If Putin moves Against Estonia...

Childlike Empress said:
LOL. As I hinted at, your sources of information are crap. I advice you to follow the events with what these sources told you in mind. Don't let them get away with it.
Click to expand...

So you have no actual evidence to support your position?

I'll "advice" myself to continue not taking you seriously.
 
Russia might be in for hard times - but I don't think that is a certainty. They still run a trade surplus, they still have cash reserves to prop up the ruble, and the interest rake hike resembles the hike that was done in the U.S. back in the 1980's, which is credited with stopping inflation and stabilizing the economy.

Most of all, Russia doesn't have much of any government checks and balances anymore. Putin can do what he wants, and if he sees an opening he will take full advantage of it, fast.

Russia is clearly not in the best situation, and Russia caused it to be this way. Still, I would not be surprised if Russia still manages to pull a rabbit out of it's hat.
 
Nihilianth said:
I would argue that there is great risk involved for Putin.
Click to expand...

Risk of what? I don't see much stomach among NATO's political leaders to go to war with Russia over Estonia, especially if Putin plays the anschluss card again, like he did in Ukraine.

It's a proven technique, and he's already demonstrated that it's politically acceptable to NATO. Why wouldn't he double down on it if he saw a benefit? I think the lack of reward, not the potential risk of war, will be the deciding factor in Putin's calculus.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Risk of what? I don't see much stomach among NATO's political leaders to go to war with Russia over Estonia, especially if Putin plays the anschluss card again, like he did in Ukraine.

It's a proven technique, and he's already demonstrated that it's politically acceptable to NATO. Why wouldn't he double down on it if he saw a benefit? I think the lack of reward, not the potential risk of war, will be the deciding factor in Putin's calculus.
Click to expand...

There is a hugedifference between Estonia and the Ukraine that would make all the difference:

Estonia is a part of NATO, and the NATO Charter obligates NATO to come to the aid of any member who is attacked.
 
crescent said:
Most of all, Russia doesn't have much of any government checks and balances anymore. Putin can do what he wants
Click to expand...

Can he? They don't have much in the way of democratic checks and balances, but I'm not convinced that Russia's numerous oligarchs will stand idly on the sidelines in all scenarios that destroy their wealth and business opportunities. Putin can intimidate and twist the arm of one or two rebellious billionaires, but what if he's faced with 40 or 50?
 
Border Reiver said:
There is a hugedifference between Estonia and the Ukraine that would make all the difference:

Estonia is a part of NATO, and the NATO Charter obligates NATO to come to the aid of any member who is attacked.
Click to expand...

Politicians need the support of the people. Do you think the people of France or Germany or the U.S. would support going to war over some tiny Baltic country?
 
Fudbucker said:
Politicians need the support of the people. Do you think the people of France or Germany or the U.S. would support going to war over some tiny Baltic country?
Click to expand...

The domestic opinions of the people are irrelevant if they want you to walk away from an established international agreement. It's international political suicide to do so because you're admitting that your county's signature to a treaty, agreement, charter, etc. is meaningless or at best fair-weather.
 
Border Reiver said:
There is a hugedifference between Estonia and the Ukraine that would make all the difference:

Estonia is a part of NATO, and the NATO Charter obligates NATO to come to the aid of any member who is attacked.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends if Putin offers NATO any opportunity to spin the anschluss as something other than an "attack".

I mean, if Russia had invaded Ukraine and annexed the Crimea by naked force of arms, the world might have gone to war over that. But that's not what happened, is it? Nobody but the most unreconstructed cold-war hardliners are calling what happened in Crimea an "attack".

I can definitely see Obama and Merkel making sad puppy dog eyes at the world, while they explain that of course NATO would go to the aid of any member that was attacked, but what happened in Estonia--regrettable as it may seem--is a political and diplomatic event that requires a political and diplomatic solution. To rush to war over this would be an unforgivable violation of Russian sovereignty, and a grave sin against world peace.
 
Last edited:
Stacko said:
The domestic opinions of the people are irrelevant if they want you to walk away from an established international agreement. It's international political suicide to do so because you're admitting that your county's signature to a treaty, agreement, charter, etc. is meaningless or at best fair-weather.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the consequences of abandoning Estonia wouldn't be horrific- they would. But in any kind of democratic system, you need public support. If the American people overwhelmingly oppose yet another foreign adventure, the House simply won't fund it.
 
theprestige said:
I guess it depends if Putin offers NATO any opportunity to spin the anschluss as something other than an "attack".

I mean, if Russia had invaded Ukraine and annexed the Crimea by naked force of arms, the world might have gone to war over that. But that's not what happened, is it? Nobody but the most unreconstructed cold-war hardliners are calling what happened in Crimea an "attack".

I can definitely see Obama and Merkel making sad puppy dog eyes at the world, while they explain that of course NATO would go to the aid of any member that was attacked, but what happened in Estonia--regrettable as it may seem--is a political and diplomatic event that requires a political and diplomatic solution. To rush to war over this would be an unforgivable violation of Russian sovereignty, and a grave sin against world peace.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The Estonians would "vote" to join the Russian Federation, and we would strongly condemn Russian aggression.

Where I think we would not put up with something like that is if Russia tried that with a long-standing NATO member, like Poland.
 
timhau said:
Will Estonia be a long-standing member in 2019?
Click to expand...

Not compared to the original NATO members. NATO developed as a way to protect Western Europe against Soviet Aggression. It took on a new role when the Soviet Union collapsed. Estonia isn't even close to the North Atlantic.
 
theprestige said:
Why, is 2019 the expiration date on Europe's "let's avoid war with Russia" warranty?
Click to expand...

Sorry, that was too snarky, even for me. Let me try again: What should NATO do, in 2019, if Russia does in Estonia what it just did in Crimea?

If Putin foments unrest in [ETA] Crimea Estonia, gives aid and comfort to pro-Russian agitators, and accomplishes a vote for union with Russia? If he then moves Russian troops into Estonia to protect the ethnic Russians and pro-Russian sympathizers, and to put down any opposition that remains?

Should NATO then move its own troops into Estonia? Drive out the Russian army? Seize the capital, establish martial law, and hold new elections in the face of Russian protests? Is that what NATO should do? Start a shooting war with Russia, just to reverse Russia's peaceful annexation of Estonia? I would say, "yes!", but I'm an unreconstructed cold war hard-liner. I don't think there are enough like me among NATO's political leadership for Putin to be too worried about that.
 
Last edited:
Fudbucker said:
Not compared to the original NATO members. NATO developed as a way to protect Western Europe against Soviet Aggression. It took on a new role when the Soviet Union collapsed. Estonia isn't even close to the North Atlantic.
Click to expand...

Poland wasn't a part of the old NATO, nor is it on the Atlantic.
 
theprestige said:
Sorry, that was too snarky, even for me. Let me try again: What should NATO do, in 2019, if Russia does in Estonia what it just did in Crimea?

If Putin foments unrest in Crimea, gives aid and comfort to pro-Russian agitators, and accomplishes a vote for union with Russia? If he then moves Russian troops into Estonia to protect the ethnic Russians and pro-Russian sympathizers, and to put down any opposition that remains?

Should NATO then move its own troops into Estonia? Drive out the Russian army? Seize the capital, establish martial law, and hold new elections in the face of Russian protests? Is that what NATO should do? Start a shooting war with Russia, just to reverse Russia's peaceful annexation of Estonia? I would say, "yes!", but I'm an unreconstructed cold war hard-liner. I don't think there are enough like me among NATO's political leadership for Putin to be too worried about that.
Click to expand...

The reason the year 2019 was chosen is because in that year Estonia will have been a part of NATO for as long as Poland has today. It was a challenge of Fudbuckers claim that Putin wouldn't try his aggression on a long standing NATO member, like Poland.
 
uke2se said:
The reason the year 2019 was chosen is because in that year Estonia will have been a part of NATO for as long as Poland has today. It was a challenge of Fudbuckers claim that Putin wouldn't try his aggression on a long standing NATO member, like Poland.
Click to expand...

I figured it was some kind of gotcha game along those lines. Thus the snarky reply.

Seriously, though, I think to Americans of a certain age and outlook, it seems like Poland has been a friend and ally of the US for a long time--much longer than the years of its NATO membership. I think that it's that historical rapport, rather than its NATO birthday, that would make a difference between Poland and Estonia.

That, and about a score of other factors, the greatest of which is the lack of any significant profit for Russia in annexing Estonia at this time.
 
theprestige said:
Sorry, that was too snarky, even for me. Let me try again: What should NATO do, in 2019, if Russia does in Estonia what it just did in Crimea?

If Putin foments unrest in [ETA] Crimea Estonia, gives aid and comfort to pro-Russian agitators, and accomplishes a vote for union with Russia? If he then moves Russian troops into Estonia to protect the ethnic Russians and pro-Russian sympathizers, and to put down any opposition that remains?

Should NATO then move its own troops into Estonia? Drive out the Russian army? Seize the capital, establish martial law, and hold new elections in the face of Russian protests? Is that what NATO should do? Start a shooting war with Russia, just to reverse Russia's peaceful annexation of Estonia? I would say, "yes!", but I'm an unreconstructed cold war hard-liner. I don't think there are enough like me among NATO's political leadership for Putin to be too worried about that.
Click to expand...


Given that ethnic Russians are not a majority in Estonia, or any of the Baltic States, you'd need some "interesting" voter results to get the "Anschluss " result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom