![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
canyonwalkerPresident Biden today is catching a lot of heat for, basically, speaking plainly about the situation with Russia massing troops on Ukraine's border.
He made apparently two missteps in public comments. One, that he thinks it likely Russia will invade Ukraine. Two, that the US and EU will respond strongly to a "major" incursion— implying, by omission, that a minor incursion would be tolerated.
(1) is a statement that I think anybody who's paying attention to the situation would have to agree is true. Putin has been building toward this for years with actions out in the open— including, not least of all, actually invading Ukraine in 2014 and annexing Crimea, which Russia still holds. In recent months he's set up all the same conditions all over again, plus has apparently attacked Ukraine's civilian infrastructure via information warfare. Sadly this is a situation where plain talk freaks people out because only vapid happy talk, like "We're going to stop Putin," is deemed palatable.
(2) is an accurate statement of realpolitik. Again, not the vapid happy talk people have become conditioned to expect, but a sober assessment of what likely what will happen if/when (1) comes to pass. I mean, again, Russia annexing Crimea already happened 7 years ago. We've got experience to draw from, here. Western democracies deplored the military attack and enacted a bunch of sanctions, initially. In the ensuring months and years most removed those sanctions and resumed doing business with Russia whenever there was a nontrivial benefit to them in doing so. Plus, outside North America and the EU few nations if any cared enough even to impose ineffectual sanctions. People need to understand that currently there's no meaningful deterrent to Russian aggression.
He made apparently two missteps in public comments. One, that he thinks it likely Russia will invade Ukraine. Two, that the US and EU will respond strongly to a "major" incursion— implying, by omission, that a minor incursion would be tolerated.
(1) is a statement that I think anybody who's paying attention to the situation would have to agree is true. Putin has been building toward this for years with actions out in the open— including, not least of all, actually invading Ukraine in 2014 and annexing Crimea, which Russia still holds. In recent months he's set up all the same conditions all over again, plus has apparently attacked Ukraine's civilian infrastructure via information warfare. Sadly this is a situation where plain talk freaks people out because only vapid happy talk, like "We're going to stop Putin," is deemed palatable.
(2) is an accurate statement of realpolitik. Again, not the vapid happy talk people have become conditioned to expect, but a sober assessment of what likely what will happen if/when (1) comes to pass. I mean, again, Russia annexing Crimea already happened 7 years ago. We've got experience to draw from, here. Western democracies deplored the military attack and enacted a bunch of sanctions, initially. In the ensuring months and years most removed those sanctions and resumed doing business with Russia whenever there was a nontrivial benefit to them in doing so. Plus, outside North America and the EU few nations if any cared enough even to impose ineffectual sanctions. People need to understand that currently there's no meaningful deterrent to Russian aggression.
