Russia - General Discussion.

[Ananda]

As outsider (Non West and Non Russian), I see in the end compromise has to be taken However both side are still far from compromising. Both side still in the thinking of I have to win not I have to compromise.

NATO on one hand still in the thinking of Old Paradigm of containtment and not truely on cooperation with Russia as USSR replacement. Coop in NATO term. Just like what @Feanor wrote and some of @STURM pointed out, as long as NATO still not taking care what Russia concern, why Russia has to give care on what NATO concern. If that happen then there's no more room to compromise, and everything spiral down to more conflict.

The way I see it, what NATO thinkin of Russian Co-op behaviour should be Russia in Yeltsin era. Russia that honestly must be admitted of weak and chaotic Russia that NATO can push down. NATO did take advantage of Yeltsin Russia to expand east with the deep down motives of Containt Russia.

From Russian media and forums that I see, what many Russian say too much on NATO expansion is when NATO take on Baltic states. Seems many Russian still accepted NATO expand to ex Warsaw Pact nations. However taking on Baltic states seems get too much on Russian nerve as those states are smack down in the middle of Russian Proper teritory.

I'm not going to talk much on what @Feanor and @STURM already wrote. I also don't want to put much on NATO/Western perspective as many of other members already put in this thread. However NATO also can not put talk that all what Putin demand is outrageous.

I know as Outsider what Putin demand has some resemblences on what Hitler demand on the chezch on sudetenland. I know the west will not going to fall on that problem again. However talking toward a coleague of mine that is a Russian Ethnic Ukrainian, they do have genuine feeling that many Ukrainian (ethnic ukraine) are having agenda to push them down or push them out.

West can not close their eyes on this one. Those Ukrainian historically embrace Wermarcht and some of them even fight with Wermacht against Red Army. As outsiders some of us (non Western and Russian) see this and begin questioning Western support to Ukraine without seeing this ethnic problems.

What I'm trying to point out, both West and Russia has fault on this ongoing spiral down relationship problem. If both of them can not make compromise, then there will be on going conflict in the near future. Both tell International audiences, they are not looking for armed conflict, but until compromise can be reach that path still there.

Russia need to give confidence toward ex USSR nations but at same time NATO has to give guarantee to Russia they will not move in toward those nations. It can be done without compromising NATO basic principle.

I always see Ukraine problem is something that need to be ethnically compromise. Both ethnics (Russian and Ukrainian) do have historical suspicions that need to be resolve. I do believe some federation split between Western part and Eastern part need to be resolve, in order to satisfied all parties concern.

Well just my two cents

 

[STURM]

From Russian media and forums that I see, what many Russian say too much on NATO expansion is when NATO take on Baltic states

How Westerners or others view things is at odds with how many Russians view things. There is large level of disconnect. Many Russians might not be
enamoured of Putin but this doesn't necessarily mean they totally disapprove of everything that he is doing.

West can not close their eyes on this one. Those Ukrainian historically embrace Wermarcht and some of them even fight with Wermacht against Red Army.

Larges number of Ukrainians fought on the side of the Germans; there was a strong nationalist movement. Large numbers of Belarussians, Latvians, Estonians and others who were Soviet citizens also fought with the Heer and Waffen SS; for varying reasons and with varying levels of effectiveness. Some served as rear rear security type troops; some as frontline combat troops.

If both of them can not make compromise, then there will be on going conflict in the near future. Both tell International audiences, they are not looking for armed conflict, but until compromise can be reach that path still there.

Well some adopt the position that this is simply impossible because of the Russians who aren't interested in genuine dialogue/diplomacy and will continue to be confrontational and expansionist until they get what they desire.

 

[Ananda]

Large numbers of Belarussians, Latvians, Estonians and others who were Soviet citizens also fought with the Heer and Waffen SS; for varying reasons and with varying levels of effectiveness. Some served as rear rear security type troops; some as frontline combat troops.

That's exactly my point. Some of them just want to fight Soviet because the Russian dominant. That's make some of them also have genuine feeling not want to live with Russian.

If NATO can accept Kosovo Albanian to be separated with Serbs, why can't NATO accept some kind of separation of Russian ethnics Ukrainian in East from Nationalistic Ukrainian in West ? Rather then give excuses from Russia to absorb them, why not let begin talk on separate federal power in Ukraine that guarantee Russian Ethnics concern.

One thing that true is that Russian Ethnics concern that also fuel the rebels. What make them difference then Kosovo Albanian rebels, that West accept ?

some adopt the position that this is simply impossible because of the Russians who aren't interested in genuine dialogue/diplomacy and will continue to be confrontational and expansionist until they get what they desire.

Yes and seems Russia argue that they ask their demand because NATO always still have final goals to strangle and confined Russia. The suspicion on other party have genuine will for dialogue, seems working both ways.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

@Feanor Russian integration with the west is more than just peaceful intentions. The west, as a bloc, is based not on mutual interests or any single military alliance, but on a cultural affinity. That's why Saudi Arabia is treated the way it is, some even imposing an embargo on it - because it's an ally to some, which is more than can be said about some western countries in that regard. But it is kind of oppressing women and homosexuals and basically anyone that can be oppressed so the west obviously will keep cold relations with them.
Russia improved after the fall of the Soviet Union, but it didn't become a western-standard safe haven for pluralistic thought and a liberal democracy.

You want to talk about policy; NATO's policy of slowly expanding closer and closer to Russia's border's and sphere of interests have not worked. It has not created a more stable Europe and has not deterred Russia - it has had the opposite effect. It has created a very annoyed and insecure Russia and that has consequences as Russia is reacting the way it knows how;

NATO did not expand via internal policy. It expanded because other countries requested membership, and were given that. If NATO didn't exist, this sentiment would manifest in some other way that would bring about a similar effect.
Many former citizens of former Soviet republics have a deep rooted resentment for the Soviet Union. This resentment exists in those countries, immigrants of those countries, and in Russia itself. Same goes for members of the now defunct Warsaw pact.
This push to join NATO came from those individual countries, because of that resentment. Without NATO, they'd become US-sponsored states with perhaps even more foreign presence inside.

If Russia retains the status quo, resentment to it in Ukraine will persist and increase, leading to yet another enemy that will grow in capability with time, sufficient to either deter or pose a threat.
Its conflict with Ukraine will also persist via the Donbass and possibly Crimea in the future, becoming warzones.
If it invades Ukraine to occupy its cities, it will rule over an unruly population, increasing general opposition. Ukraine will be set back decades, but eventually it will achieve its independence, with Russia taking a net loss throughout the whole process.

A EU-affiliated Ukraine that would grow economically and modernize, would be beneficial to Russia far more than having it as an enemy.

 

[ngatimozart]

I think what is missing from the debate is the cultural aspect which may help inform the debate. I cannot speak for other nationalities, but I like a couple of other Kiwi posters on here can speak from two different cultural aspects and that does give a certain understanding. We have been raised in a European western, centric cultural world and those of us of a certain age remember having British history and culture rammed down our throats at school, in the movies, in the media, and by the government. However we are also Maori - the indigenous peoples of NZ who were colonised by the British during the 19th and first half of the 20th Century and colonisation wasn't kind to us. We lost much of our culture, however we have regained some of it and it's improving each day. So we live in both worlds; the Maori world and the European, western world. which has given us an understanding of both worlds. Yes they are different because the cultures and belief systems are different.

The Russians have different cultural, belief systems, and values to the west. Their Catholic Church is different to the Greek and Roman Church. Their alphabet is different to the Latin alphabet and like all cultures they are a product of both their geography, environment, and history. Like their forebears the Princes of Rus, the Russians are geographically misplaced Vikings.

One poster commented that they have turned capitalist, which indeed they have, but it must be remembered that Russia has been a capitalistic society for ~ 90% of its history and the communist non capitalist period was an aberration. Just because it is capitalistic does not make it a western society. In fact it is anything but and you really cannot use a western / WASP lens to fully analyse the Russians because you will end up with flawed results. If you don't analyse them through a Russian cultural lens then you are really wasting your time.

I have given this much thought over the last 24 hours and realised that I have been guilty of it, when I was doing something else which involved my own people.

So start thinking about it, because there appears to be a bit of orientalism going on. Orientalism is the term used to describe a pervasive Western tradition—academic and artistic—of prejudiced outsider-interpretations of the Eastern world, which was shaped by the cultural attitudes of European imperialism in the 18th and 19th centuries. (Source). Edward Said came up with the term in the 1970s and I do have a copy of his book somewhere.

That's impossible as long as Russia rejects westernism.

Why should Russia have to accept "westernism"? Isn't that somewhat arrogant and cultural imperialism. It would be like me saying that Israel has to accept Roman Catholicism as the state religion. That's going to go down like a bag of cold sick with the Jewish population of Israel isn't it.

Feanor, underlying much of this seems to be a believe that Russia is at risk of invasion from "the West". However It's a nonsense. I don't believe there is anybody in 'the west' who seriously envisages invading Russia. We all saw how that went for Hitler and Napoleon, who commanded armies that had dominated Europe but failed dismally in Russia. So it's written in western DNA - do not invade Russia. In no circumstances invade Russia. So do Russians really believe the west is going to invade?

Napoleon went on his walkabout in 1812 and ended up retreating home with his tail between his leg after losing the Battle of Borodino, then Col Gen Winter harried all the way back to beyond the Oder River. Kaiser Willhelm II defeated the Russians on the field during WW1 and forced them out of the war. In WW2 Hitler had a go with OP BARBAROSSA and we all know how that turned out. So one of the reasons that Stalin was keen on the satellite states between him and Western Europe was because they were buffer states. But if you look further back in history, the Russians have bad memories of the Teutonic Knights, wars with the Swedes, Poles etc., and not all they won. So I don't really blame them for having real concerns about invasions from the west. Things can change quickly and there's no iron clad guarantee that it won't happen again.

 

[denix56]

I wonder, what China thinks about this situation. On one hand they are “allies” with Russia (actually, more neutral relations), on the other hand they have increased their investments into Ukraine / Belarus over the last decade, seeing it as one of the points to trade /communicate with EU.
In case of any military actions, will they receive any kind of compensation from Russia?

 

[ngatimozart]

I wonder, what China thinks about this situation. On one hand they are “allies” with Russia (actually, more neutral relations), on the other hand they have increased their investments into Ukraine / Belarus over the last decade, seeing it as one of the points to trade /communicate with EU.
In case of any military actions, will they receive any kind of compensation from Russia?

That's an interesting question. IIRC the main rail line from Xinjiang to Northern Europe goes through Ukraine and Belarus then into Poland. The PRC have started to ship increasing amounts by rail to Europe now because it is quicker than shipping by sea. They have billions invested in this and they will be wanting to ensure that there is as little disruption as possible. However I have been hearing unconfirmed reports that their foreign currency reserves are being depleted and they can no longer depend upon them like they used to bolster Belt and Road Initiatives. The same reports claim that over US$1 trillion has flown the country into foreign accounts of high value CCP individuals.

 

[denix56]

The Russians have different cultural, belief systems, and values to the west.

The thing is, it is not quite true. It could be true during Soviet Union in 1960s-70s. However now there is actually no particular beliefs at all. If we consider the current propaganda against USA it is based on (figuratively) the narrative that LGBT will rule the country and convert all the people, the West has no moral in comparison to Russians, etc.
However, as I see, they try more to defend conservative / ultraconservstive looks in USA (to make Russians not to look what is going on in Russia), where the major problems (suicides, HIV, poverty, emigration, huge Coronavirus problems in regions, etc.), that are exist in Russia, not so big and pretend that Russians have same quality of life, just in different manner. In such environment there is not so much space for the formation of some strong adequate beliefs left. There might be something in the Moscow / St Petersburg formed, but in regions it is more like a mix of propaganda with archaic religious beliefs (also modified by propaganda).

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Why should Russia have to accept "westernism"? Isn't that somewhat arrogant and cultural imperialism. It would be like me saying that Israel has to accept Roman Catholicism as the state religion. That's going to go down like a bag of cold sick with the Jewish population of Israel isn't it.

Plenty of actual values we Israelis have still failed to accept and are playing catch up with the west, but maybe that's just the atheist and idealist in me speaking.

I lived my whole life in Israel. But I lived it with 2 parents and one grandparent, who came from the Soviet Union (lived in Ukraine via transfer, born and raised Russian). They taught me quite a lot about Russian culture and some of it was ingrained in me, even if my mother and grandmother resented Russia and Ukraine (as one piece) very much. My father's still on the Russian and anti-Ukrainian kool-aid but other than political rants it didn't really manifest in any way that affected me.

Russian culture is one that does in fact promote a good amount of values that are essential for western lifestyle. They value learning and self improvement, and cultural enrichment. It lacks liberalism, or at least it did according to an account of how things were in the 80's. Today, not so much. Since my school days I've encountered so many people who at the time were only a few years in Israel and yet assimilated so well.
The largest immigration wave was in the 90's, and their assimilation is a success story. They faced some discrimination and bigotry at first, but it died down very quickly, I even use them as an example of how you can combat racism and bigotry effectively, in contrast to for example black communities worldwide.
What has changed since then is the internet becoming widespread in Russia, and it is a very underestimated cultural normalizer. Russian youth today are more in contact with people outside their country, than with those inside it.

Russia is ripe for democracy and a liberal western lifestyle. I won't say I'm 100% sure, so let's say 90% sure of it.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

If NATO can accept Kosovo Albanian to be separated with Serbs, why can't NATO accept some kind of separation of Russian ethnics Ukrainian in East from Nationalistic Ukrainian in West ?

For the following reasons.

1. The Kosovan issue was caused by Serbs starting ethnic cleansing. Separating Kosovo was done to protect what was an ethnic minority in Serbia. In contrast there was no such threat to Ukrainians leaving in the east.

2. Putin annexed the Crimea during this period of instability. In contrast there was no annexation of Serbian territory by say Albania.

Putin has already been given huge latitude over Crimea. He could probably choose to keep Crimea and let Eastern Ukraine be reabsorbed by Kiev, or give Crimea back in exchange for Eastern Ukraine to have a high degree of autonomy. But he can't have both.

 

[Ananda]

This two image shown after two Presidential election the division of Ukraine practically the same. The Russian Ethnic colleague that I mentioned in my post, once I ask on the charge of corruption that Yanukovich done by Ukrainian in online website. He said simply, what the difference with what Ukraine has right now.

He then add, we choose Yanukovich because he's our devil. What rules now in Kyiev is their (Ukrainian ethnic) devil. They're rules due to EU/NATO support. If we can choose, we still goes with Yanukovich because he's one of us.

Thus it's clear the Rebels now, due have support from Russian ethnic and not just only because Russian support. The idea of dividing Ukraine on ethnics line also being discussed by some 'democracy' think tank in the west.

This because just like in ex Yugoslavia the Ethnics differences already too deep because of the 'coup' that push Yanukovich from power. For Russian ethnic, this shown Western double standard.

To keep Ukraine as one country, the federal division of power between ethnic Russian and ethnic Ukrainian should be done. If West can accept it in ex Yugoslavia, why can't except this in Ukraine ?

My own suspicion, because dividing federal power on ethnic lines can results with Pro Russia Federal controlling the whole Ukraine coasts. Off course NATO will not want that to happen.

However if they really want to settle Ukrainian problem once for all, that's what in my opinion should be done. Face it, when ethnic differences already flaring up too big, then partition between ethnic lines is the only choice.

That's what happens in ex Yugoslavia, that's what happened in Cyprus, that what should be done in Syria, and that could be the way out in Ukraine.

Perhaps if that happens, Putin could be persuaded to return Crimea to an Ethic Russian control Federal part of Ukraine. The west will going to see it as Putin victory, however that's just following Ethnics division on a nation that from beginning it's border created by Stalin, and not on national identity.

This is just my two cents on keeping Ukraine border intact, but at same time satisfying the Ethnics division that already flare up like it or not.

 

[Ananda]

Kosovan issue was caused by Serbs starting ethnic cleansing. Separating Kosovo was done to protect what was an ethnic minority in Serbia. In contrast there was no such threat

That's what the talk the Western Ukrainian (ethnic Ukraine) sell in the west. The ethnic Russian in the east seems doesn't think the same. They are thinking it's just matter of time. That's why they're due supporting the rebels.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Ethnicity has always been a crippling factor in politics. I would support an agreement that allows ethnic Russians to migrate from Ukraine to Russia with compensation in the form of housing and payments according to the property and businesses they have there. Russia would have a net gain from that within a few years.

 

[Ananda]

Russians to migrate from Ukraine to Russia with compensation in the form of housing and payments according to the property and businesses they have there. Russia would have a net gain from that within a few years.

Those land is Ethnics Russian from beginning not Ethnics Ukraine. Why should the Ethnics Russian that has to migrate ?

 

[Dobrica]

For the following reasons.

1. The Kosovan issue was caused by Serbs starting ethnic cleansing. Separating Kosovo was done to protect what was an ethnic minority in Serbia. In contrast there was no such threat to Ukrainians leaving in the east.

2. Putin annexed the Crimea during this period of instability. In contrast there was no annexation of Serbian territory by say Albania.

Putin has already been given huge latitude over Crimea. He could probably choose to keep Crimea and let Eastern Ukraine be reabsorbed by Kiev, or give Crimea back in exchange for Eastern Ukraine to have a high degree of autonomy. But he can't have both.

Hello,

I've been reading a lot not posting but this is something I need to say something. I'm from former Yugoslavia and Kosovo isn't that easy to explain as said above. It is historic Serb territory and they will never let it go completely. Even Albanians are now majority and they have a state in Kosovo. It was long time Serb territory with a lot of Serb church still existing but I believe future will show You what I mean.

Regarding Crimea Russia will never let it go nor will east Ukraine. Reasons are very simple. Crimea peninsular are key to black sea who hold Crimea holds black sea and it was for centuries centre of Russian navy. All famous Russian admirals are buried there. Also if Putin let's east Ukraine that can jeopardy Crimea from land so no go.

And You miss one big reason why west (USA hawks) wants Russia in their control and that is Russia's vast natural resources (not just oil and gas but gold, diamantes , minerals and so on). Also China wants that but at the moments China interest is to be friend with Russia since their main enemy is USA.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

And You miss one big reason why west (USA hawks) wants Russia in their control and that is Russia's vast natural resources (not just oil and gas but gold, diamantes , minerals and so on).

This is pure conspiracy theory territory. Russia has already willingly sold the EU pretty much all the oil and gas it can produce, so there's no need to somehow force Russia to be more agreeable. Moreover in the future Russian oil and gas will have less and less value as the world has to move towards net zero.

As for other resources, there's nothing that Russia has that cannot be obtained elsewhere. And again, anything Russia might have of interest after 2050 can still be bought at a fair price.

 

[Ananda]

You miss one big reason why west (USA hawks) wants Russia in their control and that is Russia's vast natural resources (not just oil and gas but gold, diamantes , minerals and so on). Also China wants that but at the moments China interest is to be friend with Russia since their main enemy is USA

Please don't put that kind of conspiracy theory in this forum. You'll anger the mod. No one wants to control Russia, It's just too fast, too diverse and too Armed to be control by anyone but Russian them selves. Napoleon and Hitler already try that only to their own doom.

You have to make a difference between to contain and to control. It's two big difference in perseption.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Those land is Ethnics Russian from beginning not Ethnics Ukraine. Why should the Ethnics Russian that has to migrate ?

Russia already has far more land than anyone else. Right now seemingly useless and brings hardships but soon enough land will become a significant resource for development and population density control.
Ukraine does not need to shrink over a war it didn't want, and Russia has expanded quite sufficiently.

It is all quite pointless though - it won't happen via agreement. Such things happen by force.

 

[Ananda]

Right now seemingly useless and brings hardships but soon enough land will become a significant resource for development and population density control.

Again why the Russian Ethnic that must migrate? They are becoming under Ukraine administration because Lenin say so in 1922. Crimea not under Ukraine administration until Khrushchev think it's better for administrative easiness to be control from Kyiev rather then Moscow.

No Lenin, Stalin or Khrushchev ever dream that one day USSR will collapse and thus creating ethnic problem in Ukraine. That's why federal power division between ethnics lines can be more preferable to maintain Ukraine border.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

That's why federal power division between ethnics lines can be more preferable to maintain Ukraine border.

That is obvious. Naturally populations eventually normalize around one homogenous culture, whether it takes years, decades, or centuries.
For Ukraine the conflict with Russia raised the opposite trend. So my comment was related to that.