semi-temporary aberration and the US will align itself against Russia again in the next however long - and if so, how much advantage Russia can take in the meanwhile.

It wouldn't make sense for the US to burn all bridges just for a temporary fling. They're at least aiming for long term commitment to Russia's cause.

What about the current administration makes you think "making sense" at all factors into the decision making process?

[The Brain]

The big question here for me is whether this is an attempt at a more permanent realignment between Russia and the US - and if so, whether Russia will countenance it; or whether this is a semi-temporary aberration and the US will align itself against Russia again in the next however long - and if so, how much advantage Russia can take in the meanwhile.

It wouldn't make sense for the US to burn all bridges just for a temporary fling. They're at least aiming for long term commitment to Russia's cause.

What about the current administration makes you think "making sense" at all factors into the decision making process?

My impression is that they have a genuine and deeply felt affection for Russia's cause.

[Tamas]

Sure I guess working toward swiftly establishing a world where Eurasia allies with Oceania against East Asia would make Trump's actions make some sense, but I challenge you to point me to just one instance where Trump clearly did such long-term and "visionary" thinking.

Personal pet peeves and a mad emperor going on a rampage are still far more convincing arguments for me.

[Jacob]

It wouldn't make sense for the US to burn all bridges just for a temporary fling. They're at least aiming for long term commitment to Russia's cause.

IMO the one consistent thing about Trump, in his whole life, is that if someone trusts him or relies on him he doesn't think twice about lighting that on fire to gain what he thinks is leverage in the moment. I'm not confident that this will change with regards to Russia.

[The Brain]

It wouldn't make sense for the US to burn all bridges just for a temporary fling. They're at least aiming for long term commitment to Russia's cause.

IMO the one consistent thing about Trump, in his whole life, is that if someone trusts him or relies on him he doesn't think twice about lighting that on fire to gain what he thinks is leverage in the moment. I'm not confident that this will change with regards to Russia.

Trump might croak tomorrow, but his whole coterie is bending over forwards to help Russia.

[crazy canuck]

There was a piece I read and found really interesting from a Singaporean analyst (as ever bracingly realist and honest take) who basically said the strategy that makes sense for Europe if it feels America is an opponent is to reconcile with Russia and build closer ties with China. Obviously that fucks Ukraine (and any argument about values). If the priority is Ukraine and confronting Russia then I think that means working with the Americans and Chinese as best we can to try to sway them from Russia (again, not great from a values perspective).

I don't think that works; with an isolationist or hostile America, Russia will inevitably seek to destabilize the EU, dividing Europe, weakening the individual states, and picking off the stragglers on its periphery.

The realist play is to resist and contain Russia on the one hand, while aligning with the PRC on the other and trying to water down China's alignment with Russia.  The EU doesn't really have a dog to hunt in the Pacific fight.  And if Trump really does follow through on a US-Russia alignment, it reduces the value of Russia to China as a strategic partner that can distract US attention.

This is what I've been thinking too. For China the pre-Trump status quo with an isolated Russia in a quagmire in Ukraine and the Western countries not going all out for support to Ukraine suited them nicely. If a US that is more friendly to Russia then it gives them more options and China has less leverage over them which may not be to their interests. Conversely a Europe where Russia is their biggest threat and with an unreliable US, it make sense to at least mollify China, even to the extent of throwing Taiwan under the bus. We can't fight everyone all at once, but neither can anyone else, not even the US.

Agreed, we are heading back into competition amongst the great powers, with all the instability that brings.