Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
International law wise, they are right. Providing even just logistical support from your bases makes you a party to the war. So the countries that allow Ukrainian aircraft to use their bases have already joined the war on the Ukrainian side before getting attacked by Russia. This also makes the NATO article 5 non-applicable.

The problem is the US would have a very hard time explaining this to its own populace and others. People think any conflict that has a NATO member in must pull all the others in too. If the US joins the war after such an incident, it will be risking its own existence. If it doesn't (which it shouldn't according to even NATO treaty itself) it will lose a lot of its credibility in an unjustified way.

I can see the US having a very serious conversation with the Baltics, Romania, and Poland right now if the allegations are real. The US is a lot of things but it isn't a country that would allow Eastern European NATO members to skirt around WW3 hiding behind its might.
Article 5 may not come into it. Russia may perceive an attack from Poland (say) as an attack from all of NATO.

Those conversations have already happened and appear to have had the intended effect. Poland was previously baying for Russian blood, they've suddenly lost all interest in sending jets to Ukraine.

It is a very difficult situation for Biden that I don't envy. Not only does he need to manage the expectations of his own population who are very anti-Russian right now. But also the governments and electorate of every NATO country. It only takes one to do something stupid and we are in a potential nuclear war.

Most of the population are completely unaware how close we came to nuclear war a week ago, many people in the western world aren't aware that nuclear war is even being discussed, despite that fact Russia has publically threatened it on multiple platforms.
Sino-Ruso relationship is defined by China as 新时代全面战略协作伙伴关系, Full spectrum strategic "collaboration" partnership. It is the highest bilateral relationship in China's diplomacy. I don't know about the translation of 协作 to collaboration is accurate in English or not. But in Chinese definition it is a closer and fuller cooperation that involves one party to assist the other party's strategic objective and vis versa.

It is an alliance without the word "alliance". So in essence Russia and China are strategic allies. I am confident that the Chinese leadership knows what they are doing, so is the Russian leadership, and they are well aware of the histories.
The only problem with this is that there is no underlying ideological underpinning for an alliance. Being anti-western isn't an ideology. Putin only dislikes the west because of years of russophobia. This isn't a country like Iran which is anti-western for religious reasons, or North Korea or Vietnam which are communist.

What if tomorrow NATO offer Putin a deal to take over CIS countries and recreate the Russian Empire in return for support against China? Would he take it? Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. But he doesn't have an ideological reason to say no.

That's why I think there will be a deal between Xi and Putin for Russia for the communist party to take over Russia when Putin retires.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
The only problem with this is that there is no underlying ideological underpinning for an alliance. Being anti-western isn't an ideology. Putin only dislikes the west because of years of russophobia. This isn't a country like Iran which is anti-western for religious reasons, or North Korea or Vietnam which are communist.

What if tomorrow NATO offer Putin a deal to take over CIS countries and recreate the Russian Empire in return for support against China? Would he take it? Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. But he doesn't have an ideological reason to say no.

That's why I think there will be a deal between Xi and Putin for Russia for the communist party to take over Russia when Putin retires.
I don't see any ideological underpins in US and its Gulf allies. Neither was ideology the underpins of WWI and numerous previous alliances.

Besides, since when ideology became the foundation of alliance? It is only an US invention since 1945, China never believed in nor practised it.
 

Lapin

Junior Member
Registered Member
The 'Russians are really Asiatics (sic) at heart' meme has long been used by Westerners, both to demonize Russians
and to excuse Russian misbehavior. For instance, some Western sympathizers have attempted to rationalize the Soviet
soldiers' mass rapes of German women as 'natural' because Russians have been under 'Mongolian' cultural influence,
as if German women had nothing to fear from the 'civilized' white Soviet soldiers.

"Pan-Mongolism--though the word is strange,
My ear acclaims its gongs."
--Vladimir Solovyov

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"You are the millions, we are multitude
And multitude and multitude.
Come, fight! Yea, we are Scythians,
Yea, Asians, a squint-eyed, greedy brood."
--Alexander Blok

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"They are 'civilised' and 'look like us': the racist coverage of Ukraine.
Are Ukrainians more deserving of sympathy than Afghans and Iraqis? Many seem to think so."
--Moustafa Bayoumi

"These comments point to a pernicious racism that permeates today’s war coverage and seeps into its fabric like a stain
that won’t go away. The implication is clear: war is a natural state for people of color, while white people naturally gravitate
toward peace."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"The people of Ukraine need our solidarity. But not just because they’re ‘like us’"
--Kenan Malik

"In 1857, the English poet and Chartist leader
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
wrote a series of articles in the People’s Paper about the
“Indian Mutiny” of that year. It was, he observed, no “mutiny” but a “national insurrection” that Britons should support as
much as they had supported similar struggles in Europe. Britons were “on the side of Poland” when it “struggled for its
freedom against Russia”. If Poland was “right”, Jones insisted, then “so is Hindostan”."

"the belief that our capacity to empathise with people’s hopes, fears and suffering is defined by whether they are “like us”.
It’s an argument that circumscribes solidarity along lines of identity. One of the ironies of much rightwing criticism of
identity politics is the obliviousness to their own wallowing in the swamp of identity.

There is an irony, too, in that the place of eastern Europeans and of Russians in the western imagination has always been ambiguous.
Today, Europeans might embrace Ukrainians as “one of us”. It has not always been so. There is a long history of bigotry towards Slavs,
of viewing them as primitive and “Asiatic”."

"The 1917 Russian Revolution was cast by many in racial terms. The prominent white supremacist Lothrop Stoddard viewed the
Russian population as “made up chiefly of primitive racial strains… which have always shown an instinctive hostility to civilisation”. Another American writer, Clinton Stoddard Burr, saw Bolshevism as “fundamentally an Asiatic conception which is repugnant to
the western mind”

"In 2018, the Wall Street Journal
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Putin’s diplomacy headlined “Russia’s Turn to Its Asian Past”.

"The boundaries of those who are “like us”, of those who are European, of even those who are considered “white”, are not
fixed but shift according to political and social need. And those ever-changing boundaries are defined as much by those
deemed to be not like us as by those whom we acknowledge are."

"The EU president Ursula von der Leyen
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that Ukraine “belongs in the European family”. One of her first
acts on becoming EU president in 2019 was to move responsibility for immigration into
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for “Promoting Our
European Way of Life”, the task of which included protecting it from “
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
”. Refugees from Ukraine are part of
the “European way of life”. Those from beyond are not. That is how boundaries are marked to delimit empathy and solidarity."
 

Phead128

Major
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Sino-Ruso relationship is defined by China as 新时代全面战略协作伙伴关系, Full spectrum strategic "collaboration" partnership. It is the highest bilateral relationship in China's diplomacy.
Ugh, no, The Sino-DPRK mutual defense treaty is a formal treaty alliance and arguably a stronger bilateral relationship than a "comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination" (China-Russia) and higher than "all-weather strategic cooperative relations" (China-Pakistan).
I don't know about the translation of 协作 to collaboration is accurate in English or not. But in Chinese definition it is a closer and fuller cooperation that involves one party to assist the other party's strategic objective and vis versa.

It is an alliance without the word "alliance".
Except the Foreign ministry explicitly said it was China-Russia relation is a "Non-Alliance" relationship.

Wang Wenbin: China and Russia are comprehensive strategic partners of coordination. Our relationship features non-alliance, non-confrontation and non-targeting of any third party.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Hua Chunying: "I must also stress that China-Russia relations are based on the foundation of non-alliance, non-confrontation and non-targeting of any third party. This differs fundamentally and essentially from the practice of the US, which is, ganging up to form small cliques and pursuing bloc politics to create confrontation and division based on ideology. China has no interest in the friend-or-foe dichotomous Cold War thinking and the patchwork of so-called allies and small cliques and has no intention to follow such a path."
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So in essence Russia and China are strategic allies. I am confident that the Chinese leadership knows what they are doing, so is the Russian leadership, and they are well aware of the histories.
All of the benefits, but none of the risks (such as actually defending Russian territory as your own), unlike the Sino-DPRK MDT treaty.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Ugh, no, The Sino-DPRK mutual defense treaty is a formal treaty alliance and arguably a stronger bilateral relationship than a "comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination" (China-Russia) and higher than "all-weather strategic cooperative relations" (China-Pakistan).

Except the Foreign ministry explicitly said it was China-Russia relation is a "Non-Alliance" relationship.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

All of the benefits, but none of the risks (such as actually defending Russian territory as your own), unlike the Sino-DPRK MDT treaty.
You are playing word again. I am willing to entertain you.

Here is the name of the treaty between PRC and DPRK
中华人民共和国和朝鲜民主主义人民共和国友好合作互助条约

Here is the name of the China Russia treaty
中俄睦邻友好合作条约

If you want to insist on the word alliance or ally, tell me where is it in the two treaty?

China did not say China and DPRK is in an alliance in any document either. So what is your point to nit-picking a word?
 
Last edited:

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
I am wondering but what’s the need for Russia to assault Kiev anyway. Their military reputation is already tarnished. Won’t change anything if they decide to move in or not on Kiev. Why not cut the power and starve them out because it’s quite clear the Ukrainian cities did not stockpile food before hand. Kiev may have greater food stocks but the west aren’t airlifting dropping supplies into the city are they.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
there is immigration of Global South to Europe. ultimately the interests of Global South and Europe will converge.
thats the reason Turkey is still attached to Europe and Turkey want to drag rest of Central Asia to this system.
Iran will be in similar situation. India is already there.
finally the slaves and slave masters fall in love and live happily ever after. What a nice fairy-tale.
Chinese are not attracting this scale of immigration nor it can afford global military bases to support its trade. China can produce more but still it cannot make alot of complex products 100% domestically. when US was becoming superpower it had practically 100% control over complex products with full energy independence. China need Russia in various ways to divide this Global south from North.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China will work with Russia, NOT based on your reasons.
 

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
I don't see any ideological underpins in US and its Gulf allies. Neither was ideology the underpins of WWI and numerous previous alliances.

Besides, since when ideology became the foundation of alliance? It is only an US invention since 1945, China never believed in nor practised it.
They aren't alliances though. More like a rich family who America agree to keep in power in return for cheap oil. A modernised version of colonialism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top