Also for big issues, the veto doesn’t matter (as evidenced today), since an emergency session of the general assembly can be called (United Nations General Assembly Resolution 377 - Wikipedia this was setup explicitly to bypass the veto).
It is a necessary part of strategizing and living among other powerful beings to not act rashly and ponder the implications of our actions, and the potential scenarii resulting from those, before acting.
It’s harsh, it’s painful, but that’s part of assuming responsibilities.
8 Likes
Aren’t peace keeping missions something that can be done through GA resolutions?
That was what I thought, just didn’t want to say it without being sure.
Anyway, you say if Russia drops a nuke on Ukraine, NATO will respond, even if it would be at the risk of nuclear holocaust? Why? I think they would be afraid to attack, even if everyone was 200% sure this can’t go on.
1 Like
It is frustrating to watch, I agree.
But I guess (and hope in fact) they are evaluating 2nd and 3rd and Nth order consequences of their moves, before making them.
We don’t want the world to rush to red buttons on a whim, I believe.
3 Likes
Well the first example of an emergency GA did just that 
On 7 November 1956, the Assembly adopted resolution 1001,[3] thereby establishing the United Nations Emergency Force I (UNEF I) to “secure and supervise the cessation of hostilities”. The Assembly, by its own resolutions, not only established UNEF I, but also called for “an immediate cease-fire”, and recommended “that all Member States refrain from introducing military goods in the area”, thereby authorizing military sanctions.
Edit: it’s just that normally all conflict/peace question are in scope for SC, but the emergency GA override that.
I’m not sure what to think of this talking about Ukraine joining the EU. Of course, they are looking for help anywhere they can. But it would drag the EU (and subsequently NATO) into an armed conflict that would leave no winners?
I don’t think not pissing of Putin is part of the rule of EU membership
Huh? Obviously it would take years for Ukraine to join the EU. It’s a long process. But maybe Zelenski was trying to take advantage of the situation and Europe’s sympathy to get the ball rolling. Personally, as a Pole, I would be happy to see Ukraine and even Belarus in the EU, so that Poland had a buffer between them and Russia. There is also the Kaliningrad Oblast, which I wish could somehow detach from Russia…
Btw Switzerland joined in on freezing Russian accounts (cc: @Patron )
2 Likes
What’s the likelihood that something like to this would escalate to a nuclear war and possibly World War 3?
And the Russians will be sending in the Wagner guys.
It fits well with your overall vision of minimum state/government interference and free enterprise to also privatise war and outsource it to for-hire mercenaries (Oh… and seems that the U.S. also outsourced their torturous “interrogation” techniques to contractors).
1 Like
I agree with the “Low” part of your statement. But I also think the chance of having any nuclear bombs exploding (intended to kill) in 2022 probably going up from ~0.5% to ~3% which is super scary!
This won’t necessarily trigger MAD but even a likelihood of – let’s say – 0.3% should give me fucking nightmares. (The only reason I’m not is that the part of me that grasps maths and the part that handles emotions are not well linked.)
If you’re young, healthy, and living in a large-ish NATO city, your probability of dying is probably currently dominated by the chance of a MAD-level nuclear war. That’s insane!
In light of this, I’m super concerned with the growing sentiment that we should do “whatever it takes” to support Ukraine. No, we shouldn’t! We should do whatever we can to help Ukraine, constrained by being something we are pretty certain will not further increase the risks of nuclear bombs being used.
2 Likes
I don’t think you fully realize what the foreign legion is, it is the french army (so might as well send the whole army, which is not going to happen if we don’t want to start an actual WW3)
2 Likes
Seems to me like it’s really hard to understand how the tzar “reasons”, making it difficult to know what might or might not increase the risk of nuclear attacks.
We have some knowledge about how Putin thinks about nukes. At least about how he wants us to think he thinks about nukes.
Let me begin with an admission. So many times, I’ve thought: “Putin would never do this.” Then he goes and does it.
“He’d never annex Crimea, surely?” He did.
“He’d never start a war in the Donbas.” He did.
“He’d never launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.” He has.
I’ve concluded that the phrase “would never do” doesn’t apply to Vladimir Putin.
And that raises an uncomfortable question:
“He’d never press the nuclear button first. Would he?”
It’s not a theoretical question. Russia’s leader has just put his country’s nuclear forces on “special” alert, complaining of “aggressive statements” over Ukraine by Nato leaders.
Listen closely to what President Putin has been saying. Last Thursday when he announced on TV his “special military operation” (in reality, a full-scale invasion of Ukraine), he delivered a chilling warning:
“To anyone who would consider interfering from the outside - if you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history.”
“Putin’s words sound like a direct threat of nuclear war,” believes Nobel Peace Prize laureate Dmitry Muratov, chief editor of the Novaya Gazeta newspaper.
“In that TV address, Putin wasn’t acting like the master of the Kremlin, but the master of the planet; in the same way the owner of a flash car shows off by twirling his keyring round his finger, Putin was twirling the nuclear button. He’s said many times: if there is no Russia, why do we need the planet? No one paid any attention. But this is a threat that if Russia isn’t treated as he wants, then everything will be destroyed.”
In a 2018 documentary, President Putin commented that “…if someone decides to annihilate Russia, we have the legal right to respond. Yes, it will be a catastrophe for humanity and for the world. But I’m a citizen of Russia and its head of state. Why do we need a world without Russia in it?”
Note that what Putin considers a threat to Russia has been pretty lax recently.
So, not unimaginable that he would consider a Russia that didn’t go according to his plans, a Russia without him as a Russia that is to some degree annihilated.
1 Like
On the other hand, I think that’s precisely the effect he wanted to achieve. Scare the West into submission. But tell me, if you have this mafia guy making all or nothing threats to people around you, do you sit quiet and hope he doesn’t ever notice you, or do you cut his throat the second you get the chance? How do you know how much will he consider enough to blow us up? I could not live my life like this.
This mental portrait that you pasted is fantastic, it puts in words what I’ve been thinking. I think too many people try to measure Putin with rational thinking, as if he was just trying to get the best deal for Russia. But my friend who lives in Poland wrote to me and asked me if when things go bad, can he send his wife and kids to me. He’s that scared already!
An interesting part would be to get insight on what is really going on in the Kremlin. If you’re a russian with influence, would you completely stand idly by as the leader seems to be intent on going down a slope potentially leading to a nuke landing on Moscow as retaliation? It’s very possible that, to Putin, right now, everybody in his vicinity is a threat. Outside events matter and the more firm and determined the response of the rest of the world, the better, but what’s going on inside also matters a whole lot too (and the two are related).
I totally get the sentiment.
It’s just… that’s how nuclear power always worked. If Russia really, really wants to take Ukraine they probably can. The nukes are the reason the US never drew a clear read line or fully committed to protecting Ukraine. There’s also a difference between a country just constantly threatening nuclear war (North Korea) and one that has been quite careful about it in the past and now suddenly hints at it (Russia). It’s just a much more credible threat – most likely still a bluff but even quite a small likelihood of it being Putin’s true intentions it soon becomes the most important consideration.
I’m on board with considering most reactions/sanctions to Russia, but the public consensus seems to currently be that one should be super hard on them, potentially creating a no-fly zone. I think it’s just as likely to be true that one should try to find a compromise and appease Putin – to give him a way out that doesn’t require clear defeat. Appeasement gets a bad wrap because it didn’t work with Nazi Germany. But there isn’t even consensus if it was clearly the wrong strategy – and appeasement worked for many other conflicts.
Completely sucks that Putin can extort the West in such a way, but I’m not sure how much can be done about it.
On a meta note: I’m pretty uncertain about all of this. I do think it’s likely to be the most important aspect of this war – and it’s not discussed enough publically at the moment.
2 Likes
I hope it turns out Putin has overplayed his hand. He will win the war militarily but if the reporting we are seeing is anywhere near reliable he has misjudged the resilience of the Ukrainian people and the reaction of the west, he won’t win the war politically
He was visibly squirming discussing the sanctions yesterday, I think it is possible the reaction of the west is stronger than he planned for and it is, sadly, devastating for ordinary Russians as well as oligarchs see Here. Even Switzerland has stated it will follow EU sanctions
2 Likes
I don’t like this article, it just tries to arouse fear by saying that the author couldn’t have imagined things that then happened. I still think that a rational and objective analysis is the best approach, even though of course we do not know how the actors in this conflict analyze the situation.
There are a few blindspots that nobody seems to discuss. For example, where do we put China in all this? What’s happening here is good for them because two global powers are weakening each other – but that’s also bad for business. Will they drop their support for Russia eventually?
He tragically underestimated it. He thought it’d be like a second Crimea: A bit of indignation here and there, some pseudo sanctions and the military operations would be over in a couple days.
Now, I think that @trotro is right and we need to leave Russia a way to get out of this.