Why are we rushing to defend Ukraine? [merged threads]

[Dashinka 24,649]

4 hours ago, millefleur said:

I can fill in the blanks and give a report about what's happening in Russia. McDonalds is closed as are a bunch of other western brands, but this was and has always been a largely symbolic move. There are plenty of other restaurants and cafes, Russian brands, that continue to function as normal. Food prices have gone up but so far but Russia has always had problems with inflation and the ruble not being the most stable currency, so it hasn't been a huge shock yet. Things might change down the road of course. Interestingly so far my in laws in Russia have told me that the Covid 19 measures, the lockdowns were much worse than what is happening in Russia now, consumer economics wise. When the invasion first broke out, people started panic buying sugar and other dry goods (think of Covid here and the toilet paper) but it seems to have calmed down and things are stabilizing again. Now, we're still pretty early into the sanctions so time will tell in the end. By far, the biggest major change has been in the aviation sector, that was felt overnight. But with other stuff, seems like massive impacts still have not settled in yet and the inflation on most goods has not been catastrophic levels, people just tighten their belts and deal with it.

 

Now, in terms of life for the "yuppies" in Russia: yes, life has been more affected. It's harder to buy luxury items and cars, the price increase on these items has gone through the roof. iPhones are now basically so astronomically priced that even the wealthy question if it's worth it. People who had extra money and were reliant on imported goods are feeling the heat more than the average Russia who never cared about these things, I've heard of reports for imported beauty products drying up for example. However, there are still a lot of European companies that have not shut down in Russia yet. So, it has not been a total iron curtain, plenty of lesser known European companies are still operating under the radar. However, I think this article is a bit overstating the value of luxury goods. By definition, one can do without. Luxury is always the first market to plunge in hard times because they're not necessary to live with. Russians with enough money/means will simply just leave, and move to other countries (or vacation there) where they can still access those goods. Armenia, Georgia and Turkey have been go-to destinations for these reasons. For the ultra wealthy, Dubai seems to fit the bill.

 

In my opinion, the big kicker which has started to settle in but not en masse is medical and pharmaceutical. I actually think this would be the thing that would anger enough people across the spectrum in Russia that it could even lead to riots. If people cannot get medicines from Europe or don't have access to medical implants (a lot of those are imported) and it starts causing the robust private medical industry in Russia to crater, this will be a major blow. So far, my in laws are not majorly affect but there have been complaints about shortages. A very bad sign. I will be watching this closely most of all as I think it is more likely the kindling for some kind of "revolution" in Russia rather than a lack of Louis Vuitton bags. Imagine that you have money but simply can't get your procedure done because they don't have the materials. This will be very frustrating for people who especially saved up just for that. When it comes between "Do I care about this war or being in constant pain (or may even die) because I need a surgery?" I think it's pretty obvious most people will opt for their own health and well being over some war. Now, Russians may be a bit more masochistic and willing to accept pain compared to others, but even they have a breaking point.

 

This is just my take on what I hear from ordinary people in Russia right now. I'm sure I'm missing out on some blind spots where the sanctions are hitting and the longer the war goes on, the more obvious it will become. There will absolutely be a recession and unemployment is going to go up, but it's coming right off of Covid where that already was happening. If this had happened pre-Covid when the Russian economy was stronger, the shocks would've been more obvious initially. In general, the longer the war goes on, the worse it is for everyone, so I just don't see the "support" for the war being sustainable if it takes years. Now will the "support" just turn to apathy/defeatism or something else? Remains to be seen, definitely a "watch and wait" situation.

I also heard about Western airplane parts being sanctioned from export to Russia.  I guess the US wants to kill people on airplanes.

[Mike E 11,741]

9 hours ago, millefleur said:

Has the UN Security Council actually done anything at all in terms of global security? Seems like there's been plenty of criticism around it for years, maybe it's time to just reassess the whole thing from the ground up.

Assuming we wanted a world police, then unsc should be made up of any country  willing to commit military resources and each country should get a vote in proportion to those committed resources.  

[Ban Hammer 13,441]

from a game i play - world of warships:

Over the past weeks, Wargaming has been conducting a strategic review of business operations worldwide. The company has decided it will not own or operate any businesses in Russia and Belarus and will leave both countries.

Effective March 31 2022, the company started the process of closing its studio in Minsk, Belarus and transferred its live games business in Russia and Belarus to local management of Lesta Studio that is no longer affiliated with Wargaming. The company will not profit from this process either today or going forward. Much to the contrary, we expect to suffer substantial losses as a direct result of this decision.

Going forward, in all other countries Wargaming will continue to operate World of Warships as before. The game servers will be operating as usual, and players' accounts, as well as their in-game property accumulated through purchase or any other means, will remain unchanged. 

[Dashinka 24,649]

Very good analysis, much of it already discussed here.  Mr. Sacks is spot on how wrong our State Department is, but what else is new.  Whether it is run by neo-con Republicans, or obstinate Old Democrats, it is sad how badly the US acts in these situations.  In this current incarnation of the State Department, one wonders if its actions are being driven by an incompetent stubborn Joe Biden, or something else.  I am inclined to think this is Joe Biden, because as Obama warned us, don't underestimate the ability of Joe to mess things up.

 

The State Department Failed To Prevent The War. Will It Now Prevent The Peace? 

 

 

Ever since the Bucharest Declaration of 2008, when NATO opened the door to membership for Ukraine and Georgia, the Russians have indicated that membership for these two border nations was an unacceptable “red line” for them. They quickly proved their seriousness later that year by invading Georgia and securing territory where predominantly-Russian populations were located. (Doesn’t that sound eerily familiar?) For the last 14 years, Putin and the entire Russian elite have spoken with one voice: NATO membership for Ukraine was an intolerable security threat. We ignored this red line, continuing to push for NATO expansion and transitioning Ukraine’s military onto a NATO platform even before official membership.

 

In response, a Russian troop buildup began on Ukraine’s border around the beginning of last year. This had the intended effect of getting the new president’s attention. Biden called for a summit and met with Putin in Geneva in June last year. We don’t know exactly what was said in the room but we do know that Biden said publicly at that time that corruption in Ukraine prevented its entry into NATO. Putin seemed mollified, and tensions seemed to abate. According to recent reporting by The Intercept based on U.S. intelligence sources, the Russian military buildup on Ukraine’s border started to subside after the Biden-Putin Summit and did not increase again until October/November. So what happened in between to upset the apple cart?

 

On September 1, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky visited the White House. This was the first such visit by a Ukrainian head of state, fulfilling one of Kiev’s long-standing diplomatic objectives. On that day, the U.S. and Ukraine issued a “Joint Statement” affirming deep economic and military ties between the two nations, including support for Ukraine’s NATO membership. This likely reflected weeks of back-channel negotiations that preceded Zelensky’s visit, suggesting Biden’s reassurances to Putin were dead-letter virtually from the day he made them. On November 10, Secretary of State Blinken and the Ukrainian foreign minister signed a massive 10-year Charter Agreement, which was the long-form version of the Joint Statement issued earlier.

 

Predictably, the Russians hit the roof. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said they had reached “the boiling point.” They delivered a virtual ultimatum to the U.S. in December demanding written assurance that Ukraine would not become part of NATO. A month of furious negotiations began in January between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Lavrov, during which Blinken gave no ground on NATO membership. In fact, he seemed proud of western intransigence, makingstatements like “There has been no change; there will be no change.” And: “NATO’s door is open, remains open, and that is our commitment.”

 

Yet that’s not what Blinken was saying privately. We now know, thanks to a stunning recent interview by Fareed Zakaria, that Zelensky was privately told that Ukraine wasn’t going to be admitted into NATO but that the door had to remain publicly open.

What could possibly be the rationale for this diplomatic approach? We refused to accede to the Russians’ most long-standing and important demand even though we privately admitted to Ukraine that we had no intention of following through. In other words, we refused to give the Russians “the sleeves off our vest,” a concession that was largely meaningless to us but of paramount importance for them.

 

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-state-department-failed-to-prevent-the-war-will-it-now-prevent-the-peace/

[millefleur 5,047]

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Yet that’s not what Blinken was saying privately. We now know, thanks to a stunning recent interview by Fareed Zakaria, that Zelensky was privately told that Ukraine wasn’t going to be admitted into NATO but that the door had to remain publicly open.

This infuriates me. It reminds me of a man who keeps leading on a woman by saying he's not "ready to settle down yet" but continues openly flirting with said woman, who has made it clear she is ready to commit. Pretty sure most people would view such mixed messages as scummy behavior, by someone being duplicitous and wishy washy. I think we just need to ban metaphors like "the door is publicly open" in politics. Seriously. It just leads to vague statements that can be misinterpreted.

 

In fact, the US could have put it's foot down and said: you need to solve your civil war in the Donbass before we even consider membership. And yet as far as I'm aware, that was never brought up either, despite being an obvious roadblock to NATO membership as well. Also, Zelensky ran as a "pro peace" candidate who promised to solve the Donbass issue (this was a huge reason why he got elected), but the situation just continued to fester. There is even a bizarre video floating around of Zelensky in 2019 being talked down to by an Azov Battalion solider, where he comes across as completely ineffective as a leader and the situation is obviously beyond his control. Zelensky is not 100% at fault, this is a complicated situation and he is an inexperienced politician. It just reveals the chaotic nature of the situation and the fact that NATO membership was always going to be off the table as long as this level of dysfunction and conflict was happening:

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/im-not-a-loser-zelensky-clashes-with-veterans-over-donbas-disengagement.html

 

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

For the last 14 years, Putin and the entire Russian elite have spoken with one voice: NATO membership for Ukraine was an intolerable security threat.

It wasn't even just Putin. It was Gorbachev and Yeltsin also who said this as well. And we discussed previously in this thread that NATO took actions in the 1990's that severely challenged it's "defensive alliance" status such as the bombing of Yugoslavia, which only further made Russia paranoid. Interestingly WW3 also almost happened back then as well. American General Wesley Clark wanted British General Mike Jackson to escalate the situation with the Russians at Pristina airport. General Jackson famously defied orders and said: "I'm not going to start World War 3 for you."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incident_at_Pristina_airport

 

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

We don’t know exactly what was said in the room but we do know that Biden said publicly at that time that corruption in Ukraine prevented its entry into NATO.

Is it just me or is this a rich statement of Biden to make considering what his own son was doing in Ukraine? Again with the mixed messages. We tell Ukraine publicly "Don't be corrupt" but then behind closed doors openly take advantage of said corruption, even actively encourage it?

Edited April 8, 2022 by millefleur

[Dashinka 24,649]

On 4/8/2022 at 1:50 PM, millefleur said:

This infuriates me. It reminds me of a man who keeps leading on a woman by saying he's not "ready to settle down yet" but continues openly flirting with said woman, who has made it clear she is ready to commit. Pretty sure most people would view such mixed messages as scummy behavior, by someone being duplicitous and wishy washy. I think we just need to ban metaphors like "the door is publicly open" in politics. Seriously. It just leads to vague statements that can be misinterpreted.

 

In fact, the US could have put it's foot down and said: you need to solve your civil war in the Donbass before we even consider membership. And yet as far as I'm aware, that was never brought up either, despite being an obvious roadblock to NATO membership as well. Also, Zelensky ran as a "pro peace" candidate who promised to solve the Donbass issue (this was a huge reason why he got elected), but the situation just continued to fester. There is even a bizarre video floating around of Zelensky in 2019 being talked down to by an Azov Battalion solider, where he comes across as completely ineffective as a leader and the situation is obviously beyond his control. Zelensky is not 100% at fault, this is a complicated situation and he is an inexperienced politician. It just reveals the chaotic nature of the situation and the fact that NATO membership was always going to be off the table as long as this level of dysfunction and conflict was happening:

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/im-not-a-loser-zelensky-clashes-with-veterans-over-donbas-disengagement.html

 

It wasn't even just Putin. It was Gorbachev and Yeltsin also who said this as well. And we discussed previously in this thread that NATO took actions in the 1990's that severely challenged it's "defensive alliance" status such as the bombing of Yugoslavia, which only further made Russia paranoid. Interestingly WW3 also almost happened back then as well. American General Wesley Clark wanted British General Mike Jackson to escalate the situation with the Russians at Pristina airport. General Jackson famously defied orders and said: "I'm not going to start World War 3 for you."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incident_at_Pristina_airport

 

Is it just me or is this a rich statement of Biden to make considering what his own son was doing in Ukraine? Again with the mixed messages. We tell Ukraine publicly "Don't be corrupt" but then behind closed doors openly take advantage of said corruption, even actively encourage it?

Not sure if the mixed messaging is just Biden and his administration being incompetent, or Old Joe being not there.  It begs the question another thread or earlier in this thread asked, is Joe going to bungle his way into a more protracted war?  It is also interesting that the EU leaders are not really depending much on the American President other than for funding.  I really do hope all those folks that voted to put two incompetent people in place of our President and VeeP are happy, but at least we do not have any mean tweets.

[TBoneTX 45,654]

16 hours ago, Dashinka said:

at least we do not have any mean tweets

Oh, everything that we've experienced since has been WELL worth this!  (or so they say)

[millefleur 5,047]

Thought this was a very interesting and exhaustive list. Seems like it's still missing a bunch, though. I don't see all of the European airlines listed for example.

Over 600 Companies Have Withdrawn from Russia—But Some Remain

Since the invasion of Ukraine began, we have been tracking the responses of over 1,000 companies. Over 600 companies have announced they are voluntarily curtailing operations in Russia to some degree beyond what is required by international sanctions — but some companies have continued to operate in Russia undeterred. 

 

Originally a simple "withdraw" vs. "remain" list, our list of companies now consists of five categories—graded on a school-style letter grade scale of A-F for the completeness of withdrawal. We challenge companies to voluntarily curtail operations in Russia beyond the bare minimum legally required by sanctions. 

 

The list below is updated continuously by Jeffrey Sonnenfeld and his team of experts, research fellows, and students at the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute to reflect new announcements from companies in as close to real time as possible. 

 

Read here: https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-600-companies-have-withdrawn-russia-some-remain

Edited April 13, 2022 by millefleur

[Dashinka 24,649]

15 hours ago, millefleur said:

Thought this was a very interesting and exhaustive list. Seems like it's still missing a bunch, though. I don't see all of the European airlines listed for example.

Over 600 Companies Have Withdrawn from Russia—But Some Remain

Since the invasion of Ukraine began, we have been tracking the responses of over 1,000 companies. Over 600 companies have announced they are voluntarily curtailing operations in Russia to some degree beyond what is required by international sanctions — but some companies have continued to operate in Russia undeterred. 

 

Originally a simple "withdraw" vs. "remain" list, our list of companies now consists of five categories—graded on a school-style letter grade scale of A-F for the completeness of withdrawal. We challenge companies to voluntarily curtail operations in Russia beyond the bare minimum legally required by sanctions. 

 

The list below is updated continuously by Jeffrey Sonnenfeld and his team of experts, research fellows, and students at the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute to reflect new announcements from companies in as close to real time as possible. 

 

Read here: https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-600-companies-have-withdrawn-russia-some-remain

Never been a big fan of activists that try to get companies to do their political bidding, it is not as easy as turning off a switch.  If these folks really want to make a difference, why not protest all companies that do business in any country lead by a totalitarian?  It is interesting that Janet Yellen is now sending out warnings to countries that do not follow the US/EU lead on the sanctions.  So are we going to hammer China, India, the Middle East countries, etc.?  Is the US and EU going to start ignoring environmentalist and break ground on new mining or drilling operations?

 

Btw, I noticed Ukraine falling out of the news a bit, so I wonder when Zelenskyy will ramp up his propaganda again?

 

Yellen sends warning to countries 'indifferent' of sanctions

 

"Let's be clear," Yellen said, "the unified coalition of sanctioning countries will not be indifferent to actions that undermine the sanctions we've put in place."

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/yellen-sends-warning-to-countries-indifferent-of-sanctions/ar-AAWb5bf

Edited April 14, 2022 by Dashinka

[Boiler 45,744]

 

[millefleur 5,047]

5 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Never been a big fan of activists that try to get companies to do their political bidding, it is not as easy as turning off a switch.  If these folks really want to make a difference, why not protest all companies that do business in any country lead by a totalitarian?  It is interesting that Janet Yellen is now sending out warnings to countries that do not follow the US/EU lead on the sanctions.  So are we going to hammer China, India, the Middle East countries, etc.?  Is the US and EU going to start ignoring environmentalist and break ground on new mining or drilling operations?

I wonder the exact same thing. Also, isn't' this in violation of the principle of free market economics? So the US now gets to bully and police the economic decisions of countries like China and India? How is that "free"? Is someone like Janet Yellen some great humanitarian who is a crusader for human rights? Since when do finance people care about human rights? That's not why anyone decides to become a banker.

 

5 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Btw, I noticed Ukraine falling out of the news a bit, so I wonder when Zelenskyy will ramp up his propaganda again?

I think people are going to naturally lose interest no matter what because a WW1 style frozen front where people on both sides just pointlessly kill each other over a long drawn out period is not the cool Marvel movie experience they thought this war would be.

[millefleur 5,047]

Biden official admits US refused to address Ukraine and NATO before Russian invasion - Responsible Statecraft

A senior Biden administration official recently admitted that prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the United States made no effort to address one of Vladimir Putin’s most often stated top security concerns — the possibility of Ukraine’s membership into NATO. 

 

When asked on a podcast published on Wednesday by War on the Rocks — a U.S. foreign and defense policy analysis website — whether NATO expansion into Ukraine “was not on the table in terms of negotiations” before the invasion, Derek Chollet, counselor to Secretary of State Antony Blinken replied that “it wasn’t.” 

 

Chollet’s remarks confirm suspicions by many critics who believe the Biden administration wasn’t doing enough — including offering to deny or delay Ukraine’s NATO membership — to prevent Russia from launching a war against Ukraine. 

 

Read more: https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/04/14/biden-official-admits-us-refused-to-address-ukraine-and-nato-before-russian-invasion/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=biden-official-admits-us-refused-to-address-ukraine-and-nato-before-russian-invasion

[Mike E 11,741]

Before the invasion I was not a fan of Ukraine joining NATO.  
 

After seeing Ukraine  outclass Russia in battle, I’m thinking if the USA is going to stay in NATO, it should offer Putin to eject France and Germany from NATO and accept Ukraine into NATO.  Everyone wins:

 

* USA doesn’t have to spend money defending Germany and France any more, which are useless allies anyway 

 

* The USA doesn’t need to have its boots, wheels, or wings in Europe anymore because Ukraine is capable of defending NATO in Europe. Instead these resources can be shifted to Asia Pacific and maybe even the Indian Ocean

 

* Russia isolates two major economies from NATO. That has to be a bigger prize to Putin than conquering the pile of rubble in its creating in Ukraine.  Putin saves face.  

 

* Ukraine is safe from Russia 

 

* USA gains a reliable partner in continental Europe 

Edited April 14, 2022 by Mike E

[millefleur 5,047]

20 minutes ago, Mike E said:

After seeing Ukraine  outclass Russia in battle, I’m thinking if the USA is going to stay in NATO, it should offer Putin to eject France and Germany from NATO and accept Ukraine into NATO.

I would love to see that kind of deal making be on the table but I can't see it happening, especially not under this administration. If Le Pen got elected in France, I could maybe see her making such an offer, but Germany no way. 

 

Another thing I haven't seen the Euros address with their newfound talk about beefing up militarization is the demographic crisis. If they are serious about this, they will have to reinstate a draft of some kind, just like Ukraine itself had a draft long before this even started. I don't think Euros have really thought through what a remilitarized Europe actually looks like and how it would affect their societies. Also, I wondered about the "guns and butter" conundrum, whereas if countries with high taxes and robust welfare states like France and Germany want to beef up their military even more, how are they going to afford it, especially with an aging population who will use more and more benefits? I really think Europe is not thinking things through here, just reacting emotionally. When they have to sit down and crunch numbers, the reality might set in.

 

I personally don't understand why the US is so obsessed with viewing Russia as such a major threat, when like you said, they aren't exactly proving to be the huge wicked force everyone thought they were. Isn't it fairly obvious that in every single way, China is the actual peer competitor to the US, not Russia? I don't get this administration's obsession with Europe. Sure, short term arms dealing profits but.....that's idiotic. If we want to think long term, China is the true peer competitor in every way.

Edited April 14, 2022 by millefleur

[TBoneTX 45,654]

6 hours ago, Dashinka said:

"Let's be clear," Yellen said

Why did Richard Nixon come to mind?  "Let me be perfectly clear:  I am not a crook."