• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 year ago

    Let me ask you the opposite question: what do all of those nations on that list (and really, it’s only a partial list because it doesn’t even feature Russian aggression on the Asian continent, in the Middle East and in Africa) have in common?

    Is it possible that the commonality is that not a single one of them is part of a large military alliance capable of stopping Russian aggression?

    And, to take this one step further: why do you think that, in the last two decades, Russia has never messed with Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania - even though it has repeatedly claimed that they should be part of Russia?

    Is it possible that NATO membership of those three, very small nations is all that has prevented Russia from treating them like Transnistria or Crimea or South Ossetia or Chechnya?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Those are all excellent questions, and unfortunately I don’t know all the answers. I’ll try to answer what I can despite their loaded nature, and say when I don’t know.

      1. There are a few different commonalities; they generally identify as slavs (with exceptions, especially in the middle east like Kazakhstan), most former USSR states are member states of the CIS, almost all nations have people within them that identify as ethnic Russian, and naturally most share borders with Russia.
      2. That’s a good point, most former Soviet states don’t have a modernized military and likely wouldn’t be capable of withstanding a Russian invasion, however I think it’s worth pointing out that the majority of the West also thought Ukraine would fall during the initial invasion. Generally, I don’t think I understand your point here and I’m genuinely interested in the reasons you brought this up.
      3. Honestly, I have no idea why the northern Slavic nations haven’t seen more aggression from Russia. It’s possible that the Kremlin doesn’t see them as valuable, though they have seen some disinformation campaigns and political propaganda via proximity to Russia and Belarus.
      4. I don’t think NATO has been a deterrent, but it’s possible that I’m wrong. I think it’s worth pointing out that an excuse for Russia invading Ukraine was explicitly NATO trying to expand into Ukraine. They didn’t have much interest in doing so either, until after the initial invasion saw Ukraine still standing.