Ukraine

@chewkw I agree with all of that, apart from

There is no right or wrong in a conflict

War is of course a failure of diplomacy and undeniably a terrible thing which results in immeasurable suffering. To be avoided at all costs.  However it can be much, much worse and the suffering amplified if the belligerents ignore established international law and treaties which try to govern the conduct of armed conflict.  The stuff about treatment of prisoners, bombardment of civilians, respecting medical staff, the weaponising of rape and sexual violence, torture etc. Ignoring those accepted rules is undeniably ‘wrong’ is it not? Sadly, all sides fail to live up to these rules at times.  In some cases it’s a local breakdown of discipline and in others it’s strategic policy.  It seems to me that Russia tends more towards the latter.

Thanks. I watched that.

It was interesting and depressing in equal measure. Poor guy.

It really does sound like the Russian military are running on fumes, holding out for Trump in November. So what happens if Harris takes it?

War is of course a failure of diplomacy and undeniably a terrible thing which results in immeasurable suffering. To be avoided at all costs.  However it can be much, much worse and the suffering amplified if the belligerents ignore established international law and treaties which try to govern the conduct of armed conflict.  The stuff about treatment of prisoners, bombardment of civilians, respecting medical staff, the weaponising of rape and sexual violence, torture etc. Ignoring those accepted rules is undeniably ‘wrong’ is it not? Sadly, all sides fail to live up to these rules at times.  In some cases it’s a local breakdown of discipline and in others it’s strategic policy.  It seems to me that Russia tends more towards the latter.

Currently they are in the transitional period so the narrative is uncertain with each side proclaiming to be on the right side of history.  But once the situation situation stabilises they narrative will be created by the magnanimous victor(s).  Generally, the narrative will focus on the good (victor) prevailing over the evil (the defeated) with the victor(s) magnanimous celebration in the remembrance of the greatness of peace, forgiveness etc, and by creating virtue of victory.  Virtue is derived from the outcome of defeating and causing calamity onto the opponents, and with the opponents submission.  Plenty of examples in history but there is a current conflict in middle east now where virtue is put into action and with the narrative of the victors.

It seems to me that Russia tends more towards the latter.

It would, because that is what all your (our) media are broadcasting.

t really does sound like the Russian military are running on fumes, holding out for Trump in November. So what happens if Harris takes it?

Probably about the same as happened when Ukraine got Leopards, Storm Shadow, Abrams, Patriots, F-16s i.e. nothing much.

It would, because that is what all your (our) media are broadcasting.

I don’t think they are making up the abduction of Ukrainian children, the bombing of hospitals, the torture of POWs, the mass murder of civilians in Bucha. They are simply reporting what has happened. Even without Western media, Russian soldiers aren’t shy about posting videos which would be classed as incriminating if there was the slightest risk of any official come back . These have included the torture of prisoners such as removal of genitalia, summary execution, beheadings and sledgehammer murders of their own for desertion.

I don’t think for a second Ukrainian forces are entirely blameless, but there isn’t the state sanctioned contempt for international law that Russia displays

Probably about the same as happened when Ukraine got Leopards, Storm Shadow, Abrams, Patriots, F-16s i.e. nothing much.

Why some optimists might have expected those things to result in a swift Ukrainian victory, I think most on here have been a bit more measured and realistic.  You say ‘nothing much’. I would argue that without those things and Western support more generally, Ukraine would now be subjugated and subsumed into Russia. The Baltic states would be next (but not last) in line. Now whether you or I think that is preferable to Ukraine continuing to resist is moot. It’s up to them and it seems they are pretty determined to prevent it.

but there isn’t the state sanctioned contempt for international law that Russia displays

Maybe. Who knows? There is state sanctioned contempt for international law displayed by Ukraines allies elsewhere on the globe, so why would Ukraine be specially virtuous?

so why would Ukraine be specially virtuous?

If for no other reason, that the continued international coalition of support depends on it.

If for no other reason, that the continued international coalition of support depends on it

That doesn’t seem to be a factor elsewhere. Saddam Hussein was supported by the west despite gassing the Kurds.

Yes, sometimes (often) Western foreign policy is unprincipled and duplicitous. I’m not claiming otherwise. Gaza and relations with Israel being a much more recent example. But this thread is about the war in Ukraine. Even if our politicians are self serving and unscrupulous, they are beholden to public opinion. If there were widespread, state sanctioned war crimes by the Kyiv government, western governments would come under a lot of public pressure to stop aid. Zelensky can’t afford that.

Putin doesn’t have the same pressures because he has total control of the state media and thus public opinion. So he doesn’t have to give a toss about international law or atrocities committed by his troops. Currently, there is pretty strong public support for continued aid to Ukraine in most Western countries  It’s not entirely altruistic and standing up for the plucky underdogs. Especially in eastern Europe and the Baltics, they know what awaits them if Putin is emboldened by a win in Ukraine.

If there were widespread, state sanctioned war crimes by the Kyiv government, western governments would come under a lot of public pressure to stop aid. Zelensky can’t afford that.

Since you brought it up – there are widespread state sanctioned war crimes by the Israeli government. How much has that resulted in aid being stopped?

i believe, for what it’s worth, that the Russians have been another level of evil in this war. But Grozny, Aleppo etc don’t stand out much from Raqaa and Gaza as atrocities perpetrated on a civilian population, so I’m not confident that if/when the boot is on the other foot we won’t see some horrors of Ukraine’s making.

so I’m not confident that if/when the boot is on the other foot we won’t see some horrors of Ukraine’s making.

Perhaps we will. I personally doubt that they will ever reach the depths that Russia has plumbed with the encouragement of atrocities at the highest level. I don’t know if you ever watch Russia Media monitor? The talking heads on state TV call for genocide in Ukraine on on almost daily basis. One pundit called for Ukrainian children to be drowned or burned alive. On a prime time TV chat show. I don’t see that happening in Ukraine.

Western media, for all its faults HAS reported on some Ukrainian war crimes at individual or unit level. I wonder how many of of the multitude of proven Russia war crimes are reported by the the Russia media?  The Red Cross and other international monitors are allowed access to battle areas by the Ukrainian authorities. Not so by Russia. Even though they (Ukraine) are fighting for their very existence and Russia is fighting for conquest and to massage an old man’s ego.

“war crimes” will happen in any army and any conflict.  Young men desensitised to violence and packed full of hate for their opponents.  I can think of atrocities committed in many wars by all sides.  UK troops included

I’d be astonished if there were none committed by ukranian troops but I will also bet its a tiny % of those committed by Russian troops

^^ yep

The big moral difference here is that if the Russians stop fighting, that’s the end of the war, if the Ukranians stop fighting, that’s the end of Ukraine.

I would imagine that Russians will say that if they stop fighting then the ever increasing NATO encirclement will continue.

I would imagine that Russians will say that if they stop fighting then the ever increasing NATO encirclement will continue

Russia says lots of things, the truth is that Ukraine wasn’t pursuing NATO membership and Finland and Sweden weren’t in NATO.

Russia’s actions have expanded NATO; Finland’s membership alone doubled Russia’s border length with NATO

I would imagine that Russians will say that if they stop fighting then the ever increasing NATO encirclement will continue.

Wonder whos fault that is.

I would imagine that Russians will say that if they stop fighting then the ever increasing NATO encirclement will continue.

And yet recent NATO membership has increased only as a direct result of Russia’s invasion.  Avowedly neutral non NATO countries are now joining because they fear being attacked themselves.  Sweden and Finland would never have considered joining before Russia invaded Ukraine.  Putin is NATO’s top performing recruitment consultant.

Edit:  Too slow to state the obvious 🙂

They are all human (both sides). If we look back to history we have plenty of evidence that human beings are always fighting with each others for whatever reasons.

Yep

The last few hundred years saw the expansion of Western empires colonising less technologically advance nations, creating lasting conflicts in their path. But empires do not last forever and as in history empires collapse after a period of time, but it is the transitional period that is usually considered as the difficult with death and destruction before it can stabilise again.

How does that effect Russia invading Ukraine?

In 1993 Russia went through a constitutional crisis, the so-called October Coup and came close to civil war as President Yeltsin took on parliament, which opposed him.

Vladimir Putin, variously serving as PM and President, took power in 1999 and improved the economy enormously, became a major trading partner with the EU, second largest exporter of weapons in the world, holder of vast natural wealth, etc. All very stable and prosperous.

There is no right or wrong in a conflict, and the victors will always dictate the narrative.

On this occasion, Russia is very much in the wrong

Currently they are in the transitional period so the narrative is uncertain with each side proclaiming to be on the right side of history.

See above

BUTR +1 (x5-ish – lost count) 🙂

Maybe. Who knows? There is state sanctioned contempt for international law displayed by Ukraines allies elsewhere on the globe, so why would Ukraine be specially virtuous?

Why do they need to be “specially virtuous”, abiding by the rules is special enough when you’re fighting for your existence. Russia doesn’t have that pressure (although that may be a moot point as a result of their invasion)

Some Ukrainians will remember the holodomor and this invasion probably feels horribly like that

the truth is that Ukraine wasn’t pursuing NATO membership

The truth is that Ukraine has pursued NATO membership at various times.

However, the point is not to claim who are goodies and who are baddies, but to observe that groups have their own motives which may not appear valid to outsiders but which make sense to them. How history judges them is not necessarily obvious at the time.

Why do they need to be “specially virtuous”,

This comment makes no sense.  Suggest you re-read the context.

The truth is that Ukraine has pursued NATO membership at various times.

They may have aspired to, but there was zero prospect of it happening. Before 2014 because it was opposed by most NATO members for fear of antagonising Russia (ironic huh)? And after 2014 because their territorial ‘dispute’ with Russia automatically barred them.

You didn’t mention Finland and Sweden? Did they pursue NATO membership before 2022?

The truth is that Ukraine has pursued NATO membership at various times.

Not since 2010 when the pro-Russian Ukrainian government of Viktor Yanukovych declared the country “neutral”, which the Kremlin would be very aware of. In 2014 Russia’s invasion of Crimea and the Donbas region triggered further calls from Ukraine for NATO membership, understandably

However, the point is not to claim who are goodies and who are baddies, but to observe that groups have their own motives which may not appear valid to outsiders but which make sense to them.

Do Russia’s motives justify laying waste to every town and village that they come near, destroying civilian infrastructure. killing and wounding hundreds of thousands of people, etc.

This isn’t the first time; you gave examples including Grozny and Aleppo, but include the rest of Chechnya, Georgia, and involvement in civil wars in CAR, Mali and Burkina Faso over the last 25 years.

X with BUTR (+1)

This comment makes no sense. Suggest you re-read the context.

I’d suggest that it makes absolute sense. Anyway, this is descending into a rerun of the Gaza thread; I’ll leave you to it 🙂

Not since 2010 when the pro-Russian Ukrainian government of Viktor Yanukovych declared the country “neutral”, which the Kremlin would be very aware of. In 2014 Russia’s invasion of Crimea and the Donbas region triggered further calls from Ukraine for NATO membership, understandably

So not since 2010, except for since 2014. Yes. Now I understand.

Do Russia’s motives justify laying waste to every town and village that they come near, destroying civilian infrastructure. killing and wounding hundreds of thousands of people, etc.

No, and nowhere do I suggest that they do. But they’re hardly alone in conducting a war this way – it seems to be the rule rather than the exception.

Do we have a tankie, or do we have a tankie?

I would imagine that Russians will say that if they stop fighting then the ever increasing NATO encirclement will continue.

Encirclement? Blimey, who’s joining next? Kazakhstan? China?

So not since 2010, except for since 2014. Yes. Now I understand.

Yawn

Either Tankie or just a terminal case of whataboutery.

It would be good to discuss the subject matter without making it personal. Although there seems to be a consensus amongst regular posters on here, different views should tolerated imv. Reading back through my posts I’ve maybe been a bit tetchy with DrJ at times.  Apologies.

Poor misunderstood Russia accidentally invaded Ukraine, again… and then some of its neighbours joined a defence alliance for some unrelated but aggressive and egregious reason.

Reading back through my posts I’ve maybe been a bit tetchy with DrJ at times.  Apologies.

No offence taken. And apologies where I gave it.

The irony is that Ukraine was not a candidate for NATO membership and Finland and Sweden had no interest in joining until Russia invaded Ukraine. Following the invasion, Finland and Sweden joined NATO and Russia’s response was just to bluster about it and then to withdraw troops from the north (i.e. where NATO now borders Russia) to send them to fight in Ukraine (which isn’t in NATO). So Putin’s ramblings about NATO are just nonsense to justify trying to expand the Russian empire but tankies don’t think anyone has agency except the U.S. so anything that happens in the world is America’s fault because capitalism bad.

tankies

zzzzzzzz

The irony is that Ukraine was not a candidate for NATO membership

Wasn’t the problem corruption at a political level with Ukrainian oligarchs

Or was that related to EU membership ?

Wasn’t the problem corruption at a political level with Ukrainian oligarchs

I think that was a factor.  Certainly Ukraine has had big problems with corruption, but I think they have tried very hard to crack down on it. I’m sure there’s more to be done. The other reasons were a totally different military doctrine and logistical mismatch to NATO countries due to the Soviet legacy and the aforementioned fear of antagonising the Russians.

Huge strides have been made in coordinating doctrine and equipment with NATO countries in the last decade. The AFU in 2014 was a shadow of what it has become since.  Before the invasion they were ‘partners’ of NATO and working towards increasing coord and cooperation, but there was no prospect of full membership or article 5 protection.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm