Russia - General Discussion.

[JGCAC]

I didn't want to drag the Donbass thread off topic, but this needs to be said, so I'm posting it here.

The Western response to Russian fake news has been counterproductive. Fake news and trolling are being applied overly generously even to legitimate dissenting views. Things like the Defencetalk "trolling" label on posts are part of this regrettable trend.

As such, Western media have made it difficult to express genuine criticism of Western countries and their policies. It also had a chilling effect on free speech. Meanwhile, there's been no effect absolutely on the creation and spread of Russian fake news at the source.

Now, I don't know what the solution is. But I am starting to think this response will be more damaging to the West in the long run than Russian fake news. It seems like the first casualty has been nuanced discussion which is necessary to get closer to the truth.

This is not to suggest I naively believe Russian fake news will stop if we just have a free for all discussion. But as I mentioned above, Russia et al will produce fake news no matter what we do or don't do in the West. But the current paradigm has always been a deeply suboptimal solution. We can and must do better.

To pre-empt any allegations/accusations against me, please note the following:

I am a citizen of a Western country and I've been here all my life.
I am a big fan of classical Western values and I see these countries as the best societies ever created in history.
Politically, I am a classical liberal with a mix of moderate left and right views.

 

[JGCAC]

Another point is that the ICBM based on the submarines cannot fly far enough, so the submarines have to stay close to US Navy (who has a lot of anti missile stuff there).

I don't think this is accurate. IIRC, the Delta boomers are equipped with upgraded Sineva missiles with a range of 8,000 km or more. That's enough to reach the American Northeast from the Barents Sea.

 

[John Fedup]

An interesting interview in this Cipher Brief article wrt Putin and his inner circle as to what might happen if certain insiders perceive Russia might implode as a result of the Ukraine invasion. The other aspect of course would be the insider reaction to Putin’s consideration of the nuclear option.

The Risks Facing Putin and his Inner Circle

Cipher Brief Expert and former Senior Member of the CIA's Clandestine Service, Steven Hall shares insights on President Putin's Inner Circle

www.thecipherbrief.com

 

[Rob c]

An interesting article on the Ukrainian Russian war with an interesting diagram illustrating both Russian military spending and the conflicts that they have been involved in since the break up of the USSR. While they have been in conflicts for most of that time, it would have to be pointed out that so has the USA.

Russia-Ukraine war military dispatch: March 9, 2022

 

[Feanor]

I have found 1 more article about nuclear weapons in Russia. It is written in quite anti-Russian style, however it might contain interesting ideas.

The author says that the a lot of nuclear warheads, that are currently present in Russia, might not be in the good state, as they are too old and Russia stops the production of the plutonium for warheads as well as probably don’t have enough specialists to restart the production. And the maintenance of the existing warheads is also a difficult and very expensive process.

Another point is that the ICBM based on the submarines cannot fly far enough, so the submarines have to stay close to US Navy (who has a lot of anti missile stuff there).

Also, the distance that missiles launched from Topol-M have a reduced range when we install a warhead big enough to make a sense to launch it.

Ядерный блеф России

Пока политологи ведут дискуссии вокруг будущего постфедеративного пространства, последний редут евразийской империи подданные г-на Путина теплятся надеждой, что распада России никогда не произойдет, патамуша этого просто не может произойти. Логика железная. И, как аргумент в их подсознании…

oleg-leusenko.livejournal.com

I wouldn't trust that article. Consider the following:

"На России утеряна даже технология изготовления стволов для танковых пушек, после нескольких первых выстрелов полет следующих снарядов у нового российского танка мало предсказуем. "

Translated "Russia has lost even the technology of producing barrels for tank guns, after the first several shots the trajectory of further shels from a new Russian tank is unpredictable."

This is a pretty strange claim since production of MBTs in Russia never really stopped with T-72 production continuing through the 90s for export, and T-90 production picking up for India almost immediately after and conitnuing uninterrupted since then. When would the technology become "lost"? And if the situation is this bad, why does the T-90 tank sell so well? It's been purchased and delivered to India, Algeria, Vietnam, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Uganda, and Turkmenistan. Granted I can believe that Uganda and Turkmenistan could be duped, but Iraq and Azerbaijan used these tanks in combat, and neither India nor Algeria strke me as the kind of customer to continue purchasing tanks that literally can't shoot straight.

An extremely odd claim. It was followed by a claim that the west secretly calculated when the last Soviet warheads wouldn't work anymore, and after that they were willing to completely disregard Russian interests. It of course ignores the fact that production of nuclear weapons in Russia never stopped. New Topol missiles continued production in the 90's, Topol'-Ms in the 2000s. It's theoretically plausible that these all used Soviet warheads, but the new Yars came along, and it had a new MIRV warhead, on a missile very similar to the Topol'-M. Those can't be repurposed warheads. There was also info of "special" warheads (WMD warheads) for the Iskander showing up. Russia doesn't operate anything CBRN except nuclear so it's almost certainly a nuclear warhead.

It then goes on to fancifully interpret a statement from Condoleeza Rice. In respones to a statement from then president Medvedev about a plan for new SLBM carrying submarines with a statement that this would not alter the strategic balance. The article then claims that this is because Russia has no warheads for the new Bulava missiles. This is a rather odd interpretation. The obvious interpretation is that Russia is replacing a large old Soviet SLBM truck fleet with a new fleet of similar-ish more modern subs. Even at 1 for 1 this doesn't alter the strategic balance, and Russia can't afford a 1 for 1 replacement.

He then goes on to do some strange projection math regarding how many nukes Russia will have in 2015 (145 ICBMs). If anyone is interested, here's the actual numbers.

Current status - Russian strategic nuclear forces

It reads like either highly biased anti-Russian fanboy nonsense, or active propaganda. I'm not sure which but I wouldn't trust it as credible. To inject a little reality, RosAtom is a highly successfuly nuclear technology corporation. The idea that they don't have the ability to replicate Soviet plutonium production from decades ago is rather silly.

 

[danonz]

Russia's response to the Unfriendly countries and Sanctions

Russia Imposes a Series of Measures and Countermeasures to Address the Economic Impact of Sanctions | JD Supra

In response to the economic sanctions and export controls imposed on Russia by the US, EU, UK and other major economies, Russia imposed measures and...

www.jdsupra.com

Looks like any loans owned by Russian entities to unfriendly countries cant be paid unless in rubles.

• As of March 1, 2022, Russian residents are prohibited from providing foreign currency to non-residents under loan agreements.
• Russian government approval is needed for any transactions with Persons of Unfriendly Countries involving securities, loans and foreign currency transactions.

If they get paid in rubles sounds like the unfriendly countries own sanctions wont allow it, so will unfriendly entity will need a Russian bank account to hold their rubles till sanctions are removed.

I'm not sure how much foreign debt Russia has to unfriendly countries but I'm guessing EU counties have some rubles coming its way.
This and I also read some where the will not prosecute software piracy if it is from an unfriendly countries that wont sell licenses.

 

[Ananda]

they get paid in rubles sounds like the unfriendly countries own sanctions wont allow it, so will unfriendly entity will need a Russian bank account to hold their rubles till sanctions are removed.

Theoritically they can use Chinese markets (like Shanghai and Hong Kong), since those markets still open banking relationship and exchange rate market with Russian Banks. So they still technically open with Ruble market.

The question now if Putin's only allowed the payment using Russian market rate. If that happen yes, they have to work with some of Russian Bank that still has SWIFT access (as not all Russian Bank according to latest ban are cut off from SWIFT).

How Significant Is Russia’s Partial Ban from SWIFT?

The move demonstrates the seriousness of the effort to punish Putin’s regime, but the effects may be limited.

www.newyorker.com

So just the article put, there are 'midle guys' in the market that can arrange the exchange. However it will cost higher. In short by using those guys, the 'unfiendly' lenders will have to take significant higher cuts on the exchange rate transaction.

I believe that's what Putin aim, he wants West to take hit also, not just Russian.

 

[Ananda]

Ukraine - Global Economic Dislocation has just Started - Armada International

As the assessment by our colleagues at TangentLink notes, the economic impact of Russia's invasion of Ukraine is likely to be complex and wide-ranging.

www.armadainternational.com

This is quite good article from Armada International. It is quite realistic on looking how the effect on the Two War that being done so far. War in the Ground between Russia and Ukraine, and Trade War between West and Russia.

Stable economy need access to relatively stable energy price. Especially after two years of COVID can Euro Zone population (as they will beared the biggest impact on Energy war) willing to take more pressure after two years of COVID.

Russian population will take higher burden, but not the Oligarchs. As their fortunes come from Russia vast resources, and many non Western nations will still take Russian relatively cheaper energy sources to safe guard their own economy.

As long as the Oligarchs can still make money, Putin can still use them to provide some stabilisation on Russian basic domestic need. Thus reducing potential risk of popular uprising.

Whatever happens on the ground war result, the damage on relationship between West and Russia already happen and quite irreversible. Thus West especially Euro Zone must need to go back to Nuclear energy to provide their own stable energy sources, despite what those liberal green thinking.

 

[Ananda]

China seems going to stick with Russia, and blame US and West campaign to push them appart as part of US hegemony policies. Their point to US and West that push Ukraine and Russia conflict to breaking point, clearly shown support for Russia position.

Add:
One thing of that position, is China want the Trade progress as usual with China. However seems their company still watching the development. China position with Russia will going to impact their brand market in the west, however in over time will put Russian dependence for Chinese market substatially increase. The trend will move that way.

Subscribe to read

www.ft.com

 

[denix56]

China seems going to stick with Russia, and blame US and West campaign to push them appart as part of US hegemony policies. Their point to US and West that push Ukraine and Russia conflict to breaking point, clearly shown support for Russia position.

Add:
One thing of that position, is China want the Trade progress as usual with China. However seems their company still watching the development. China position with Russia will going to impact their brand market in the west, however in over time will put Russian dependence for Chinese market substatially increase. The trend will move that way.

Subscribe to read

www.ft.com

To me it seems that China sticks to Russia enough only to be able to consume it later. China needs to sell their goods somewhere and bad relations with the West (especially Europe) will not help in the trade war with USA. Russia is much less important market that the Western coutries.
I suppose this is the goal of Chinese media to show support of Russia without actual support to avoid any sanctions / bad relations with West. Russia cannot afford to accuse China of not supporting enough as it is actually the only influential country left, who is not with the West (India and Israel just don't say anything as the relations with Russia are important for them for now, however I think they do not support it too).

Russia says China refuses to supply aircraft parts after sanctions

China has refused to supply Russian airlines with aircraft parts, an official at Russia's aviation authority was quoted by Russian news agencies as saying on Thursday, after Boeing and Airbus halted supply of components.

www.reuters.com

For example China refused to provide parts for airplanes to avoid sanctions. There were also reports, that Chinese phone manufacturers halved the amount of phones imported in Russia due to economic problems / sanctions, but they do not admit it publicly as China "supports" Russia.
Russian economy will decline pretty fast in the following years and there is no reason to hold too tight to it if it can worsen realtions with multiple times larger markets.

 

[Ananda]

The Russian economy will decline pretty fast in the following years and there is no reason to hold too tight to it if it can worsen realtions with multiple times larger markets.

Russia economy will suffer from the sanctions. However so does the West, especially Euro Zone.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/11/gol...-europes-economy-if-putin-shuts-off-gas. html

There are already two nation with large hydrocarbon reserve that West already hostile with, Iran and Venezuala. With Russia is already making three. Do West can survive of total blockage of three large hydrocarbon reserves ? Market don't think so.

Politically EU want to reduce dependency to Russian Gas. However, how to do it, not sure about it. The EU parliement full of SJW leaning politicians, that want to Tax energy company to retribute their income to consumers. Sound socialism to me, and don't see that will work.

The matra of more green energy is much of wishy washy. How to provide that investment when you are going to recession due to energy war with Russia? The EU parliement avoiding talk to go back to one Energy that can do it, which is Nuclear. That's why this talk on fast switching to green energy without Nuclear is just liberals dream.

For next two to three years, EU still need Russian hydrocarbon resources, and that the same period for Russia to find new market for their energy export. Remember Russia resources are also not only related to Hydrocarbon. Russia still has much other resources that global market needs outside hydrocarbon.

In short West still need hydrocarbon energy for foreseable future. Russia on the other hand also sit on resources that still be needed after (or "if") global market switch from hydrocarbon energy.

China refused to provide parts for airplanes to avoid sanctions. There were also reports that Chinese phone manufacturers halved the amount of phones

Off course China can not provide the Parts, it is western parts anyway. They can get problem with Airbus and Boeing, for their own supply. However don't think you can not get those parts, even with sanctions. Iran Boeing and Airbus airplanes can still fly with parts from 'grey' market, even with much longer sanctions.

USSR use their own airliners, can Russia make their own aerospace industry to turn the clock for self sufficient ? Time will tell but don't discount them. MC-21 and Sukhoi Superjet already have version that rellied more on Russian parts. This situation potentialy will also increase the speed for China and Russia to improve their collaboration on Airliners. CR929 (so call A330 and 787 competitors) seems got some problem on work and tech sharing agreement. However it can be change as China also can see what happen to Russia can happen to them.

So Russia economy will get hurt for this year and next, but so does Euro Zone on this trade war. The third year market predict both economy will stabilize, as potentially each of them already make their own adjustment.

I already put Moody's projection on that, and it is one of projection from market that say more or less similar thing. Don't discount the Russian economy future yet. For me on matter of economy, I trust the market more then Politicians.

Add:
Market also predict their assumption base on Short or Long War in Ukraine. Short War (less than two months) can potentially stabilize the economy of both West and Russia faster. Remember, Western population already facing Covid recession this last two years, don't think they have patience with their own Politicians if they drag the trade war longer, when Ukraine and Russia already making settlement.

 

[denix56]

Russia economy will suffer from the sanctions. However so does the West, especially Euro Zone.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/11/gol...-europes-economy-if-putin-shuts-off-gas. html

There are already two nation with large hydrocarbon reserve that West already hostile with, Iran and Venezuala. With Russia is already making three. Do West can survive of total blockage of three large hydrocarbon reserves ? Market don't think so.

Politically EU want to reduce dependency to Russian Gas. However, how to do it, not sure about it. The EU parliement full of SJW leaning politicians, that want to Tax energy company to retribute their income to consumers. Sound socialism to me, and don't see that will work.

The matra of more green energy is much of wishy washy. How to provide that investment when you are going to recession due to energy war with Russia? The EU parliement avoiding talk to go back to one Energy that can do it, which is Nuclear. That's why this talk on fast switching to green energy without Nuclear is just liberals dream.

For next two to three years, EU still need Russian hydrocarbon resources, and that the same period for Russia to find new market for their energy export. Remember Russia resources are also not only related to Hydrocarbon. Russia still has much other resources that global market needs outside hydrocarbon.

In short West still need hydrocarbon energy for foreseable future. Russia on the other hand also sit on resources that still be needed after (or "if") global market switch from hydrocarbon energy.



Off course China can not provide the Parts, it is western parts anyway. They can get problem with Airbus and Boeing, for their own supply. However don't think you can not get those parts, even with sanctions. Iran Boeing and Airbus airplanes can still fly with parts from 'grey' market, even with much longer sanctions.

USSR use their own airliners, can Russia make their own aerospace industry to turn the clock for self sufficient ? Time will tell but don't discount them. MC-21 and Sukhoi Superjet already have version that rellied more on Russian parts. This situation potentialy will also increase the speed for China and Russia to improve their collaboration on Airliners. CR929 (so call A330 and 787 competitors) seems got some problem on work and tech sharing agreement. However it can be change as China also can see what happen to Russia can happen to them.

So Russia economy will get hurt for this year and next, but so does Euro Zone on this trade war. The third year market predict both economy will stabilize, as potentially each of them already make their own adjustment.

I already put Moody's projection on that, and it is one of projection from market that say more or less similar thing. Don't discount the Russian economy future yet. For me on matter of economy, I trust the market more then Politicians.

Add:
Market also predict their assumption base on Short or Long War in Ukraine. Short War (less than two months) can potentially stabilize the economy of both West and Russia faster. Remember, Western population already facing Covid recession this last two years, don't think they have patience with their own Politicians if they drag the trade war longer, when Ukraine and Russia already making settlement.

The world is moving to other, eco energy sources. China as well as the West targets to reduce the emissions in near future as it starts to cause financial issues for them. China stopped financing the new foreign coal power plants and will probably help with the renewable energy power plants.

China to stop all overseas coal power funding by end of 2021 | World Economic Forum

The oil and gas from Russia will help in the short term, but if they plan to reduce CO2 in the long term they might switch, at least partially, to something different.

 

[Ananda]

world is moving to other, eco energy sources. China as well as the West targets to reduce the emissions in near future as it starts to cause financial issues for them.

Yes, but it will not be in this 2-3 years. Even 5-6 years it is very ambitious. Euro zone will have more incentive after this to there, China already shown their interest on fasten their transition.

This is already been talk on other thread on alternative energy. The problem to make the Eco green energy, present tech and capacity for this solar, wind, etc is not there yet to replace total energy capabilities from hydrocarbon.

So I'm very sceptical that any countries that want to do it can really get rid of hydrocarbon in this decade, unless they increase the nuclear capabilities. That's the only sources of non hydrocarbon energy sources under present tech, that have enough capacity to replace most of hydro carbon. However most green and SJW politicians and their pressure Group don't like it. Thus Euro Zone especially have to choose on either increase the nuclear back or still have to rely on hydro carbon until at least this decade.

Even countries like Indonesia that have one of the largest geothermal potential in the world (due to location in ring of fire), found geothermal that in paper can potentially reduce half of Indonesian hydrocarbon need, in reality is very hard and tricky to extract.

Thus Euro zone for at least this 2-3 years will be very difficult to really get rid of hydro carbon, even they increase the Investment in green energy substantially. Related to this thread, they'll have to work with Russia or have to pay higher bill to do it. Thus cutting off Russia entirely by Euro zone is something that market sceptical they can do it even for this decade, let alone in just 2-3 years. Unless they go back to Nuclear.

Add:
You can look to the other thread on alternative energy within off topic section. Consumers being push by EU to go green by switching to EV or Hydrogen cars. However what green about that when those electricity and hydrogen produce from Hydrocarbon sources.

 

[T.C.P]

Yes, but it will not be in this 2-3 years. Even 5-6 years it is very ambitious. Euro zone will have more incentive after this to there, China already shown their interest on fasten their transition.

This is already been talk on other thread on alternative energy. The problem to make the Eco green energy, present tech and capacity for this solar, wind, etc is not there yet to replace total energy capabilities from hydrocarbon.

So I'm very sceptical that any countries that want to do it can really get rid of hydrocarbon in this decade, unless they increase the nuclear capabilities. That's the only sources of non hydrocarbon energy sources under present tech, that have enough capacity to replace most of hydro carbon. However most green and SJW politicians and their pressure Group don't like it. Thus Euro Zone especially have to choose on either increase the nuclear back or still have to rely on hydro carbon until at least this decade.

Even countries like Indonesia that have one of the largest geothermal potential in the world (due to location in ring of fire), found geothermal that in paper can potentially reduce half of Indonesian hydrocarbon need, in reality is very hard and tricky to extract.

Thus Euro zone for at least this 2-3 years will be very difficult to really get rid of hydro carbon, even they increase the Investment in green energy substantially. Related to this thread, they'll have to work with Russia or have to pay higher bill to do it. Thus cutting off Russia entirely by Euro zone is something that market sceptical they can do it even for this decade, let alone in just 2-3 years. Unless they go back to Nuclear.

Add:
You can look to the other thread on alternative energy within off topic section. Consumers being push by EU to go green by switching to EV or Hydrogen cars. However what green about that when those electricity and hydrogen produce from Hydrocarbon sources.

2-3, more like 10. France is the only one who can do it fast thanks to their nuclear tech and even then their newest reactors will probably not be operational before 2030.

Regarding Nordstream 2, what are the chances that Germany certifies it 2-3 years after the Ukranian war ends? I think its relatively high, they need cheap gas.

 

[Ananda]

Regarding Nordstream 2, what are the chances that Germany certifies it 2-3 years after the Ukranian war ends? I think its relatively high, they need cheap gas.

Honestly speaking, that's billions dollar question that many market analysis in Euro Zone still graping to answer it. Basically I suspect (base on market assesment), it will depend on how long and how far this war going to end.

That's what make thing difficult to completely cut off Russia. Despite what EU Presiden Von der Layen talk tough on Russia, Market still not see how they are going to winding down Russian Hydrocarbon soon. Even they want to pay much higher prices, there are supply problem that will limit for wholle Euro Zone demand. Even they go with getting supply from two other western pariah, Venezuella and Iran, there's problem on deteriorating production capacity from those two suppliers due to long term sanction.

In the mean time other market that still need Russian Energy, will still moving on, and finding alternative for Russian Trade.

India and Russia explore payment options for crude

India and sanctions-hit Russia are exploring the possibility of using China’s yuan as a reference currency to value the rupee-ruble trade mechanism, two Indian government officials aware of the development said.

www.livemint.com

 

[Vivendi]

Latest poll in Finland shows that support for NATO has increased further -- 62% are now in favor of NATO membership. YLE: Support for Nato membership rises to 62% in Finland (helsinkitimes.fi)

Noteworthy that females are now in favor. Also the Left Alliance has gone from clearly opposing NATO (before February 24) to now supporting NATO membership. Also noteworthy that support from NATO membership increases to 74% if the Finnish government concludes Finland should join, and 77% if Sweden decides to join at the same time.

This change in opinion is huge.

I have not seen any very recent Swedish polls -- one was done early in the conflict, showing 51% of Swedes wanted to join NATO, 37% against, and 21% undecided, the first poll ever to show a majority supporting Swedish membership. För första gången vill en majoritet av svenskarna att vi går med i Nato (aftonbladet.se)

The two countries have a very close defense collaboration. If Finland decides to join, it's highly likely that Sweden will also join, even if the current Swedish prime minister seems to be against joining, at least at this point in time.

In the meantime, Russia has again threatened Sweden and Finland, warning about "military and political consequences" should they decide to join. Russian Official Warns Finland, Sweden Against Joining NATO (bloombergquint.com)

I hope both Sweden and Finland will join NATO, the sooner the better. This will stabilize the whole Baltic sea region and neutralize any threats from Russia. And Russia will hopefully start to acknowledge that in spite of all their paranoia, NATO is not a military threat to Russia, it never was.

It is however threat to Putin's dreams of a new Russian empire.

 

[Vivendi]

As of today, almost 400 companies have withdrawn from Russia. Link

Several still remain active though, in particular Schlumberger, Baker Hughes, and Halliburton. These are oil and gas service companies, and they have so far decided to stay in Russia.

This rapid exodus of so many companies from Russia is unprecedented to my knowledge.

In other news, EU imposed additonal sanctions on Russia yesterday: EU imposes 4th set of sanctions against Russia for war | AP News.
Japan (link) and Australia link also expands sanctions.

An "old" article from March 8 concluded already that Russia had become the "most sanctioned" country in the world: link

As my links above show, since then it has only gone downhill for Russia.

Another significant development is that a large number of Russians are now fleeing Russia. Tiny Georgia has seen an influx of 25,000 Russians, and one estimate put the total number of Russians fleeing Russia at more than 200,000 since the start of the war. link

Many of those fleeing Russia are resourceful, and often in tech industries, in other words a significant "brain drain".

FIDE President and former Russian Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich condemns the invasion in Ukraine. Referring to the invasion as a "war" he is intentionally breaking the new law that threatens up to 15 years of prison. link

 

[Ananda]

Viktor Yanukovych – Ex-Ukraine President Now Backed by Russia as New Head to Replace Zelenskyy - News18

Viktor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia in 2014, is reportedly being prepared by Russia for 'a special occasion'.

www.news18.com

For Pro West Ukranian politician this one person is always thorn in their side. There's also many speculations how far this man influence still has with Ukraine opposition, especialy those with more Pro Russian stand which had all their media closed down by Zekensky.

For one thing South and Eastern Oblast give majority vote for him during his two ellection. He seems still has substantial follower in Donentsk and Luhansk oblast. Don't know how it will be from the rest of East and South that use to vote for him.

One thing for sure, if Russia want to create Pro Russian Republic in part of East and South, he is being the choice (as present Ukrainian administration claim) will only potentialy work in that area. As Central and Western Ukraine are the ones that push him down from Presidency.

It will be interesting to see what Russia going to do with him. Could he regain support in East and South to effectively creating seperate Ukraine Republic (you can say Ukraine version of DDR) ? Will Russia see him as assets or liabilities in East and South ?

If the claim from Ukranian are true, then it is also shown Russia not interested with Central and West Ukraine, cause he certainly will be Liabilities there. In the end it all depends on how the War result will be.

 

[STURM]

I hope both Sweden and Finland will join NATO, the sooner the better. This will stabilize the whole Baltic sea region and neutralize any threats from Russia.

Will it really neutralise any threats? You absolutely sure about that? I'm not as sanguine. On paper if Finland and Sweden join; this would leave just Switzerland, Austria and a few other players. This in theory would usher in a new era of stability and prevent any further aggression from the nefarious Russians. So goes the theory.

In actual reality if the Russians still perceive that its interests are under threat; it will not make a difference if every single country in north, south and west Europe join NATO; the Russians will still react even if the odds are stacked against them. Also note that NATO expansion since the 1990's was intended to make Europe safer and deter possible threats; has it?

And Russia will hopefully start to acknowledge that in spite of all their paranoia, NATO is not a military threat to Russia, it never was.

We can hope for an end to all wars and and end to nuclear weapons whilst we're at it. You can give me whole paragraphs of why NATO/the West is not at fault [if I'm not mistaken you said previously that the main fault of NATO in the past was not being firm or enough or something along similar lines] and is not a threat to Russia but the fact remains that as long as the Russians perceive or believe otherwise; the possibility of tensions and war will always be there.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

In actual reality if the Russians still perceive that its interests are under threat; it will not make a difference if every single country in north, south and west Europe join NATO; the Russians will still react even if the odds are stacked against them.

In my book Finland joining would change the calculations about an attack on the Baltics. Currently the Baltics are isolated from the bulk of NATO and only have the narrow Suwalki gap for a direct route. If Finland was part of the organisation then there are options to easily resupply by air or sea without having to worry about Kaliningrad. It would also give NATO a way to quickly counterattack into Russia via Finland's long border, so sizeable Russian forces would have to be stationed there.

Putin's invasion of Ukraine appears to be largely emotional but it also looks like he assumed a quick victory. Had he realised what was going to happen he might have begrudgingly not gone ahead. Similarly if he realised an invasion of the Baltics would be complicated by forces stationed in Finland he might hold off on it.

Sweden would be a further problem for Russia, but not as much as Finland in my view.