They don’t seem strong/genuine enough to me, that’s all.
Why not?
In fact, for the odds of that happening through an invasion, I’d give it less than 1% chance.
This is extremely overconfident. I don’t know what else to say about it other than that, and even if you’re going to hold this forecast you have to understand that not everyone in the world is as confident as you are in this claim.
I happen to think they’re too smart to believe their senseless propaganda. If you disagree, that’s fine.
Even if you think Russian security concerns are somehow illegitimate, what’s senseless about Russian animosity against the post-Maidan government of Ukraine that results from the war in Donbass? Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 for quite similar reasons, and the tensions between Greek and Turkish nationalists on the island definitely set the stage for that.
“Security concerns over NATO forces stationed in Ukraine
Irredentism over the lost territory of the Russian Empire & USSR
Retribution for the killing of Russian civilians in the war over Donbass”
Doesn’t seem genuine because Russia has plenty of nukes, which make a NATO invasion a suicidal act. Yes, not all wars are fought with nukes. But there’s an very high probability that a war between the 2 greatest nuclear powers would escalate to that. Which makes such invasion irrational and suicidal. Even more when Putin has clearly stated that he would use nukes to defend himself from a NATO invasion.
Doesn’t seem genuine because I don’t see modern Russia as a highly ideological nation like the USSR was. I don’t doubt they would like to have Ukraine and the rest of the former empire back. The question is what they’re willing to sacrifice for it. Invading Ukraine is a huge sacrifice and realistically won’t even give them Ukraine back, just install a puppet government at best.
Same as 2), don’t doubt they desire that, but the cost of invading Ukraine seems just too high.
“Even if you think Russian security concerns are somehow illegitimate, what’s senseless about Russian animosity against the post-Maidan government of Ukraine that results from the war in Donbass?”
Same as 2) and 3), don’t doubt such animosity, but the cost of invading Ukraine seems just too high.
“Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 for quite similar reasons”
Same thing yet again. What’s the population and size of Cyprus? What’s its connection/strategic importance to NATO/Europe, aka likelihood of it receiving tons of military aid? Is it a huge 44 million people country at the doors of Europe?
Alright, then here is a question for you: what would Russia have to do for you to be convinced that these motivations are genuine? I’d think a full-scale invasion of Ukraine is a pretty strong signal of that, but your prior on it seems to be so low that “everything they say is propaganda that they don’t believe in” is still somehow winning over the alternative simple explanation of “they really mean what they say”.
If the motivations are genuine, they are misguided. I happen to think that the regime is intelligent and therefore isn’t that misguided. That’s why I tend to side more with domestic power-seeking explanations, like those expressed in the most upvoted comment in this post. I’m not sure of what Russia could do to convince me otherwise. “War not being enough to convince me” is an obvious fallacy.
You do realize that you’re implicitly saying everyone who disagrees with you about the legitimacy of these concerns (including me) are not intelligent, right? Are you sure this is not a case of “no true scotsman” reasoning on your part?
No, I’m not saying that at all. Foreign civilians like you and me don’t have access to the important classified information that the Kremlin has. Or to their minds. Therefore, it’s reasonable to buy into their official motivations, maybe as much as it is reasonable not to. So, sorry but that’s another obvious fallacy.
Plus, this is just my opinion, which I never claimed to be certain of.
Russia is ideologic enough that companies like Yandex and VKontakte can exist. There are no European search engines or social networks as Europeans have no ideological issues with using US services. On the other hand, Russians are ideological enough that they prefer Yandex and VKontakte over Western services.
What’s its connection/strategic importance to NATO/Europe, aka likelihood of it receiving tons of military aid? Is it a huge 44 million people country at the doors of Europe?
Ukraine has a huge population but it’s also quite poor and doesn’t have many important exports. Strategically, access to Russian gas is much more important than Ukraine to Europe. Giving it military aid is more a matter of principle than due to strategic importance.
“Europeans have no ideological issues with using US services. Russians are ideological enough that they prefer Yandex and VKontakte over Western services.”
Is it really the population who prefers, or the autocratic government who prefers it for them? Isn’t it obvious that 1) they are not a democracy like most of Europe, 2) they are not US allies like most of Europe, 3) social media has a huge influence on politics and power, therefore it’s normal that we see dominance of Russian companies which are all deeply connected to the state given their type of regime?
“Ukraine has a huge population but it’s also quite poor and doesn’t have many important exports.”
Russia is also kinda poor. But that’s not all. Population size is correlated with army size and overall defense capabilities. Or at the very least with the difficulty to dominate and seize control of a country.
“Strategically, access to Russian gas is much more important than Ukraine to Europe. Giving it military aid is more a matter of principle than due to strategic importance.”
That’s also a really blind argument. There’s the obvious threat of Russian escalation to other countries if they succeed in Ukraine, and overall a threat to continental and global peace. That’s way more important than gas.
Is it really the population who prefers, or the autocratic government who prefers it for them?
While Facebook was recently blocked, for a long time it was accessible and people still used VKontakte. Google and Bing still seem to be useable by Russian speakers even now.
If the population wouldn’t prefer using Yandex and VKontakte those wouldn’t be successful businesses.
Russia is also kinda poor.
Russia’s GDP per capita is more than twice that of Ukraine. More importantly, its major exports are wheat, sweet oils, and corn which European nations don’t want to import as we want to support our own farmers. Its iron exports might be more valuable but there are plenty of other sources for that.
There’s the obvious threat of Russian escalation to other countries if they succeed in Ukraine, and overall a threat to continental and global peace.
That’s something different than strategic importance. It’s a principle of how to react to aggression.
Why not?
This is extremely overconfident. I don’t know what else to say about it other than that, and even if you’re going to hold this forecast you have to understand that not everyone in the world is as confident as you are in this claim.
Even if you think Russian security concerns are somehow illegitimate, what’s senseless about Russian animosity against the post-Maidan government of Ukraine that results from the war in Donbass? Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 for quite similar reasons, and the tensions between Greek and Turkish nationalists on the island definitely set the stage for that.
“Security concerns over NATO forces stationed in Ukraine
Irredentism over the lost territory of the Russian Empire & USSR
Retribution for the killing of Russian civilians in the war over Donbass”
Doesn’t seem genuine because Russia has plenty of nukes, which make a NATO invasion a suicidal act. Yes, not all wars are fought with nukes. But there’s an very high probability that a war between the 2 greatest nuclear powers would escalate to that. Which makes such invasion irrational and suicidal. Even more when Putin has clearly stated that he would use nukes to defend himself from a NATO invasion.
Doesn’t seem genuine because I don’t see modern Russia as a highly ideological nation like the USSR was. I don’t doubt they would like to have Ukraine and the rest of the former empire back. The question is what they’re willing to sacrifice for it. Invading Ukraine is a huge sacrifice and realistically won’t even give them Ukraine back, just install a puppet government at best.
Same as 2), don’t doubt they desire that, but the cost of invading Ukraine seems just too high.
“Even if you think Russian security concerns are somehow illegitimate, what’s senseless about Russian animosity against the post-Maidan government of Ukraine that results from the war in Donbass?”
Same as 2) and 3), don’t doubt such animosity, but the cost of invading Ukraine seems just too high.
“Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974 for quite similar reasons”
Same thing yet again. What’s the population and size of Cyprus? What’s its connection/strategic importance to NATO/Europe, aka likelihood of it receiving tons of military aid? Is it a huge 44 million people country at the doors of Europe?
Alright, then here is a question for you: what would Russia have to do for you to be convinced that these motivations are genuine? I’d think a full-scale invasion of Ukraine is a pretty strong signal of that, but your prior on it seems to be so low that “everything they say is propaganda that they don’t believe in” is still somehow winning over the alternative simple explanation of “they really mean what they say”.
If the motivations are genuine, they are misguided. I happen to think that the regime is intelligent and therefore isn’t that misguided. That’s why I tend to side more with domestic power-seeking explanations, like those expressed in the most upvoted comment in this post. I’m not sure of what Russia could do to convince me otherwise. “War not being enough to convince me” is an obvious fallacy.
You do realize that you’re implicitly saying everyone who disagrees with you about the legitimacy of these concerns (including me) are not intelligent, right? Are you sure this is not a case of “no true scotsman” reasoning on your part?
No, I’m not saying that at all. Foreign civilians like you and me don’t have access to the important classified information that the Kremlin has. Or to their minds. Therefore, it’s reasonable to buy into their official motivations, maybe as much as it is reasonable not to. So, sorry but that’s another obvious fallacy.
Plus, this is just my opinion, which I never claimed to be certain of.
Russia is ideologic enough that companies like Yandex and VKontakte can exist. There are no European search engines or social networks as Europeans have no ideological issues with using US services. On the other hand, Russians are ideological enough that they prefer Yandex and VKontakte over Western services.
Ukraine has a huge population but it’s also quite poor and doesn’t have many important exports. Strategically, access to Russian gas is much more important than Ukraine to Europe. Giving it military aid is more a matter of principle than due to strategic importance.
“Europeans have no ideological issues with using US services. Russians are ideological enough that they prefer Yandex and VKontakte over Western services.”
Is it really the population who prefers, or the autocratic government who prefers it for them? Isn’t it obvious that 1) they are not a democracy like most of Europe, 2) they are not US allies like most of Europe, 3) social media has a huge influence on politics and power, therefore it’s normal that we see dominance of Russian companies which are all deeply connected to the state given their type of regime?
“Ukraine has a huge population but it’s also quite poor and doesn’t have many important exports.”
Russia is also kinda poor. But that’s not all. Population size is correlated with army size and overall defense capabilities. Or at the very least with the difficulty to dominate and seize control of a country.
“Strategically, access to Russian gas is much more important than Ukraine to Europe. Giving it military aid is more a matter of principle than due to strategic importance.”
That’s also a really blind argument. There’s the obvious threat of Russian escalation to other countries if they succeed in Ukraine, and overall a threat to continental and global peace. That’s way more important than gas.
While Facebook was recently blocked, for a long time it was accessible and people still used VKontakte. Google and Bing still seem to be useable by Russian speakers even now.
If the population wouldn’t prefer using Yandex and VKontakte those wouldn’t be successful businesses.
Russia’s GDP per capita is more than twice that of Ukraine. More importantly, its major exports are wheat, sweet oils, and corn which European nations don’t want to import as we want to support our own farmers. Its iron exports might be more valuable but there are plenty of other sources for that.
That’s something different than strategic importance. It’s a principle of how to react to aggression.
I’ve heard an opinion that VK has much better user interface than FB. Didn’t verify.
Russia’s Gini index is 1.5 times higher, so part of that difference means “Putin is rich”.
When trading with another country total wealth does matter but income is also still double.