, I'm guessing he's just reiterating a justification (perhaps preparation) for taking over Ukraine. Some of this stuff is about telling propagating selling a story in public. Going by (fallible) memory, his concerns over Iran go further back (years), and might also have included China. Maybe such concerns have been shelved for the time being? (politico, latimes, rferl, ft)

Kremlin: No hope for positive shift in ties with Britain under Sunak (Reuters; Oct 25, 2022)

At the moment we see no grounds for hope that there will be any positive changes in the foreseeable future. Russia remains open and ready to discuss the most difficult issues at the negotiating table. But not to the detriment of our own interests. — Dmitry Peskov

No talks here, at least nothing initiated by the Kremlin.

As ssu suggests, Putin isn't exactly approachable here. Peskov? Lavrov? Medvedev? How might the diplomats get on with it?

Putin speaks of missiles on the other side of their borders.

In this connection, we have made it clear that any further movement of NATO to the East is unacceptable. [...] Are we deploying missiles near the US border? No, we are not. It is the United States that has come to our home with its missiles and is already standing at our doorstep. Is it going too far to demand that no strike systems be placed near our home? — Putin (Dec 23, 2021)

I think he meant nuclear implicitly. (Something substantial at any rate.) Surely he knows there aren't any though (that we know of), at least not on Russia's western side, which is also where Ukraine is. Doesn't seem like he's referring to Germany Italy Turkey (or China India for that matter). It's possible he's including (defensive) missile intercept systems, those intended to take down missiles, but now it's getting further off from his statements.

My reading: No missiles / nuclear weapons installed close to Russia's border, which might happen if Ukraine was to become a NATO member.

Other readings?

, Åslund's proposal is better than Musk's. But, from the looks of it, that ship has sailed, train has left the station, the genie is out of the bottle; Putin's Empire The Russian Federation has rolled their submission-machine out. Shams won't do, though, even if in-the-works for 8 years. NATO is, first and foremost, a threat to free Kremlin movements/actions.

• Putin's Russia is a present existential threat to Ukraine, to which the Ukrainians are responding
• until Putin's Russia has taken over all of Ukraine, the (supposed (or, say, future-hypothetical)) threat of NATO membership remains
• if Putin’s Russia was to take over all of Ukraine, then Russia becomes an increased substantial threat to others (like Putinian autocracy, nuclear rattling doesn't help)
See where this is going? — jorndoe

• Putin's Russia is a present existential threat to Ukraine, to which the Ukrainians are responding

• until Putin's Russia has taken over all of Ukraine, the (supposed (or, say, future-hypothetical)) threat of NATO membership remains

• if Putin’s Russia was to take over all of Ukraine, then Russia becomes an increased substantial threat to others (like Putinian autocracy, nuclear rattling doesn't help)

See where this is going?

- Ukraine remains neutral. — Elon Musk (Oct 3, 2022)

David V Gioe, William Styles (Sep 16, 2022):
Vladimir Putin’s Russian World Turned Upside Down

I, for one, don't want to see a Russia "limp[ing] along". If anything, I'd reserve that for their autocrats. Prosperity felt by the regular Russian on the street (or out yonder) is preferable. :up:

The nuke rattling can also backfire. Russia's Western neighbors don't host nukes (as best we know), surely that would have included Ukraine, had they become a NATO member. On the other hand, Russia's nuke placements are on neighbors' doorsteps. And Russia bulging seems likely to carry such weaponry along, or threaten to, which might elicit a reaction; after all, not everyone airs nuclear threats.

The systematic re-culturation efforts could be added to the domestic measures put in place by the autocrats (mentioned by Gioe and Styles), as an indication of the uncertain future prospects if the Ukrainians were to surrender.

In direct contrast to Russia’s frightful trajectory, the world is witnessing the full-throated and inspiring political birth of a Ukrainian nation-state, its founding myth strengthened by the shared trauma of conflict and common hardships — Gioe and Styles

Ukraine is clearly now a nation with an inarguably separate identity to Russia

Putin’s latest invasion has hardened and consolidated Ukraine’s national resolve—arguably creating the very thing he sought to strangle at birth, a politically confident and culturally separate nation, through his own reckless actions

The struggle against a regress into autocratic regimes is real enough.

Elon Musk suggested a peace plan on Oct 3, 2022 and put it to the vote.

(my emphasis)

what's ultimately a stupid proxy war — Mikie

Right. The aid to the Ukrainians makes the providers proxied elements. Though, I don't think the instigator meant to (ultimately) attack them instead (in this war anyway). Or maybe someone disagrees with this? Seems Iran has joined in, too (drones, personnel). Regardless, evidence suggests Putin wants to ultimately convert (all or part of) Ukraine to Russian oblasts; that part at least isn't proxy.

Bondarev is a Russian diplomat that was assigned to the UN. He resigned the position May 23, 2022 due to the war. His resignation letter:

Statement

My name is Boris Bondarev, in the MFA of Russia since 2002, since 2019 until now – Counsellor of the Russian Mission to the UN Office at Geneva.

For twenty years of my diplomatic career I have seen different turns of our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my country as on February 24 of this year. The aggressive war unleashed by Putin against Ukraine, and in fact against the entire Western world, is not only a crime against the Ukrainian people, but also, perhaps, the most serious crime against the people of Russia, with a bold letter Z crossing out all hopes and prospects for a prosperous free society in our country.

Those who conceived this war want only one thing – to remain in power forever, live in pompous tasteless palaces, sail on yachts comparable in tonnage and cost to the entire Russian Navy, enjoying unlimited power and complete impunity. To achieve that they are willing to sacrifice as many lives as it takes. Thousands of Russians and Ukrainians have already died just for this.

I regret to admit that over all these twenty years the level of lies and unprofessionalism in the work of the Foreign Ministry has been increasing all the time. However, in most recent years, this has become simply catastrophic. Instead of unbiased information, impartial analysis and sober forecasting, there are propaganda cliches in the spirit of Soviet newspapers of the 1930s. A system has been built that deceives itself.

Minister Lavrov is a good illustration of the degradation of this system. In 18 years, he went from a professional and educated intellectual, whom many colleagues held in such high esteem, to a person who constantly broadcasts conflicting statements and threatens the world (that is, Russia too) with nuclear weapons!

Today, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not about diplomacy. It is all about warmongering, lies and hatred. It serves interests of few, the very few people thus contributing to further isolation and degradation of my country. Russia no longer has allies, and there is no one to blame but its reckless and ill-conceived policy.

I studied to be a diplomat and have been a diplomat for twenty years. The Ministry has become my home and family. But I simply cannot any longer share in this bloody, witless and absolutely needless ignominy. — Boris Bondarev

You have to understand that, if he [Putin] loses the war, it will be the end for him, he will have to explain to his elites and his population why it is so and he may find some problems in explaining this. — Boris Bondarev

• US division ready to enter Ukraine in case of attack on NATO — TV (TASS; Oct 22, 2022)

• 1st Time In 80 Years, US Army Deploys ‘Screaming Eagles’ 101st Airborne Division Just Miles Away From Ukraine (The EurAsian Times; Oct 23, 2022)

• False flag? Russia says Ukraine plans to detonate a ‘dirty bomb’ (Al Jazeera; Oct 23, 2022)

As suggests, Putin isn't exactly approachable here. Peskov? Lavrov? Medvedev? How might the diplomats get on with it?

If Putin is actually going down the nuclear path, then Moscow will get all eyes-on, attention. I don't imagine they think that'd be a good move for Russia, or anyone at all. Anyone know specs of the Russian dirty / tactical nuclear bombs? (radius, time until area is safe, materials, yield, emp, delivery systems)

That’s why it has never worked — NOS4A2

I'm not convinced communism is realistic or feasible in general, at least not as the political philosophers mused, perhaps, in some respects, going all the way back to Plato's "Republic".

In small communities like kibbutzes, sure.

Yet, communism (again, like the philosophers mused) requires a kind of homogeneity or participation, which might explain why it has consistently failed in large communities.

The philosophers thought in terms of flattened class structure, proletariat rule, all that.

Supposed communist countries tend to become something else, something that (to me anyway) is a far cry from what the philosophers envisioned.

it doesn't appear that the US has any interest in encouraging negotiations -- nor does Putin — Mikie

It was argued earlier in the thread that the US and the UK should stay out of such efforts. (You?)

Maybe talks could be held under the auspices of the EU? The UN? China? More direct Zelenskyy-Putin channels? It all just seems a (long) longshot, especially with the widespread ongoing bombing.

As an aside, Putin raised some concerns about Iran years back. That seems to be a thing of the past these days. I guess priorities change.

:up:

Finland-Sweden relations, Poland-Ukraine relations, ..., regardless of whatever history.

With Putin at the helm, it seems genuinely difficult to build trusting relations with Russia. :meh: Many would otherwise stand in line to do so, is my guess, which also would be beneficial for Russia.

Your mileage may vary, (taking) control is a special theme among autocrats:

Vladimir Putin: Experts reveal reason why the Russian President declared martial law (Oct 21, 2022)

Roughly 10 years ago, Christmas 2012:

United Russia proposes to resettle 7 million Ukrainians in Siberia to create a "cordon against the Chinese influx" (Korrespondent; Dec 24, 2012)

(United Russia is the large Russian political party.)

Kind of thought this sounded neat:

People cannot be free unless they are willing to sacrifice some of their interests to guarantee the freedom of others. — Saul Alinsky (1909—1972) in 1971

Goes well with this and this, too.

Since 2014, Donetsk + Luhansk (≈ Donbas) have been an organized Russian staging area, and Crimea was grabbed.
By 2022, with Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, five Ukrainian regions were annexed.
Net result is that a fifth of Ukraine has been declared part of Russia (none independent, either) by Putin.
I wouldn't try a linear regression here (like extrapolating another 8 years), but Putin's moves and actions point in one direction: take-over.
That's the geography; check the map; factual tangible evidence is in.
Look at the "re-culturation" efforts (since mid-2021); more evidence (no NATO here): take-over.
You can't hang this on Putin's "lines"; you might be able to hang it on larger ambitions.

, I'm not quite sure how it was before with respect to the languages. (Don't think Ukraine received all that much attention before the invasion.)

3) Ukraine has strengthened it's national identity — ssu

I admittedly expanded @ssu's comment to a broader cultural thing.

Mariupol elementary schools must reportedly now call their home "Russia", and have introduced books in Russian. In Crimea, someone singing Oi u luzi chervona kalyna at a wedding were targeted.
The machine has been rolled out, apparently part of the agenda.

Ukraine war: Belarus is not yet committed to a closer military partnership with Russia – here’s why (Jennifer Mathers; The Conversation; Oct 19, 2022)

The Ukrainians are busy elsewhere at the moment. Seems odd that they'd attack Belarus unless directly related to the Russian invasion.
Though, an overwhelming surprise attack from Belarus (plus Russia) could take out Kyiv, maybe?
Either way, Belarus not joining in would be preferable.

Prior to this war the role of the Ukrainian language and Russian were a hot potato in Ukraine, but now that has gone away. — ssu

Hate is one of the "winners" here. :/

Was just looking over some of the cultural moves...

^{On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians (Vladimir Putin; Jul 12, 2021) ■ Putin lashes out at Russians with Western mentality (CNN; Mar 17, 2022) ■ Putin Lashes Out at 'National Traitors' with Pro-Western Views (The Moscow Times; Mar 18, 2022) ■ We should all be concerned that Putin is trying to destroy Ukrainian culture (Jeffrey Stepnisky; The Conversation; Mar 22, 2022) ■ Putin lashes out at West ‘cancelling’ Russian culture, says it reeks of Hitler’s Germany (TASS; Mar 25, 2022) ■ A Kremlin paper justifies erasing the Ukrainian identity, as Russia is accused of war crimes (Chris Brown; CBC; Apr 5, 2022) ■ Moscow's ethno-cultural war (Vladimir Rozanskij; AsiaNews; Apr 12, 2022) ■ Draft Document Gives New Clues To Russian Plans For Occupied Ukrainian Regions (Heorhiy Shabayev; RFE/RL; Apr 30, 2022) ■ Why is Ukraine trying to cancel Russian culture? (Mansur Mirovalev; Al Jazeera; May 6, 2022) ■ Russia moves to eradicate Ukraine from schools in occupied Mariupol, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia (Halya Coynash; Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group; Jul 4, 2022) ■ Putin Aims to Triumph in Battle for ‘Cultural Supremacy’ (Bloomberg; Sep 6, 2022) ■ Putin Is Trying to Turn Ukraine Into a Culture War (Lionel Beehner, Thomas Sherlock; Foreign Policy; Sep 9, 2022) ■ Previously, a Russian collaborator shared a video on social media showing people at a wedding in Crimea dancing to the Ukrainian patriotic song Chervona Kalyna, which caused a massive backlash from the occupation authorities of Crimea. (Euromaidan Press; Sep 13, 2022) ■ Ukrainian TV host shows textbook to Russify school students in occupied Mariupol (Andriy Bednyakov; The New Voice of Ukraine; Sep 14, 2022) ■ Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, September 30 (Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, September 30; Institute for the Study of War; Sep 30, 2022) ■ Miss Crimea fined for singing patriotic Ukrainian song (The Guardian; Oct 4, 2022) ■ Damaged cultural sites in Ukraine verified by UNESCO (Thomas Mallard; UNESCO; Oct 17, 2022)}

There's a (large) playbook for this sort of thing.

^{(elevate/magnify negative (historical) aspects/examples; cast culture in a negative light; incite/induce division/instability among representatives; seek allies among non-representatives; convert representatives; question or deny its (unique) identity; destroy/attack symbols thereof; suppress expressions thereof; catch them young (indoctrination/enculturation); "re-school" (or incarcerate) representatives thereof; take control of related narratives; ...)}

No doubt there were and are such efforts.

But what does all this...crap tell us anyway? To me it suggests a regular take-over attempt on the one side (this isn't just about NATO), and growing Russo-hate (perhaps resolve) on the other, both of which are bad.

@Manuel, you're right of course (I'm surely guilty).

That said, things go awry when someone points (or keeps pointing) elsewhere at a supposed "real antagonist", "the actual offender".

As usual, we might find whatever number of questionable activities or related offenses all over, all of who may carry a measure of fault, yet when that turns to shifting the blame, then it becomes misdirection, fallacy, diversion, which is another fault.

It so happens that Mearsheimer has become a popular springboard for promoting whatever, say like "Washington installed a puppet Nazi regime in Kyiv". (I've seen this put forth in small groups among acquaintances more than once.) That's not to say that Mearsheimer's lectures/writings don't carry any merit at all, in fact the freedom to air them is important. Yet that remains but a fraction of the story, one that also tends to lose sight of the victims on the ground and their assailants, and instead play right into the assailant's game.

Anyway, when first shifting the blame, then perhaps going off on wicked storytelling, people sometimes lose patience.

I'll just note that NATO can't force anyone to join, they can admit/deny requestors and cancel memberships. Ukraine can request/cancel membership. Putin can't decide for either nor simply make a fifth of Ukraine part of Russia, but can decide to invade bomb kill destroy sham.

Such destruction.

Civilians To Be Evacuated From Ukraine's Kherson As New Commander Says Situation 'Tense' For Russian Forces (RFE/RL; Oct 18, 2022)

Ukrainians told to 'charge everything' as power grid hit by Russia (BBC; Oct 19, 2022)

Russia Abandons Kherson as Putin's Army Flees Back Across Dnieper (Newsweek; Oct 19, 2022)

, OK, no predicting the future then, we can run with that.

So, fast forward to today. What do we have? Just the facts.

A Russia with nuclear weapons on their doorstep? A Russia invaded by NATO (or anyone, for that matter)? Anyone having threatened Russia with invasion? A defeated Russia having been forcibly split into several nations? A Russian culture being wiped? Heck, a Russia having been blocked (by NATO) from invading Ukraine?

Nah. (Well, don't know about Chinese or Indian nuclear weapons here.)

There are sanctions on Russia (not so much a NATO thing, though). And, a NATO with more troops than Russia.

We have a Norway Finland Estonia Ukraine with nuclear weapons on their doorstep (don't know about Canada), and an autocracy flaunting them. We also have the Russian submission-machine having rolled out in Ukraine: bombing killing ruining shamming. A Donbas that's been an organized Russian staging area for some time. Crimea land grab. Plans. A fifth of Ukraine declared part of Russia by Putin.

Russia's a direct and present, tangible threat to Ukraine (and perhaps some neighbors). Including cultural: Jul 12, 2021; Mar 17, 2022; Mar 18, 2022; Mar 22, 2022; Mar 25, 2022; Apr 5, 2022; Apr 12, 2022; May 6, 2022; Sep 6, 2022; Sep 9, 2022; Sep 13, 2022; Sep 14, 2022; Oct 17, 2022.

I suppose we could go back to speculating.
Had Ukraine become a NATO member before 2014, I'm guessing Russia would be intact (like today), and Ukraine as well (unlike today). Any fair reasons to think otherwise?

It's a false narrative — Mikie

Nah.

NATO's a threat to Putin's ambitions, a threat to free Kremlin movements/actions, to Putin's Russia bulging. Should be clear to anyone. NATO isn't an existential threat to Russia, cultural or otherwise. Well, except (ironically perhaps) Putin's moves have put Russians in danger. (Nov 6, 2014; May 19, 2021; Feb 14, 2022; Feb 22, 2022.)

Russia's a direct and present, tangible threat to Ukraine (and perhaps some neighbors). Including cultural: Jul 12, 2021; Mar 17, 2022; Mar 18, 2022; Mar 22, 2022; Mar 25, 2022; Apr 5, 2022; Apr 12, 2022; May 6, 2022; Sep 6, 2022; Sep 9, 2022; Sep 13, 2022; Sep 14, 2022; Oct 17, 2022. No wonder the Ukrainians sought NATO protection.

Keep up. (Long thread.)

But, granted, NATO might a factor somewhere.

Peace talks could aim at a neutral Ukraine (no NATO), which would address one of Putin's arguments.

FYI, should anyone still be interested, a handful of recent articles:

Sep 26, 2022 Association of Primary and Booster Vaccination and Prior Infection With SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Severe COVID-19 Outcomes
Oct 10, 2022 Pandemic origins and a One Health approach to preparedness and prevention: Solutions based on SARS-CoV-2 and other RNA viruses
Oct 12, 2022 Immune Imprinting and Protection against Repeat Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2
Oct 13, 2022 How SARS-CoV-2 battles our immune system
Oct 13, 2022 Epidemics That Didn't Happen

As of typing, the virus has spread more or less everywhere with impressive success.

Fortunately, it hasn't been as dangerous as the 2003 outbreak, which had a 10% fatality rate, and we're fortunate that such a deadly mutation hasn't emerged in this round.

, holy smokes, that's a bit. One down. :up:
(FYI, 1 billion dollars in $100 bills weigh 10 tonnes.)

Much speculation; bombing proceeds. :/

I'll just note that the more complex (or "chained") the speculation, the less accurate it's likely to be.


Anders Åslund, Ukraine’s six key conditions for peace talks with Putin’s Russia (Aug 24, 2022):

1. recovery of occupied Ukrainian territory
2. credible security guarantees
3. Russia to pay up for rebuilding what's been destroyed
4. Russian Black Sea Fleet to leave base in Sevastopol, and don't come back
5. Ukrainians to be permitted to leave Russia; children taken to Russia must be returned
6. prosecution of Russians who have committed serious war crimes at The Hague

Still fair, still unrealistic. Let's see 5 though, can also serve as a goodwill gesture.
Peace talks could aim at a neutral Ukraine (no NATO), which would address one of Putin's arguments.

@Isaac, here's one for your consideration.

The Battle of Culiacán:

Back in 2019, the Mexican government arrested a son of crime boss El Chapo, who, in turn, worked for crime boss El Mayo. In response, El Mayo had 100s of gunmen attack civilians and government targets. Eventually, the Mexican President released the arrested son to prevent further killing and violence. (Government forces and cartel gunmen shook hands.) Some said that El Mayo had become government, or whatever along those lines.

But, this is just an example of ... power ... ethics ... "don't negotiate with terrorists" (Chatham House) ... collateral damage ... who protects who (from)? ... democracy, roles of electees ...

Tensions:

• saving lives (perhaps minimize suffering / maximize well-being)
• giving in versus standing up to attackers (perhaps courage versus cowardice)
• dis/allowing offenders/thugs to continue/escalate offending (compromise, future)
• doing the right thing

I (personally) don't think there's a one-size-fits-all, though maybe standing on principles can sometimes deter malefactors from going there, or make them reconsider.

Anyway, in the present case (different from the example above), millions of Ukrainians have fled, and many are fighting, apparently with notable unity/cohesion/direction. Can we easily say what the right thing to do is?

This poetry performance by Russian-installed Kherson official Kirill Stremousov is truly one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen — Francis Scarr (Oct 18, 2022)

Maybe their Pr department is out manning the artillery?

Jason Jay Smart reported (Oct 15, 2022):

Is Russia bullying Ukraine ... or has NATO been trying to bully Russia these past decades?
Is Ukraine standing up to Russia ... or is Russia standing up to NATO? — boethius

Putin frames it in terms of threats, danger, fear. So, we could try to examine that.

First, though... Broken promise or not? This seemed to me a recurring claim — and justification — by Putin + team, and some others.

^{• Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says “No” (Brookings; Nov 6, 2014)
• Did The West Promise Moscow That NATO Would Not Expand? Well, It's Complicated. (RFE/RL; May 19, 2021)
• Ukraine: the history behind Russia’s claim that Nato promised not to expand to the east (The Conversation; Feb 14, 2022)
• “NATO (under direction from the United States) is violating previous agreements and expanding eastward.” (PolitiFact; Feb 22, 2022)}

Hmm ... Not quite so clear (earlier on, I thought it was more clear). More of a "he-said-she-said" thing apparently. Either way, the violence/bombing/shamming can't hang on this. (Ukraine is the obvious victim here.)

The threats (via earlier comment instead of repeating): Nuclear? More or less everyone's threatened. Only some flaunt. Troops then? NATO has more of them, is larger. Russia's flanked. Large country. (Well, bases and troop concentrations are susceptible to tactical nuclear weapons I guess.) Cultural threats? Humbug. Are we talking "claustrophobia" versus limiting free Kremlin movements/actions?

Non-hypotheticals: At the moment, Russia is a direct/present tangible threat to Ukraine (and perhaps some neighbors), more so than NATO is to Russia, except Putin's moves have put Russians in danger. There are casualties and losses, by far most in Ukraine, not Russia, not in NATO countries. The invasion. Conversely, sanctions are threatening Russia, albeit not so much a NATO thing.

The geo-strategic interests mentioned by @Tzeentch suggests a plain old land grab, which is a rationale, just not the one out of the anti-NATO rhetoric (≈ distraction). What threat is NATO to Russia that's different from protecting the members? No one has threatened with invading Russia. The threats to Russia aren't looking like what they're made out to be. Which suggests other aims, in part at least.

3 ways of looking at Putin’s barbaric escalation against Ukrainian civilians (Vox; Oct 17, 2022)
The international level, The domestic level, The psychological level

Much speculation; bombing proceeds. :/

When it comes to opinion of the Russian president, right-wing populist supporters are, in many cases, again more likely than those who do not support these parties to have confidence in Putin. — Among European right-wing populists, favorable views of Russia and Putin are down sharply · Pew Research Center · Sep 23, 2022

On Dec 14, 2016, Will Jordan noted ...

, these scrolled by a while back (your mileage may vary) ...

Why white evangelical Christians are Putin's biggest American fan base (MSNBC; Mar 2, 2022)

Putin’s Propaganda Machine Is What America’s Far-Right Wants (Defense One; Mar 11, 2022)

Whatever is going on, it doesn't look pretty.

Dear Russian people! [...]
— Alexandr Dugin — Paine

And that snippet is more subtly echoed by Putin, Matviyenko, and probably a few I forgot (including in the US). A call for nationalism in a category that history has seen before. Such like has been noted a few times recently (UN, 2019), not that anyone listens/cares.

, in case no one else welcomed you: welcome to. :)

Yes, you'll find grumpy old folks and angry young folks here, but more importantly smart and knowledgeable folks, too. :up:

Re the (existential) threats ...

Apart from Turkey, NATO members close to Russia don't host nuclear weapons (Canada not shown here):



↑ Source: What countries have nuclear weapons, and where are they? (The Conversation; Apr 1, 2022)

Something similar can't be said for Russia. Though, I don't know of anyone in Norway Finland Estonia Ukraine Canada that has detected ☢ with a hand-held Geiger counter. :)

• 352. Missile Defenses in Eastern Europe: Who Threatens Whom? (Wilson Center)

^{By the way, Bulgaria (pdf), for example, turned their armament down a bit before becoming a NATO member.}

Putin's NATO-phobia can't quite be due to nuclear weaponry on their doorstep, though they have aired complaints about radar and such defensive systems. Conversely, any Russo-phobia could be due to the nuclear weaponry; flauntery by autocrats doesn't help. Concerns over resources falling into the wrong hands is another factor.

• Russia says it may be forced to deploy mid-range nuclear missiles in Europe (Reuters; Dec 13, 2021)

NATO troop allocations could be a reason for Putin's NATO-phobia. Reported some months after the Crimean grab:



↑ Source: THE EUROPEAN CHESSBOARD: Here's A Map Of The Russia-NATO Confrontation (Business Insider; Sep 29, 2014)

• The map that shows how many Nato troops are deployed along Russia’s border (The Independent; Feb 5, 2017)
• Factbox: Where NATO forces are deployed (Reuters; Jan 24, 2022)
• Here's where Alliance forces are deployed across Eastern Europe (CNN; Feb 10, 2022)
• Number of military personnel in NATO countries in 2021 (Statista; Aug 5, 2022)

Putin's moves have resulted in NATO (and other) moves, which seems warranted enough. (Troop presence gives a kind of claustrophobia versus limiting free Kremlin movements/actions?) Mobilization (and perhaps transport) could suggest resource shortage, escalation intent, or some such.

Then there's a supposed cultural threat to Russia (has also come up prior in the thread).
Rhetoric, hot air.

Perhaps a mutually forthcoming/accommodating attitude, reconciliatory gestures, bona fides signs, would go some way towards peace? Not easy when shams have been presented as legit, yet one step at a time? How about asking China to put pressure on Putin, however unlikely?

No one's marching on Moscow, has expressed wanting to, threatened with.
This part is about Ukraine, sovereignty, self-determination, self-power.

Ukraine member of NATO ...
• Russia less of a threat to Ukraine (limit Kremlin's free movements/actions)
• NATO more of a threat to Russia, cf Putin's speeches
In Ukraine's own interest, now proven, not hypothetical.
In Moldova Poland Romania Hungary Slovakia's interests.

Ukraine not member of NATO ...
• Russia more of a threat to Ukraine (proven, non-hypothetical)
• NATO less of a threat to Russia
In Russia's interest. (More Kremlin freedom.)

Ukraine neutral ...
• free to pursue EU/whatever affiliation/memberships
• not thoroughly demilitarized in light of present crisis

The Ukrainians have nonetheless changed stance on occasion, entertained options in public, shown willingness to hear others, and it's their homes and lives.
I'm guessing they don't have much patience left for those saying that NATO is an existential threat to Russia and calling it a day.

, equivocation aside, the Russian autocrats can say and do whatever, and that's what they do — with or without others.
Should others then stand idle by, if they propagandize (their population) into justifying/eliciting a world war, nuclear war, a(nother) catastrophe?
Letting them run their course isn't an answer, standing up is.
Fortunately, the current crisis isn't there, but some are standing up (on the high ground).

(Hmm perhaps a public ceremony isn't so far out after all... :smile:)

A separate idea, while babbling anyway: How about a different sort of talks and negotiations, one that's more direct, persistent, ongoing? Central/involved leaders have a direct line and are expected to talk with the rest frequently, promoting negotiations, perhaps compromises, and initiating putting guarantees on paper (formalized). They'd be recorded or something, so the world could figure out what's on their minds. This would sort of force participants to think about and address things, not just listen to their own generals.

As an aside, the borderless world is a neat idea, sort of. ^{(726952, 746063)}
John Lennon, 1971.
It's just far from the current world, whether by traditions, cultures, whatever, and doesn't seem feasible, at least not for a good while.

I think the Ukrainian government should arrange a large formal ceremony, to officially declare the Russian referendums not worth the papers they're written on.
They could invite foreigners, like government officials, UN representatives, reporters from all over, etc.
There would be lots of suits, a speech or two, paper signing, handshaking, shoulder padding, all the usual, with a bit of fanfare.
Importantly, the ceremony would be broadcast in great detail, whether live or not, but preferably available to Russians.
Could be held in Kyiv, Warsaw, some such, perhaps with some large outdoor screens for onlookers, Poland has lots of Ukrainian refugees.
Depending on any onlookers showing up, some of them could be interviewed as well, rounding things up neatly.

What say you?

, you tell me?

The referendums don't really mean anything, as per the UN and most others (is my guess). Those regions aren't part of Russia, regardless of what some Russians think, contrary to what Ukrainians think. I suppose Putin could always arrange/allow for a real vote. They had to invade first and what-not, though, which is kind of telling from the get-go. No particular change, militarily or otherwise, is a consequence of the referendums. The show rolls on.

Anyway, you tell me?

Russia stretches just about all the way to Japan, to Alaska, out to the Pacific.

So you admit that Ukraine could not possibly successfully invade Russia? — Isaac

As far as I know (correct me if wrong), they've never expressed wanting to, threatened with, or the like. Not their interest. Why would anyone anyway? The only reason that comes to mind as such, is as a defensive measure. I guess, technically at least, it's possible that this could change. Until then, there's not much threat to Russia (like there is to Ukraine).

Not a whole lot of countries could occupy Russia, if that was the aim of an invasion.

, the existential thing is quoting Putin. Strategic interests are other matters. Then there's the context, further elaborating interests. Besides, going by strategic interests points at a plain land grab, however shrouded in rhetoric.

As an aside, suggested by Zaporizhzhia:

He would see this country burn if he could be King of the ashes — Lord Varys

Territorial integrity of Ukraine: defending the principles of the Charter of the United Nations (Oct 7, 2022)

^{• illegal so-called referendums
• unlawful actions of the Russian Federation
• have no validity under international law and do not form the basis for any alteration of the status of these regions of Ukraine
• not to recognise any alteration by the Russian Federation of the status of any or all of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk or Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine
• immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine
• a violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine}

Votes:

78% of UN tells Putin to go home. 5% tells him to go ahead.
Would it be strange if Russia had voted for? :)