Putin’s Asymmetric Blind Spot

Rightguide

Prof Triggernometry
Joined
Feb 7, 2017
Posts
66,474
An interesting take on the possibility of a Russian Invasion of Ukraine:

Putin’s Asymmetric Blind Spot
Opinion
DECEMBER 24TH, 2021 BY GREGORY SIMS

OPINION — Perhaps it is just a reckless Khrushchevesque opening gambit, but Russia’s recent security demands suggest that Vladimir Putin’s condition for avoiding military action against Ukraine is Western acquiescence in converting Ukraine into a Russian vassal state. Given he also demands NATO roll back deployments of personnel and equipment to its 1997 positions, before Poland or the Baltic republics joined the alliance, it is not just Ukraine he wants to see neutered.

Russian officials never hesitate to raise their country’s genuinely horrific suffering at the hands of the Nazis during World War II when justifying their need for a cordon sanitaire at their borders, but their historical self-righteousness is highly selective. What they fail to mention, but what Russia’s neighbors will never forget, is that in 1932-33, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin precipitated a politically driven famine, the “Holodomor,” which killed nearly 5 million Ukrainians. This was followed by the 1937-38 Anti-Kulak campaign (NKVD Order 00844), resulting in the execution of another 400,000 people. The concurrent anti-Polish campaign (NKVD Order 00485) resulted in the execution of 100,000 ethnic Poles, and the Anti-Latvian campaign (NKVD Order 49990) killed more than 16,000 Latvians. Over a 15-month period, these hundreds of thousands of non-Russians were executed for the alleged crime of being “anti-Soviet.” Most were dispatched by a gunshot to the back of the neck and buried in unmarked mass graves. Many thousands more were imprisoned or deported to Siberia or Central Asia.

To this unimaginable slaughter, add the 1939 Nazi-Soviet partition of Poland and the execution of 22,000 captured Polish officers, the 1940 Soviet occupation and annexation of the Baltic states, and the 45 years of imposed communist rule in Central Europe after World War II and crushing of multiple uprisings against it. Can it be surprising that these post-Soviet states, once freed, would gravitate toward a defensive alliance for collective security? Perhaps their worries would have been alleviated had Russia cleanly broken with its Soviet past after 1991, but after halting steps under Boris Yeltsin, Putin turned back the clock on the expansion of civil liberties and candor about the Soviet past, which increasingly glorifies Stalin’s role.

Putin’s focus on NATO is disingenuous. Remember in 2013, Russia pressured then-President Viktor Yanukovych to terminate Ukraine’s steps toward an association agreement with the EU, seeking an economic not a military alliance. This prompted the “Maidan” uprising which ousted Yanukovych, quickly followed by Russia’s use of military force in the Donbas and outright annexation of Crimea. Only after the killing of Ukrainians and occupation of their territory by Russia did joining NATO become a serious Ukrainian national objective. Putin can blame himself for this.

Putin’s real fear, however, is not NATO. He knows its decisions are made by consensus, i.e., unanimously by all member states, thus the prospect of offensive military action by NATO against Russian aggression is negligible. His actual fear is that Ukraine will succeed in developing into a Europe-oriented democracy where state power is limited by a free press, independent judiciary, and the rule of law. Success in this endeavor by Ukraine, so close to Russia culturally and linguistically, would serve as an intolerable contrast to Putin’s authoritarian, state-centric vision for Russia’s future, and he must therefore prevent it.

More here:

https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/putins-asymmetric-blind-spot
 
The Holodomor is not really relevant here. Russia is not seeking any control over Ukrainian agricultural practices.

Of course, Operation Barbarossa is not relevant either. No EU nation has the slightest interest in invading Russia.
 
The Holodomor is not really relevant here. Russia is not seeking any control over Ukrainian agricultural practices.

Of course, Operation Barbarossa is not relevant either. No EU nation has the slightest interest in invading Russia.

That wasn't the point either. The point is the event is etched firmly in the minds of Ukrainians and will give them to will to exact a heavy price on Putin in exchange for their freedom.
 
His actual fear is that Ukraine will succeed in developing into a Europe-oriented democracy where state power is limited by a free press, independent judiciary, and the rule of law. Success in this endeavor by Ukraine, so close to Russia culturally and linguistically, would serve as an intolerable contrast to Putin’s authoritarian, state-centric vision for Russia’s future, and he must therefore prevent it.

That part, at least, is almost plausible.

But, that attribution of motivation makes no difference at all to the strategic considerations of the situation. No matter why Putin is doing what he is doing, he is doing it. The West has no carrot to offer him, only stick.
 
That part, at least, is almost plausible.

But, that attribution of motivation makes no difference at all to the strategic considerations of the situation. No matter why Putin is doing what he is doing, he is doing it. The West has no carrot to offer him, only stick.

He'll get the stick.
 
The Holodomor is not really relevant here. Russia is not seeking any control over Ukrainian agricultural practices.

Holodomor is relevant, it is remembered and present in psychology of the combatants, thus relevant for troop morale at very least, and shaping of the political discourse at least on propaganda level (witch of course has synergies with strategic direction). In short, it is relevant as shortcut explanation why Russians would be seen as invaders on the ground in most of Ukraine (and yes, it shouldn't need explaining, but it does).

Unfortunately it's effectively impossible for us to see what the Putin's real strategy there is. I fully agree with this though:
His actual fear is that Ukraine will succeed in developing into a Europe-oriented democracy where state power is limited by a free press, independent judiciary, and the rule of law. Success in this endeavor by Ukraine, so close to Russia culturally and linguistically, would serve as an intolerable contrast to Putin’s authoritarian, state-centric vision for Russia’s future, and he must therefore prevent it.

Crippling Ukraine is the overarching goal, but actually openly invading it again would be borderline insanity, even though they might (even very likely, yet) succeed.

I still think the actual game Putin plays is far more meta, flirting with the potential of invasion and tension for forcing... well, seemingly senseless direct talks with US? It's in essence trolling. Seriously. Those guys are attention whores like that. It's important to their self esteem to be a perceived superpower dictating their vision of the world to everyone. In this case to demonstrate, in particular, that Ukraine is not a country but a territory to be talked about between "the big boys" without their own input. That format itself is a goal for demonstrative purposes, any concessions blackmailed just icing on the cake.

I know how crazy it sounds (it is), but partly I wish we could call the bluff and say, "okay, let's then..." But of course, that's unacceptable for so many reasons. For one, Ukraine's not ready. Nobody really is, of course.

In cold blood cynical "sportsmanship" take this could potentially be very interesting war. It could be even more interesting in a year or two and another billion dollar or few more dropped into Ukraine militarily capabilities. Sure, personally I'm strongly biased having vested interests and being fan of one team and likely would be gravely disappointed by the actual results...

And that may be indeed a thing in this, that Putin's window of opportunity to actually do something fabulously stupid is closing.

***

Now, for truly irrelevant random historical elaborating
followed by the 1937-38 Anti-Kulak campaign
Probably the most insane thing the bolsheviks did in pursuit of collectivization of farming (in pursuit of the ideal of traditional (east-)Russian village). The "kulak" translates as "fist" (both Russian and Latvian), and alleged to oppression by feudal landowners, but with a threshold set insanely low, catching anyone who: employed any paid labor, or even just owned more that four cows and a horse.

Then, this really illustrates how poor the core Russian peasantry was, as from their viewpoint this really was already "obscenely rich" even already long after "the great catastrophe" (abolishing of serfdom in Russia was catastrophic for peasantry). While the European parts, the traditional homestead culture, it was basically anyone marginally competent. It was very sharp clash of cultures episode. The most insane part, those competent peasants were uprooted in the middle of the night, sent over to Siberia with nothing, where they survived (or not) the first winter, then claimed free land, and in few years built houses and employed locals, just to be often repressed again.

the Anti-Latvian campaign (NKVD Order 49990) killed more than 16,000 Latvians
This may seem a small number on the big order of things, but first, there's never been significantly more than two million Latvians, and much more relevant in this case, this was before Latvia was added to USSR. Those Latvians were there as of result of WW1 and Russian civil war, and most were Red Latvian Riflemen. Those guys... well, why or how Lenin get them as bodyguards is stuff of legend, as was battles of Russian civil war allegedly won by just rumor that "Latvians are coming!" or that first KGB meetings were held in Latvian... for added security, but also convenience.

Among others, those repressions included first commander-in-chief of Red army Jukums Vācietis (literally, Crazy German), and although he was just a military academy professor by the the time when Heinz Guderian worked on the Blitzkrieg in Russia's training grounds, loss of the expertise and experience of those men conceivably changed the course of at least the first half of the Great Patriotic War (WW2 eastern front). Then, one might argue, stronger USSR wouldn't be a good thing at all, so, take this just as a perverse nationalistic boasting.
 
Last edited:
Then, this really illustrates how poor the core Russian peasantry was, as from their viewpoint this really was already "obscenely rich" even already long after "the great catastrophe" (abolishing of serfdom in Russia was catastrophic for peasantry).

How was it catastrophic for them?

Among others, those repressions included first commander-in-chief of Red army Jukums Vācietis (literally, Crazy German), and although he was just a military academy professor by the the time when Heinz Guderian worked on the Blitzkrieg in Russia's training grounds, loss of the expertise and experience of those men conceivably changed the course of at least the first half of the Great Patriotic War (WW2 eastern front). Then, one might argue, stronger USSR wouldn't be a good thing at all, so, take this just as a perverse nationalistic boasting.

Yes, one of the most strategically disastrous things Stalin did was purge his experienced generals.
 
"the great catastrophe" (abolishing of serfdom in Russia was catastrophic for peasantry.

How was it catastrophic for them?

It was done in remarkably knee-jerk way, peasants were simply declared free, period. So they lost their land and houses that remained property of the mansion.

In European parts of Russian empire it wasn't such a problem, the spread out homestead peasants were always been self sufficient and only did serf duty part time or even buy out of it by what's in practice a tax anything more meant the mansion did burn in regular uprisings. Upon abolishment of serfdom many, perhaps even most peasants were rich enough to buy their homesteads and ancestral lands out of the mansion (many of with caused to function as much more than villas at that, or transited fully in manufacture or services.

It wasn't how Russian village functioned. Unlike homesteads, in Russian village houses are build side by side along a street, there's very little personal land (basically only kitchen garden) and while most owned some animals, it was very limited, and those one-two personal cows and so were depending on commons for basically anything. Commons were managed by the mansion that basically employed the whole village full time.
Once the peasants cased to be property of the mansion, the land remained. Basically all that changed was that the mansion no longer had to take care of and employ every last ivan regardless... And it happened 19. February 1861. Yup, that late. The 1905 mass uprising (the dress rehearsal for the 1917), was a direct result, to large extent.

The Soviet communal farm in large extent attempt to recapture that particular feudal model, in idealized, supposedly upgraded form. For the European parts, it was more feudal than anything for quite a long time.
 
The former guy's "Good optics > good deeds" credo crippled the world's view of the United States for the foreseeable future.

Yep, and as long as he is still relevant to american politics and potentially be re-elected, the US can suck the big one.
 
It was done in remarkably knee-jerk way, peasants were simply declared free, period. So they lost their land and houses that remained property of the mansion.

In European parts of Russian empire it wasn't such a problem, the spread out homestead peasants were always been self sufficient and only did serf duty part time or even buy out of it by what's in practice a tax anything more meant the mansion did burn in regular uprisings. Upon abolishment of serfdom many, perhaps even most peasants were rich enough to buy their homesteads and ancestral lands out of the mansion (many of with caused to function as much more than villas at that, or transited fully in manufacture or services.

It wasn't how Russian village functioned. Unlike homesteads, in Russian village houses are build side by side along a street, there's very little personal land (basically only kitchen garden) and while most owned some animals, it was very limited, and those one-two personal cows and so were depending on commons for basically anything. Commons were managed by the mansion that basically employed the whole village full time.
Once the peasants cased to be property of the mansion, the land remained. Basically all that changed was that the mansion no longer had to take care of and employ every last ivan regardless... And it happened 19. February 1861. Yup, that late. The 1905 mass uprising (the dress rehearsal for the 1917), was a direct result, to large extent.

The Soviet communal farm in large extent attempt to recapture that particular feudal model, in idealized, supposedly upgraded form. For the European parts, it was more feudal than anything for quite a long time.
You should teach Russian history in one of our more traditional universities, your prospective is quite interesting as well as insightful.
 
You should teach Russian history in one of our more traditional universities, your prospective is quite interesting as well as insightful.
You now have a front-row seat to Russian history in the making. Just saw a couple of Russian tanks rolling over cars with fleeing people in them. Not much has evolved in Russian humanity in the last 70 years.
 
You now have a front-row seat to Russian history in the making. Just saw a couple of Russian tanks rolling over cars with fleeing people in them. Not much has evolved in Russian humanity in the last 70 years.
I've been around for 70 years and watched the Russian people strong-armed by one thug after another, Stalin being the worst. Unfortunately the Russian people have been kicked in the balls both by their own leaders as well as from outside ( Nazis )
 
I've been around for 70 years and watched the Russian people strong-armed by one thug after another, Stalin being the worst. Unfortunately the Russian people have been kicked in the balls both by their own leaders as well as from outside ( Nazis )
There are now demonstrations in Moscow against the invasion of Ukraine. I wonder how long it will be before they are arrested and disappear.
 
There are now demonstrations in Moscow against the invasion of Ukraine. I wonder how long it will be before they are arrested and disappear.
They're being arrested and disappearing as we speak.
Putin is unstable mentally, I can only hope he has sane generals around him that control his nuclear arsenal.
 
i'm sure stalin had a huge impact on you when you were learning to walk.
 
Do you think Putin will stoop to using the same tactics as Trudeaau?
There are also 150 high-ranking officials who have signed a letter of opposition to the invasion. I think it depends on how vociferous it all becomes.
They're being arrested and disappearing as we speak.
Putin is unstable mentally, I can only hope he has sane generals around him that control his nuclear arsenal.
Just saw a news report saying he may not be well, but that could be propaganda. He might be sick about how many tanks and aircraft he's lost and how many of his paratroopers have been defeated and captured and killed trying to take the main airport.
 
Back
Top