In The Ukraine there are apparently two sides to the story

I went looking for an analysis that would provide something like the Russian perspective on the events in The Ukraine, and by coincidence the video was sent to me at the very same time. The vid is from 2015 but once you watch this bit of history many bits fall into place. This is the notes that come with the vid:

The Causes and Consequences of the Ukraine Crisis

John J. Mearsheimer, the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor in Political Science and Co-director of the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago, assesses the causes of the present Ukraine crisis, the best way to end it, and its consequences for all of the main actors. A key assumption is that in order to come up with the optimum plan for ending the crisis, it is essential to know what caused the crisis. Regarding the all-important question of causes, the key issue is whether Russia or the West bears primary responsibility.

And again I emphasise that the vid is from 2015 in a discussion of an earlier conflict in the same area with the same two sides involved. The first twenty minutes of the video provides a pretty good summary. 

I also went looking for something on my own and went to DuckDuckGo, but the news reports that it has gone google seem to be true. Virtually everything was from some Western “news” source, which to me meant that you cannot rely on a word they write. Eventually I found this: What Russia Wants In Ukraine from The American Conservative whose tagline is this:

Russia’s position has been remarkably consistent for nearly three decades, especially when compared to the West’s.

We are just spectators here, but if we are going to have a nuclear war, might as well understand why.

 

 

 

36 thoughts on “In The Ukraine there are apparently two sides to the story”

  1. I suspect we may very well see a military coup in the USA if the current demented and incompetent administration actually initiates a war with russia.


    Report comment

    6
  2. I am quite positive towards Mearsheimer on a number of issues, however this is from 2015. The problem is that it is now 2022 – Putin has taken the decision to invade Ukraine, which had zero – absolutely zero – prospect of joining NATO or the EU until 5 minutes ago, blown up their cities, killed tens of thousands of civilians, and destroyed Russia’s own economy. Did Putin “need” to do all that? Absolutely not. This was completely a war of his own choice, based on the most preposterous casus belli since 1939, and he owns the consequences. Correction – his people own the consequences.


    Report comment

    4
  3. Let’s look at this another way – even if Ukraine had joined NATO next year (no, that was never a remote possibility as Germany had nixed it and the US were not interested – as they still recognise Russian-controlled Crimea as part of Ukraine, it would be crazy to then bring that under the NATO umbrella), what would that actually mean for Putin? Nothing. There is zero chance of NATO ever launching an offensive war against Russia. Not going to happen. In fact, you can add Georgia to the NATO pile and the prospect of attacking Russia, if anything, becomes even more remote as NATO gets spread thinner with few deployable troops over a much wider theatre. No way is NATO rolling into Russia.

    This whole NATO threat is a figment of Putin’s deranged imagination. Too bad he allowed himself to get “provoked” into ruining his own country!


    Report comment

    3
  4. “I suspect we may very well see a military coup in the USA if the current demented and incompetent administration actually initiates a war with russia.”

    By then it will be too late.

    AFAIC, the coup should’ve started back when that Neocon nimrod Bush signed the Patriots Act into law.


    Report comment

    6
  5. “This whole NATO threat is a figment of Putin’s deranged imagination. Too bad he allowed himself to get “provoked” into ruining his own country!”

    I get the impression that a lot of what you write is a product of your vivid imagination.


    Report comment

    10
  6. “Petrossays:
    March 18, 2022 at 5:38 am
    So the NATO bombing of Serbia and the Cuban missile crisis were figments of my imagination? Wow. Got to stop dropping acid.”

    Touche.

    I’m finding the anti-Putin narrative just as simplistic as those who sprout pro-Putin narratives. The truth is more complex.

    I’m wondering if Fisk similarly described Bush as “deranged” or Obama and Clinton, when they destroyed Libya, as “deranged”.

    As for Fisk’s line “Putin has taken the decision to invade Ukraine, which had zero – absolutely zero – prospect of joining NATO or the EU until 5 minutes ago,”, that is simply not true.


    Report comment

    9
  7. Mearsheimer lived up to expectation – a politics professor from Chicago put a shiver down my spine of how this is going to be our fault.
    The missiles pointing at us is the arguement.
    Russia has been aggressive all along. Ukraine should be allowed to defend its self against another country who has been openly aggressive against it.
    What my question is Putins reason that the Ukraine and Russian are physically, mentally and behaviourally (culturally) the same. Is this the advertisement against the 2014 overthrow of the Ukrainian govt by the US.
    The bio labs, this in my mind is a reason to invade – did Putin know about it.
    The Ukraine is a chessboard between US and Russia. The populace is the victim.
    Was the 2014 overthrow about the same time Gaddafi was killed in his own country for not doing harm (?) and was this the time of the attempted Syrian coup.I recall the meeja when the current Assard was about to take over how fawned over him – he is an eye doctor, he studied in the US, he rides a Harley, his wife is a good looker who wears jeans.
    So that’s 3 males – who is on the other side doing this?


    Report comment

    2
  8. I suspect we may very well see a military coup in the USA
    Increasingly looks like the only way to clean out the lefty riff-raff and timeservers. But will a conservative version of Che Guevara get a t-shirt? I think not.


    Report comment

    5
  9. “The pressure to start World War III is on. NATO now expects that there will be a major war with Russia and the confrontation may come even in a few weeks. The NATO Secretary-General announced an increased war alert for hundreds of thousands of soldiers. Stoltenberg issued a joint statement with US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, stating that hundreds of thousands of NATO troops were placed on high alert along with 100,000 US troops.

    The problem with war is that BOTH sides lie and twist the facts to support their own agenda. They paint their adversary as evil to stir up the troops to go fight and risk their lives typically for fake stories and agendas.”

    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/war/nato-calls-up-hundreds-of-thousands-of-troops-ready-to-begin-wwiii/


    Report comment

    5
  10. @ Ellen:

    ““The pressure to start World War III is on. ”

    Now, remind me about the “other” high-stakes player in this game.

    You know, the one with enormous and expanding military and commercial power.

    The one with its beady eyes on the prize of a large high-tech offshore island.

    The one intimately involved in “bio-war” labs in Iran.

    The one steadily “stitching up” Australian (and Canadian, US, PNG, Cambodian, Malaysian, etc.) resources, transport and politics.

    The one with a timetable pivoting on a major “gender imbalance” in military-age men vs women.

    The one waiting to ride in on the charger and “save” everybody.

    If they play their cards right, all they have to do is “creatively invest” in academics, pollie-muppets and churnalsists, and they won’t have to break a sweat performing this salvation.


    Report comment

    6
  11. I am quite positive towards Mearsheimer on a number of issues, however this is from 2015. The problem is that it is now 2022 – Putin has taken the decision to invade Ukraine, which had zero – absolutely zero – prospect of joining NATO or the EU until 5 minutes ago, ….

    Merscheimer’s position hasn’t changed. Here he is in March 2022, and he argues things only escalated between 2015 and 2022.


    Report comment

    3
  12. Let’s look at this another way – even if Ukraine had joined NATO next year (no, that was never a remote possibility as Germany had nixed it and the US were not interested – as they still recognise Russian-controlled Crimea as part of Ukraine, it would be crazy to then bring that under the NATO umbrella), what would that actually mean for Putin? Nothing. There is zero chance of NATO ever launching an offensive war against Russia. Not going to happen. In fact, you can add Georgia to the NATO pile and the prospect of attacking Russia, if anything, becomes even more remote as NATO gets spread thinner with few deployable troops over a much wider theatre. No way is NATO rolling into Russia.

    See Mearsheimer above.


    Report comment

    4
  13. “There is zero chance of NATO ever launching an offensive war against Russia. Not going to happen.”

    I would certainly hope this to be true, and actually believe that barring something like, oh, I don’t know, a mentally incompetent puppet US president being elected and/or a group of greedy, corrupt politicians being in charge of the US, that this would never happen – oh, wait…

    However, from a military intelligence PoV, they look at capabilities, not intentions.
    The additional “risk” then of having NATO troops and/or weapons right next door is huge – especially when you don’t know who is actually commander in chief of the US!

    Trump certainly demonstrated several times that although he would prefer to withdraw from the “forever wars”, he did not take kindly to people “breaking the rules” or reneging on a deal and was happy to pound said people into the dust. Which is why Putin and Xi were a bit more circumspect with him.


    Report comment

    3
  14. “Cassie: do you get paid by Russians “

    No, I leave that sort of corruption to the Biden and Pelosi families.

    Once again, Killing the dream, you’re trolling me and not engaging in discussion. I suggest you read Dover’s blog rules.

    Now piss off.


    Report comment

    7
  15. “New York Times Admits Hunter Biden Laptop Evidence Was Accurate, The Intelligence Community Was Lying
    March 17, 2022 | Sundance | 305 Comments
    Apparently, the motive everyone inferred about Joe Biden to making those bizarre statements about compromising sexual material and blackmail was accurate. Less than 12 hours after his weird comments, yesterday the New York Times released a devastating article finally admitting that every previously denied allegation surrounding the Hunter Biden laptop was accurate.”

    “To the extent that any institutional credibility remained, all of that is now gone – as the house of cards collapses. However, there is a more consequential aspect that needs to be emphasized. When you accept that our government, all intelligence agencies and officials, and all of the collaboration with media and big tech was built on a foundation of manipulative lying,

    WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT THE CURRENT NARRATIVE AROUND UKRAINE?”

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/03/17/new-york-times-admits-hunter-biden-laptop-evidence-was-accurate-the-intelligence-community-was-lying/

    And

    “Zelensky has just signed into law the first steps of Schwab’s Great Reset. He announced he is introducing a Social Credit Application combining Universal Basic Income (UBI), a Digital Identity & a Vaccine Passport all within their Diia app. He also says that because so much money is coming into Ukraine as he has become an international celebrity, he has legalized cryptocurrencies in Ukraine. He will allow foreign and Ukrainian cryptocurrencies exchanges to operate legally, according to the country’s Ministry of Digital Transformation.”

    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/war/ukraine-adopts-wef-proposals/

    “What is the difference between a conspiracy theory and newspaper headlines? – About 6 months”


    Report comment

    2
  16. […]

    As for Fisk’s line “Putin has taken the decision to invade Ukraine, which had zero – absolutely zero – prospect of joining NATO or the EU until 5 minutes ago,”, that is simply not true.”

    Ukraine was told in 2010 that its application for NATO membership was refused. There has been no suggestion since then that NATO had even considered changing its position. You say that’s not true, but provide not even a suggestion of evidence.
    This is entirely typical of your approach. You promote “hard power” Putin and his narrative, ignoring completely his incompetence in a long planned invasion that has is now a big into which Russian (Chechen and Syrian) troops are dying as they conduct an increasingly vicious and entirely criminal attack on civilian targets.
    […]


    Report comment

  17. “Putin has Eritrea and Cassie on his side, but no one else.”

    I don’t think so. But he certainly has Xi on his side.

    Oh and when China inevitably moves on Taiwan, I look forward to your robust condemnation of China for moving on the independent country of Taiwan.

    You’re just a gold star hypocrite.


    Report comment

    3
  18. Oh and when China inevitably moves on Taiwan, I look forward to your robust condemnation of China for moving on the independent country of Taiwan.

    Sadly, I don’t think GetUp! has a script for that, Cassie.


    Report comment

    2
  19. Ukraine was told in 2010 that its application for NATO membership was refused. There has been no suggestion since then that NATO had even considered changing its position. You say that’s not true, but provide not even a suggestion of evidence.

    As Mearsheimer describes, people are ignoring the de facto situation between NATO and Ukraine.


    Report comment

    2
  20. Cassie: your idea of “discussion” seems to be entirely based on the Putin line. For example:
    “I’m finding the anti-Putin narrative just as simplistic as those who sprout pro-Putin narratives. The truth is more complex.

    I’m wondering if Fisk similarly described Bush as “deranged” or Obama and Clinton, when they destroyed Libya, as “deranged”.

    As for Fisk’s line “Putin has taken the decision to invade Ukraine, which had zero – absolutely zero – prospect of joining NATO or the EU until 5 minutes ago,”, that is simply not true.”

    Ukraine was told in 2010 that its application for NATO membership was refused. There has been no suggestion since then that NATO had even considered changing its position. You say that’s not true, but provide not even a suggestion of evidence.
    This is entirely typical of your approach. You promote “hard power” Putin and his narrative, ignoring completely his incompetence in a long planned invasion that has is now a bog into which Russian (Chechen and Syrian) troops are dying as they conduct an increasingly vicious and entirely criminal attack on civilian targets.
    Putin has Eritrea and Cassie on his side, but no one else.


    Report comment

  21. I’m wondering if Fisk similarly described Bush as “deranged” or Obama and Clinton, when they destroyed Libya, as “deranged”.

    Indeed, Obama and Clinton were cheered on by the rest of the Dems, and many others on the left.
    In fact, U.S. citizens in the embassy were killed because of Secretary of State Hillary’s actions, or rather, non-action.
    Of course, had Trump done that …


    Report comment

    1
  22. Petros says:
    March 18, 2022 at 5:38 am
    So the NATO bombing of Serbia and the Cuban missile crisis were figments of my imagination? Wow. Got to stop dropping acid.

    Maybe you should get off the drugs if you think that either event was NATO starting a war.

    Those who imagine that the inherent risk in NATO is something like a deranged US President….. Even ignoring the checks and balances in the US system, NATO is not a lockstep military union in which every member is committed to supporting every other member regardless of circumstances.
    NATO is a specifically defensive alliance, with the members committed to supporting other members if they are attacked.

    The proposition that all the European NATO members would follow the US blindly in a war of aggression against a nuclear power – with the almost inevitable result that Paris, Berlin, London, Brussels and most other European capital cities would be toasted, is laughable.

    The only “consistency” in the Russian position is in claiming that Russia should have a vast empire and that anything thwarting that ambition is obviously malign. That has been the case for centuries, the brief hiatus being in the early 90s when Russia twice agreed that Ukraine was a sovereign, independent nation.

    Some of is seems to forget a little too easily, that most of history has been one of Empires….. and the more we let other nations be gobbled up by Empires, the less stands between us and the same fate.


    Report comment

    1
  23. Zipster:

    I suspect we may very well see a military coup in the USA if the current demented and incompetent administration actually initiates a war with russia.

    If that happens, it will have to come from the Colonel level – Obama/Biden/Harris regime has the Brigadier/General echelons thoroughly wired up. Even the Admirals.


    Report comment

  24. This is entirely typical of your approach. You promote “hard power” Putin and his narrative, ignoring completely his incompetence in a long planned invasion that has is now a bog into which Russian (Chechen and Syrian) troops are dying as they conduct an increasingly vicious and entirely criminal attack on civilian targets.

    I would go a little further – they promote “hard power” (with literal hard-ons in many cases as I have no doubt many Putinists around here had about three weeks ago!) and then complain when it results in crippling sanctions and military resistance from Ukraine! What on earth were you all expecting??? So much for “realism”!


    Report comment

  25. Cassie: it is beyond stupid to suggest that I’m in any way likely to defend invasion by China of Taiwan. You have no evidence to support that attempted slur, which is typical of your dissembling.
    It is you who constantly runs the Putin meme. You have yet to offer a single rational justification for Putin’s invasion and yet you constantly proffer weasel words that diminish Ukraine’s right to sovereignty and support Putin’s pathetic excuses.
    Most amusing to me is that you call people Leftists when it is you who is aligned with the Left arguments.


    Report comment

  26. Kneel: Germany and France were not willing at all. The US at no stage pushed them to do so. It is patently clear that the Democrats failed to understand most of what happened in Russia going back to Yeltsin. Unfortunately, Republicans got hauled into the Trump agenda and have also lost sight of the issues.
    In any case, there was no NATO membership on offer and everyone knew it.


    Report comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.