|
|
|
|
|
by Roark66
174 days ago
|
|
Hyper power that can't overwhelm a country that was supposed to fold in 48h? Give me a break. While your sentiment may be correct in 2010s it certainly was not when these things were being decided in early 90s. USSR and Russia which de facto ruled it was seen as a failed state that needs "western help" and on a path to democracy. While we (here in Poland) we're quite skeptical, having the Russian WW2 occupying force leave in 1991 (yes, we didn't get freedom after WW2 until 1991). There was still a lot of hope Russia will follow in the footsteps of other central/eastern European countries like Poland/Czech/The Baltics if only we help them. So yes, there was huge resentment, but also a huge benefit of hope and benevolence too. Was some of this calculated? Sure. No doubt someone sat in Talin and Helsinki and thought: if we treat them like post WW1 Germany it will be easier for the extremists to take power. So let's not pour sand in their fuel tank as they are desperately trying to restart the engine of their economy. I don't even think it was a mistake at the time. It was a decent way to behave. But the moment the tide has started turning in Russia towards autocracy the screw should've been tightened. No oil and gas should fund Russian army after at least their attack on Georgia. If not before when the atrocities of the Chechen war became known. Unfortunately corrupt politicians (that are still in power in Europe and even in my country) have continued signing deals and making money by financing what was clearly a huge enemy in the making. Russia wasn't an eny in 1993, but it certainly was one in 2008 when it invaded Goergia. If only we acted properly in early 2000s all of this could've been prevented. |
|