Russia - General Discussion.

Ananda

The Bunker Group

The United States-initiated resolution received 93 votes in favour on Thursday, while 24 countries voted against and 58 others abstained.
The margin is smaller then 140 votes that previously support US lead resolution against Russia. Especialy the number of abstain. It can be seen the number that questioning US lead resolution/Politics on this war increasing. Well what do I know.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Let's see what Russia will do after this

Russia can set up an alternative human rights council with China and North Korea, they can call themselves the three stooges.
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member



The margin is smaller then 140 votes that previously support US lead resolution against Russia. Especialy the number of abstain. It can be seen the number that questioning US lead resolution/Politics on this war increasing. Well what do I know.
Big difference: a Resolutions is just words. Kicking somebody out is Action, and therefore fundamentally different. Many of those who abstained or even voted against did not doubt that civilians had been murdered, however they were still not willing to kick out Russia. Perhaps because several other countries should then have been kicked out, for instance. Or because they are worried about their relationship to Russia:
Let's see what Russia will do after this

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #885
Martti J. Kari is a former Finnish intelligence colonel and currently teaches cybersecurity at the University of Jyväskylä. He has spent several decades studying Russia, and a lecture he gave in 2018. Quite interesting if you want to understand the "Russian Mindset".

On youtube (English subtitles): Tiedustelueverstin arvio Venäjästä | 3.12.2018 - YouTube

If you prefer to read instead of watching a movie, somebody has written down the lecture in English: Finnish Intelligence Officer Explains the Russian Mindset – Ricochet
Very insightful. It's definitely an outside looking in, but an outsider who has looked in for a very long time and has spotted patterns and pathologies. I strongly recommend everyone read this, I haven't come across depictions this concise and relevant in English before.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Very insightful. It's definitely an outside looking in, but an outsider who has looked in for a very long time and has spotted patterns and pathologies. I strongly recommend everyone read this, I haven't come across depictions this concise and relevant in English before.
Agree with you on this, I have only got about half way through so far, but I think if anyone is serious about understanding what is going on at this time, this is a must read.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Very insightful. It's definitely an outside looking in, but an outsider who has looked in for a very long time and has spotted patterns and pathologies. I strongly recommend everyone read this, I haven't come across depictions this concise and relevant in English before.
Very interesting indeed and explains to a large degree the current mess. Probably means a long grind in Ukraine with continuing destruction and loss of life.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #888
Very interesting indeed and explains to a large degree the current mess. Probably means a long grind in Ukraine with continuing destruction and loss of life.
Assuming the Ukrainian military doesn't collapse, yes. Slog is of course a relative term. A lot will depend on the battle in the east right now. If that fight goes well for Russia, it could change things a lot. If it goes poorly that could change things too.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Assuming the Ukrainian military doesn't collapse, yes. Slog is of course a relative term. A lot will depend on the battle in the east right now. If that fight goes well for Russia, it could change things a lot. If it goes poorly that could change things too.
I think it would be unlikely for a collapse of the Ukrainian military for some considerable time, as they appear to be well motivated and they are after all fighting for their own country, against a foe that they don't particularly like. The recent events of civilian deaths, I think will only stiffen their resolve.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I think it would be unlikely for a collapse of the Ukrainian military for some considerable time, as they appear to be well motivated and they are after all fighting for their own country, against a foe that they don't particularly like. The recent events of civilian deaths, I think will only stiffen their resolve.
The other factor will be Western resolve in providing military kit and intelligence. Also if Russia significantly escalates, what additional support will the West offer?
 

Vivendi

Well-Known Member
New threats from Russia against Finland this week:

MOSCOW, Apr 6 - RIA Novosti.
The decision of the Finnish leadership to join NATO would be a strategic mistake, would make the country a target for Russia's retaliatory measures, said Vladimir Dzhabarov, first deputy head of the international committee of the Federation Council.
[...]
He recalled that geographically Finland and Russia are neighbouring countries: from Finland to St. Petersburg a few hours drive. "And Finland, which has been successfully developing all these years thanks to close trade and economic ties with Russia, would turn into a target. I think it would (be) a terrible tragedy for the entire Finnish people," Jabarov said.
Joining NATO will make Finland a target for Russia, according to the Federation Council - RIA Novosti, 06.04.2022
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Let's see what Russia will do after this

INTERACTIVE_UN_Vote_suspend_Russia_07-04-2022.png

It will be foolish for Russia to be hostile with those who abstain. Some of the abstaining come from emerging markets and have enough regional clout on their own (India, Brazil, Nigerians, Saudi, South Africa, Indonesia, etc).

Those are countries Russia need to keep open good relationship, considering they already burning the Bridge with US and Allies for considerable time in future. Each of those abstain votes have reasons on their own.

I can't talk on others, but couple of reasons that Indonesia abstain are related to present G20 Presidency position (need to shown impartiality), and secondly (I do believe this's could be more important) is oil.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It's interesting that out of the Pacific Island nations only Vanuatu abstained and the Solomon islands didn't vote. That's to be expected although i thought Fiji might've abstained or not voted.

Meanwhile Russia has blacklisted the entire NZ Parliament, senior military leaders, and intelligence agency heads. Ukraine war: Russia blacklists Jacinda Ardern, Government, Parliament MPs - NZ Herald. They all are probably horribly disappointed - not, and have gone down down to the pub to celebrate.

Russia's statement accused New Zealand of joining "the campaign initiated by the US and its satellites to contain Russia". [It] said New Zealand had become "Russophobic" and alleged the Government had fallen into the orbit of Washington. "Wellington's readiness, forgetting about his own interests and generally accepted decency, to follow a Russophobic course once again testifies to the lack of independence of his foreign policy and servility towards the leaders of the "collective West". The statement warned that any "anti-Russian actions" including inciting a "negative attitude towards Russia "will be resolutely rebuffed".

We take note of Russia's note and they can go tell someone who cares, we don't.
 

phreeky

Active Member
It's interesting that out of the Pacific Island nations only Vanuatu abstained and the Solomon islands didn't vote. That's to be expected although i thought Fiji might've abstained or not voted.
In the context of these votes, I can't seem to find an explanation of the difference between not voting and abstaining to vote. Do you know where the difference is explained?
 

RubiconNZ

The Wanderer
I’m curious to hear any opinions on how the west may escalate its involvement.

As the civilian casualties mount, I can’t see certain countries tolerating continuous strikes like the train station today for a extended period of time.

What are options which don‘t amount to direct action such as all out warfare or no flynzones. (I’m aware of the threats from Russia) and perhaps nothing will

a) Larger range of material supplies and weapons (probably a given)
b) Safe zones/cities established by European or US nations in Ukraine proper
c) ….
 

RubiconNZ

The Wanderer
In the context of these votes, I can't seem to find an explanation of the difference between not voting and abstaining to vote. Do you know where the difference is explained?
I‘d hazard a guess that those delegates were not present at the vote, as an abstention is still a vote.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
In the context of these votes, I can't seem to find an explanation of the difference between not voting and abstaining to vote. Do you know where the difference is explained?
The only explanation that I can think of is that they weren't present for the vote. Done an Elvis and left the building.
 
Russian state owned news outlining the meaning behind denazification published 3rd April;

What should Russia do with Ukraine?

The article is long and contains many outrageous claims. It repeats frequently claims of Ukrainian Nazism as justification for an explicitly intended generational occupation, control of education, introduction of forced labour, and denial of sovereignty within the territory taken by Russia following the war. Quoted bolding by me;

"Denazification is necessary when a significant part of the people - most likely the majority - has been mastered and drawn into the Nazi regime in its politics. That is, when the hypothesis "the people are good - the government is bad" does not work....... Denazification is a set of measures in relation to the nazified mass of the population, which technically cannot be subjected to direct punishment as war criminals. "

I find the above sentence particularly unsettling in terms of how the conquered Ukrainians are likely to be treated. Once an occupied area's civilians are framed like this, what outcome can we expect?

"The Bandera elite must be eliminated, its re-education is impossible. ........ And also because not just the Bandera version of Nazi Ukraine will be eradicated, but also, and above all, Western totalitarianism, the imposed programs of civilizational degradation and disintegration, the mechanisms of subjugation to the superpower of the West and the United States "

Again, what does this mean post war?

In terms of signalling future intentions;

"In order to put the plan of denazification of Ukraine into practice, Russia itself will have to finally part with pro-European and pro-Western illusions, realize itself as the last instance of protecting and preserving those values of historical Europe (the Old World) that deserve it and which the West ultimately abandoned, losing the fight for himself.......
Everything that Russia has done for the West, it has done at its own expense, by making the greatest sacrifices. The West ultimately rejected all these sacrifices, devalued Russia's contribution to resolving the Western crisis, and decided to take revenge on Russia for the help that it selflessly provided. Further, Russia will go its own way, not worrying about the fate of the West, relying on another part of its heritage - leadership in the global process of decolonization."

The closing paragraphs of the article talk about moving away from the West and taking a new place of leadership on its own in the developing world. Given Western sanctions and Russia's pariah state diplomatically, I am concerned for the future of Russia deepening its authoritarian control, and dare I say fascist-victim-strongman character. What a tragedy for humanity and the Russian people.
 
Top