221
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] nammi@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Still a mystery really? Listen to Jeffrey Sachs or Mearsheimer please

[-] Nautalax@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

I don’t think it’s just a matter of reacting to NATO expansion like those guys would have you think. Russia had already prevented Ukraine from joining NATO with the Crimea invasion (plus earlier Georgia) and successfully muddied the waters such that almost no one in the West even really cared that much. Trump’s antics were deteriorating relations such that Macron was publically calling NATO brain-dead. Nordstream 2 was soon to come online and bring new fissures between particularly Germany on one side and Poland and Ukraine on the other, since more bypass capability allowed Russia to pressure Ukraine and Poland with gas games without giving up on German cash. They were basically already winning as they were with NATO looking irrelevant more and more by the day, they were making tons of money with western Europe which was fed up with what they saw as petty eastern European disputes threatening stable gas supply, etc.

Invading Ukraine more seriously than they had been blew all that nice position up and put new urgency and energy into the alliance, scared Sweden and Finland into throwing their lot in with NATO, moved NATO borders much closer to Russia and made re-arming a far FAR more salient issue in EU countries while also getting a jillion sanctions slapped on Russia. And it’s not like those measures would have been unexpected unlike Ukraine actually being able to fight back surprisingly well. It’s a weird anti-NATO maneuver that’s practically designed in a lab to make NATO more relevant than it had been in decades.

[-] zanzo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Rather, Peter Zeihan. He was forecasting this over a decade before the invasion. It’s about geography, population decline and the desire to create a buffer against possible invaders. Not that anyone was seriously looking to invade Russia. But their history has hardened their perspective on this matter.

[-] andallthat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

I don't get the buffer thing. Russia already has an immense, absurdly hard to invade territory, even if anyone had any interest in invading it.

And if Putin is successful at invading Ukraine and Ukraine becomes Russia, like Crimea... then what? They need more buffer to protect Bigger Russia?

Unless it's not buffer against oursiders coming in but a wall against Russians leaving. That I can imagine. "You escaped Putin? Haha, joke's on you, now have fun with f###ng Lukashenko" sounds like a pretty good deterrent.

this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
221 points (99.6% liked)

World News

56940 readers
1710 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS