khrushcheva145_Peter Klaunzer - PoolKeystone via Getty Images_bidenputin

美国对俄罗斯有哪些误解

Dec 28, 2021 Nina L. Khrushcheva

莫斯科—随着数以千计的俄罗斯军队现在集结在乌克兰边境附近，俄罗斯和美国宣布将很快举行安全谈判无疑是颇受欢迎的。虽然很难保证紧张局势会由此缓和，但越过同一个房间的人而去跟他人交谈却要困难得多。

在弗拉基米尔·普京执政的21年里，俄罗斯和西方一直在这样做。当然，双方曾有过一段短暂的蜜月期：在2001年，美国总统小布什众所周知地声称他曾直视俄总统的“双眼，”并“感受到其灵魂是直截了当和值得信赖的。”而普京也曾在美国干预阿富汗的最初几个月伸出过援手。

但局势从那以后就一直在走下坡路。西方一直无法理解普京，而最明显的莫过于美国评估俄罗斯的乌克兰政策——尤其是有美国高官称普京或许正试图“重组苏联，”并称其为普京的“遗产计划。”

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 40 Comments on this article

Alan Rhodes Jan 2, 2022

The United States and the Soviet Union engaged in a mutual bear-hug for over six decades, first as adversarial proponents of competing economic systems, for a time as successful war-fighting allies, then finally as dyadic partners in the Cold War, each with its own European sphere of influence. Economic systems were tested by ever-escalating weaponry development and the competition between the Soviets' fear-based control of Eastern European states and the US-aided Western States.

Having failed at military control, Gorbachev eventually chose to release Eastern Block countries, and promoted perestroika. For a brief time the bear-hug relaxed as the West reconsidered its absolute certainty that the Soviets were irredeemably evil and could only be beaten by military force. But fearful strategists in US courted Mr.Yeltsin while he was still President of the RSFSR, correctly assessing his personal vulnerabilities and luring him toward the dissolution of the Soviet Union with assurances that Russia could start anew and flourish, accepted into the capitalist sphere as an equal partner and rid of the burden of the other Soviet States.

In the most powerful country, fear and momentum dominated as the United States and its military industrial complex re-discovered the value of an identifiable enemy. Yeltsin's resignation brought Putin to power, satisfying the need for such an enemy, and the century-old bear-hug resumed–now with Russia. Communism, it seems, was not the controlling issue.

Russian cooperation with Europe over the supply of natural gas is an issue, albeit strictly capitalistic. Nationalism and the means of self-protection and exercise of power are issues too. But the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands by the US and the inclusion of Crimea into post-soviet Russia are two examples of aspiring state power, not all that different from each other. Defensive anxieties swell in times of uncertain alliances. Democratic notions of local rule are decidedly not historically influential to aspiring and fearful large nations.

The bear-hug continues because the adversarial paradigm is more enticing, and supposedly more profitable, than any cooperative one we have yet devised. That adversarial model must be replaced with one that recognizes much more than national interests.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Dec 31, 2021

Slightly expanded quote of George Kennan on NATO expansion, linked within the article (speaking to Thomas Friedman for NY Times, 02 May 1998):

>>>>> BEGIN QUOTE >>>>

"I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,” said Mr. Kennan from his Princeton home. ”I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else."
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Cary Fraser Dec 31, 2021

Russia and China over the course of the 20th century observed American expansionist impulses and policies from Wilson to Trump. The contemporary leaders in both societies are quite clear that strategic coordination between them is a necessity for the future containment of the US.

Realpolitik will drive the future interactions among these major powers and the West, Central, and East European states recognize the wisdom of "when the elephants fight, it is the grass that get trampled."

It is no longer a bipolar international system - and Germany will be a fulcrum for managing those tensions.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henk Crop Dec 30, 2021

That Russia freed itself of Communist Rule is an event of historical importance.
Although Russia is now smaller than in the past, it still has 146 million people, a significant militairy/nuclear power and a vast amount of natural resources.
A stable Russia is important for both the EU and the US.
There cannot be any other feasable policy for the EU and US than a strategic one, which is to develop relations of good neighborhood. That has not always been done in the past.
While Russia was on its knees some 20 years ago. I recall that:
- Obama stated that Russia was only a regional power now
- Russia was excluded from international diplomacy
- Putin had to make a new supersonic bomb, to be taken seriously again
- At the same time the EU tried to develop a militairy partnership with Ukraine ( with included the Russian naval base )
- Romania and Bulgaria suggested that NATO install a Black Sea fleet.
Now EU politicians blame Russia for occuping the Crimea because that is not legal.
However they neglect that they first attempted to grab the important Russian Naval base there. The legal, political and militairy aspect should be addressed too.

The author addressed the US. But in the EU they also should take the long view and work at improving relations.
( see also PS, May 24, 2019, Orenstein, The Russians are coming )
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Joe Ryan Dec 30, 2021

The main burden of Nina Khrushcheva's essay is to point out that Russia's concern about NATO's expansionism is realistic.

The essay also mentions regret for loss of the inter-republic connections that the USSR embodied. This second point is important too.

While the USSR was built in large part through conquest, the concept of close connections between its regions is a good one. The way those connections were trashed by Yeltsin-era gangsters was repulsive but the damage was more fundamental than personalities.

Ukraine should have the sovereignty it wants, but that can and should include cooperation with other sovereigns.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Francois Meunier Dec 30, 2021

If ever Russia has a security problem, it is eastbound, with its eastern boarder with China. There is a vacuum to fill in these regions, economically, demographically, that China is willingful to comply.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kurt Bayer Dec 30, 2021

I do not see, why Russia, or any country, has to be"exceptional" to have its security interests taken seriously.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jaap Bosma Dec 30, 2021

Often a country's foreign policy is best understood from it's domestic power struggles and political tensions. Isn't Putin's popularity under threat and isn't sabre rattling against the West Putin's way of getting support from the Russians?

Also, Putin has no business threatening Ukraine..., and if Ukraine wants to join NATO that is up to Ukraine.

If the West gives in to Putin this time, there will only be more (and more outrageous) demands in the future
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Yoshimichi Moriyama Dec 30, 2021

Kennan said, "What we needed were principles---sound principles---principles that accorded with the nature, the needs, the interest, and the limitations of our country."
Why Americans fail to see those principles is because they carelessly think that the American principle of liberalism, admirable in itself in my view, is universal and acclaimed everywhere. They do not understand that American liberalism is historically conditioned.
Mr. Richard Haass had an interview with Nikkei Business Publicatinos, Japan, on December 24 and said that Americans need hitorical perspectives. He traced it back to the low estimation of history education in American school.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
NM Wander Dec 29, 2021

We in the USA are coached to react with horror and outrage about "russian medling in US elections"....
Not a single one of us appreciates just how much USA meddling there has been in Ukranian Elections......amoung dozens of other nations.....Iran 1952 comes to mind.
- Bernhard Kopp Dec 29, 2021
  
  The meddling in elections would be agreeable if it were transparent and with the honest objecitve to contribute to free and fair elections. Please read the publication of Brown University / Watson Institute of September 2020 - Cost of War / Creating Refugees since 9/11. Particularly in the EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa ) region, the US had been the benevolent hegemon. This got somewhat lost after the first golf war of President Bush Sr.
  - NM Wander Dec 29, 2021
    
    Hello Bernhardt....I just scanned through the Watson Inst. Study you suggested.
    Yes. It is very upsetting to have to face up to the disruption and chaos that WE(the USA) have created through our poorly concieved visions of "the world".....although I honestly think that these disrupted and chaotic regions were already poor places to live long before the USA wallowed into the fray.
    The USA clings to a world view that hasnt truly been relevant since about 1968....with lots of Peace Corps veterans now running the State Dept, wistfully reviewing war stories with one another....the good ole days. The Defense Dept doesnt function much better.....they're still dedicated to "containing the USSR".....which doesnt even exist any more... Up until about October 2021, blissfully ignoring the obvious China challenges.
    20 years of flailing around in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Syria....the USA has committed some of the attrocities and violations of basic rights that we used to accuse those other places of.....
    We have met the Enemy......and He is Us.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
NM Wander Dec 29, 2021

Ever since the departure of Reagan, the USA has cynically manipulated a dream world that insists we still live in a Post WW2 Era.
Recall that the Soviet Union effectively vanished by about 1992...yet....our official foreign policy stance remains...." the Soviet Union still must be contained".
Even to this day....We conjure up "russians" and "insurrectionists" in order to maintain status quo bureaucratic power.......the USA begins to look similar to the last days of Soviet Union...using every imaginable maneuver to uphold a creaking Bureaucracy and outdated worldview....while ancient leadership waves from the podium during a cold and wet Victory Day Parade.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Justme Andmeonly Dec 29, 2021

"NATO has edged closer and closer to Russia’s borders, embracing lands to which Russia is bound by history, geography, and security interests."

I guess people forget how WE reacted when USSR was courting Cuba.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Brad Sandy Dec 29, 2021

The one thing left out about NATO vs Russia in this article is that most of the NATO countries have not been building a strong military and are a weak opponent compared to the "modern" Russia. Mr Putin either sees this and ignores it so he can always be aggressive, or he knows that NATO is weak and he can push it back. For 20 years Merkel in Germany has been his ally and has made sure he got no real conflict from taking Crimea or any other action.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dec 29, 2021

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jonathan Engel Dec 29, 2021

What makes the Ukraine of interest, as a "nation" to the EU, or the US ? Over the past thousand years the "nation" was independent between 1917 and 1923, and subsequently to the explosion of the USSR. During the USSR period the "Republic of the Ukraine was a thing to be gifted, added to, and subtracted from at the slightest gesture of the Power Centre. Crimea was gifted to the Ukraine by Mr Khrushchev (the dad of the Author of the article) on his accession to supreme power... Since the end of the Soviet Union the "nation" (with its various different regions speaking different languages, and worshiping (fervently) in different Churches) has been a kleptocracy of Mobutu proportions, and ranks with the most corrupt "nations" (or rather family bizinesses) on earth.

We are expected to spend European (and American) taxpayers funds to further line the "family offices" of these guys ?
- Bernhard Kopp Dec 29, 2021
  
  Beginning in the early 1990s, the US policies towards Ukraine was heavily influenced by Americans of Ukrainian descent, diaspora nationalists and fiercely anti-Russian. Anti-zarist-Russia, anti-soviet-Russia and anti-russian-forever. Quite many of them did speak some Ukrainian, which during Russian and Soviet times was predominantly the dialect of country folks - but not Russian. At least half of the Ukrainian population does not speak or wish to speak Ukrainian. Ukraine ( south-western borderland ) is a renegade Russian province.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Julius Fortius Dec 29, 2021
  
  That is hardly relevant. Over the past "thousand years" Ireland, Iceland, Slovakia or Slovenia -to name but a few- were never modern nation-states. They just consolidated as nation-states in the 20th century. Whats counts as the basis of statehoood is not the opinion of the EU or US governments as to the merits of statehood but rather the will of the people in the particular country and their sense of nationhood. Ukraine is a state under international law and Ukranian citizens want to be an independent state, not a province of an autocratic Russian empire.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
George Bittlingmayer Dec 29, 2021

The problem is that Russian rulers have historically "solved" Russia's legitimate and well-founded security concerns by turning the peoples on its periphery into vassals. The Russians themselves have been brutalized by their rulers, and in a familiar pattern, much of Russian opinion in turn regards domination of Poles and Ukrainians as a natural right. The courageous Finns, who managed to secure some measure of freedom, are regarded with contempt. Russia's GDP is comparable to Canada or South Korea, the country is still smarting from the breakup of the Soviet Union, and it has many of the hallmarks of a corrupt petrostate. To stay in power and to build and protect his own massive personal wealth, Putin relies on continual provocations and stoking the most primitive instincts at home. Making trouble is his magic power.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henry Rech Dec 28, 2021

What are the legitimate security concerns of Russia?

What is the chance that NATO would pre-emptively invade/attack Russia?

I would say zero.

On my figuring then, Russia has no legitimate security concerns as far as its western borders are concerned.

If Russia were to eschew threatening military behaviour and intervention in the affairs of states along its western borders what chance it would be accepted by the West as a valued member of the European community?

I would say, they are pretty good.

So why all the Russian paranoia?

Firstly, it serves the internal political ambitions of its leader. It distracts from his own misbehaviour.

Secondly, it might reflect what Russian military strategists might actually want to do themselves - invade Europe and take territory. If they think this way, they say to themselves, then our opposition must think this way.

There is absolutely no evidence that NATO wants to conquer or subdue Russia. To the contrary.

And possibly, to further expose my naivete, I would say that the interests and desires of the border states are always ignored.

From Finland down to Georgia, the peoples of the border states have expressed their desire to be free of Russian despotism and interference in their affairs.

NATO does not hold a gun to their heads - Russia does.
- Henry Rech Dec 29, 2021
  
  NM Wander,
  
  The plain fact of the matter is, that since 2014, the majority of the Ukrainian people have expressed the desire to be free of Russian oppression.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- NM Wander Dec 29, 2021
  
  Ukraine.
  Almost as foolish an over-reach by the Bush Years, as was the earlier misadventure clawing Russian Georgia into NATO. Ukraine....much like Georgia is completely geopolitically indefensible...........and both are likely to drag the USA into horribly desparate unwinnable, impractical, shooting wars which cannot be won.
  Ukraine. Kiev.
  One time, not so long ago.....Kiev was capital of..........RUSSIA. Moscow only became the center when the Romanovs determined that location much more defensible.....and they were right. While numerous conquering armies have swarmed across the plains of Ukraine and Mother Russia.....none......NONE......have succeeded in their quest to dominate Russia.
  Modern Ukraine. still living with the boundaries of Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic.
  The Ukranian Soviet Socialist Republic is a Frankensteinian Monster Creation, stitched together in 1956, by the new Premier of USSR, Nikita Kruschev, himself a son of "Ukraine'......the Ukranian boundaries are nonsensical.....attempting to destroy centuries of local identifications and forge "a new soviet socialist identity" completely separated from the past.............(this ideological nonsense has obviously failed...even it the Bush Minions refuse to accept it),
  Early on, the Putin-Sergei Lavrov factions proposed redrawing the borders of Ukraine to both sides satisfaction......this was immediately rejected by the Bush Era Press Corps with melodramatic horror...."this is just like the Partitioning of Poland!! Hitler all over again!!! Run for your lives!!!"
  - Henry Rech Dec 29, 2021
    
    NM Wander,
    
    The simple fact is that since 2014, the majority of the Ukrainian people have expressed their desire to be free of Russian oppression.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mirek Fatyga Dec 28, 2021

Mrs Krushcheva should be taken seriously here, showing the scope of the problem that we are dealing with. She is Russian, after all.

140 million Russians seem to still culturally believe that they have a God given right to brutalize everyone around their borders and turn them into the Russian style oligarchic kleptocracy to satisfy "legitimate security interests of Russia".

The only way to modify this behavior is to raise the price that Russia has to pay for such behavior. This is the lesson of history.

Any half sane military analysis would say that NATO has neither the inclination nor the cohesion to actually attack Russia. Again, any half sane military or political analyst would conclude that the primary threat to Russia is China and possibly India should that country ever go authoritarian. Russia has ~5% of the population of Eurasia but still holds ~25% of Eurasian landmass, including the land east of Ural Mountains which is mostly empty of people but full of natural resources that the most populous countries of Eurasia desperately need. The only reason that Russia is still aspiring to be a superpower is that it converts these natural resources into weapons with which it seeks to blackmail everyone around. This is the fault of the Russian people who seem to, invariably and repeatedly, produce an out of control, autocratic government, hellbent on war.

We are in a precarious position today, somewhat similar to the 1930-ies. Two autocrats, Putin and Xi are conspiring together to undermine the democratic West. Should they succeed, as Hitler did, they may set the world on the nuclear fire, which will consume them as well as they turn on each other, as Hitler and Stalin did. One only needs to look at the map, colored by the population density, to see why.

If Russian politics was even half sane, Putin would be seeking the best relations with EU and the US, trying to actually strengthen the EU, to keep peace on at least one of his borders. There would be no need to expand NATO into Ukraine or Georgia if Russian soldiers and mercenaries went back to where they came from, Russia.
- Jerzy Pawlowski Dec 28, 2021
  
  "Russians still believe that they have a God given right to brutalize everyone around their borders and turn them into a Russian style oligarchic kleptocracy."
  Nonsense.
  Ukraine was turned into an oligarchic kleptocracy by Western reforms, not by Russia. In contrast, Belarus, which is close to Russia, has no oligarchs. So maybe Ukraine should become more like Belarus, since it also has double the GDP per capita of Ukraine.
  And Finland is Russia's neighbor, yet it enjoys peace and prosperity. So maybe Ukraine should become more like Finland?
  Wesołych Świąt!
  - Mirek Fatyga Dec 28, 2021
    
    Belarus has just one Oligarch.
    
    GDP of Ukraine is 2.5 times larger than GDP of Belarus. The GDP of Belarus per capita appears larger, but Belarus continues to receive aid from Russia.
    
    Finland earned her status by repelling Soviet invasion which occurred after the Ribbentrop-Molotov treaty. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War). I would not call this enjoying peace and prosperity.
    
    Ukraine is a sovereign country. Without the war in 2014 (which is what it was, war waged by Russia against the sovereign Ukraine), Ukraine might have been on much more friendly terms with Russia today, despite Maidan. It may be further true that Eastern Ukraine has greater proportion of Russian speakers who may be uncomfortable as citizens of Ukraine. The reason for this excess of Russian speakers is Holodomor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor). A premeditated campaign of starvation which killed off a large proportion of Ukrainian peasants, who were later replaced by industrial workers resettled from other regions of the USSR. Same as with Crimean Tatars.
    
    Russia is an ongoing menace to everyone in the region, including Poland. The reason Russia is an ongoing menace is that Russian people appear to be incapable of living under anything but violent dictatorships. Foreign aggression is a feature of dictatorships. This is how unrestrained dictator tends to express himself. Foreign aggression (having an enemy) is an integral part of maintaining the dictatorship, so there is also a political motive.
    
    Read history, as she tends to rhyme. Not repeat exactly, but rhyme.
    
    Szczesliwego Nowego Roku.
    - John Smithson Dec 29, 2021
      
      Russia's relations with Ukraine were fine until the bloody and illegal coup d'etat overthrew the duly elected president of Ukraine and cast the future of Russia's naval base in Sevastopol into question. The Russian annexation of Crimea was supported by the vast majority of the residents of Crimea. Hard to argue with that.
      - Mirek Fatyga Dec 31, 2021
        
        it was not a coup, but a revolt against a corrupt leader. I participated in such a revolt in my young years. It was called a Solidarity movement.
        
        John Smithson Jan 1, 2022
        
        Call it what you will, the elected president of Ukraine was forcibly driven from office by blood and violence, not legal means under the constitution and laws of Ukraine. That harmed Russian interests. I'm not surprised that Russia in turn annexed Crimea, a move supported by over 90% of the Crimean people.
        
        Mirek Fatyga Jan 1, 2022
        
        A corrupt president ordered his soldiers to shoot at demonstrators, killed a bunch, the demonstrators did not back down and he ran away to Russia.
        
        None of this was a reason for Russia to wage war on Ukraine.
        
        This is what the Soviet Union used to do. Hungary in 1956, Chechoslovakia in 1968, we likely narrowly avoided the same in Poland in 1981 solely because our own army decided to attack us instead. Something that the Ukrainian army, fortunately, decided not to do.
        
        This is the reality of Russia.
        
        John Smithson Jan 1, 2022
        
        The Ukrainian police only shot at demonstrators in self-defense after being attacked by violent demonstrators who stormed government buildings (setting one on fire), attacked police, and beating to death at least one government computer programmer.
        
        The demonstrators seized control of Ukraine and illegally ousted a sitting president. If that's not a coup d'etat, I don't know what is.
        
        Russia has never waged war against Ukraine. Russia has supported separatists in the Donbas region, which has long had historic ties with Russia, but has never tried to invade or annex the region.
        
        Many seem to see more evil in Russia than has been evident in its actions. As I mentioned, the people in Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia, and people there are still happy that they did. Russia's actions in the Donbas region are more problematic, but less so than America's invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.
        
        Mirek Fatyga Jan 1, 2022
        
        you should learn some history before you speak. Perhaps talk to someone who lived in that general neighborhood. We had elections in Poland as well. 99%+ for the Party. You do not have referendums under the barrel of the gun.
        
        Sorry to say, you are citing Russian propaganda, through and through. Broaden your horizons.
        
        John Smithson Jan 1, 2022
        
        There's no propaganda about it. The Crimean people have much stronger ties with Russia than with Ukraine. The voting in the referendum matched the polling numbers that Western polling companies (Gallup and Pew).
        
        Crimea had already long been an autonomous republic whose main tie with the rest of Ukraine was a subsidy it was paid by Kyiv. By joining Russia, pensioners saw their pensions increase by several times. That may be one reason why Crimeans were happy to join Russia.
        
        The Donbas region is different. Most people even in that region do not want to join Russia, but want to remain part of Ukraine while strengthening ties with Russia. That was reflected in the referendums taken in that region.
        
        Comparison with Eastern Europe countries under the USSR is not a valid one. In the case of Crimea, the claim that the Russian annexation referendum was not a valid view of the will of the Crimean people is Western propaganda not borne out even by Western polling or other indicators.
        
        Mirek Fatyga Jan 1, 2022
        
        Have you asked Crimean Tatars? Or do they not matter all over again?
        
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars
        
        Here are few recent commentaries that I found about the reality of Crimea today.
        
        https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/03/17/crimea-six-years-after-illegal-annexation/
        
        https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/5/21/the-devastating-human-economic-costs-of-crimeas-annexation
        
        John Smithson Jan 2, 2022
        
        The Crimean Tatars make up less than 10% of the population, and have been disgruntled (rightfully) for a long, long time. They boycotted the Russian annexation referendum, but they were no happier under Ukraine rule than they are now under Russian rule.
        
        Indeed, in a poll a few years ago, only 2% of Crimeans said they would like to go back to being part of Ukraine.
        
        The point I am making is not that Russia is a benign power. Russia has abused its power in some ways, and the West should be cautious.
        
        On the other hand, as far as Crimea goes, Russia did not invade the country and is not occupying it. The Crimean people had a choice, and freely and fairly chose to join Russia.
        
        That's why I think Nina Krushcheva makes some good points in this article. Criticize Russia if you will. But also understand that Russia's policy toward Ukraine has been one of restraint rather than aggression. The West would do better to stop bloviating and start talking sensibly to the Russians.
        
        The US, in particular, has been far more aggressive than Russia in invading and occupying countries. And in our case, those countries are far from home, not just our strategic neighbors.
        
        Mirek Fatyga Jan 2, 2022
        
        war on Ukraine is a continuation of Soviet policy of treating all neighboring countries as their sphere of influence. Admitting Eastern European and Baltic countries to NATO shifted the area of intervention few hundred miles east but did not change the basic behavior. It has been roughly the same for centuries, but certainly the same since the Ribbentrop-Molotov treaty.
        
        Do understand this: often genocidal Soviet policies did create significant Russian populations in peripheral republics that were annexed at various times. This does not give Russia a license to invade today. Significant Russian minorities do exist today in the Baltics, for instance.
        
        Russian hostility towards NATO is simply made up for internal political purpose. There is no discernible intent or cohesion on the part of NATO that would indicate any plan to infringe on the interests of the Russian Federation, never mind invade. All that the West is asking is for Russia to stay within her borders.
        
        More about Crimean Tatars.
        
        https://www.rferl.org/a/crimean-tatars-russia-detentions/31444725.html
        
        my last post.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      - Bernhard Kopp Dec 29, 2021
        
        " was fine " appears a bit too optimistic. To some extend, Russia sees Ukraine as a renegade Russian province - as do some Ukrainians who are not infected by the tradititional and predominantly Western-Ukrainian nationalism. I do agree that 2008 must have been a turning point from teeth-grinding coexistence to looking for revenge. Crimea was revenge for questioning Sevastopol, and the continuing threat to pull Ukraine, and even Georgia into Nato. I do not believe that Moscow has any design to invade Ukraine. Too expensive in every respect, and little chance of winning anything. Sooner or later a regime change in Kiew will be cheaper to maneuvre. Russia will strengthen its relations with China and India, in order to stay on its feet economically. Everntually, there will be an opportunity to blow away the useless cleptocratic oligarchy of Kiew.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      - Dec 29, 2021
        
        This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/2OnGZGYzh

美国对俄罗斯有哪些误解

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

美国对俄罗斯有哪些误解

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification