Don't worry folks; Putin is not invading Kiev.

Vanity | Dangus

[dangus]

"If I want to, I could invade Kiev in two weeks, " says Putin. And with that deliberately misinterpreted sentence, the Western powers that be completely lose their mind.

A brief lesson in symbolic logic to explain what Putin meant:

p-> q (If I want to, I could invade Kiev in two weeks,)

~q (Putin is not invading Kiev in two weeks.)

therefore, ~p (Putin doesn't want to.)

Putin was explicitly saying that he has no interest in invading Kiev. And that's because he knows it's not in his political best interest.

When Russia annexed Crimea, although I didn't create a vanity thread like this one, I explained many times all over FR that Putin would not invade Kiev. Crimea was a special circumstance for several reasons:

1. Crimea had been part of Russia for centuries, even for those centuries when the Ukraine was a separate nation.

2. Crimeans don't speak Ukrainian, and have come under severe discrimination against their native languages.

3. Crimea only seceded from Russia and joined Ukraine under pledges from Ukraine that it would be autonomous.

4. Way back in 1993, Crimeans voted overwhelmingly to maintain Russian citizenship, demonstrating that this year's vote was no neo-Soviet fix.

5. Kiev responded to that vote by unilaterally revoking Crimea's autonomy, and has essentially held Crimea as occupied territory ever since.

Lots of Western commenters insist Russia isn't a democracy. While that's the sort of judgment certain to contentious and subjective, even if we presume it isn't a democracy, we should all agree that at least the veneer of democracy is very important to Russia. Seizing a large population against their will and extending to them the veneer of democracy means keeping up the appearances would be all the more difficult.

Donetsk and Luhansk (the "Donbas") are a crisis come home to roost for Putin, not an opportunity. The Donbas was almost unpopulated until the late 19th century, by a Welsh businessman saw the potential for exploiting its natural resources. Already part of Russia, It was then populated almost exclusively by Russians who not immigrating, but simply moving within a nation, as if from Pennsylvania to New Jersey. They maintained close familial and business ties with Russia, and ended up in a separate country only by a fluke of history.

Reasonable people can have many debates as to whether Putin intends to annex the Donbas, establish 2 more de-facto micronations (see "Transnistria" or "South Ossetia") or wishes they'd just go away. But given these close ties, and the use of quasi-legal militias throughout the Caucuses during Putin's various conflicts with Muslims, the entanglement with Russia and the Donbas is more a sign of Putin's weakness than his imperialism. To completely disavow the Russians in Ukraine would expose that he has little operational control over his own territory; to directly interecede would create a must-win situation that is much more difficult to win than he'd like to admit.

So, Putin plays this awkward game of tease, allowing just enough support in the Donbas to assess if a war of attrition is possible, but not enough to own the crisis. Key to this game is the claim that the ethnic Russians want nothing to do with Kiev. For fans of comparing Putin to Hitler, taking the Donbas would be like taking the Sudenland (making Crimea the equivalent of Saar); invading Kiev would be like invading England. Even if we presume Putin is as evil as Hitler, we can't presume he has learned nothing from Hitler's failure.

And I would like to remind those fans that by the time Hitler invaded Austria, the following events had already taken place: The bombing of the Reichstag... the Night of Long Knives, wherein Hitler had all his intraparty moderates murdered... Kristallnacht... the establishment of the Dachau death camps... the Enabling Act, making Hitler dictator... the prohibition of labor unions and opposition parties...

We SHOULD have foreseen Hitler's plans because HItler published and espoused his plans and committed atrocity after atrocity. Arresting a bunch of naked women for desecrating a cathedral... and then releasing them... is not the same as establishing death camps for Jews, alcoholics, homeless, unemployed, Romani and Catholic priests. And we shouldn't respond as if it were.

[Alter Kaker]

You assume Putin acts rationally. I'm not so sure he does, given everything else he does that is not in his best political interest.

Really? His popularity is soaring. And it's clearly in Russia's national interest to not have a strong enemy on its doorstep. The question I would ask is how do Putin's actions accomplish that goal? I agree with you that I'm skeptical that there's an easy out for Russia, but I understand his reason for invading.

[ansel12]

It won’t be a “strong enemy”, it just won’t be Russian.

[McGruff]

Who would want Kiev?. The eastern part is the good part. The EU can have the rest.

[ansel12]

You sure are selling the Russian empire arguments, has it occured to you that you are speaking to an American audience that opposes Russian/Soviet military conquest?

[GeronL]

Great post

[Alter Kaker]

You sure are selling the Russian empire arguments,

Huh?

has it occured to you that you are speaking to an American audience that opposes Russian/Soviet military conquest?

Um, I also oppose Russian/Soviet military conquest. I just think it makes sense to think about Russia's interests and motivations to try to figure out what they're doing and how they might react to steps by Ukraine, the United States and NATO.

I'll quote Winston Churchill here: " I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."

[Alter Kaker]

It won’t be a “strong enemy”, it just won’t be Russian.

Not if it's just Ukraine, but it clearly would be strong if NATO were arming the Ukrainians, Ukraine became economically integrated with Europe or -- and this is the Russians' worst nightmare -- Ukraine joined NATO. I suspect the odds of NATO admitting Ukraine are pretty much zilch at this point, but I'm not sure Putin does.

[ansel12]

Ukraine is no threat to Russia, nor is NATO unless Russia forces us into war.

You are with the enemy? We are NATO, Russia is a threat to the world and why NATO exists.

[grania]

NATO would be wise to shift its reason for continued existence to be stopping ISIS genocide from spreading into NATO nations. That and possibly Ebola or some other horrific disease are today’s problems.

[Alter Kaker]

Ukraine is no threat to Russia, nor is NATO unless Russia forces us into war.

I mostly agree with you that Ukraine and NATO aren't threats to Russia, but Russian leaders don't agree with you. So our opinions aren't really relevant. There's no question that if Ukraine were to join NATO, Russia would see it as a very serious threat to its national security.

You are with the enemy? We are NATO, Russia is a threat to the world and why NATO exists.

Huh? Maybe you missed the spot where I said I don't support Russia's actions. The Russians have motives here -- if you want to ignore them, fine. But don't blame me for talking about them.

[ansel12]

LOL, our opinions are the only ones that matter.

Our interests are what matter, not the evil enemy that wants to enslave the world.

[ansel12]

Right now NATO needs to focus on what it’s mission is, protecting us from the military threat of Russia.

Just what do you want our paratroopers and nuke subs doing, in regards to Ebola?

[grania]

Troops in the US and other NATO countries could stop the influx of people who will bring with them disease and radical jihad.

[ansel12]

Right now NATO has to face Russia which is currently invading another country, and doing what they are supposed to do.

As far as terrorists, each nation’s individual police and military forces deal with them when they are discovered operating inside their borders, and of course the military doesn’t need to be screening me for infectious diseases, we have people that handle that kind of thing.

[free_life]

So many flaws in your wee logic. Here are two.

Crimea was part of Ukraine a sovereign nation.

Russians have historically taken and held lots other nations and their capital cities. Remember something called the Soviet Union? How? Genocides, gulags and total control over every aspect of conquered people’s lives. Any opposition to Russian authority means your death even if millions have to be eliminated.

You assume Putin is different, when in fact he has shown himself to be just like the Soviet leaders of yesterday.

[ansel12]

"U.S., allies to stage exercises in West Ukraine as battles rage in East"

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/02/us-ukraine-crisis-exercises-idUSKBN0GX23Q20140902

Rapid Trident is designed to promote regional stability and security, strengthen partnership capacity, and foster trust while improving interoperability between USAREUR, the land forces of Ukraine, and other PfP and NATO partner nations.

More than just an exercise
YAVORIV, Ukraine -- Paratroopers from (left to right) the U.S. Army, Canada, the United Kingdom, Belarus, Poland and Ukraine embrace for a photograph to commemorate an event they won't soon forget.

[Rockpile]

I do not believe at all that Putin wants to seize all of Ukraine just the eastern most provinces.

Of course he may have mounted the tiger and cannot now find an easy way off.