Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by st4lz 1167 days ago
There is a shocking reality of how short-sighted and strategically shallow the opinions of people may be, even very literate ones with unlimited access to information.

There are very long tensions between Japan and Russia about the Kuril Islands, that both countries have a claim on. It is very possible, that the same vague claims used on annexing Crimea today, or Donbas, would be used against Japan, and may not stop there. What is more, Japan is an ally of the United States since WW2, and seems to benefit much both militarily and economically. What is more, another raising power in Asia and growing tensions around Taiwan may have the same consequences for Asia, which may threaten japanese influence in the reqion. We are also seeing proliferation of nuclear weapons, and the threats and blackmail is rising, when deescalation is seen as a sign of weakness.

Usually, being united against common threat is the cheapest strategy, and to pay a few bucks less for oil might turn to be very expensive in the long run. If there would be no punishment for disrespecting international law, the chaos would come.

2 comments

>"If there would be no punishment for disrespecting international law, the chaos would come."

The list of "disrespecting international law" is pretty big. The list of punishment is way shorter and highly selective.

Could you please list any other war of conquest with that much casualties, armour usage and refugee issue in Europe?

And what punishment are we talking about, voluntary economical sanctions? Those numbers of atrocities, stealing children, mass graves - I still can't understand how the international response is so mild.

> in Europe?

This is an interesting little bit on the end of that question.

Also note “of conquest”: presumably, if the purpose of Russian invasion was to just hang Zelensky and institute a regime change with government sympathizing with Russia, and not to annex any territory, that would have been OK too.
Why is that?
What is so special about Europe?
> and strategically shallow the opinions of people may be, even very literate ones with unlimited access to information

The problem with unlimited access to information is that you can find a thousand people arguing for a thousand different opposing things with all that information.

There is nothing wrong about arguing if all the parties are interested in truth. Discourse is a backbone of free people.

In my perspective, there is no doubt about japanese government stance on the matters in Ukraine. And any other non-totalitarian society. I am ready being convinced otherwise.