Required reading: what Vladimir Putin really wants

[Giz]

Inspired by the ISIS thread, I thought this article summarized Putin's ambitions and methods pretty well, putting the Ukraine in the context of larger efforts to undo the post cold war settlement:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features...-putin-is-waging-war-on-the-west-and-winning/


[edit: damn - screwed up the title!]

 

[Caper]

Russia is scary.

 

[angrysoba]

I have to wonder about the context of Applebaum's opening anecdote. I'm going to guess the Russian guy talking about referendums was talking in the context of Crimea being absorbed by Russia and asking rhetorically or jokingly, if Germany could reunify without a referendum then why can't Russia when it has gone the extra step of having one in Crimea? Or words to that effect.

As for the rest, I wonder how much influence Russia can really buy when it is supposedly being bankrupted by sanctions. I don't doubt that Russia would prefer to weaken the EU but the EU has been weakened plenty enough by its own performance and its own critics within its member nations. I doubt a lot of critics actually need to be paid by Putin to criticize it.

 

[CapelDodger]

Russia is scary.

Another problem we could do without.

 

[CapelDodger]

"The post-Cold War settlement" - when and where was that settled, who by, and where can we find the minutes?

 

[Loss Leader]

Typo fixed

Posted By: Loss Leader

 

[Childlike Empress]

Anne Applebaum? LOL

 

[McHrozni]

As for the rest, I wonder how much influence Russia can really buy when it is supposedly being bankrupted by sanctions. I don't doubt that Russia would prefer to weaken the EU but the EU has been weakened plenty enough by its own performance and its own critics within its member nations. I doubt a lot of critics actually need to be paid by Putin to criticize it.

Resources required to create chaos and unrest are several orders of magnitude lower than the resources needed to fix it and run the country as needed. There are a few numbers in France - €9 million loan to LePen and another €30 million promised. That's peanuts, even for a bankrupt Russia.

If the article is correct - and a lot of it rings true - Putin is massively overplaying his hand. Even if he succeeds, and European experiment unravels, few and fewer countries will flock to him. He offers nothing, except maybe a means for a corrupt class to sustain itself in an impoverished country. That was what brought Ukraine to revolt twice in a decade. Russia can't even afford to keep Ukraine in check in this way, I can't imagine it working on a significantly more prosperous and west oriented Poland. He may have a shot with Orban and Edrogan, but that's it for the time being, and it's unclear if he can afford either.

It could be that Putler will be what unites Europe in the end. He is a clear and present threat Europe didn't create, want, seek or desire. He can't be blamed on Americans either. Certainly having an external enemy to unite against would help the European experiment.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

I was talking to a defence analyst over dinner last night who specialises in Russian affairs and although I'm sure he was dumbing things down for an inexpert audience the gist of it was that until a couple of years ago the actions of the Russian government and of Putin in particular could be explained in terms of attempting to satisfy the requirements of a cadre of acquisitive oligarchs. Whilst you may not agree with the actions, they made sense in that narrow economic context.

He said that recently Putin's decisions were no making good economic sense which in turn made the whole situation far more volatile. If you don't know what someone's objectives are then it's difficult to plan to counter them. Although he didn't think we were in a state of "OMFG WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE IN A NUCLEAR FIREBALL !!!11!!!!!!!1!", he termed the situation "unsettling" and left it at that.

 

[McHrozni]

I was talking to a defence analyst over dinner last night who specialises in Russian affairs and although I'm sure he was dumbing things down for an inexpert audience the gist of it was that until a couple of years ago the actions of the Russian government and of Putin in particular could be explained in terms of attempting to satisfy the requirements of a cadre of acquisitive oligarchs. Whilst you may not agree with the actions, they made sense in that narrow economic context.

He said that recently Putin's decisions were no making good economic sense which in turn made the whole situation far more volatile. If you don't know what someone's objectives are then it's difficult to plan to counter them. Although he didn't think we were in a state of "OMFG WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE IN A NUCLEAR FIREBALL !!!11!!!!!!!1!", he termed the situation "unsettling" and left it at that.

I have a hypothesis as to why that is. He really does have cancer and knows his time is short. He wants to leave a legacy that will see him taxidermied and put on display next to and slightly above Lenin in the Red Square when he croaks. It could be something relatively benign, a slowly progressing prostate cancer for example, but enough for him to be fully aware of his own mortality.

One thing is certain - something caused him to go haywire, and an incurable disease is as good possibility as it gets.

McHrozni

 

[Aber]

Or just the passage of time - dictators tend to get cocooned in a sanitised bubble. How long has he been effectively running Russia, c 15 years?

 

[McHrozni]

Or just the passage of time - dictators tend to get cocooned in a sanitised bubble. How long has he been effectively running Russia, c 15 years?

It's certainly also possible, although the issue began in 2008 at latest, just 8 years into his reign. It's not a new thing, really. Of course the passage of time is a possibility, I just think it's less likely than a fairly common external factor that pushed him over the edge. The incidence of prostate cancer is over 0,5% per year in his age group.

McHrozni

 

[Craig B]

Anne Applebaum? LOL

She's certainly a sabre-rattler!

On March 7, in another article in the Telegraph discussing an information war, Applebaum argued that "a robust campaign to tell the truth about Crimea is needed to counter Moscow's lies." At the end of August, while acknowledging that the question might sound "hysterical, and foolishly apocalyptic, to American or Western European readers" she asked whether Ukraine should prepare for "total war" with Russia and whether central Europeans should join them.

 

[dudalb]

So now some people here are going do the ostrich bit with regard to PUtin as well as to ISIS?

 

[dudalb]

And I note the bad mouthing of Anne Applabaum. Some people on the left will never forgive her for 'The Gulag" which totally destoryed the idea that somehow the Soviet Union was "never as bad as Nazi Germany".

 

[angrysoba]

And I note the bad mouthing of Anne Applabaum. Some people on the left will never forgive her for 'The Gulag" which totally destoryed the idea that somehow the Soviet Union was "never as bad as Nazi Germany".

This is confusing. Who on this thread are you referring to? And what is your opinion on the relative evils of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany?

 

[angrysoba]

Ann Applebaum says this at the beginning of her article:

Last week, the Russian foreign minister, speaking at a security conference in Munich, hinted that he might have similar doubts. ‘Germany’s reunification was conducted without any referendum,’ he declared, ominously.

She suggests that Russia wants to reverse the reunification of Germany with this quote and it made me a little suspicious.

Earlier I suggested this...

I have to wonder about the context of Applebaum's opening anecdote. I'm going to guess the Russian guy talking about referendums was talking in the context of Crimea being absorbed by Russia and asking rhetorically or jokingly, if Germany could reunify without a referendum then why can't Russia when it has gone the extra step of having one in Crimea? Or words to that effect.

So, I looked up the context and found it was indeed in the context of Crimea being absorbed by Russia. It's also important to note what Applebaum has snipped off the end of her quote:

Crimean residents saw what was happening in Ukraine. At the very early stages of the crisis, the Right Sector made attempts to break through and seize administrative buildings, but they were stopped by voluntary people’s guards at the isthmus. Then, referendums on Crimea’s independence and then on incorporation into Russia were held. In Kosovo, no referendum was held, although US President Barack Obama recently claimed Kosovo as an exemplary case, as people voted in a referendum there. No referendums were held in Kosovo, nor were many other “referendums.” Germany’s reunification was conducted without any referendum, and we actively supported this.

 

[Craig B]

And I note the bad mouthing of Anne Applabaum. Some people on the left will never forgive her for 'The Gulag" which totally destoryed the idea that somehow the Soviet Union was "never as bad as Nazi Germany".

No, I "bad mouthed" her for the suggestion that East European countries should engage in total war against the USSR. I don't think that's the best policy at present.

I doubt if Applebaum considers the USSR as bad as Nazi Germany. She is married to former Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski and became a Polish citizen in 2013, so she is well acquainted with that country. The Soviet-dominated Polish régime, while vile, was hardly as bad as the Nazi "Generalgovernment". It was oppressive, but not genocidal.

 

[dudalb]

No, I "bad mouthed" her for the suggestion that East European countries should engage in total war against the USSR. I don't think that's the best policy at present.

I doubt if Applebaum considers the USSR as bad as Nazi Germany. She is married to former Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski and became a Polish citizen in 2013, so she is well acquainted with that country. The Soviet-dominated Polish régime, while vile, was hardly as bad as the Nazi "Generalgovernment". It was oppressive, but not genocidal.

True, but Stalin policies were often Genocidal.You can ask the Ukranians about that.

 

[Beerina]

Who in East Germany didn't want reunification, aside from a handful of crooks and thugs in the government who knew they would probably face trial?

That's completely different from something like this, even assuming the validity of the poll itself, highly questionable given an invading army standing with a hand on your shoulder.

Hell, I would argue that a popular vote to join a dictator is invalid on its face, regardless of sentiment. You may have a right to go live under him, but you have zero right to drag others into dictatorship.

Voting is not a holy grail cleansing and justifyng everthing it touches. In a separatist case, it should be a supermajority as it is a constitutional-formation level issue. And even then only valid insofar as it transfers to, or creates, a nation of similar or greater freedom.