I agree that animosity is deep rooted between neighbors. But I suspect it is less deep between distant countries that have had working relationships in the past.
It's very easy for Americans to shrug their shoulders and say "we don't care it's a long way away", regardless of whether or not that would be a historic surrender for the global hegemon, but we Europeans cannot. It's on our doorstep. Russia has not just attacked Ukraine, but all of Europe. There will never be normalised relations with Russia whilst he is in power, just as there never could be normalised relations with Adolf Hitler once he had crossed the Rubicon and started WW2.
Is's not like you're going in with a military action and capturing Volgograd, after all. Adolf Hitler could be neutralized by capturing Berlin. Good luck dealing with Russia that way.
The problem is what to do with the likes of Georgia and Ukraine (which has been deeply regretting giving up nukes against Russian/US/UK "protection" for some years now).
So far, we have seen the opposite pattern of Russia messing with countries which didn't make it into NATO in time.
If that does not happen, these sabers will be rattling from time to time. If Russia's (and China's) immediate borders are packed with countries armed to their teeth, there would be wars.
Buffer states happen for a reason.
I believe USA kind of understands this (see how they reacted to Cuba) and EU surely understands this too (see how Sweden reacts to any signs of Russian militarization), but they have trouble projecting it on other countries or still believing they can coerce these countries into "dealing with it".
I like this Putin's style of passive threats like "there would be wars". Just say the threat explicitly, Russia would invade their western neighbors.
> Buffer states happen for a reason.
Ukraine was a buffer state, yet it was invaded by Russia three times in the last 10 years. People have now justified doubts about this model.
Arms do not win wars without people holding them, and even then, fighting off an agressor does not mean your country isn't ruined.
Ukraine was in the process of ditching its buffer state status by choosing a side. They bragged for a decade how they are going to do that. Needless to say it didn't go so well for them, and only them so far. Other countries in thir position turned out to be smarter as not to win the first Russian invasion target prize.
Please note that I'm not asking for a moral judgement because everybody else who may pass it has worse skeletons in their own closet than Russian Ukraine affair.
Other countries just managed to join NATO fast enough before Putin lost his mind. Ukraine's mistake was joining too slowly. Now Russia and Ukraine both suffer for basically no reason other than the fantasies of a senile 71 year old man.
>Please note that I'm not asking for a moral judgement because everybody else who may pass it has worse skeletons in their own closet than Russian Ukraine affair.
I don't know if that is true, the Ukraine War stands out as particularly evil. Russia is guilty of particularly evil crimes against humanity in this war that they chose to start.
Most of these countries Russia never touched, or fought off of Turks and then let them be. They never lived under Russia's anything. Were it Czechs live under several centuries of Russian tyranny? Because these ones are particularly obnoxious now, despite many years of feeding off of Russian statesmen in Karlovy Vary.
I don't think you even remotely understand what you are talking about, and people are going to die in great numbers before they start reading history books instead of NYT columns on the subject.
> stands out as particularly evil
I guess they just don't hand out history textbooks in the child care...
Does the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact ring any bell? Do you know what the Baltic states went through? Did you hear about the Prague spring or that glorious sister republic in eastern Germany? Fuck, do you know about the Holodomor?
It’s a bit rich to say these countries never knew Russian oppression. It may not have lasted very long, but it was particularly brutal. The first thing they did is get away at the first occasion and all of them are traumatised to this day. Ukraine and Belarus tried to play nice. Belarus is now subservient and annexed in all but name, and Ukraine is being torn apart. So tell me why those Eastern European countries would not do anything they can to stay out of Russia’s reach?
XX century was a disaster, you had to grind your teeth and survive through it. Holodomor is a pathetic Ukrainian attempt to privatize a much greater Communist hunger and frame it on its victims. They do so because they believe that they should get a specific, better treatment than everybody east of them. Rings any bells?
Needless to say Russians did not invent Communism and you can find a huge number of fans for it in any HN thread. Russians sincerely believed they have a traumatic experience of struggle to share with the rest of "socialist camp" only to discover that the whole 500 million strong camp frames it on their small ethnic fraction.
Belarus is a paradise now compared to Ukraine (and to extent Russia). You can do whatever you like and there is no fear of draft. There are also jobs and industry intact. You can cross the border if you are male but is not economically obliged to do so.
I think you just struggle to understand how fundamentally your country is hated by Eastern Europeans. Russia is like Germany, if Germany still was proud of its Nazi heritage. You just don't get it, it's sad, you're so hated but you have no idea why, you're just so blinded by ultranationalism. Russia could have chosen to enter the 21st century but instead decided to enter the 18th. Meanwhile most of your people outside of Moscow and St Petersburg don't even have indoor toilets. It's honestly tragic what a gigantic shithole your country is, and yet you're so proud of it being such a gigantic shithole. Just tragic.
The problem with most Eastern Europeans is that they'll sing and dance on anybody's 5 cents. You can buy and sell them and they will always be eager to serve.
That is frankly revolting to Russians who are able to maintain long term loyalties, and will be heartbroken to betray long term commitments. Russians do not hate Eastern Europeans, neither do they want to invade and occupy their countries, but Russians do despise Eastern Europeans now. Every stupid thing you say gets laid on these scales.
Still, Russians did not write Armenia off completely even after all this.
Armenia basically tell Russia they break up with them to join another relationship. However, the other side does not look like they want Armenia. No breakup exchange of personal effects happens. In the end, Russia lingers there to see what happens and is not closing the door yet. Again, it is a bad analogy because even the closest country to country relations are not monogamous.
The reason of why the breakup is discussed: your bearded girlfriend taunted another girl (with a mustache) and got serious bruises in return. Now she thinks you should've fought with that another girl instead of her doing so. Your girlfriend was the cause of the fight but you do think the mustached one has overreacted.
But I'm more optimistic about that and don't believe your empty threats. If the NATO strengthens its eastern border, Russia's military has simply no chance there. It's a suicide, it doesn't make sense to bang your head against the wall. Russia has many other weaker neighbors it can abuse instead.
> Ukraine was in the process of ditching its buffer state status by choosing a side.
Ukraine was invaded because it wanted to get closer to EU in the form of the association agreement.
Interestingly, the roughly analogous CIS was never a problem in this concept of "buffer state". Or does "buffer state" actually mean "Russia-aligned"?
And that's the crux of the issue. You can stay as a buffer state only as long as you're a Russian puppet.
The first move was at the end of the Cold War. The drunken President Yeltsin took the existing administrative map of the USSR and created a new state that had artificially attached Russian regions. This set up the time delay fuse. Second was the US-backed coup in 2014. And third - what we have today. The US is good at playing the long game. Only China is better.
Downvote away, it seems to make you happy. But maybe before you write this off as "Russian propaganda" go read what Solzhenitsyn had to say on the subject. Yes, that Solzhenitsyn, the dissident who wrote "Ivan Denisovich".
Look, we tried normalising relations. In the end, Russia just takes what it can. It’s lunacy to believe that everything would be better if European countries just rolled over, accepted being bullied, and just gave Putin what he wants. It’s insane.
I also remember how bad they were during COVID time, etc.
Europe’s economy is in shambles, they do not have the power to push back if Russia and the US were to push for détente never mind that the country with the most EU influence (Germany) is a major dove on this issue.
> (Germany) is a major dove on this issue.
No, they're not dovish, they're just not leaders and not willing to take initiative and require others to move first. That stems from their history. They've sent huge amounts of aid already to Ukraine (~1% of GDP versus 0.2% of GDP for the USA).
> Europe’s economy is in shambles
I mean, it's not as good as the USA's, but it's not in shambles. It's relatively OK. I live here. I'd rather live here than in Russia. Russia is a glorified petrol station with nukes and a military. Europe's economy still absolutely dwarfs Russia's. When I speak to my (many) Russian colleagues, it's clear they'd rather be here in Germany than in Russia.
> US were to push for détente
It's not realistic. The only person who is going to do that is Trump. There's no scenario where we Europeans just give up our security and let imperial war conquests become acceptable on our continent (not yours, yank) for the sake of Trump's ego. Why? Because we think he's completely retarded. Only Americans like him. And how would we benefit exactly from trading away our security? How can the US force us? All it would do is seal the USA's historic break from its European allies (And I know it's not popular at the moment in the USA, but any one with a basic understanding of geopolitics knows that the USA's strongest asset its just how many rich and powerful allies it has). Good luck standing up to China alone, in that case. Then the West is truly fucked!
Putin isn't Hitler. People are way too quick to write off negotiation when it is people's real lives at play.
> They've sent huge amounts of aid already to Ukraine (~1% of GDP versus 0.2% of GDP for the USA).
False? not sure where you are getting your numbers from but USA has sent both considerably more in magnitude and as a percentage of the GDP through the end of 2023.
Germany doesn't even spend 2% of GDP on all military expenses (they recently pledged to as it is a new NATO requirement), they are not spending half of that on Ukraine allocation.
> It's not realistic. The only person who is going to do that is Trump.
Wavering support for the Ukraine war is not just a Trump-ism phenomenon. I am not sure how the media reports this in the UK but support is collapsing across both parties in the polls.
A majority of Americans think Trump is stupid too and you are very unlikely to meet a supporter on HN.
> Good luck standing up to China alone, in that case
US policymakers already perceive no will to stand up to China among EU lawmakers.
> And how would we benefit exactly from trading away our security? How can the US force us?
EU+UK citizens will not be willing to pay the full brunt of this conflict for an extended period of time.
The fact of the matter is that most Europeans are much more ambivalent about this conflict than you are implying [0] which is obvious from the polling. Ratchet up the spending and energy price impact to considerable portions of GDP and what will happen?
[0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/at-your-service/files/be-hear...
No he's not Hitler, he's Putin. Putin cannot be negotiated with, that is the point.
>False? not sure where you are getting your numbers from but USA has sent both considerably more in magnitude and as a percentage of the GDP through the end of 2023.
No it is not. My numbers are from the Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/ca7fa865-97a1-4013-bde6-b69731b03...
Where are yours from? If you have better numbers, share them.
>Wavering support for the Ukraine war is not just a Trump-ism phenomenon. I am not sure how the media reports this in the UK but support is collapsing across both parties in the polls.
Wavering or collapsing? The majority still support aid for Ukraine. That much is a fact. I am not in the UK anyway, I live in Germany.
Your source for polling is sadly incoherent, just quoting random countries, but judging by this poll, it looks clear that Europeans support Ukraine:
https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/news/european...
But to some extent it does not matter, there is no choice, because Europe is being attacked. It's not as if we have choice but to support them. Arguably more importantly, our establishment supports Ukraine.
>US policymakers already perceive no will to stand up to China among EU lawmakers.
US policymakers firmly believe that the best way to counterbalance China is through strengthening alliances around the world.
>EU+UK citizens will not be willing to pay the full brunt of this conflict for an extended period of time.
We already are. I think a lot of you yanks like to get high on the idea of Europe being seconds from collapse, but actually things here are OK. The worst is over, that first winter after the invasion? Yeah that was tricky, but it's already past now. The way you talk it's like we're rationing supplies to make ends meet to raise money for another missile. Yes the USA is richer than Europe, but Europe is the richest place in the world after the USA, so it's OK, there's no shame in being second place. Everything's OK. Europe will ultimately do whatever it takes to see out Russia's invasion. There's no way a country with an economy the size of Spain can outlast the entirety of Europe. Russia is a paper tiger, as evidenced by how shit its military has performed ever since it invaded.
And yet, here we are with another ultranationalist dictator hell bent on getting back that vital space and dreaming of fallen empires. Hitler had Charlemagne, and Putin has Catherine and Peter the Great. Putin did not gas anybody that I know of, but the gulags remained the whole time. It’s true that he is closer to Stalin than Hitler in many respects, but I am not sure it’s much better.
> Europe’s economy is in shambles, they do not have the power to push back if Russia and the US were to push for détente never mind that the country with the most EU influence (Germany) is a major dove on this issue.
That is a terrible misreading of how the EU functions. By design it cannot be dominated by a single country and Germany is basically following others. It’s not a major dove in any way, it’s just in the middle of the pack and they started from a fundamentally pacifist political background. The fact that they are merely talking about rearming is a demonstration of the seismic shift in domestic politics there.
Détente won’t happen in the current situation, regardless of what the US push for. They simply have no power to force that outcome. What would happen is another Korea, Georgia or Moldova: a country split in two, with one half living under yet another brutal dictatorship.