Timothy Snyder: “How to think about war in Ukraine”

On February 10, 2021 Timothy Snider tweeted on a thread[0] on his lecture «Timothy Snyder on Germany's Historical Responsibility towards Ukraine + Discussion» (lecture recorded on June 20, 2017).[1]

N.B. Euromaidan Press news media posted[2] daily review on January 18-19, 2022:

> Daily review: Germany keeps blocking arms exports to Ukraine; Russia moves troops to Belarus; another false-flag warning.[2,3]

[0] https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/135952826111454412...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDjHw_uXeKU

[2] https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/01/19/germany-keeps-blockin...

[3] https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/14835874177811988...

Great article....

Unfortunately the Russians love their tyrants, 800 years of history is proof. For some reason they have embraced this system of poverty, lies, deceit, murder, evil and continue to support these prophets that lead them further down this hellhole. I can't think of any country in Europe (besides maybe Serbia) that wants anything to do with them.

Frankly, this article does explains nothing at all. Not the motivation of the conflicting parties in Ukraine, not the ambitions of Russia or the West.

Not saying that the fears of Russian encroachment are invalid at all. While it is Kremlin propaganda to exaggerate the civil war in Ukraine as an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the current government, it is nonetheless true that there is a conflict. A conflict that began because part of Ukraine was staunchly against free trade with the West. The former government actually did want to associate more with Russia (due to plain cold economic interests of their own industry which would have suffered if trade would not have been restricted, a form of protectionism every country engages in).

Cut short the government was ousted by protesters in Kiev, who wanted a closer association with the West. It was the Maidan protests. People installed a new government which Russia did not see a legitimate because the ousting was against the Ukrainian constitution. The Bush government of the US used the opportunity to get involved and tried to support the new government.

Part of Ukraine denounced the new government too, most importantly the industrial regions dependent on trade with Russia (Donezk & Lugansk mainly). These were the regions that also did not want free trade with the EU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Donbas

It is of course even far more complicated, I don't understand this conflict fully, but I don't think the author is realistic about it either because it cannot really explain the behavior of the actors involved.

Suggesting or encouraging a nation to join a military alliance while bordering Russia is an act of aggression even if it was suggest by Ukrainians themselves. Compare it to Cuba, even if that won't really fit. We are talking about international politics and reasons for war. I agree that it was Russian actions that might have increased the motivation in Kiev for closer association. That is is the case for a lot of countries bordering Russia.

A peaceful solution is to disassociate Nato from Ukraine and help them to solve their internal conflict politically.

There's a guy, Michael Kofman [0], who actually does have a clue on what is/was going on there - he wrote extensively on the topic and with more depth than most articles that got produced by the mass media.

[0] ... serves as Research Program Director in the Russia Studies Program at CNA and as a Fellow at the Kennan Institute, Woodrow Wilson International Center in Washington, DC.

https://www.cna.org/experts/Kofman_M

An excellent article. Really, read it - I won't TL;DR it.

But I will highlight one line:

> But the simple fact is that Ukraine's present western orientation is a result of the last Russian invasion.

Russia keeps driving countries on its periphery into NATO. It's not just NATO's fault.