[smsm42]

The problem is not condemning, the problem is just condemning and not taking the next step, or making it so weak it actually emboldens tbe agressor, who thinks "oh, that's all they got? Wasn't too bad, I guess I'll just keep on"

[trhway]

On the main, "voice of the state", the 1st channel of Russian TV they have just discussed that the West would introduce more sanctions, yet half a year down the road the West would just get used to the situation.

[rebuilder]

I wonder what that reflects. Sanctions would not be very popular among the Russian population, is this just the regime calming down the populace? Or does it genuinely reflect the calculus here?

[oleg_antonyan]

All real opposition is imprisoned or killed. State controls all media and actively censor internet. You will get in trouble for organizing or even mentioning any kind of mass protest on social media. 60+ generation only watches TV and supports Putin, and for the rest he has massive amount on police and special forces if censorship and "regular" repressions didn't work. Many people leave the country b/c leading the revolution === getting killed regardless of outcome. Those who cannot leave are too weak, those who can but don't want to are trying to ignore all this shit and live their normal lives. The abundance of oil money helps Putin to keep most people barely above poverty level regardless of sanctions, and that's ok for many.

[trhway]

Realistically Russia can't occupy any significant part of Ukraine, nor Kiev in particular - tens of millions of pissed-off resisting Ukrainians with many taking up arms (on Ukrainian TV they said that they already give arms to such civilians as former police, and Zelenskiy said that they would give arms to all "willing and capable to defend the country") would shake off any army, and any such occupation attempt would be very unpopular in Russia too. Such scenario would be fiasco and catastrophe for Russia and especially for Putin's regime and would make sanctions issue a noise. On the other side if Putin goes "only" for enlarged Donbass zone - like making Donetsk unreachable for Ukraine artillery, etc. - and limits the all-Ukrainian strikes only to military objects as it was officially declared then such conflict will soon again go back to slow-burn/frozen state, and that as usual would take international attention away from it.

[buran77]

I don't think Russia is willing or able to occupy Ukraine. They most likely want to "poison" the region and make the country undesirable in NATO.

No superpower wants the enemy right at their border. The US didn't appreciate Russian missiles being put on Cuban land 60 years ago, Russia certainly doesn't want NATO forces and weaponry being put on Ukrainian land now.

It doesn't take a strategist to see that all superpowers want a buffer and if you take away that buffer spark will fly - whether a blockade or a full out war. I'm certain Europe (EU) saw this outcome the moment Ukraine was considered for joining any Western alliance or union. But different continents have different interests.

[throw0101a]

> No superpower wants the enemy right at their border.

There's a reason why Russia's neighbours are so nervous and want a support system:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru...

And let's not forget Malaysia Airlines Flight 17:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17

Former Warsaw Pact members, and former 'provinces' of the Soviet Union, want to get on with their lives. Russia is making it harder for them than the other way around IMHO.

Western governments made a good faith effort to support Russia (e.g., G8), and it was only after Putin got into power and started heading in his own direction that things started to sour.

[buran77]

Everyone who was abused by a superpower is nervous and would like the same help. What's the point in making that list to support your point if you're not going to paint the other half of the picture which is making the opposite point?

Cuba would have loved to not be cut off from the world for more than half a century for doing what the Ukraine was just enticed to do. Palestine could use some help in what has to be one of the most unbalanced displays of power in a conflict in recent memory. The Middle East or Western Asia would have looked decidedly different without the "explosive support system" they received over the decades. And the South China Sea countries could use a hand settling their territorial disputes.

If you can't see how Russia would like the West to stay away from their borders (Ukraine) just as much as the US wanted Russia to stay away from their borders (Cuba) then maybe it's a good moment to take a step back and look at this without thinking of the names. If you care more about allegiance then you can't care about objectivity or history.

Cuba became the enemy of the US the moment they showed any allegiance to Russia. Was there a doubt in anyone's mind that the exact same thing would happen again when the tables are turned? If you're not educated by mass-media then the outcome was obvious. And you are free to wonder why would anyone approach a an enemy superpower's neighbor for an alliance, knowing full well that probably without exception in the history of mankind this lead to war.

I am fairly certain the EU could live with Ukraine as a buffer zone if that means no conflict in Europe and not crippling them. There are forces far enough from Europe who have no such concern about poking a hornets' nest and sacrificing/destroying Ukraine in the process.

[smsm42]

There's no NATO forces on Ukrainian land. But there are Russian ones. And they have already occupied large parts of Ukraine - and trying right now, right this very moment, to take more. So you can "think" whatever you want, but the facts are completely opposite to your claims.

[xdennis]

> No superpower wants the enemy right at their border.

Phrase it right: no power wants a country it can't bully on its border.

[buran77]

I did phrase it right. I don't care about judging the "morals" of any superpower but the status of "enemy" is less subjective.

[yesplorer]

Afghanistan under Taliban makes your claim invalid.

[southerntofu]

I don't understand this claim. USA army occupied Afghanistan, organized corruption (oh sorry "privatization of public services") for years and paid masses of informants and mercenaries and still had to stop occupying Afghanistan. Just like France was kicked from Algeria over 50 years ago after countless massacres.

Not that i'm happy with the Taliban regime now that the USA are gone, but this wave of reaction is the logical aftermath of USA policy. Turns out not killing/oppressing millions of people and not destroying their public services could have a much better outcome in terms of "progressive politics".

[tim333]

They may be thinking of installing another Lukashenko type as president and then leaving.

[southerntofu]

It's not just Lukashenko though: Kadyrov is another example. It appears Putin has learnt from history of the Russian empire that it cannot survive with a single ruler doing ethnic cleansing from above (like the Empire did with the jews before 1917 or the USSR did with muslims).

So yes Putin has wet dreams about reuniting all territories from the ex-Empire or ex-USSR, but as you pointed out he certainly needs "local men" (strong/macho/authoritarian type) to rule the local communities before an uprising occurs as is the logical conclusion of any colonial occupation.

[raxxorrax]

Ask Crimeans. Putin invested heavily in the region and he probably has many supporters now. Some separatists begged Putin to invade. Difficult to say how numerous they are.

Maybe we see a new iron curtain in the middle of Ukraine.

[smsm42]

That's how it's been since 2014. And that's why Putin feels so bold - he's already been down this road, and he knows it's not as scary as they try to make it look like. To scare him off, something bigger would be required - but looks like there's not much. Even SWIFT restrictions are a no go. The most the West can do is slap some personal sanctions on a couple of billionaire oligarchs (which can very well sit it out in Russia) and on some Russian banks (which probably also can stomach it for years).

[praptak]

This is the biggest problem. I don't believe the sanctions imposed on Russia for the previous acts of aggression reached the level which Putin had already calculated into his plans.

[MattGaiser]

I was really surprised at how lightweight the first wave of sanction was. They sanctioned some Russian politicians who were proud of it and the invaded areas only.

[praptak]

There is no going around it: any sanctions which don't even inconvenience the West don't hurt Putin and are already calculated into his plans.

[MattGaiser]

Depends. You could target Russian citizens with strong ties to Putin with asset seizures like Roman Abramovich. Seizing Chelsea F.C. and handing it over to fans would be quite popular.

[gls2ro]

What would this kind of sanction achieve? Do you expect that a friend of Putin will go to him and then ask him to stop a War? Right now in his own circle of friends, there is nobody more powerful than Putin and their money does not matter right now. The war will not be stopped because some friends will have their assets frozen or even lost. Global Power > Friends Money. To stop this war one has to show a bigger power. Some other type of sanctions needs to be considered.

[ozim]

How do you think one gets power?

By having rich friends and connections.

Don't get fooled, they are only "friends" because they have common business and goals. Average Joe from the street is not going to be their "friend" because he would not bring anything to the table.

Friends money is part of that power, taking that money away makes whole group weaker, because it is not "evil villain in a cave", world does not work that way. It is connections and groups of people.

[tut-urut-utut]

What would stop Russia to retaliate in that case? Every western company property in Russia would become a fair game, including e.g Bidens son and his property in Ukraine.

It's not the game anyone would like to play.

[MattGaiser]

Nothing. But the value of the property they have likely outweighs the value of the property they have.

[account42]

The west not having the stomach for any real sanctions that also hurt them in return is exactly why Putin was confident enough to start the invasion. The only way non-violent way to stop it (besides an internal uprising) is to make exactly to make it clear that Putin miscalculated.