Comment by imtringued | Hacker News Reader

Comment by imtringued | Hacker News Reader

There is no way this war is fought for the benefit of Russia as a whole, not even in the form of a neo soviet union. Russia isn't threatened directly by the west, nuclear weapons are a sufficient deterrent and Europe is a loyal customer of coal, gas and oil.

If nuclear weapons grant super power status amongst nations, then Russia is doing everything in its power to reduce its ability to maintain its current nuclear capability. The Russian-Ukrainian war is a bigger threat to a neo soviet union than any border dispute (think annexation of the Russian populated crimea) with a nato nation or a neighbour of a nato nation. Russia has excellent military logistics within their country thanks to their military rail network but they have none of that outside Russia. Putin is sending the precious weapons that Russia needs to defend itself against NATO into a war zone where they are left behind, towed away by tractors and then destroyed by the cheapest weapon that can do the job.

If one were a believer in the neo soviet union nonsense, then this entire war is getting Russia further and further away from that goal. The west can't fight on Russian territory, it can only fight proxy wars in buffer nations by supporting those nations with weapons and training. The only way to explain this is that Putin has ambitions that will only benefit himself and a handful of people close to him. Either that or he is so incompetent he could never win any wars whatsoever.

I sure hope Putin is an evil genius because if he isn't I can only say "Say goodbye to your super power status, Russia, and enjoy your hard fought international insignificance!"

My armchair thoughts are perhaps this is happening now because Putin knows it's a last chance to do something "big" due to his age, declining demographics in Russia, and/or aging of their nuclear and military arsenal.

Or perhaps he's making a bet on abandoning the West to instead be Chinese dependent, and there's something in it for him and his cronies. Seems China would benefit from all this.

>I sure hope Putin is an evil genius because if he isn't I can only say "Say goodbye to your super power status, Russia, and enjoy your hard fought international insignificance!"

I never understood what Putin's end game was here with this war, what can he earn extra of what he doesn't already have? He's already one of the world's richest men and he's already quite old. Couldn't he just like take his insane wealth and retire to some Caribbean island and live out the rest of his life in absolute luxury? Why did he need to start WW3 for? What does he stand to gain now? Seems like a stupid idea to become the world's most hated person when you were already set for a luxurious life.

Might sound stupid but perhaps it's the same restlessness everyone has?

What do I now after building my home? Doing the garden. Okay what now?

Also a little bit like CK: he was musturbating in front of a few woman in the office and did not get spoken out.

He took the Crimea without real troubles perhaps this combined with him being allowed to poison people around the world and hacking the west gave him the feeling that he can just take Ukraine.

On his level he probably can't even just walk around in a crowd of people. That has to feel to him very unnatural.

If you have everything legacy might become your driving motivation. Unfortunately he doesn't think legacy could mean making as many life's good but territorial restoration.

I might very well be mistaken, but this war and Russia's belligerence during the last 10 years never seemed to me a matter of ambition and territorial expansion, but rather desperation. Putin is 70, and his death will certainly plunge Russia into a period of turmoil. It doesn't matter if a successor is anointed by big P himself. The democratic opposition will see it as an opportunity for reform. The political and military elites will be fighting each other to advance their position. I'd be surprised if after Putin's death the Russian state could settle for a coherent agenda and foreign strategy within a decade.

The last time Russians found themselves in a similar position, NATO and the EU showed up at their doorstep. Baltic countries, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria... all of them joined NATO and/or EU in quick succession.

That's what I think Putin is trying to prevent. So the goal is to either have loyal buffer states (e.g. Belarus, Kazakhstan) or leave "unruly" buffer states (Georgia, Ukraine) in such state of destruction and disarray, that after Putin's death, Russia could get back on its feet before those states could focus again on entering international alliances. In other worlds, if I need 10 years to recover, I'll make sure you need 20 years, even if it adds a couple of years to my tally.

Of course this need of keeping NATO at bay exists only if the economic and political strategy of the state is to be an international gun for hire. It's a pity that the Russian elites decided to go for the easy buck with gas and military instead of developing the huge technical and artistic talent of the Russian people.

The irony is, after Iraq's invasion, NATO was incredibly unpopular in many European countries, and actions against Russia were seen as undesirable. I think fellow Europeans will agree that we saw Russia as an authoritarian state with old-fashioned values, but we were hopeful that one day we could have shared institutions and deeper political and economic cooperation. Now a lot of my fellow citizens perceive Russia as a direct enemy.

>The last time Russians found themselves in a similar position, NATO and the EU showed up at their doorstep. Baltic countries, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria... all of them joined NATO and/or EU in quick succession.

NATO and the EU did not show up at their doorsteps. Baltic and Eastern European states willingly joined NATO and the EU seeking better economic opportunities than what they had under Russian imposed communism and protection against future Russian aggression.

NATO didn't invade those countries under special military operations but those countries joined willingly since it was in their best interest and despite the EU's and NATO's faults, they're better alternatives than living in the fear of Russian aggression where the sate can imprison you for saying stuff against state approved propaganda and living in constant poverty and corruption.

Eastern Europe has ~50 years worth of scars to prove how vile such regimes were. That's why they were so eager to join NATO and the EU at the first chance they got and they flourished quiet well after that economically and socially. And Ukrainians wanted the same for their country since 2014, not living as Russia's puppet state forever.

The decision of those countries is perfectly legitimate (and in hindsight a very good one, seeing how Putin instrumentalizes Russian minorities).

But my point is, before the soviet collapse Russia didn't have a lot of shared borders with NATO countries. Now they do. If Ukraine, Moldova (who knows, maybe one day Belarus) end up joining NATO or the EU, this will considerably hinder their power projection capabilities. Expanding on McCain's analogy, Russia is a sketchy gas station where you can hire bruisers.

>Putin is 70, and his death will certainly plunge Russia into a period of turmoil.

As if Russia is currently a bastion of stability.

It's only stable now because everyone is afraid of being gulaged if they speak up, similar to a lighter version of the purge in the Stalin days.

Well, now you're just being obtuse. Putin just got into an incredibly expensive war, and protests are marginal at best. This is achieved through repression and violence, but if you don't think that is stability, you're deluded.

>Couldn't he just like take his insane wealth and retire to some Caribbean island

Putin isn't a startup founder. The man has no interest in leaving Russia and if you go and read his piece on the question of Ukrainian and Russian statehood[1] it's very clear that to him, Ukraine has historical and even spiritual significance. Going all the way back to the Kievan Rus he sees the three peoples of Belarus, Ukraine and Russia as inseparable and the emergence of, in his view, 'anti-Russian Russia' in Ukraine as a red line.

And I don't know why people keep this 'the world's richest man' meme alive but just because he always tolerated the oligarchs as a support structure for the state there was never any indication he cared a single bit about money. He always had aspirations to restore Russia to a great power, quite openly.

[1]http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181

For somebody who doesn’t “care a single bit about money” he certainly has gathered a significant amount of material wealth for himself, his mistresses, etc.

But then again, since you’re taking his ridiculous casus belli scribblings at a face value, there’s little I can do to convince you.

Yeah. "He now has goals other than money (because he already has all the money he could possibly need)" makes sense. "He never cared about money" is incompatible with reality.

Similarly, it makes sense that he would selfishly prefer to be historically remembered as the guy who unified Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine, rather than the most successful thief after the fall of communism. The citizens of Ukraine (and probably also Belarus) are not happy about it, but I guess the idea is that after being conquered and brainwashed and all dissidents thrown in jail, maybe their grandchildren will feel like happy patriots of the Greater Russia -- and if they won't, well, it's not like in Russia anyone actually cares about what people think (unless it is telling them what to think).

>The citizens of Ukraine (and probably also Belarus) are not happy about it

The citizens of Belarus have way less freedom of speech than even Russia, let alone Ukraine that's relatively free since 2014.

Russia has had, until recently, some forms of freedom of speech, at least on paper, while Belarus has none of that, not even on paper.

Putin wishes he had the authoritarian powers Lukashenko has in Belarus where he's been the sole dictator for the past 26 years.

Putin is basically a dictator but still has to go through a bunch of red tape to stay in power and pretend he's there though democratic elections and what not, while Lukashenko doesn't need to do any of that BS in Belarus, he's an absolute savage who doesn't even believe COVID is real and says "being a dictator is fine since it's better than being a homosexual".

So good luck being unhappy in Belarus and doing something about it.

>> I never understood what Putin's end game was here with this war

His endgame is to prevent free democratic elections in Ukraine. He sees Ukraine as the country most similar to Russia. He wants to prevent elections in Ukraine, because what works in Ukraine will work in Russia. And the very last thing he wants is free elections in Russia.

Could be a geopolitical move to gain resources, I've read some analysis that Russia's strength is currently peaking and will decline, and the territory that has been captured in Ukraine has coastal land around newly discovered gas fields.

If that's the case I doubt that it would have been done if the current outcome was known in advance.

the endgame was money: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If61baWF4GE

Reply on news.ycombinator.com