War and the Speed of History

Eric Medlin

History instructor. Writer. Rising star in the world of affordable housing.

Related Post Roulette

35 Responses

  1. Doctor Jay says:

    Color me one of those optimists. I thought that the US was signalling “we know what you’re up to and we are ready for it, we are all ready for it” I thought Putin would find some offramp that let him declare victory and go home.

    That didn’t happen. He may escalate again, or a few more times. They can do a massive amount of damage if they think it might help them. Many Russians see Ukrainians as hicks and contemptible. That’s not going to make this easier.Report

  2. Dark Matter says:

    The weird part is Putin and his crew clearly believed their own rhetoric/propaganda. They expected to be welcomed as liberators. The people would love to have the (jewish) Na.zis thrown out.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter says:

      Considering the relative collective shrug after Crimea I am not surprised.Report

      • InMD in reply to Philip H says:

        My guess is that even very nationalistic Ukranians understood Crimea as an indefensible periphery with a Russian population, only under Ukrainian control as an accident of Soviet bureaucracy. Huge difference between letting that go and having your capital occupied and presumably your government replaced.Report

        • Philip H in reply to InMD says:

          All of that is probably true, but I also think its looking in the wrong direction. There are many ways a fully ethnically Russian enclave could have been handed back to Russia. So far as I recall, Russia didn’t pursue any of the. And other then Ukraine cutting off Crimea’s water supply, there was a collective wink from the world.Report

          • InMD in reply to Philip H says:

            Well yes, if you ask there’s a chance you might get no for an answer. Russia took the approach they did because they already decided they would never accept that.

            Russia and Putin are of course responsible for their own actions but I do think the degree of Ukranian resistance we are seeing to this invasion is a major factor in the response. If the government had fled and military laid down its arms at the first sight of the Russian army I do not think the international reaction would be remotely what it has been. Probably a little more than the shrug it gave over Crimea but not a lot. It’s hard to care about a country that won’t fight for itself but extremely easy to sympathize with one that does.Report

        • Dark Matter in reply to InMD says:

          For perspective: Ethnically Crimea is 65% Russian and 15% Ukrainian.Report

          • Philip H in reply to Dark Matter says:

            So you let the Crimeans have a referendum and if they want to leave they leave. Wouldn’t be the first time a country split itself.Report

            • North in reply to Philip H says:

              All those routes risks giving Putin a “no” answer. His snatching of Crimea was indefensible but the collective shrug after he did it was quite understandable.Report

              • Kazzy in reply to North says:

                Do you think we will (are?) look back on Crimea as another failed attempt at appeasement?Report

              • North in reply to Kazzy says:

                The neocons will but fish em. As for the rest of us, I doubt it. Crimea was just a muddle. Putin grabbed it because he unexpected lost his client government in Ukraine. Ukraine couldn’t hold it because they’d just had a revolution and everything happened so quickly that everyone else was just left blinking over the matter. Crimea’s ethnic make up and history made it very hard to gin up an international scandal over how the whole thing ended up.Report

  3. John Puccio says:

    It’s hard not to be inspired by the valor and resiliency of the Ukrainians. But the reports of the Russian “failures” in this invasion is wishful thinking thinking at best, and straight up propaganda at worst.

    I fear the calculus has changed even more with Putin demonstrating he is willing to attack the largest nuclear plant in Europe. He’s already on to the next conflict sending that message to the EU and the US.

    I see no off ramp at this point.Report

    • Philip H in reply to John Puccio says:

      Sadly I agree with you. While it is good that Russia has slowed its advance into Kyiv, they are mostly doing so to firm up the supply lines and depots they need for sustained conflict. The effectiveness of their movements out of Crimea indicates they are willing to fight a multiple front battle, and the composition of their soldiers as conscripts suggests the real pros – who are far more accurate and deadly – are yet to be deployed. No doubt they’d like to have their flag over Kyiv by now, but they clearly aren’t backing down.

      Which means we have to hope that the Ukrainian resistance does enough damage to bog them while the sanctions work, so that the oligarchs go into rebellion. That and the swelling internal protests he’s facing might, might be his undoing.

      I don’t expect him to go quietly however.Report

      • John Puccio in reply to Philip H says:

        I hope you’re right, but I think an oligarch revolt is a pipe dream.

        As long as Putin has China’s support, international sanctions will not deter him.Report

        • Philip H in reply to John Puccio says:

          Agree on china, which is why sanctions have been targeted at the oligarchs. They are being cut off from their overseas assets, and given the work they had to do to accumulate those assets its not going to go over well long term. And Putin’s agreements with China will not shield them from the impacts.Report

    • Pinky in reply to John Puccio says:

      But the reports of the Russian “failures” in this invasion is wishful thinking thinking at best, and straight up propaganda at worst.

      Any details of breaking news in peace time is as likely as not to be disproved within 48 hours. In war time, even general themes might be incorrect, or if correct, turned on their heads as events unfold. It’s not necessarily deception (self- or otherwise), it’s just the fog of war.Report

    • North in reply to John Puccio says:

      I wish I could disagree. The war is only a week old. Just because it isn’t the cakewalk that Putin (channelling Bush the lesser) predicted doesn’t mean that Russia will lose it.
      That being said Russia has already lost the overarching conflict. The Russian military’s reputation for effectiveness and Putin’s reputation for savvy are both wrecked. Geopolitically and economically it’s been an unmitigated fiasco for Russia.Report

      • InMD in reply to North says:

        The Ukranian’s short term but apparent significant exceeding of expectations is likely to lead to long term misery for the people. At the same time I think it’s hard to imagine Putin being able to hold the country much better than we held Afghanistan. If any government they prop up can’t withstand the withdraw of foreign troops it will become a perpetual suck of resources Russia is a lot less equipped to deal with than we were in our own misadventures.

        The big question is how all of that plays out in Russian domestic politics over the long haul. Maybe the people who matter don’t care or see it as a price worth paying. Maybe they don’t or their patience will run out. My guess is we probably won’t ever know in the moment.Report

        • Dark Matter in reply to InMD says:

          Nato openly supplying weapons right on the other side of the border is a big deal. The population being relatively united against him is also.

          This could easily go worse for him than it did for us.Report

          • North in reply to Dark Matter says:

            Possibly, but Ukraine is mostly flat. Mountains are a lot better for insurgents. OTOH Ukrainians are almost the same as Russians racially/culturally speaking so it’s an open question if the Russians would be as sanguine on an emotional level about Ukrainian suffering and death as they (and we) were/are with arab/muslim suffering and death.Report

            • InMD in reply to North says:

              There’s also just a sheer numbers problem. The full invasion of Iraq involved about 250k soldiers including the US and all other contributors. I believe for the hottest years of the occupation that number was about 130k. Even at the time experts said that was far too few for the mission.

              Russia has gone into a geographically bigger country with a comparable population and no friends to help. To your point they do have a cultural and geographic proximity advantages we did not. However with those numbers the Russians won’t be able to control the country if the Ukranians won’t let them, even if the big cities eventually fall. It then becomes a question of how brutal the Russians are willing to be. I would think the answer is much more than we were but even that might not guarantee success.Report

            • JS in reply to North says:

              Iraq was not getting, well, Europe shipping it modern arms designed to defeat armored vehicles, tanks, jets and helicopters.

              As well as enough rifles, food, and ammunition to finish outfitting every man in Ukraine that’s been trained to hold a weapon. Which is pretty much all of them, because Ukraine has mandatory military service.

              Add that to the advantages of a defender versus an attacker or occupier, and you have a very ugly situation.

              Furthermore, brutality will not help Putin pacify the area — it will just create more partisans to fight him, in a country more awash with military weapons than the NRA’s wet dream.Report

        • John Puccio in reply to InMD says:

          You touch on the point about that makes me sick to my stomach.

          The West is helping Ukraine enough to keep them on life support, but not enough to actually cure them. The Ukrainians are literally pawns in this global chess match.

          The more damage they do, the longer they do it, the better for us.

          Not so much them.

          How nice of us to help them sacrifice themselves for Europe’s benefit. This is a tragedy in slow motion.Report

          • North in reply to John Puccio says:

            I prefer to assign agency to the Ukrainians instead of calling them pawns. They wish to resist, they desire that aid, they could stop at any time.Report

            • John Puccio in reply to North says:

              Oh, I don’t deny them their agency. It’s what is enabling the irony.

              I meant pawns in terms of how the West is playing the chess game out. Ukraine’s well being is immaterial to the service they are providing the rest of the pieces of the European chess board.Report

              • Dark Matter in reply to John Puccio says:

                Poland and the Ukraine share a border and there are streams of refugees coming in. My in-laws in Poland are welcoming them.

                I think you are giving everyone a level of cynicism that is undeserved.

                We are not willing to create a no-fly zone, i.e. shoot down Russian aircraft and actively go to war with Russia. That is not the same as “not caring”.Report

              • I didn’t say we didn’t care. We do. Very much.

                But not enough to start a World War over.

                I don’t disagree with the lines the West has drawn. My point is that the ethical dilemma (let some die to prevent more from dying) makes me ill.Report

              • Philip H in reply to John Puccio says:

                My point is that the ethical dilemma (let some die to prevent more from dying) makes me ill.

                I seem to remember a lieutenant governor of Texas saying something similar at the beginning of the pandemic. That made me ill too.

                Unfortunately Putin operates from just that basis apparently. In that he doesn’t mind sacrificing some Russians to secure what e sees as the long term future of Russia.Report

              • Philip H in reply to John Puccio says:

                That was the case when they gave up their nukes after becoming independent in the mid 1990’s. It was the case when they signed the Minsk Agreement a few years ago. That part of the equation hasn’t changed.

                Putin’s approach hasn’t changed easier. He’s daring the west to do something and until he invaded we didn’t.Report

          • InMD in reply to John Puccio says:

            I guess it depends on the long or short view of the Ukranians. On the one hand these may be the first days of a real, much more coherent Ukranian nation. They may look back on this decades hence as when they ‘got free.’ At the same time, if that happens which is still very much a hypothetical, it will be very cold comfort for the huge numbers of innocents suffering and dying for however long it takes to get to the other side, if they ever do.

            That is the ultimate irony of what Putin is doing. No one ever seems to successfully build a nation from the top down but plenty of nations have found or invented themselves out of solidarity against a common enemy. Plenty have also of course ceased to exist.Report

  4. Chip Daniels says:

    In 1987 I was studying in Europe for a semester and went to East Berlin. At that time, passing through Checkpoint Charlie, the Evil Empire seemed impregnable and eternal, with an iron fisted grip on the East Bloc countries.

    No one, and I mean even no one, not even in the CIA or KGB, had any inkling that it was all about to just collapse without a shot being fired.

    Point being that sometimes nations change like bankruptcy, bit by bit then all at once.
    What will be the outcome of this war? I don’t think anyone can even guess at this point.Report