As the situation in Ukraine has continued, there’s been less of the “World War III” rhetoric floating around than there was when Russia first became directly involved. Russian intervention in the Ukraine was immediately seen by many in isolation as Russian aggression against their smaller neighbor. Seen in the light of events over the last couple of decades, it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. Nor should it come as a surprise that NATO didn’t immediately mobilize to come to the Ukrainians’ defense.
The more you look at geopolitics, the more it becomes evident that there are very few events that are really surprises if you’ve paid attention. Russia has been working to bring its former satellite states back into the fold since the late ’90s. When the US and Poland entered into talks about the possibility of installing an American missile defense system in Poland, the Russians threatened to move Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad to neutralize the system. While the justification for the threats was that NATO was “encircling” Russia and “testing our (Russia’s) strength,” Russia has been quick to oppose any movement of one of the former Warsaw Pact states toward NATO and the West.
A great deal of Russia’s geopolitical moves have been extremely pragmatic at their base. Much of Russia’s current economic prosperity has come from the sale of oil and natural gas to Europe. Ukraine holds the primary pipelines running from Russia to Europe. The prospect of those pipelines being cut off by a break between Russia and Ukraine, regardless of the Ukrainian people’s desires, threatened Russia economically.
Russia also has been opposing the US and NATO, albeit in a much quieter fashion than it did before 1989, at just about every turn. Bosnia? Russia sided with the Serbs. Kosovo? Russia sided with the Serbs. Russia opposed the invasion of Iraq, and has supported both Iran and the Assad regime in Syria. The Russians also condemned the US for the killing of Muammar al Gaddafi in Libya. Whenever the US makes a military move, or even talks about making a military move, anywhere in the world, one can expect to find the Russians taking the other side.
or Log In
JohnChristopher1 . "...I don't know how you go about pretending that didn't happen..." . ...The U.S. pretended that Communist China was not the "legitimate" China for a couple of decades. Didn't seem to crush the spirits of the Chicom leadership... . -YP-
"it will not be recognized by most of the world." Well, that's what they said about East Germany: It wasn't recognized until it was. Except, with Crimea, following a putatively fair vote for secession, it'll be part of Russia. I don't know how you go about pretending that didn't happen. All in all, Russia if gains Crimea, it loses the Ukraine. (Alternative solution: Russia "leases" Crimea.)
. ...If Putin annexes the Crimea, it will not be recognized by most of the world. Wow... and that means what, exactly? Much of the world does not recognize Jerusalem as the seat of the Israeli government (our ambassador in Tel Aviv) but otherwise business goes on as usual. . ...The people of Russia will recognize the annexation... and that is all that matters to Putin. . -YP-
CloydDowling I think China has Russia beat in Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and the rest of South/Central American. When the USSR collapsed, China moved in as a sort of new "sugar daddy" for Cuba and Latin American leftists. China is also after increasingly large amounts of natural resources to fuel its growing economy and industrialization. Likewise, I wouldn't say Russia is a contrarian to Western interests. The Russians are out for their own interests and will step on Western interests when they run contrary to those of the Russian regime.