What a strange part of Putin's legacy.
I'm still hoping for de-escalation, but frankly it feels like we could easily have an incident that causes things to spiral out of control, a la the start of WWI.
I'm still hoping for de-escalation, but frankly it feels like we could easily have an incident that causes things to spiral out of control, a la the start of WWI.
Now the cat's out of the bag, and there's no reason for them not to formally join the alliance (Ankara willing). But it doesn't change any strategic calculus.
If this is not a ripple in northern geopolitics, I don't know what is. I'll give you that it currently isn't as important if Sweden joins or not. Erdogan made the impossible possible - having Finland join before Sweden.
The standard for Russian satellite state is Belarus, not Finland.
Finland has been occupied multiple times by Russia and ceded 10% of its land to the USSR in an attempt to make peace. Heck, some even argue that Finland did a "redo" of one of their parliamentary elections because the USSR didn't like the results. Joining NATO is a major departure from their many decades of attempting appeasement - it's far from a nothingburger.
It may be an even bigger deal inside Russia though: Putin directly triggered one of the very specific things Russia didn't want to have happen. This both arms his domestic critics and raises the pressure for him to deliver some sort of "win".
The amount the world and Europe in particular has changed since WWI is astounding. The entire world was deeply belligerent in a way that really surprised me and seems foreign to our modern sensibility. The only country of today that acts/thinks this way seems to be Russia, but leading up to WWI almost every single country in Europe was still planning for the conquest and destruction of their neighbors. Everyone (the major powers anyways) just assumed “ya, we’re gonna fight a huge multi-million person war and we’re gonna win.” I really don’t see that kind of belligerence in the minds of the world anymore.
Of course, there were some academics at the time of WWI saying the same thing, so…
They can't get through eastern Ukraine. What world war? They have no means (and the mediocre means they had before the beginning of the war in Ukraine, have been slashed in half, to say nothing of vast degradation of still quasi-operating hardware), they'd get stomped by NATO within a month and throw the nuclear card on the table to end it.
Iran? Trivial to contain within their own borders, and we'd ignite an armed revolution by flowing massive amounts of weapons into Iran.
Belarus? Barely has a military worth mentioning in this context.
And there's good reason to be skeptical of China joining Russia in a world war.
You don't seem to have an understanding of basic strategy. China will probably use this opportunity to take back Taiwan. And North Korea might as well invade South Korea while we're at it.
Why take back Taiwan when they can take back parts of Russia that Russia previously annexed?
There is the potential for great misery and destruction from NK, but that's mostly due to the fact that a lot of well off urban areas are within NK artillery range.
I'm not so sure about Taiwan, either. Ukraine is right on the border of Russia, no shipping, no mountainous terrain, and no direct treaties with the US. China has already said in the event of a shooting war they'd consider US allies as legitimate targets, so a Taiwanese war means Japan, Australia, SK, and maybe NATO entering the fray. It would be an ugly, mountainous fight, possibly leading to a guerilla war / insurgency.
In 20 years after technology (chips, etc.) transfer back to the US there isn't really any reason for the US to give a shit. Why risk Ukraine-ing yourself when you can just let economic and demographic forces do it for you?
That's what everybody assumed all along that World War III meant. Russia's antiquated invasion of its neighbor is quaintly parochial compared to that... so long as that's where it stays. But if somebody, somewhere, gets an itchy trigger finger at just the wrong time, everybody everywhere becomes part of WWIII all at once.
That's why people keep referencing Russia and WWIII.
World War One was the 1914-18 show. I think you mean: WWIII or WW3.
There won't be a de-escalation of any sort because stupidity at national level knows few bounds. However there will be changes, probably unpleasant. I think that nuclear is unlikely because despite how despotic we might paint Russia right now - the Management are not completely hatstand (however Mr Putin appears to be exhibiting quite a few neuroses).
Prepare for the worst and hope for the best is indicated.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Archduke_Fr...