Head of Ukraine’s national foreign intelligence service – “We have studied…the strengths and weaknesses of the enemy. We are aware of Russia’s long-term plans…at least until 2030.”
If it was only about conquest, there is countries like Kazachstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tschadjikistan that Russia could conquer easily and w.o. consequences from the West.
The key strategic goal for Russia is to prevent NATO standing on their homeland doorsteps.
For a good explanatiom see this talk by Prof. John Mearsheimer, who foresaw this war coming ten years ago already.
My guess: it was Putin doubling down on his bet made in 2014, which in turn was triggerd by chance (protests over an EU accession treaty triggering a revolution in Ukraine) and opportunism.
Putin seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and his popularity ratings soared. He allowed the conflict to be frozen and undertook a campaign of military reforms, but Ukraine also undertook their own.
He subsequently isolated himself to such degree that he was surrounded by yes-men, and they told him Ukraine could be conquered with 200 000 men (and “was about to collapse anyway”, etc). He thought it would be over in days and told them to get it done.
NATO has already been on Russia’s borders - the Baltics and Poland were already NATO members that bordered Russia.
I think the invasion of Ukraine was indeed a conquest for land. John McCain over 10 years ago predicted that Putin wanted to grab a “land bridge” between mainland Russia and Crimea:
If it was only about conquest, there is countries like Kazachstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tschadjikistan that Russia could conquer easily and w.o. consequences from the West.
The key strategic goal for Russia is to prevent NATO standing on their homeland doorsteps.
For a good explanatiom see this talk by Prof. John Mearsheimer, who foresaw this war coming ten years ago already.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4&pp=ygULbWVhcnNoZWltZXI%3D
My guess: it was Putin doubling down on his bet made in 2014, which in turn was triggerd by chance (protests over an EU accession treaty triggering a revolution in Ukraine) and opportunism.
Putin seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and his popularity ratings soared. He allowed the conflict to be frozen and undertook a campaign of military reforms, but Ukraine also undertook their own.
He subsequently isolated himself to such degree that he was surrounded by yes-men, and they told him Ukraine could be conquered with 200 000 men (and “was about to collapse anyway”, etc). He thought it would be over in days and told them to get it done.
NATO has already been on Russia’s borders - the Baltics and Poland were already NATO members that bordered Russia.
I think the invasion of Ukraine was indeed a conquest for land. John McCain over 10 years ago predicted that Putin wanted to grab a “land bridge” between mainland Russia and Crimea:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLAzeHnNgR8&t=58s
They only recently deployed soldiers in the capital there.
is not the be all end all of geopolitics. His “realist” perspective is limited and he has often been wrong, including regarding Ukraine.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/power-of-power-politics/mearsheimers-multipolar-myths-and-the-false-promise-of-realist-policy-prescriptions-the-empirical-inaccuracy-of-the-realist-paradigm/AEDB8F3F56FD2D5048E79FD8332A5DAE
Maersheimer is also an apologist for imperialism.
The war started when Russia took Crimea in 2014, that’s 11 years ago. Georgia was invaded in 2008.
MItt Romney warned of Russian agression back in 2012.
Dugin’s Foundation of Geopolitics was published in 1997 and outlined how Russia could regain its lost empire.