Comment by lovehashbrowns
5 years ago
There is literally no conceivable way Ukraine was ever going to remain independent as long as Putin is in control of Russia.
Everything you talked about has already been done--Ukraine gained independence and, after years of Ukraine-NATO relations, began actively seeking membership in the alliance and with the EU. For example, in 2002:
> "Ukraine's total integration into NATO is dictated by the reality of European and world politics, particularly after the tragic events of Sept. 11 in the United States," Kuchma said in a statement.
> "We are aware that joining NATO will be a long process and we will do everything possible," he added.
https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2002/07/09/Ukraine-reiterat...
Followed by a formal attempt in 2008:
> Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and Parliamentary Chairman Arseniy Yatsenyuk have signed the statement calling for consideration on Ukraine`s entry into the NATO membership action plan at the Bucharest summit" ...
https://www.unian.info/world/89447-ukraine-asks-to-join-nato...
Then we get the events of 2014 in Ukraine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity where Yanukovych is kicked out because of his refusal to sign a trade agreement with the EU.
There are more than 2 decades of history pointing to Ukraine's willingness to join Europe and NATO. And this is all backed by the people, both by the election of their leaders and by force.
So literally all of this fully agrees with the entirety of your "solution." How have we ended up here?
For one, Ukraine has natural gas and oil reserves--and if Ukraine can sell that to Europe, then Europe can rely on Russia just a little bit less. This was a big part of Russia taking Crimea and eastern Ukraine. But unfortunately for Ukraine, there are reserves on the western part of Ukraine, too. If Putin wants /all/ of the reserves, the entirety of Ukraine has to go.
Secondly, Ukraine is vital in a defense of Russia from a European attack. Putin consistently brings up Cuba in his reasoning for considering Ukraine's entry into NATO an act of war.
And lastly, but perhaps most significantly, is Putin's view of the relationship between Ukraine and Russia.
https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentar...
Basically, Ukraine was a point of pride for the USSR. It was host to a significant portion of the USSR's nuclear armaments, it was an important part of the economy, had a lot of natural resources, etc. (Of course, this is all a rose-colored view of the USSR from Putin's perspective.)
And then the USSR collapsed and all of these different Soviet states gained independence--including Ukraine. Although Ukraine and Russia continued to share their culture, and their people continued to go back and forth over the two countries' borders, Ukraine was slowly betraying literally everything that the USSR stood for (according to Putin).
Putin doesn't see any of this as being driven by the people of Ukraine--he thinks this is all the West interfering in Ukraine's politics. He specifically says this in all of his writings and speeches; Ukraine was POISONED by the West to "betray" its Russian heritage (USSR).
Do you really think Putin would accept this: "A way to remove any pre-text for wars like these is to allow secession by the UN, and to specifically allow regions (regardless of any existing drawn-up province/state borders) to split out in a democratic poll"
When 1. that has LITERALLY already happened, and 2. Any result of such a poll would be considered the West poisoning the pride and joy of the USSR, Ukraine?
Read Putin's writings and listen to his speeches. Take the words literally and read between the lines. You'll realize that independence for Ukraine was /never/ an option so long as Putin (or his ideology) is in charge of Russia. Ukraine joining NATO was ALWAYS going to be a declaration of war. This same concept applies to Georgia.
In an okay world, both Ukraine and Georgia are what Belarus is today in its relations to Russia. "Independent" and "sovereign" in name only. In an ideal world, the USSR stands as a superpower.
------ Edits ------
This decent YouTube video describes the relationship between the two countries as "Putin is just like [Ukraine's bitter] ex." https://youtu.be/LJNtfyq3TDE [The REAL Reason Putin is Invading Ukraine] by Johnny Harris
This other YouTube video is great as well: https://youtu.be/If61baWF4GE [Why Russia is Invading Ukraine] by RealLifeLore.
You seem to be completely denying the statement (what I though of as fact, but I am happy to be corrected) that there are regions of Ukraine which have predominantly Russian population. I am talking about allowing those regions to secede and internationally recognizing their independence.
The fact that there was continuous fighting since 2014 suggests to me that neither side was satisfied with the status quo.
I've long ago given up the premise of "independence": as a Serbian citizen, I don't have any say in what happens in Kosovo, and I shouldn't have. Majority of the population there is Albanian, and the only qualm I have is that entire (what used to be) official province of Kosovo & Metohija is automatically assigned to the majority of that province, instead of allowing small parts to remain in Serbia which desire to do so. Basically, a fuller right to self-determination. (Not that I think nationalist sentiment is a net win either: what we get in cultural value is easily cancelled with all the political crap it enables)
None of that happened through any "independence", but instead through an act of war by NATO on Serbia (just like another superpower is doing it today to Ukraine, though a lot worse since they kicked off a ground invasion too). If the UN had a framework to at least offer a peaceful secession, maybe we'd see none of the war. Because we now have plenty of evidence what immutability of borders means: it means an unavoidable war when minority regions disagree with majority vote.
> You seem to be completely denying the statement (what I though of as fact, but I am happy to be corrected) that there are regions of Ukraine which have predominantly Russian population. I am talking about allowing those regions to secede and internationally recognizing their independence.
And I am telling you, specifically, that those parts of Ukraine seceding to Russia, as they want to, does not matter in the grand scheme of things. I'm telling you, using Putin's words and ideology, that Ukraine, even without Crimea, even without Donetsk, and even without Luhansk, was never going to remain fully independent. You ignored practically the entirety of my post, it seems.
This is even evident today because Russia already has Crimea. Russia already took control of eastern Ukraine.
So...what is Putin doing in Kyiv?
I don't have a response to what is Putin doing in Kyiv: it beats me, and it certainly looks like they want full control of Ukraine (but then again, they are not after all the other Western cities of Ukraine).
I can't, for the life of me, figure out what is the ultimate outcome that Putin and Russian leadership desires: if they have only invaded Eastern Ukraine, they could keep some plausible deniability aspect in relationship to Ukrainian people. The way they've done it, especially in regards to Kyiv, throws that out of the picture, and they've established an animosity that's going to last for the next 30+ years at least.
The most likely outcome so far seems to be that they definitely succeed in taking over Eastern Ukraine, and possibly succeed in taking Kyiv over... and then what? Set up a dictatorship in Ukraine while still pretending to have democracy in Russia? That can't work.
But none of that matters in this what-if discussion. Russia took control of the eastern Ukraine, but it's obvious Ukraine still had pretension on getting it back, thus engaging their military at the frontier. I don't think you can warrant we'd see this development if there was an actual internationally-recognized secession going on, which is my entire point. Even originally I acknowledge that I wasn't certain this would stop Putin, but it would stop this excuse from being used. And then we could figure out what other excuse warlords like him can come up with, and work with that.
I mostly care about considering if there are ways to avoid wars and killing to achieve what are ultimately financial motives (hidden behind nationalistic and similar reasons, because those are great crowd-influencing tools). And the only solution to me seems to be an established framework for financial compensation for "losses" for the part of the land being split off. Unfortunately, throughout history, human life has been seen as zero cost, even though it has a huge cost even in inhumane terms (eg. lost tax income and production, taxable descendants...).
Edit: you seem to be completely underestimating the value of international recognition of a separatist region. Why did Russia not recognize separatist states earlier than last week? Their own laws would probably stop them until they were "called in to help". If they were recognized internationally, Ukraine would be prohibited from engaging in war actions as well.
2 replies →