[cmrdporcupine]

Causing chaos on NATO's borders I think isn't meant to stir up a war with NATO but rather to project an image of strength domestically and within other regions that Russia dominates and to further stoke the fires of ethno-nationalism they feed off.

Plus creating chaos in general seems part of the goal. Russia was losing (well, lost) hegemony in Ukraine post 2014, but damned if it's going to permit its success outside of of Russian control. Absolutely laying waste to Ukraine will not bring Ukraine back under Russian influence and has turned even formerly pro-Russian people in places like Odessa into Ukrainian nationalists. But this matters little to them, because Putin/Lavrov have already clearly bargained on losing them. ... So instead, create chaos not only in Ukraine but across all of Europe, making an example out of them and sewing destruction in order to prevent further splintering of Russian influence.

And it plays well to the domestic audience, and to the blindly "stick it to the West" types. Bitter ethnic animosity between Russians and Poles works for jingoistic demagogues on both sides of the border. Talking shit about Poland keeps Putin's domestic support strong. And (basically explicitly fascist) Wagner's philosophy of might-makes-right and chaos-making clearly plays well to the audience at home, so two birds one stone, sticking Wagner next to Poland to rattle some sabres.

The question is whether ultimately NATO falls for Lukashenko and Putin's stupid trap, and the next time a provocation like this happens, a helicopter or two is obliterated or a ship in the Black Sea is sunk (again), and then the hyper-nationalist audience at home can froth at the mouth some more and Putin's ratings go even higher.

But I think NATO leaders are smart enough to see the provocations for what they are.

[benterix]

Well, in 2015 Turkey shot down a Russian fighter for crossing the border just a mile or two, everybody thought there will be WW III but nothing happened.

[cmrdporcupine]

NATO doesn't need to do that kind of thing now. Ukraine is already fighting (and partially winning) a war against Russia that NATO is freely and openly supporting. There's no advantage in escalating these kinds of skirmishes when NATO can just shrug and then turn around and hand Ukraine bigger and badder guns and say "go at it, boys" instead, and avoid direct confrontation (which Putin doesn't want, either).

Of course, there _is_ a line, and Russia will probe to see where that is, but they won't cross it.

It's yet another reason why NATO is so firmly bound to supporting Ukraine. Before the opening of direct hostilities there, Russia engaged in all sorts of shit in the west with no consequences. Cyber attacks and surveillance stuff, but actually doing things like brazenly poisoning people on NATO soil and in the process killing UK civilians. Or shooting down civilian airliners. And never paying any consequence because we were afraid of war.

Well, now there's a war, but we don't have to be directly involved with the threat of nukes and cruise missiles hitting our cities...

The one place where I do see risk of the line being crossed is in the Black Sea. I'm disappointed that Turkey and NATO have not taken a firmer line. I hope/expect to see a stronger response to events like what happened in the port on the Danube a couple days ago.

It makes no sense for Russia to be allowed to control the waters outside of its territory on a sea where the coastline is filled with NATO countries.

If there is a serious flare up, it will be there, and naval.