Russia Invades Ukraine
What is Putin Thinking?
Russia has invaded Ukraine. Talks of a cease-fire seem to be in the works (a relatively good sign), but who knows how long this plays out and how much destruction will result. Vladimir Putin’s plan is unclear at this time. How far west in Ukraine will he push, take, occupy, etc.? We shall see.
It is important to remember the first casualty in war is always truth. So, it’s hard to tell what is really going on in real time. For example, the below video showing a missile hitting a residential building in Kiev is blamed by the Ukrainians to be fired by Russia. But the Russians claim it was a failed Ukranian anti-aircraft missile that accidently hit the building instead. What is the truth?
The US, EU and western allies have all ramped up sanctions against Russia, targeting banks, oil refineries, and military exports. Military and economic support from the West is also starting to flow into the hands of the Ukrainian government. Even traditionally neutral Sweden is sending in arms to Ukraine. All signs point to escalation, unfortunately.
Before assessing what is to be done in a situation like this, it is important to first know what caused the mess. Propaganda is strong in times like these, so keeping a level head is critical when the war hawks and the corporate press do what they do best by stoking war fever. There is always more going on behind the scenes than what is seen on the surface. And there is always a history that must be understood to know why this situation exists.
If you can’t identify the causes of a problem, you will inevitably fail at finding a solution. In this case, that’s a matter of war and peace, life and death. This all feels like 2002 as the establishment mouthpieces were beating the war drums against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Nationalism is a powerful drug on all sides of a war. Those who oppose war in times like these will be disparaged as Putin-sympathizers, no doubt. Back in 2002, if you questioned the Iraq war, you were disparaged as “supporting the terrorists.” Just because Putin is a bad dictator, as Saddam was a bad dictator, doesn’t mean it is in anyone’s interest to escalate this war.
So, what’s the history?
Ukraine and the Expansion of NATO
The US government, in keeping with their foreign policy of “spreading democracy,” has wanted to incorporate Ukraine into NATO for years. The Russians, of course, see NATO and EU expansion towards their border as a threat. Any honest person looking at a map should admit that this is a rational position from Russia’s perspective.
NATO expansion towards Russia really kicked off in 1999 when Poland, Czech Republic, and Hungary were incorporated. This was the same year Putin became president after leading the Second Chechen War. This is also the same year Putin witnessed President Clinton bring “peace” to Serbia with a 78-day NATO bombing campaign. That absurd intervention produced nothing but destruction. It was an offensive war operation against a nation that didn’t even threaten a NATO member. What do you think Putin made of that whole ordeal?
Then in 2004, the NATO incorporation of the Baltic states followed. So, at this point, the eastward encroachment of NATO onto Russia’s border only leaves Belarus, Ukraine, and Georgia.
In the NATO Bucharest Summit on April 3, 2008, the US tried to assert Ukraine and Georgia into the NATO alliance despite resistance from Russia. It was only a few months earlier that Putin warned the world that NATO membership and the inevitable housing of America's planned Missile Defense program would force Russia to treat Ukraine as an enemy:
"It is horrible to say and even horrible to think that, in response to the deployment of [NATO missile facilities] in Ukrainian territory, which cannot theoretically be ruled out, Russia could target its missile systems at Ukraine. Imagine this just for a second."
You see? It’s not rocket science (no pun intended) to see Russia viewing this push to incorporate Ukraine and Georgia as a direct threat, as any rational person would expect.
Later that year, the Georgian government made a move on Russia, presumably expecting they would get some backing by NATO. But no, that was just a false sense of security. George W. Bush had just welcomed Georgia into the alliance months earlier, but NATO did nothing. So, when Georgia postured, Russia clobbered the country. Georgia is in a worse position now than they were before 2008.
And Bush failed to get what he wanted. Germany and France didn’t agree to the incorporation of Ukraine and Georgia. They knew it was an unnecessary aggressive move towards Russia.
What happened on February 22, 2014?
Back in 2004, the presidential election between Viktor Yushchenko (West-aligned) and Viktor Yanukovych (Russia-aligned) was seen as fraudulent (but, aren’t they all?).
Anyway, protests broke out upon Yanukovych’s win which forced a re-vote, eventually giving Yushchenko the win. This was known as the Orange Revolution (based on Yushchenko’s campaign color). This “revolution” was seemingly backed by the US government as alluded to by Victoria Nuland — currently serving as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs — at the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation Conference in Washington D.C. in 2013:
“Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.”
$5 billion in “these and other goals,” she says. One can only imagine what “other goals” are included. This is what is meant by “spreading democracy.”
Interestingly enough, Yushchenko was mysteriously poisoned before that election but was able to recover. Because Yushchencko was promoting EU and NATO integration at the time, it’s not all that far-fetched to think Putin had a hand in the poisoning. But, the true culprit is unknown to this day.
Now fast forward to November 2013, when President Yanukovych (elected in 2010) was working to incorporate Ukraine into the EU. The Russians would accept this only if Russia was included in the deal. But, the EU wouldn’t have Russia. So, Russia offered Ukraine an alternate deal. Perhaps it was genuinely a better deal or perhaps it was a deal Yanukovych “couldn’t refuse.” Regardless, Yanukovych chose the Russia deal over that of the EU, much to the disappointment of the West (and Victoria Nuland as we’ll see in a bit).
In response, anti-Russian protests then ensued on November 21, 2013 in Maidan Square in Kiev. It was violent and over 100 people died. City Hall was seized on December 1, 2013.
As the protests flared up through early February 2014, European foreign ministers came into Kiev to work out a deal for elections. On February 22, a deal is worked out and the Ukrainian parliament elects an acting prime minister and acting president who promptly shift the country’s orientation closer to the EU. Yanukovych, fearing for his life, flees to Russia. How’s that for “democracy?”
So about Mrs. Nuland again. It appears she was key in setting the stage for this Orange Revolution 2.0 and the coup that kicked out Yanukovych. She was caught on tape directing Ukraine opposition party strategies with US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.
Commenting on European pressure put on Yanukovych – or lack thereof – she explains that she has spoken to the United Nations and has gotten an official there who said that Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, agreed to send someone to Ukraine to “help glue this thing and to have the UN glue it.”
She adds: “And you know, fuck the EU.”
“Exactly,” Pyatt replies. “And I think we got to do something to make it stick together, because you can be sure that if it does start to gain altitude the Russians will be working behind the scenes to torpedo it. Let me work on Klitschko, and I think we should get a Western personality to come out here (to Ukraine) and midwife this thing,’’ he adds.
Nuland was clearly frustrated at the EU's hesitancy on picking a fight with Russia. Hence the call for reinforcements from the UN to make sure the deal to rid Yanukovych “stuck together.”
After the Coup
The day after the coup, Parliament repeals minority language laws (i.e., the Russian language) which sends a middle-finger to Russia. On February 27th, Russian military forces in Crimea start to seize checkpoints (Russians were leasing naval bases in Ukraine at the time). Additional forces then follow into Crimea from Russia.
Within the next two weeks, Crimean parliament votes in favor of joining Russia and the country is incorporated into the federation.
Conflict then breaks out in eastern Ukraine in April 2014. Understand that eastern Ukraine is heavily pro-Russian and Russia has an interest in maintaining this. So Russian “peace keeping troops” (there’s no such thing, of course) walked right in, supported, and armed the separatist movement in Donbas.
Ukraine Today
And so what sparked the recent invasion of Ukraine? Well, earlier this month, Russia’s proposal on security guarantees — demanding the US rule out Ukraine as a future member of the NATO alliance — was responded to quite unfavorably by the US and NATO.
“We reaffirm our commitment to NATO’s Open Door Policy under Article 10 of the Washington Treaty,” the NATO response reads.
NATO’s “Open Door Policy” means that NATO membership is open to any “European state in a position to further the principles of the [North Atlantic Treaty] and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area.”
Biden again reaffirmed his “Open Door Policy” stance just last Friday, as if to turn the screw right in Putin’s eye.
The central part of the NATO treaty is Article 5 — the principle of collective defense. It’s a commitment that any attack on any NATO member country is treated as an attack on the entire alliance. Any Russian military engagement with a NATO-member would bring Russia into conflict with the entire 30-country alliance (e.g, the US, the UK, France, Germany, etc.)
NATO should be ended, or at least US should abandon it. The US has effectively become the guarantor of security of these nations in exchange for their conformity. NATO is nothing more than an extension of US authority into Europe. It has become a threat to peace. As George Washington said in his Farewell Address,
“Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?”
What is Putin Thinking?
Russia started by walking into the eastern areas of Ukraine that have declared their independence and been outside of Ukrainian government control since the coup in 2014. But it isn’t just the independent areas, Putin has declared the entire Donbas region under his control and is closing in on the capital in Kiev. The Ukrainians claim 352 civilian deaths so far. But Russian troops say civilians are not a target and that they are taking steps to ensure civilian safety, for whatever that’s worth.
So what does Putin think he will accomplish with the invasion? Perhaps he fears Washington DC will come in to control the independent, Russian-aligned portions if he doesn’t do it first. After all, it is Washington DC that essentially directs the Ukraine government now.
Does Putin want to occupy the country, conquer it? Has he not witnessed how the US government has failed every attempt at occupying countries in the world? The Donbas will be a burden on the Russian economy. And by taking the region, which is majority ethnically Russian, this only strengthens the Ukraine government by diluting out the remaining ethnic Russians from the rest of the country.
Is Putin a crazy madman like they say? Will he continue his invasion rolling westward until the Western powers react with war? Boy, I hope not!
Or is Putin rational? Putin has been in power for roughly 20 years and has, up until this point, been relatively cautious in terms of war.
Perhaps he is simply showing the EU, NATO, and the US — at the expense of the Ukrainian people — that Russia has no interest in western power expansion towards its borders. Russia, in essence, is asserting their own version of the Monroe Doctrine — “stay out of my backyard.” So perhaps Putin is just taking a jack hammer to the Ukraine so the West can’t have it in one piece.
It seems to me that the Ukrainian people find themselves being used and abused by both the western powers and Russia in a real-life Game of Thrones episode.
Even US Representative, Adam Schiff, seems to affirm my thesis, by admitting the US uses Ukraine to fight Russia over there so we don’t have to fight them over here. Of course, he says it like it’s not a bad thing. Creep.
The West’s Response
Is anyone surprised at Russia’s reaction? Only those that are incapable of putting themselves in the shoes of others should be surprised. I’m not saying it’s the right response. I’m not defending Russia. So take that accusation and shove it. I’m saying Russia is having a rational reaction. And if you’re honest with yourself, you’re saying the same thing. The blowback from February 22, 2014 and the ongoing belligerent push towards Russian borders is now coming to realization.
As we see time and time again, governments in general double-down on belligerence when they don’t get their way. I fear Russia will feel backed into a corner and find themselves employing the worst option available, the nuclear option.
Will China now lean in closer to Russia? Will Russia and Ukraine come to a cease-fire? Will the US take a reasonable step back? Time will tell how this all shakes out. Now we watch the belligerence unfold, which unfortunately, will only exacerbate the situation.
Don’t lose your head. Russia has nuclear weapons. The world may soon come to realize what the common phrase, “f$%@ around and find out,” really means.