If we would accept that Russia would be able to keep some of its gains, what would assure us that Russia would not take the time to rearm and retry some time later? I think all options where Russia is given something it did not have before is just the best way to ensure that Russia is embolden and will start a new and than probably a much bigger war. All other appeasement arguments seem naive to me…
i wonder how low the critical thinking is in the comments, not a lot have caught the subtle push of MG for Ukraine to lose what Putin has gained, AND consider it a victory ("some might call it a victory" he said) as if in 2014 this idea was not tried. Look what have that gave us. I had a lot of expectation for personalities like the Pope, Galeotti, Stotkin but somehow all want putin to incrementally slug his way to validate russian empire existance, instead of actively working to denounce it and advocate for its dissolution. And that not doing that in 1991 was the real mistake.
First of all, who should let Russia? Russia did not invade me or you, it invaded Ukraine. The Ukrainians are the only ones who have the right to decide whether they will cede any lands to Russia in peace. The mistake of Munich and 1938 should not be repeated, when the West talked to a dictator over the heads of Czechs and Slovaks. Secondly, in order to talk about giving up land at all, there must be a plan to do so. So far it has been Russia that has torpedoed the peace talks. If you listen to Putin, he wants all of Ukraine. Not necessarily all incorporated into Russia, but at least vassalised, where Ukrainians won't have the right to decide for themselves, they will come from Moscow for orders. Until this approach changes, no one is likely to trust that there is anyone to sit down at the negotiating table with. Thirdly, what you write about. Modern Russia is notorious for breaking signed agreements as soon as it sees it can get more. You can't buy peace with the current Russian leadership -- you can only buy a truce for a few years.
@@Grundewalt I believe those predictions to be premature. Warfare and dynamic diplomacy is extremely variable to say the least. It requires one to know the thought and analytical process of the players. I think many fail to realize that these factors can change, even in the most dogmatic of states or individuals. By far, predictably of leaders or systems is the hardest of all things. Leaders seldom fall into a pattern of action that are concrete and non-changing. Throw in ego, narcissistic behavior and nebulous goals and that model is useless.
Thank you, Jonathan, for this conversation with Mark Galeotti. I always enjoy the nuanced expertise that he offers. 🇺🇦 Заради життя кожного українця! 🇺🇦
So much of their conversation would benefit from clarification, exposition, and correction, that one must limit oneself: 1. The Donetsk Basin, Donbas, is where much of Ukraine's mineral and fuel extraction, raw materials for its industries lies, that stripping of Donbas to russia cedes Ukraine sovereignty. 2. The Black Sea coast is also the export route, as the "nudged", inflamed Polish and other adjacent farmers - agricultural elements of sometimes tiny states, clearly shows. 3. Crimea, ethnically heritor to one of the Khanates mentioned, is significant in the modern period genocide through which russian empire imposed its colonialization, its empire. The forced diaspora of Crimean Tatars was also the Tsarist and Soviet policy for Ukraine as a whole. Notice how Crimea contains both 1. and 2. with its offshore gasfields. Ukraine in reality formed both intermediate export passage for russia, and competitor. 4. Contrary to the assertion made of Ukraine was most of its existence russia, the FACT that languages form and exist allopatrically, argues for the cognitive error of that assertion. Even though Ukrainian was marginalized and efforts were made to stamp it out from Tsarist through Soviet, and now russian occupation, it exists, more than 85% similar to Polish and Belarusain, and only 60% similar to Russian language. Ukraine west of Dnipr was part of Lithuanian-Polish Commonwealth, with only its Cyrillic seeming to separate it. Zaporizhzhia was essentially territory of Cossacks, mobile tribal people whose hetman[s] were involved enough in internecine dispute, that some Cossacks used their military horse tech and fighting skills for the highest bidder or aligned against their Cossack opponents. Thus they became mercenaries, for both LPC and Muscovy, with some holding to their own Dniepr-Don freedom. Validity, dear scholars, is not derived solely or in reality at all, from national identity, another obfuscating issue, which is best addressed by anthropologists, psychology, neuroscience, biology and evolutionarygenomics, all inextricably linked sufficiently enough to preclude informed discussion without some background in those disciplines. (National identity being a rather modern concept, a discussion that might be relevant in the obvious Putin struggle for identity!) 5. We really cannot effectively meet, or engage in human speech without identifying rhetoric, which is the use of language to persuade, distinguishing it from factual words, and avoiding it to what extent it is possible. Strategic thinking does include paranoiac pre-emption, which happens to be why the [pre]occupations of military, intelligence, and governance spheres show such increased incidence of paranoid ideation. Conspiracy, meaning "breathing together" is an ubiquitous human trait, from momentary acquiescences of choice to long-term recognition of mutually beneficial or at least commensal goals. It is more basic to cognition than is symbolic verbal language, as brains associate sensory and motor information ion order to predict relative likelihoods. We are by no means the only strategic or tactical animals, nor are Primates. Howevermuch the interlocutors above imagine consistent specific age-related onset of mental deterioration of elders, that varies enormously, with scholars passing 102 sometimes adding to relevant discourse, while others either due to substance abuse (and some substances, like alcohol, confer greater deterioration than is commonly recognized, FAR earlier in life than the ages i mention) or other environmental or heritable stress, by mid 50s, half-a lifetime earlier. The skills which one cultivates, can, if contributing to optimal ranges of individual arousal, can persist, even as unused skills diminish or vanish. While Putin's entire developmental past involves paranoiac pre-emption, he has successfully managed the information/deceit skills of counterespionage in which he was trained. The simple leverage of influence and power his tactics share with mob bosses, autocrats, and other Dark Triad/Tetrad pathological minds is basic to survival from infancy and sibling manipulativeness for survival and both covert or overt dominance. This evolved trait complex is likely to persist. OK. Too much. But merely a minor observation of a few of the elements discussed.
The whole argument that Russia has been invaded before is bullshit. Many countries in Europe have been invaded throughout the ages. How many times has Poland been invaded? What about France?
And both France and Poland have in times past invaded or otherwise intentionally gone to war with neighbors. In particular France (Poland has never been powerful enough to do it consistently or they would have). lol Don't white wash history and pretend like Russians are the only aggressive people. No major power is innocent, accept it. Those that CAN invade and take more do.
Unlike most Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, Romanians, and other Russian neighbors, Mark doesn't understand Russia and Russians in his bones. Makes him susceptible to absurd Russian talking points that are used to justify an ignoble imperialist history of unprovoked invasions, aggressions, atrocities and war crimes.
That's a good point. Thank you for mentioning those nations, which I will cite when rebutting this argument. You can also add to that list the country in which I reside, Belgium. The times it has been invaded, invariably to get to and attack other countries, are too numerous to count. It's also worth looking at @esakoivuniemi's post (s/he is from Finland), which makes an equally pertinent point regarding the "Russia problem" (my turn of phrase).
Galeotti seems to understand Russia rather well (although his theory that put-upon Russia feels constantly threatened by any number of smaller states is dodgy, to say the least) but he doesn't seem to understand Ukraine or be particularly interested in Ukraine as a serious force to be reckoned with. It's as though Ukraine was an unforeseen side issue for him, an annoying enigma, and only the health of Russia matters in the final analysis.
He's actually pro russian clothed in gentility. And you are one of only a handful who have seen it. I wonder if the others are hired trolls (they're cheap) or useful idiots?
Indeed. His casual dismissal of Ukrainian history and identity was shocking, he usually tries to hide his bias. Ukrainians and Russians are different in head and heart, the past 2 -years have made that crystal-clear.
@@msmaryna961 Yea so different that they have to mark their equipment and wear white and blue ribbons so they can differentiate themselfs because they all look alike, speak the same language and use the same soviet equipment. This is a brother against brother war and probably the worst one in modern history, atleast in ex-Yugoslavia there were different religions.
Fascinating but still... As a person who was born and lived almost my entire life in Russia (not being ethnically Russian though) I can say that none of that arguments citing historical 'strategic Russian feeling of vulnerability' is in fact valid when it comes to the current ruling clique that consists mostly of petty late-Soviet KGB crooks. Yes, Russia was invaded many times in the past but that was in the pre-nuclear era when everything was decided by how much land one can grab militarily. Not a single time was it invaded since the USSR obtained nukes. This argument does not stand the test of reality. The current war in Ukraine is a personal Putin's war for power and influence in the former Soviet/Russian imperial territory, it's a way for Putin to keep power indefinitely in a declining empire and a sort of a personal obsession for him which he managed to impose on his kleptocratic elites (through fear) and wider populace (through fear and propaganda).
England has been invaded loads of times since 1066. How about 1216, when Louis of France was proclaimed King in London, and got as far as Lincoln; or 1545, when the Mary Rose was sunk in the Solent fighting off the French; or most famously in 1688, when William of Orange drove out King James II. There are plenty of other examples too. Moreover, other countries have been invaded as frequently as Russia and don’t resort to genocide against their neighbours.
lol What?? The UK had a long history of imperial expansion and war that only stopped because it became weak and fell apart. And my country is arguably even MORE aggressive about it, we just dress it up better. Same old shit with a different veneer. Don't whitewash England's violent history.
@@johnathanh2660 Not by the government. You could, for example, find any number of Putin apologists who "invited" him to invade Ukraine, or Georgia, or wherever. Don't misunderstand - I think the Glorious Revolution was a good thing - but then that's 20/20 hindsight for you.
@@ACD54 "Not by the government." You do understand how anti-Catholic England was, right? William of Orange wasn't Catholic, and that was the main consideration.
@@johnathanh2660 Are you saying the government was anti-Catholic? For sure, the ruling class was divided just as it had been during the Civil War, but the King was the Catholic and insensitive James II. Anyway, it doesn't negate the point that it was an invasion - just a rather successful one. We might of course think differently if Sedgemoor had gone the other way.
No, in some ways the psychotic murderer Stalin was more of a pragmatist than Putin. Unfortunately, I think Putin is not very clever, or at all imaginative.
Just noticed that Galeotti always, ALWAYS ignores the war crimes question. What sort of an end to the war, a negotiated settlement, will Ukraine accept with - the stolen Ukrainian children still in servitude and being Russified? - the Russian soldiers who raped and murders and pillaged? - the destruction of civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools, bus/train stations, shopping centres, accommodation towers? - the damage to the environment with the destruction of the dam (and possibly the nuclear power plant)? ...and on, and on, and on. What message do you send the autocrats if they are not held to account? How do you satisfy the victims of the abuse of war? By whom and according to what ethical system do these dilemmas get resolved?
Thank you. As I see the images of the mass destruction of infrastructure and nature, I keep thinking "WHO will pay for this". Making Russia pay for its crimes is a top priority for anyone who seeks stability. Mark ignores the issue because at his core he believes Russia is above the rules.
Ukraine territorial sovereignty is not negotiable under any circumstances. Any relaxation of international law is fatal to the security of democratic nations who just desire to live in peaceful co-existence. Mark is great but .......
@@GreenTeaViewer And on the other hand again, you must run along and spend your paycheck of a couple of hundred rubles before they lose what little value they had when you got them. Your work is low effort, please do better. Or you know, just quit and get a real job.
It´s a pity that Galeotti tries, at the bottom , to understand or justify. Of course the deportation of 100.000 Latvian civilians and the execution of 70.000 was deprived of any geoestrategical justification. The tiny Baltic countries were not at all a danger for Russia. No, geography doesn’t justify the imperialism, I don t understand why Sillicon Curtain is now almost trying to justify and understand Russian imperialism. Maybe as Russia is not advancing, the support to Ukraine is faltering.
I've seen other guests the same on this channel. Makes you wonder what fink's end game really is. He never challenges them. One classic troll technique is to build trust by an appearance of veritude then use that trust to manipulate opinion.
Wonderfully insightful talk between two experts on the subject. And with room for serious debate on the matter, not just superficial reporting. Great in-depth analysis. Love it ❤
Thank you , Jonathan for inviting Mark Galeotti again. Absolutely agree that modus operandi of russians hasn’t changed much since the WW 2: only the Battle of Rzhev Salient (ржевский вал) caused the death of almost 1 million of soviet soldiers . Interesting detail: no monument etc has been built to commemorate those who perished.
It would argue it predates even that war. It was the same mentality in WW1 and the Crimean War. As in human losses don't matter. It may go back further I just don't personally know so I don't want to speak on it.
"only the Battle of Rzhev Salient (ржевский вал) caused the death of almost 1 million of soviet soldiers" - even California-based Wikipedia states that the total number of Soviet troops involved in the Battle of Rzhev in the summer of 1942 was 486,000. How could 1 million Soviet soldiers be killed when there were less than half a million of them? This is similar to the Ukrainian media claiming that 500 thousand Russian soldiers were killed when the Russian army that entered Ukraine had only 180 thousand troops. Or why does Ukraine need an additional 500 thousand soldiers if the comedian said that only 31 thousand Ukrainian soldiers died?
@@harleyquinn8202ssshhh let the war investors talk their propaganda It’s so wrong that even western sources can debunk it. They don’t care about reality anymore
@@harleyquinn8202Because injury is more prevalent then death and Russia keeps mobilizing. Also POW's that are executed by Russians might not be counted yet.
@@vilandar "Also POW's that are executed by Russians" - that is questionable. The videos that I saw can be interpreted as Ukrainians refusing to surrender. Russia has 27 thousands of Ukrainian POW, way more that Russian POW held by Ukraine. It proves that if any POW are executed then it would be by Ukrainians.
I think Mark Galeotti is one of the most insightful voices on the Putin regime. He can sometimes seem a little Russocentric, but that is why his views are so valuable.
Love your program, but I'd love to hear more about Uktainian -kozak history. What made Ukrainians such good fighters? How Ukrainians dealt with being berween the Ottoman Turks, Moscovian Duchy & the Polish Kingdom? Why is surrendering to Moscow isn't realistic to Ukrainians?
I wonder what the situation is with Putin s yachts. He has one called Graceful . Is that in Kaliningrad ? The SCHEHEREZADE has been in IMarina di Carrera ,Italy and has had a 32 million dollar refit apparently with a new dive platform.
Yes, everywhere you go in russia you see 1941-45 on posters, bus stops, buses etc. It's what happened in 1939-41 which Russians need to be taught about. That way, they might understand why eastern Europe joined nato.
On the one hand, Dr Galeotti is clear, insightful and devastatingly knowledgeable about the subject matter. On the other hand, he once told me my essay, and I quote, “oils have been perfect if I had just mentioned Napoleon”, then gave me 68%. 68%?! What the fuck, Mark?! It’s been 18 years and I’m still so angry I haven’t slept!
I am a great admirer of Mark Galeotti, who has revealing insights into what is going on in Russia and why. But it is interesting to see two camps in the comments - those who have lived under Russian occupation, or the threat of it, and those (like Mark himself) who come from countries that have not been invaded in recent history. The people in the first camp complain that Mark just does not 'get' it and there is an element in Russian culture which makes them behave like 'Russians' in a way which cannot be explained in the context of Western European culture. Mark (says the first camp) over-intellectualises this essential 'Russianess'. I have to say, I find myself looking for - and not finding - the essential emotional grit in Mark's analysis, that I think needs to be there to really understand what it is to be Russian.
Of all the flaws Russia is facing, the most obvious and ultimately most fatal is the lack of a transitional mechanism. Old leaders with outdated views. This intransigence has lead to missed opportunities from economic trade with neighbors to investment in her own people. A totalitarian state only see threats to power, internal or external. It can not see opportunities for prosperity but opportunities of exploitation and conquest. This is a lesson the world is learning, particularly Ukraine.
Unfortunately is very difficult to understand Russia from afar. It was the same with Germany after the first world war. Isolationism is always a losing strategy for all parties involved. Congratulation Jonathan for your genuine effort to understand.
Very clear that Mark Galeotti is a Russia expert and a novice when it comes to Ukraine, Poland, or the Baltics. He simply is not capable of acknowledging the nation's delusions and reliance on violence. Russians truly believe they are special and don't have to live by the rules. Imagine Russians came to your city and decided they didn't need to observe traffic rules, the "Russia experts" would find a way to defend their behaviour.
Good interview, like to hear the man speak but I don't understand his positions on some issues....farmers are clearly influenced if not literally infiltrated.
Dudes . Ukraine could have put this to bed had the west EVER taken rusha seriously. Your take on history of that part of the world has always been juvenile. Now , in the third year of war , the west is still mostly just yattering. Denmark alone has grasped the full extent of what is required : consequential action and far less blather .
I have liked your comment, but there is a lot of wisdom from hindsight in there. We were fooled, pure and simple. And it has taken far too long for our leaders to admit their naïveté. Let’s hope that Europe can now turn away from their reliance on the USA and their self serving politicians and pull together for Ukraine.
43:00 WTH? One of several instances where the guest clearly has no faintest idea what he's talking about, but says things with great confidence. Are we going top pretend that Russia's meddling in Ukraine began under Yanukovych and that Yanukovych's long road to power had no assistance from the Kremlin whatsoever? Perhaps Galeotti is not aware of the many russian assets of corrupting influence that remained in Ukraine since the collapse of the USSR. Medvedchuk, Tabachnyk at al. Not to mention that Moscow poured overwhelmingly more resources into the Ukrainian information space than all Ukraine and all other foreign actors combined. In fact, in the East and in Crimea this golden shower of Russian influence made Ukrainian presence barely felt at all. Comparing this with dirty russian money in London is ludicrous. Imagine being bullied in central London for not speaking Russian because you're from a nearby village where they still speak English. Corrupt Yanukovych suddenly creating an opportunity for Putin is about as preposterous an idea, as Russia feeling threat from Vikings which he suggested at the beginning :D
My prediction for most likely outcome is that Ukraine gets back Crimea due to logistics (Crimean bridge destruction + suppression of naval assets + a successful counteroffensive south would make supplying it a nightmare), but that it doesn't end the war in Donetsk and Luhansk. With Ukraine both exhausted and also feeling like they achieved their main goal, and the Russians clearly losing but not defeated, they will agree to a truce on whatever the frontlines will be at that point.
“When you cannot rely on natural borders, when you are not a convenient island or similar”… Is a BS excuse for the Russian uncivilised barbarism. Russia as a civilised society became unhinged by the Bolsheviks around 1917 to 1922. Soviet Satanic Union was established in 1922. Many Russian authors have written books and lectured on the despotism of Josef Stalin, and the Russian people have idiolized Stalin as a great nation builder of Russian culture. How is it working for the Russian tourism? Is the Russian tourism industry better that North Korea?
I’ve read stories that describe how Moscowites (new word) actually started disputes then ran back to Moscow so they could get paid to put these disputes they created down. It rings a bell of truth to me?
17:40 Geography is a silly aside. Russia knows that no geography on the planet would keep them safe from a determined NATO. They also know that their plethora of nukes easily does what geography, troops, and other weapons of war simply can't: nobody is invading a nuclear Russia. You're giving air to a really stupid excuse. Russia is safe from invasion, but Russia's military sucks and they're losing all their Soviet stash, so they're not even the slightest risk to any NATO country. But they've got minerals, and non-NATO countries do, too. Old man Biden has been slow-walking something that should have been over long ago. Get the USA out of NATO so Europe can safely kick Russia's butt back to Russia.
You can’t expect Europe, who’ve been under US security umbrella - and naively became complacent - to ramp up to needed level overnight. Will take a decade
10:20 Routsi comes from what they called the people that came from Roslagen which is a part of Sweden. Ruotsi is finnish don't mean row it means "Swede" Can check it up on google translate if you want to. Rus means Swede. Russia means Swedishland
So far Russian pension benefits have been decreased by inflation, and the funds they are drawn from are seriously depleted but not exhausted. But if the benefits are considerably decreased, that will change the attitudes of the populace considerably. My guess is that will happen within another year or two. I am ashamed by the US Republican Party's current recalcitrance with respect to supporting Ukraine; compared to what we COULD to, our support is piddling--- almost no effort, no inconvenience at all.
Jonathan, you're spot on. I'm from Finland and listening to Mark really gets my blood boiling. Sure, he's knowledgeable, no doubt about it. But understanding Russia isn't just an intellectual exercise. Russian imperialism isn't solely motivated by geopolitics or historical events. Instead, it's fueled by deeply ingrained ideas, beliefs, and values within Russian culture, particularly among the elites. It seems to me that Mark does not take that side of things seriously enough. To be fair, Mark is far from the only Western expert who's well-versed in Russia but still somehow overlooks the most crucial aspects of it. Cultures change slowly. That's why Russia's behavior is unlikely to change anytime soon. It might take something as monumental as the transformations Germany and Japan underwent after World War II to shake things up in Russia. Until then, it'll likely continue to try and assert its dominance whenever it feels powerful enough to do so. Well, that's my two cents anyway.
Sometimes living closer to a subject of discussion helps. Rational way of thinking is not always enough to understand Russia. Anyway Finland move to join NATO is wise.
Mr. Galeotti should really stick to the subjects within his substantial expertise (Putin's regime, XX-XXI century military etc) rather than go into history deeper then XIX century. This way he will avoid produce appalling statements like, Russ being "russia" or Ukraine being associated with russian state for most of it's history. russia hijacked name of Russ from Kyiv and Ukrainians spent more time in Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth than in russian state. Hence the differences in many aspects of the two societies. It's a general problem of Westerners consuming russian version of the history. I strongly encourage everyone to listen to Timothy Snyder's Yale course on Ukrainian identity.
I look forward to the day where having that conversation with the American public doesn't seem so simply impossible. They don't even understand where the russian views came from, but fwiw 2 years ago I never would've known any of this. It's a good conversation to have. My family even came from Poland 5 generations ago, and no one will talk about it
Quoting right out of Snyder's BS playbook, huh? How can Russia have "hijacked" the name that originated in Novgorod (before Kyïv even belonged to the Slavs or the Rus')? The Rus' was associated first and foremost with the Rurikids, who moved their seat from Novgorod to Kyïv to Vladimir and finally to Moscow. The last direct-line Rurikids ruled from Moscow, which btw was originally founded by and associated with the Novgorodians. The Ukrainians have the right to the name as well, but Russia "hijacking" the name is laughable revisionism.
Moscow has nothing to do with Novgorod. The power source for Moscow was the Golden Horde. Moscow conducted imperial raids and destroyed free cities like Pskov and Novgorod. @@azamatbagatov7161
This dude’s focus on Russia made him view Ukrainian history from Russia’s perspective. He needs to study Ukrainian and other sources. And the thought that Russia became an empire out of fear is laughable. It’s the same as Britain conquered India because India was a threat to Britain.
@@SiliconCurtainI appreciate you’re unable to push back on several statements as the guest is valuable and needs to return. But sheesh some of the stuff here is so off..
@@SiliconCurtainGaleotti is a shill. You are making people question your sincerity when you invite shills on and do not challenge them. So you agree Ukraine has no choice but to human traffic it's citizens and their homes, to Putin, in violation of their guaranteed rights, then?
An exceptionally daft and ignorant way of viewing things. Russia has been invaded by a European power many, MANY times throughout history. How many times has Britain been attacked by india?... ZERO. This is the very definition of comparing apples and oranges to put it politely
Is it just me, or is your guest promoting russian talking points in a more reasonable voice? The problem with the narrative that russia is all about good defense is that their victims are clearly smaller neighbors. China is safe and Moldova is not. I invite your guest to examine his "optimism."
Not just you. I’ve seen long interview with this guy on another good channel and had thought about him as suspicious. And I even don’t want to listen to him again
Putin is basically selling Russia to China. But a war between Russia and China... Russian meat waves against Chinese meat waves... Either way that goes, there'll be plenty of humanburger!
Don’t worry. With Chinese we coexisted for centuries next to each other… it’s the anglosaxons that have urge to control with force and destroy others not the wise cooperative Chinese
@alexanderpepkin4110 A few dates with regard to the territorial wars 1857, 1929, 1969. Xi is waiting patiently the exhaustion of the Russian army on the Western border. Manchuria is much bigger and easier to take than Taiwan...
except that he seems to miss the critical part of Ukrainian history and is conflating russia and Rus. For someone who is supposed to be an expert and a historian this is just unacceptable.
@@tetianavarvynska2125 why is Russia not direct result of Rus conquests?? Last time I checked Rus rulers had children who then went into what is modern day Russia and conquered modern day Russian lands and established city states that later became modern day Russia??
@@TaiChor5Gatesequating 'direct result of conquest of' with 'predecessor' is a bit of a stretch to put mildly. 'russia' (concept inveted in early 18th cent.) has as much in common with Rus as 'Romania' has to do with Rome. Yes, there is some connection, but not a very direct one lol
Also the Russians never evolved from that Soviet war doctrine of complete disregard of human lives . Heck the Russian Ukraine strategy of this Ukraine war 2022 to present is pretty much similiar to the Soviet combat tactics in 1940 to 43, which means unimgainative clumsy brutal frontal assaults with complete disregard for human lives and losses. The Russian army has pretty much devolved and did not learn the lessons from its past wars.
When the collapse of the Soviet Union occurred in 1991, there was no threat by any nation to try and advance over their borders and take over their government. We left them to solve their problems internally for the most part as well as assisting them benevolently to help without any political commitments. Does this not negate their insistence and paranoia over other nations trying to take them over?
Well exactly! But the elite don’t see it that way, and it doesn’t serve their interests to paint us as friends. Paranoia and exceptionalism run deep unfortunately throughout Russian history.
@@SiliconCurtain паранойя слишком глубоко проникла в сознание европейцев. Вы всегда не понимали Россию и боялись её и завидовали тому, что у неё есть. Все эти чувства рождают в вас хроническую неприязнь к России, как бы она ни называлась: Российская империя, СССР, РФ, какой бы политический строй в ней ни был, кто бы ей ни правил. Вы боитесь сильную и непонятную вам Россию находящуюся рядом. Большое и непонятное рядом - всегда вызывает у человека чувства страха, дискомфорта, неприязни. Время расцвета Европы - эпоха колониализма, вы привыкли распоряжаться чужими ресурсами как своей собственностью. И наличие России, у которой много ресурсов, но распоряжаться которыми вы не имеете возможности, не даёт вам спать спокойно. Вы можете сколько угодно искать красивые оправдания своей неприязни к России, но реальность такова как я написал.
@@Алексей-ь9я3мAn exercise in projection at its finest. Europe has moved to post colonialism and was never going to invade a nuclear power. Germany welcomed Russian gas imports and helped build NordStream.
@@SiliconCurtaindemocracy is probably Putin's greatest threat. He has linked democracy with cultural depravity (or diversity) and then thrown in Denazification in for good measure to top up the reasons for invading as this is one big Cultural cleansing process. I think Putin is addicted to invasion...
@@Алексей-ь9я3мwhat bunkum. Successful countries do not need to look at Russia that is very poor when you get out of the big cities. Colonialism gave western countries more wealth and impact but is not a sustainable strategy for a rules-based world order. Russia are stuck in the past. Putin wants the Baltic nations back, Poland, Georgia and Moldova. Ukraine will never return to Russian rule!
@@SiliconCurtain there is quality, and a seriousness, in your podcasts that allow guests to feel they are being heard. Your questions are insightful and well thought out, and it's pretty obvious that your guests enjoy that. As a listener so do I
... "Let us begin with this evident fact: Muscovy does not belong at all to Europe, but to Asia. It follows that judging Muscovy and the Muscovites by our European standards is a mistake to be avoided."-gonzague de reynold, 19501 In methodological terms, one should de-Europeanise any analysis of Muscovy policy.- thomas gomart, 20062 "
I’m a psychiatrist, not an historian. I would love to hear a conversation about Russia’s relationship to Europe. Since Peter the Great, Russia adopted huge chunks of European culture in an aspirational way, and went on to make brilliant cultural contributions in literature and music, but for a long time Russians were still viewed by Europe as sort of backward hicks (true early on in the case of technology and political organization). So there’s this huge ambivalence, of wanting to be accepted as fully European while also retreating into a wounded pride. I think this drives a lot of the love/envy/hate dynamic. When Putin asserts Russia’s identity even today it’s always in contrast with European identity.
I’m totally blanking on the source, but I recently watched a great lecture where the expert laid out a case that USSR/Russia acting out was out of a desire to be recognized as the peer of the West, a worthy and equal adversary. That’s why Putin felt extraordinarily insulted when Obama called Russia a “regional power,” for instance, or why Putin wanted to “join NATO” in the sense of becoming co-rulers of the world with the U.S. It strongly reminded me of the (probably wrongly cited) “African proverb” that a child rejected by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth, or something like that.
I probably don’t reflect the views of many Europeans, but till recently I thought of them as a populace that had been badly treated by its communist rulers that disregarded their welfare in order to fanatically pursue political ideals. I believed that once free of that yoke, they would embrace the modern Western democratic ideals and cooperative values. And after the Soviet fall, this indeed seemed to be the case. But it appears to have taken very little effort on the part of the new ruling class to snatch the national wealth and revert to a system of control much closer to the old czarist regime of a hundred years ago, with little complaints from the populace. I am extremely disappointed that they should value their new freedom so little. Now, when I see the appalling conduct of their disastrous Ukrainian campaign, and the contempt they have for the lives of their own soldiers who are coerced and flung into battle with no regard for their lives or paltry benefits gained from these routine mass sacrifices, I certainly don’t regard them anything like as cultivated and civilised as backward hicks.
@@StepDub When becoming disappointed you should consider how roughly two thirds of exUSSR population (just shy of 200 million people, from total of almost 300) gained nothing or lost severely in their welfare from free market reforms, which all happened at the same time as deeply kleptocratic privatization of state's property (which was probably the largest privatization/theft in the history of mankind, and Mark would agree here) and that both also coincided with having "democracy" proclaimed to be in effect, itself quickly followed by parliament being shot up with tanks in 1993 and Yeltsin leveraging everything the state had including foreign advisors in 1996 to stay in power. What value the word "democracy" held to them as the result I leave for you to imagine.
@@dmitryfedorov114 thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. I hope that future Russian people will find some sense of responsibility for what goes on in the country, and move away from the simple idea that government is someone else’s job. This is the only way some of the nation’s stolen wealth can ever be restored. I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that most Russians received some kind of share allocation, which they quickly sold for a fraction of its value. I don’t blame them for this, life under communism was probably a day to day experience for most, at best, and they were not conditioned to planning for the future. It looks like the current generation is in for tough times, and possibly the next, what with the economic and demographic damage that has been caused, but maybe some of their children will be able to learn from it all and make some changes.
The USSR in WW2 won due to its main enemy the Germans fighting a two front war and the AMericans and British not only distracting the Germans in the west, but also bombing the crap out of Germany, it greatly helped ease up the German pressure on the Soviets when the Luftwaffe was very much slaughtered during the American and British round the clock bombing runs over Germany , also massively helped was the aid the USA and British gave to the Soviets in terms of weapons and food. most importantly was the thousands of US made trucks which modernized Soviet logsitics which at the start of the war mainly relied on horse and cart transport. those thousands of US made trucks made possible the Soviet 1944 to 1945. offensives into Germany and Eastern Europe and later the final act vs. Japan in Manchuria.
Do not forget american locomotives, american canned meat, american sugar and wheat, american telephones and american radios. Without the US the USSR would have been lost. The economic power and industrial cababilities of the US in the 40s was truly terrifying.
The USSR would not have been in such a bad position compared to the German Wehrmacht if Stalin (this insane idiot) had not prevented his armed forces from making preparations for the German attack they expected. The Russian air force was superior to the German one at the beginning of Germany's invasion of the USSR. The "surprise" attack allowed the Germans to destroy a huge part of the Russian air force within the first days. Under more "realistic" circumstances the USSR would not have needed that (much) help from the West. The Wehrmacht would have moved into Russian territory very slowly (if at all) against air superiority.
Agree 100 percent. ruSSia is a malevolent belligerent brutal barbaric backward empire and rarely won a war. Before Hitler there was Napoleon, whose army was defeated not by the ruSSian army, not the ruSSian winter, but primarily by typhus and dysentery in primitive ruSSian conditions.
@@HaukeLaging From 1939 until Operation Barbarossa, the Russians were actively countering the British Navy's blockade of Germany by delivering much needed war material to that Nazi State. What a corrupt and short sighted State Russia was and still is.
I love this channel just had to comment on this guest when he was saying Russian propaganda has not much affect on policies or populations. He is absolutely wrong. My own parents are spouting Russian propaganda, and the Republican party in my government in the US is echoing Putin propaganda and largely affecting the war. So I just had to strongly disagree his comment he was saying.
Taras Shevchenko wrote about learning from others while keeping own identity, it’s basically a commandment: …Study, read and learn Thoroughly the foreign things- But do not shun your own: For he who forgets his mother, He by God is smitten, His children shun him, in their homes They will not permit him. Strangers drive him from their doors; For this evil one Nowhere in the boundless earth Is a joyful home.
@@GreenKnight2001for 20 years ussr made plans on how to evacuate factories and such from west to east. Each year plan was updated, ussr leadership knew that capitalists would return in force, as they saw civil war as war with capitalists and their cronies. So sure - part of poland was taken to give more space and thus time for evacuation. And while most military plans on war failed miserably (based on exercises where enemies invaded ussr), evacuation worked as intended and factories went into overdrive since most were made with wartime production in mind. Ussr tried to make meaningful alliance against germany, but it hadn't worked (one time due to baltic tigers position) and thus molotov became minister - again to gain some time and maybe space before war with germany would begin. Ussr was ready to fight for Czechoslovakia, unlike france and britain - they gave it away for free.
@@DaoklUSSR was good friends with Nazi Germany. They partitioned Poland between themselves. As for moving factories, the Soviets moved a lot of factories from Germany to the Soviet Union. However, most of those factories today are as they were when they were moved
While Putin has something in common with Stalin - who was not a common thief, but a legitate ruler of the USSR. Like Stalin, Putin has created a powerful rule of terror around himself - even the oligarchs are terrified of him. At Stalins' death, the USSR recreated a rule of law that was not based on the personal power of an individual - deStalinisation. Geolotti is very informative because - unlike most commentators - he assents to the real role of corruption. He also assents to the overwhelming power and influence his old KGB - morphed into the FSB, and controlled by himself. What could have been mentioned was the ability of the FSB to penetrate, not just Western military command, but also Western politics. It should be noted that the US, once avid supporters of Ukraine, are now about to abandon Ukraine to Putin's mercy. It only takes a small number of Senators and Congressment to vote against the President's Aid to Ukraine Bill, for all aid to Ukraine to stop - SO EASY FOR RUSSIA that it does not even bear thinking about. Putin (personally) is very rich and politicians ARE VERY CHEAP! There, I did not need many University Degrees to work that out!!
_"the ability of the FSB to penetrate ...Western politics."_ That might be a bit close to home for Galeotti, who urges to give up and human traffic Ukrainians and their homes.
