I have been watching University presentations and debates on this war to try to better understand the history and likely mindset of Putin. Detached from the daily horrors we are seeing, they are objective and unemotional analyses. The last I watched is from Yale, which threw up interesting points about Putin's particular, and totally incorrect, historical view of Ukraine's place in the world. One professor, Arne Westad, is a historian and an expert on China with live contacts there. What he had to say on their position, and potential role was interesting.

One concept that made me think was that this war has actually being going on since 2014, when Putin first invaded Ukraine, and is being fought on two fronts. The obvious military one and the second on the information battleground. He has not yet succeeded on the first, but on the second he has been winning hands down. We stood back and let him take Crimea primarily because of the disinformation he sowed.

We are getting smarter, and removed RT from our screens, although Gab, bless them have decided in the name of free speech, to allow it on their platform. We have no opportunity to directly address the Russian people and show them what they are not being allowed to see. The younger people are going to find things on the net, but for how much longer.

How we fight on this front needs to be thought about. Here is the Yale debate if anyone is interested:-

[Link]

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (15 Mar 2022 9.58am)

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Yep, its application is manifold.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Perhaps Ukraine might drop its application to join NATO and I would suggest that for the West this is perhaps a sensible solution as there is little advantage to the rest of the alliance in assimilating Ukraine.

In return Ukraine could demand that Russia must agree to an immediate ceasefire and withdraw to the Donbas lines.

Don't you think the States had a hand in the 2014 coup?

It would kind of be nice to think that the politics of strategically important countries were allowed to operate freely but personally I think that what comes out of Zelensky's mouth isn't going to diverge much from what Washington currently want.....it's become another proxy war.

Once the State department want peace I think you'll find Zelensky will want it too.

I don't think we have anyone with any talent in the Biden administration....but the Pentagon, at least still seem to have some sense.

There are only bad options to choose from.....the sooner they stop the war the better, as the innocent are the victims.... but I fear that this war is being seen as politically useful to the very worst kind of liars.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

A valid point. In my view it's wholly unrealistic to ask of a country whose people have just been brutalised and bombed to demilitarise. It would in no way ensure their safety going forward (quite the opposite), and it implies that the only reason Russia attacked was due to a fear of attack from Ukraine or NATO, rather than for ideological and cultural reasons. Which has little basis in reality to begin with.

Ukraine previously gave up nukes due to an agreement that their sovereignty would be respected and this is where it got them. We've seen what happened in Crimea and again now where they lack significant military threat not possess one, so I don't see demilitarising and any kind of solution. Also, a claim that Russia want them to be 'neutral' is Kremlin BS and then some. Ukraine would be ripe for all kinds of interference and attack. Nothing would change.

The only way the demilitarisation angle could work is if the West agreed to defend Ukraine if it was attacked again. Else it very clearly soon would be (with no way to protect itself). This could potentially work, but then essentially Russia WOULD have NATO in its doorstep, and so again the dangers multiply rather than diminish.

I think any compromise may be set around how long this war can be drawn out. If this is still going on in weeks time I see Russia being more likely to compromise due to the economical and military cost as well as the inevitable impact on the Russian population too through sanctions. If on the other hand victory comes soon for Russia, there will be no need for compromise, as Ukraine will become theirs... their problem, their bombed out Afghanistan to occupy.. their guerilla warfare situation.

Edited by BlueJay (15 Mar 2022 11.41am)

That's clearly a big unknown. It implies that nations just want what is fair or reasonable. Ukraine was clearly in Russia's plans. It's a dynamic that existed way beyond recent decades, or even our lifetimes. Putin's fine with it being a bombed out shell, as long as it's a Russian bombed out shell. No agreement that involved Ukraine having a different character and approach, either culturally, politically, or economically detached from Russia was going to be acceptable long term. The battered wife outlook that if we'd somehow behaved differently it wouldn't have happened, may have provided a temporary pause, but long term I doubt the outcome would've been different.