I was already writing this before I saw your last post, I will include a link at the bottom. I’m not saying this is actually happening. But there are numerous reports in the media.


I’ve already said this, but I think it is worth highlighting as in my eyes it may be a route into an understanding of why there is confusion, and opposing arguments around the causes, motivations and drivers which brought Europe (Russia included) to this crisis.

The ideology that Western freedoms are good, inviolable, liberating, right. Is taken as gospel by many in the West. This includes the notion that welcoming Eastern European countries into European institutions is an act of benevolence and kindness. That it is so good and progressive, that it could not be seen, or conceived of as being anything else.

That we are helping them, rather than expanding our empire. Blind to the fact that others might see it from the position of an expansion of empire and influence.

https://inews.co.uk/news/russian-troops-digging-up-bodies-ukrainian-civilians-preventing-burials-mariupol-officials-1578550

There are already reports of Russian troops digging up recently buried Ukrainians and incinerating them with mobile incinerators in Mariupol. If they take Mariupol there will be 100,000 civilians to account for. Many are likely already starving to death.

Use your researching prowess.

You asserted that a narrative accepting of the inevitability of an iron curtain emerging from this crisis was likely to cause an escalation in the conflict. And yet failed to justify it, or give any rationale.

Looks like rationale is in short supply.

Yes easily. By the things you imagine happening, not happening.

Enlighten me. I really can’t see a way back from my conclusion (short of total regime change in Russia).

By your lack of a description of a settlement not requiring some kind of iron curtain. I must conclude that you can’t conceive of an alternative.

I trust my own assessment, that’s it. Do you have an unbiased source that you trust?

I’m not going to quote you, or get into misunderstandings. My point about emigration is that it is one of the reasons an iron curtain will be introduced. Along with commercial reasons. I can’t see how this can be avoided, can you?

Simply saying there's 'information' in them all is insufficient for you to choose between them.

Yes, so one makes an assessment.

How? Everything said in this entire thread could be false. The fact that you find it to be intelligent doesn't have any bearing on whether it's actually the case.

It’s unlikely to be false if it’s also being reported on multiple global news outlets, for example.

I doubt it, not with only one person

So your description of a settlement absent an iron curtain, is one indistinguishable from one including an iron curtain? Or in other words, no answer to my substantive point.

Of course it is, otherwise you're deriving misinformation from it.

That’s a simplification, there is real information in such a bulletin. Even the biased narrative is in itself and contains information.

The very fact that this subject is being discussed here in an intelligent way is proof of people deriving knowledge of what’s happening on the ground. As we are all sitting in our armchairs.

Well no, because that would be the 'iron curtain' you were referring to and you asked me what a situation without it would look like. Such a situation would be one in which he didn't do that.

And when there is only one person left in Russia, we’ll apart from those who are paid by Putin to stay there? Will things just carry on as normal?

Perhaps the removal of Putin would improve the situation. But I think the whole regime would need to be changed, or another Putin clone might emerge with no change. Also without wholesale reform of governance in Russia, European leaders might not be able to develop trust in any regime which emerges.

It’s not necessary to trust a media resource in order to derive information from it. Better to take a broad take of many sources to arrive at a sense of what is happening on the ground.

emigration would be relatively free.

And when growing numbers of people emigrate due to the dire standard of living in Russia due to sanctions etc. Presumably Putin will seek to restrict the numbers leaving. ( presumably you can see where this is leading)

We’re in the 21st century. There are multiple media resources.

So, without that iron curtain. After the conflict has been resolved. Will every Russian citizen be free to emigrate?

Your assessment of the likelihood is irrelevant. I just can't get my head round the enthusiasm with which a load of armchair laymen want to speculate about the likelihoods, it's like we're betting on a boxing match.

We’re all laymen here, or hadn’t you noticed. I’m making a substantive point, which you haven’t countered. That a new iron curtain is descending across Europe.(not a physical barrier, but one in terms of commerce and immigration, or emigration)

I find it more than a little disturbing.

Well welcome to a debating society. If you can’t take the heat don’t enter the kitchen.

What I'm talking about are the factors that we, as laymen, get to deal with - whose story do you trust and why?

So you admit to being a layman. That’s a good start.

I don’t trust anyone’s story, I don’t need to, I make my own assessment.

Now what does a resolution to this conflict look like, without an iron curtain between Europe and Russia?

“seems” is based on what is coming through on the various media sources. The poor state of the Russian army is self evident. I was listening to a Russian citizen talking on the radio the other day. Saying that she knew of fighting age men in Russia going into hiding, because they were being conscripted at gun point.
Looks pretty shoddy to me.

So what does a negotiated settlement involve in terms of commerce, or emigration? The releasing of sanctions and back to normal. The splitting up of Ukraine. It doesn’t look likely to me. I note that today Putin admitted the talks had failed.

Russia is not an economic superpower. And now it seems their so-called superpower army is a shambles.

I doubt that. There's an entire internet full of alternative narratives, if you've seriously not come across any it seems hard to believe that you're actually interested in one.

And your opinion as to the most likely outcome?

I wouldn’t be so disheartened. Those treaties were written when the West was the world (as the rest of the world was under developed, or aligned with Western states).

Now in a more global world we need to look to the UN to take a more legalistic and international arbiter role. Most of those countries you cite are not carrying out, or likely to invade their neighbours. I see the invasion of Ukraine as fallout from the disintegration of the USSR. That marauding countries invading their neighbours is largely a thing of the past.

What is more of an issue for civilisation is ideological terrorism. Maoism and Islamic derived extremism. Like a cancer, they can quietly spread and infect nations.

We shouldn’t forget the elephant in the room though, climate change. That global politics etc will soon become concerned with the climate crisis and humanitarian concerns of the population. There will be a lot of barriers going up to prevent mass migration and worst effected countries becoming broken, or failing states.

20th century style wars and international disputes will pale into insignificance as humanity struggles with these new challenges.

Yes, NATO could do more, I’m not of the opinion that Putin would escalate the nuclear risk. It looks as though NATO has chosen not to do more and hide behind the excuse of the nuclear threat. But of course we don’t have a line into their war room, so it’s guesswork, I’m afraid.

Yes, they will have chlorine barrels I expect. A good way of flushing out whose left after they’ve levelled the city. Just blame Ukrainians,

That's one way of looking at it. Trouble is, as I'm sure you'll admit, it's only one of many plausible narratives.

Is there another plausible outcome, I’d like to hear it?

It's also the one most likely to lead to escalation if it's adopted.

It’s not a narrative, or a narrative that may be adopted. It’s an opinion of the likely outcome.

The narrative of NATO is well known. What is adopted is a military and political strategy and one which is largely confidential, I expect.

The problem is this...

I don’t see it as a problem, but rather an inevitability. We and the world have seen what the US gets up to for many years. But in reality that doesn’t figure here. This crisis is between Russia and a previous member state of the USSR. There is a bit of proxy war going on, but what figures larger than that is the attempts to support Ukraine against Russian aggression by NATO. This confrontation was inevitable from the point that Putin decided to rebuild the Russian nation in the image of USSR. NATOs involvement may result in a failure by Russia and the building of a new iron curtain. If NATO hadn’t got involved in this way, a similar, or worse crisis would have developed sooner or later. And an iron curtain rebuilt, but in a different position.

Unless Russia decides to embrace a more peaceful, cooperative, unaggressive course these episodes will continue to the detriment of the Russian people. Now Europe has woken up and will arm themselves again, a new dynamic will evolve and the Russian people will experience a new crisis of identity and governance, as a result of sanctions and a phobia of commercial involvement from the West.

You do realise that Russia can and will use chemical weapons with impunity, right?
For two reasons, it is what they have previously demonstrated to do, it’s in their playbook and they are safe behind a veil of plausible deniability.

They know that NATO won’t respond, so why not?

I’ll remember that if I present their evidence against Russia.

You know the problem with evidence, like proof, is how do you prove it.

No, just the media reports and the Azov video.

There are reports of Sarin gas being dropped from drones over Mariapol last night(11/04/22).
I agree, NATO won’t act on this if it’s proven.

Yet now we do have that bloody civil war of the former Soviet Union.

This is what I’ve been thinking.
This war along with all the others involving previous members of the USSR are fallout from the collapse of the USSR.

I see EU, or NATO expansion as a side show to this. Although it might act as a catalyst. Also I expect the US is aware of this.

Asking price - Half a milion

Yes, one is less likely to indiscriminately bomb the second house.

I'd consider that a lack of imagination. Medieval peasants worked less than the average American and we're inexorably moving in that direction in Europe as well. By some measures feudalism would be preferable depending on what stage of capitalism you're living in.

This is a big subject.
Peasants in your part of the world may have had a nice life. They didn’t here, we lived under the brutality of our robber baron Norman overlords. We still haven’t shaken them off, they are still playing their robber Baron games.

Capitalism, or more pertinently, consumerism and technological advancement has had a calming effect on human society. It may have some unfortunate consequences, but we shouldn’t take the relative peace we have known for granted. Human history was more unstable before this development and with a larger global population could have become far more unstable.

It is quite remarkable that such a large population on the planet hasn’t descended into chaos and destruction before now.

It’s better than the alternative, as far as global peace and peace in Europe is concerned.
Remember the U.K. is a poodle in this, as always and with a clown in office.

That's because you're fucking crazy.

Just looked at your avatar, now that is crazy.

(One of my favourite films)

Oh, I missed out EU hegemony, I must have been distracted by something. Yes I’d opt for that all day long, of course.

I’m not sure the alternative to capitalism would have been any better.

Chomsky

Yes the the geopolitical tensions between the US and Russia continue to play out. Following the fall of the USSR this point was always going to be reached, the difference being just where the dividing lines will be on the map. It’s looking like a new iron curtain will divide east Ukraine. If NATO hadn’t expanded, a newly moneyed Russia would have.

What brought this to a head was the vast oil and gas revenues given to Russia. Have you noticed hundreds of super yachts turning up in exotic hideaways over recent weeks. Putin has a trillion $ war chest just sitting there in front of him. He has spent two years in covid isolation. This is not a surprise.

This could be the beginning of a new stable Cold War period. Although there is a much bigger demon looming over the horizon. Climate change.

I can already see the rich and powerful scurrying around before they get ready to abandon ship. In the U.K. we look on as our country is asset stripped by unsavoury characters. A smash and grab raid before the sh*t really hits the fan.

Going forward, which hegemony would you prefer, US, Russia, or China?

I know which one I will chose. I have a friend who was on the Greenpeace ship that was captured by Russia a few years back. Three months in a concrete cell in Murmansk in winter woke him up. He would probably still be there if it wasn’t the run up to the Russian Winter Olympics, when Putin pardoned them as a goodwill gesture.

There are a lot of analysts and commentators who conclude that Putin is a dictator. Certainly the failings of the military is not evidence to the contrary.

I’m equally outraged about the war crimes and starvation in Yemen. The horrors in Somalia, Sudan and now in Ethiopia. I was up in arms about the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent destruction of Syria. The fate of the Kurds is shocking. The list goes on.

I’m well aware of the problems caused by US foreign policy over the last 70yrs. Also how shamelessly the U.K. jumps when the US says jump.

The big story for me about the Ukraine invasion is how it is galvanising the EU and the awakening of Germany to the need to secure its own security. And that we might now have a new iron curtain constructed on the perimeter of Europe.

Because this is the rational and intelligent thing to do? I don't think these fears are founded. Putin threatening using nukes is to clarify NATO shouldn't get involved. What else would there be to it? What exactly did he say making you think he meant more?

I agree with you here but for different reasons. That Russia’s army is incompetent with poor equipment. They can’t even occupy Ukraine, so are not going to continue west.
I can’t point out where he said he would go further than Ukraine. But he has given long speeches in which he comes across as wanting to re establish the USSR.

But his proving himself to be a bare faced liar (100,000 troops just happen to be on military exercises on the Ukraine border, we have no intention to invade). His apparent irrational behaviour, the fact that many of his subordinates had no idea he was going to invade. The press conference where he humiliated his chief of staff. The long tables. This was interpreted in the West as someone unhinged with his hand on the nuclear button, who has just invaded a large country with a large army, which he can’t possibly hold, while insisting he wasn’t planning anything of the sort. This has crossed a line in Europe and we will now see a European army built and the awakening of Germany after 70yrs of passivism.

Regarding the mafia point. I refer to Frank’s answer. The mafia are business men, they strike deals and alliances. They had a common enemy with US after 9/11. They sell people services until they become dependent, while they grow rich and powerful and then come for their pound of flesh.

I don’t think the negotiations are likely to go anywhere as the two sides are worlds apart. The US getting involved would not help and could just cause a stand off.

I hear you about European countries not calling it out. The problem is they have been dependent on the US for security and now Russia for gas and oil. They are stuck in the middle and compromised from both sides. Ideally they would have provided their own security over the last generation and avoided becoming dependent on Russia gas and oil. In hindsight we were all asleep at the wheel while Putin was friendly, business like. We even thought he would form some sort of alliance with Europe. But quietly he amassed his forces, his wealth. He was going in the other direction. He fostered that dependency on gas and oil and now he is coming for his pound of flesh.

We know see that nato and EU expansion was becoming an existential threat to Putin. We were blind to it, under the guise of free choice, democracy, prosperity. All good things, but Putin saw it spreading his way. And if the Russian people wanted a piece of it, his grip on power might be threatened.

Hopefully you’re right, perhaps any scary variant which does emerge will not be all that bad as we become immune. I notice China is having a bit of a mare at the moment.

Prior to the invasion I was closer to your position. This changed in 25th Feb and especially when Putin threatened nuclear Armageddon with menaces. A line was crossed at that point, not just for me, but the leaders of all NATO leaders(Orban excepted). I don’t disagree that Putin and his gang are intelligent and rational. You only have to listen to Lavrov’s rhetoric, or the speech given by the representative of the Russian Federation at the UN today to understand that there is a sophisticated intelligent narrative on the Russian side. A narrative of victimhood(re NATO, or the West) and blaming Ukrainian failures (with US and Nato meddling) for everything happening in Ukraine including the war crimes. A narrative which is also drip fed to the Russian population.

The problem is what is going on behind this facade. Putin has absolute control and runs his country like a Mafia boss. He views and deals with his enemies with contempt and like the mafia, he pushes and threatens at every opportunity and takes full advantage of any weakness, or concessions. This situation has been developing for over 20yrs until now he has invaded a large sovereign country(an act of aggression) and threatened NATO countries with nuclear annihilation. Now we are waking up to the reality that he has a massive war chest, has built up a large army and is rampaging around ex USSR territories.

Now if we don’t stop showing weakness, or making concessions will this escalation just continue? If we do get involved, no fly zone for example, does the war just escalate. Either way it doesn’t solve the problem we are faced with. A tyrant.

He may become even more menacing and then at any time. just retreat to the Donbas, claim the special operation is complete and he will finish liberating the Russian speakers in that region from persecution. Or he might become more menacing and march across Macedonia, link up with Orban, just keep heading west. We just don’t know, all we see is a poker face. A Godfather, playing poker with us. Do we call his bluff, or show weakness and he wins another hand and more and more of the pot.

Yes like passing through the eye of a needle. I find it difficult to image such an outcome.

I can find you someone who has met Putin, but I don’t think it would help. Putin has a poker face, is an ace poker player. Those Kremlinologists who have met him have come to similar views. He must be judged by his actions. I’m not here to talk about Andrew Levi though, I’m here to discuss what Putin is up to and the tweet I quoted lays out the argument that he is the equivalent of a Mafia boss.

Forgive me, I wasn’t aware of discussion you were involved in with regarding the track record of the US.
I have no argument with you there. We do need to focus on the actor who has committed an act of aggression though.

It's also neither here nor there. If we want peace, if we want to stop the killing now, we need to go through the Russia that is now and the way it is under Putin. And secretly of course the wish for "fundamental change" is for Russia to roll over and accept US hegemony and pretend it doesn't have any interests or rights other than those that exactly align with what the UK/US want them to be.

So you are of the opinion that peace can be achieved with Putin in place? Provided he is held in a weak position, with some stability, I would agree with you. But this may not be possible and it might not work for him. Perhaps these acts of aggression are required for him to maintain himself in power and he would feel threatened if he is left weak. There are the problems of what might happen in Russia if it is relegated to a world pariah. He could then lash out in a more dangerous way, or the Russian people could react in some aggressive way. There is also the geopolitical considerations in which China could align with Russia and the world could divide into those states who are with Russia and those who are against.

For NATO, leaving Putin to get bogged down in Ukraine, depleting his forces until sanctions bite might have the best outcome. But this may involve the destruction of Ukraine, a sovereign state and war crimes on a massive scale. Can NATO stand by and watch this happen.

Andrew Levi co-led a UK diplomatic crisis response to Putin’s invasion of Georgia in 2008. I’m not sure what he’s done recently, but is occasionally interviewed in the media on the motives and ideology of Putin.
He arrived at his view of Putin during that mission and tried to warn the British government about Putin at the time and was largely ignored.

What I’m interested in is how this interpretation might inform an assessment of what Putin will do as the war escalates (if it does). I was thinking that if Putin is essentially a mafia boss, he is less likely to press the button than if he is a mad man, or a megalomaniac. But will retreat while claiming victory, justification and victimhood in relation to the enemy. That his primary motivation and goal is to remain in power and autocratic control of Russia. That invading his neighbours is part of that strategy

Now that Covid is endemic here in the U.K. and May we’ll be in other countries by now. Perhaps it’s time to consider if there is likely to be a deadly variant, or whether covid will fade away into fairly harmless variants.

A new variant has recently emerged in U.K,

A new Omicron variant has been found in the UK. XE is a "recombinant" i.e. a mutation of BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron strains.