The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy. It's much like the shipping blockades that were used against the European Axis countries in WWII.
Russian civilians should consider themselves lucky that the war is only economic for them.
They will disappear as soon as Russia ends its cyberwars and returns to democracy. We saw it happen in Russia in the 90s and we've seen it in other countries.
I do not think that it is that easy. It is more like Russia does not respect international law so they will be cut from world economy as soon as it is possible.
Sanctions cannot stop this war unless they will lead to coup or state collapse (both are unlikely in near future). Sanctions put pressure on Russian elites and together with foreign aid also probably will prevent Russian victory in Ukraine.
I hope that no one is so stupid to resume business with Russia if they end the war quickly. They need to completely change their mindset from imperialism first. Otherwise it is similar to doing business with North Korea.
What is actually happening is that Russia has moved onto the Chinese alternative to SWIFT, India&China&Iran&Syria etc are forming an alternative block, and Russia is put into a close relationship with China. This is not a good idea because Russia&Ukrain&Belarus produce 1/3 of all corn, a huge chunk of fertilizer production, and a huge chunk of many commodities essential for the little industry we have left.
What will happen if a significant portion of oil is no longer traded in dollars? The dollars value is supported by the large amount of oil trades, and without it the US can't run the deficits its gotten used to. The US has transferred much of the industrial base to China which makes it hard to recover from that.
> Russian civilians should consider themselves lucky that the war is only economic for them.
Russia is the largest nuclear force in the world, and as Afghanistan and Ukraine shows a conventional war is very resource demanding. If the US went to direct war against russia that would be WWIII, and considering that there are nuclear stakes here that is not a good idea.
So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right? The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen? These things are done without the consent of the governed, and these things are often done without even the knowledge of the general public. Economic warfare kills people just as much as bullets and bombs. Poverty is associated with higher death rates and economic warfare creates and worsens poverty.
>So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right? The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen?
Probably, yes. That never would have happened, but that would indeed be the logical conclusion. And I'm fine with that.
That's good of you to admit, it means you have a moral consistency here. Interestingly, most of the US politicians supported by the MSM (right and left) were all for the Iraq War and its dubious justifications (Yellowcake), republican or democrat. With a few exceptions such as POTUS 45
> So, by your moral standard, the entire Earth should have isolated the US economy when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets, right?
It is not hard to convince me that yes, that should have happened. Where does that lead us? Should I feel different now about this particular agression because there were agressions we did not respond appropriately?
The US continues to occupy Iraq against the wishes of the Iraqi legislature. As such, we shouldn’t support replacing a Russian search engine with an American one.
Not OP, but yes to all those sanctions. I was out protesting those wars in the early 2000s (and often in the years after) and called for sanctions that would have hurt me economically. I still believe it should be done and our leaders involved in those wars should be made to answer for warcrimes.
Economic warfare does kill people, but it's kind of foolish to say "just as much" as bullets and bombs. I highly doubt the number of dead Russians from these sanctions is anywhere near the number of dead Ukrainian civilians - will need some serious data to back your claim.
> when the US government/military was killing Iraqi and Afghani civilians and destroying non-military targets
The US should not have invaded Iraq for any reason. I would have supported sanctions against the US for those crimes if any country could afford them.
That said, Saddam Hussein's government is not Zelenskyy's government. They're apples and oranges. Ukraine was a functioning democracy that never antagonized Russia.
The war in Afghanistan is a lot more complicated because it was arguably provoked by 9/11 and they didn't (and don't) really have a functioning central state.
> The entire planet should also be isolating Saudi Arabia for its genocidal war in Yemen?
Yes, absolutely.
> Economic warfare kills people just as much as bullets and bombs.
Speaking only about Russia and Ukraine for the last few weeks: bullshit. Russians aren't having pieces of their loved ones sprayed on them by bombs, watching their cities be destroyed, or leaving their lives behind.
Every death, whether in Russia or out, is the fault of its dictator, Vladimir Putin. He is very popular and probably genuinely won his last few elections. It is perfectly fair to blame the Russian people, even though many are brainwashed.
But even if they were all innocent Putin-haters, this lopsided war (economic on one side, violent on the other) is preferable to an all-out war that would kill far more people.
> Ukraine was a functioning democracy that never antagonized Russia
In no way, shape or form should my following comment be construed as support for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and just in case let me clearly state I think the invasion is not right and that I think it will be Putin's downfall, and deservedly so.
That said, that Ukraine was a "functioning democracy" and that it never antagonized Russia are very debatable assertions, to say the least.
As a brown person I keep asking myself this everyday, it doesn't seem fair at all. If you raise the point you're making you'll be drowned out with "don't bring me your whataboutism, lives are being lost as we speak". Brown lives have been lost for quite a while now ...
But can you bet on what will actually happen though? Because I can. Western democracies are pretty selective on which dictatorships and failing democracies they decide to pay attention to.
Yeah, there are certainly a potential issues there,
but I'm coming at this from the recent feelings of shame from realizing that what I'm feeling now about my friends and family in Ukraine - while I didn't do anything except speaking out against it when (for instance) the war in Libya broke out - so what moral standing do I have now in asking even those Russians that do NOT have friends and family in Ukraine to potentially wreck their own lives to stop this war ?
Hence (I hope) I'll act more about these issues in the future, and hopefully I'm not the only one.
It’s not Russian policy to terror bomb civilians. But as with America’s wars, civilians get killed in large numbers because that’s the nature of high intensity warfare, at least when you’re not trying engage in a surgical coup as Russia comically attempted during the first few days of this war.
Whataboutism. I did not agree with the Iraq war but it doesn't justify the current conflict.
The US political system did also make an eventual course correction on Iraq. Eg. Republicans lost the congress in 2006 mostly as a result of that. George W. Bush was term limited out of office. The next proposed unnecessary invasions will probably be greeted by politicians not wanting to repeat Iraq. That is slow progress but it's more than I expect from Putin, with his wars in Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Ukraine again, who knows what is next? Not to mention his disrespect of term limits.
So if there are Russians who don't agree with the war (there are) and if Russia eventually makes a course correction (it will) then they're off the hook, right?
And I know lots of Russians against this war. I've been to Russia. My kids are half Russian. I am optimistic for future Russian opportunities to "course correct".
> The deal is simple: when Russia stops slaughtering Ukrainian civilians, the rest of the world will stop isolating their economy.
The world will not stop isolating Russia while Putin is still in power. And even after he's gone (death from natural causes in 10 to 15 years), it will take another 5 years to partially recover our relationship with the world. The full recovery will never happen.
> ... a fullscale Russian invasion to decapitate their government.
> ... encircle China and force them into peaceful deescalation.
While you have used the word "peaceful" I suspect a Chinese planner, if by some strange path they read your comment, would start preparing for wild escalations. Because it looks like the strategy is to wait for a moment of weakness then invade.
Invading China will likely never be a good idea. I'm for peaceful coexistence of nations unless there's a renegade actor like Putin. I think peace comes from democratic systems. Even the USSR was intended to be democratic. There's almost nothing to stop Putin.
This nuclear hostage holding he's doing has generated a lot of ire. It just can't be tolerated and I don't think it will.
Although I occasionally commit the cardinal sin of entertaining political discourse on HN, I think such disturbing statements aren't appropriate for HN.
As a fellow American, I encourage you to reassess your comment and consider if it may be guilty of American exceptionalism. I'm particularly confused by the grouping of "Greco-Roman ideals" since Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece were quite different in political structure and philosophy. For the former, Rome definitely wasn't a democracy at times [1], [2], [3]. Even during the Republic, I'm not sure it resembled a democracy as we know it today, but I'll leave it to someone more knowledgeable to answer [4].
Under the assumption, however, that "western civilization" is some unified blob of Enlightenment era thought, you must agree that there has been resistance to such ideas in the US [5].
Such arguments by vagueness remind me of Bezos's management style, which purportedly penalizes such communication approaches: "PowerPoint had become a tool for disguising fuzzy thinking" [6].
Clearly you haven’t interacted with many Indians (particularly regarding the Ukrainian conflict) if you think they’d be on board with your Western Imperialist fantasy.
An invasion of Russia would risk the destruction of the entire globe by nuclear weaponry. Ousting Putin and destabilizing Russia would increase the risk of nuclear weaponry making its way to more violent regimes. I do not think either of those is particularly wise.
I understand that you have language barrier and can't, for example, watch Ukrainian TV. Have you ever seen President Poroshenko bragging on national TV about how he will make Donetsk children hide in basement?
Have you ever seen Arestovich, current aide to President Zelensky, two years ago, saying on national TV that large scale war with Russia is only possible way for Ukraine?
Have you ever seen Ukrainian pupils chanting Moscalaku na gilyaku? Don't take my words for granted, translate this words yourself.
I suggest you'll Google that videos before saying Ukrainian government is peaceful next time
Your comment equates to a mass-murderer pointing out that some of his victims had traffic-tickets.
And while you are busy doing that, your country is killing civilians by the thousands, turning cities into rubble, explicitly and undeniably targeting civilians, to get Ukraine to stop fighting the invasion.
Your glorius leader is Vladimir Putin - and from the looks of it - you have the leader you want and deserve.
I do my part fighting elections rigging in Russia for years, while you are lecturing me with words that you have heard on TV.
I visited Denmark multiple times. I visited Crimea.
Have you been in Russia?
Friend of mine was independent observer on the referendum of Crimea. My friend's grandmother in Gorlovka now. Gorlovka. Do you know Gorlovka? You know, 8 years near frontline, regularly shelled by Ukrainian forces? My uncle have to leave Mariupol 5 years ago. My father's ex girlfriend is reporting from Donetsk.
We are enjoying consequences. Thank you very much.
Have you read my post about Ukrainian official saying that large scale war is inevitable? Two years ago?
Friends of mine in Mariupol now. They wrote that they was rescued by Russian army. Do you have any ideas why they have written this?
In west you are accusing Russian people of being victims of propaganda, brain washed and controlled by Putin. I have access to media that represents either points of view on conflict. Have you?
Xi and Kim have killed far more people than Putin has (so far). There may be up to 2 million Uyghurs in camps, and it's not a stretch to assume that at least 10% are going to die of natural causes.
Oh!! no.. We will only invade far-off countries who cannot retaliate. Who wants to invade a neighbour, esp. if the refugees come running into our country?? We want our war games played without any consequence to us.
I'm sorry but comments that harken back to ye old Rome are infuriating and it leaves a sour taste in ones mouth. I know this war is bad, but man people need to just own up, otherwise none of us can more forward. Pax Americana is fine, but you don't get to kill people and then turn back and tell me to wave a flag because grand old Europe is having it's "freedom" threatened.
"The Iraq Body Count project documents 185,000–208,000 violent civilian deaths through February 2020 in their table. All estimates of Iraq War casualties are disputed."
The official civilian casualties count in Ukraine so far is 600, according to the UN. Both wars are horrible.
> Comparing what Russia is doing in Ukraine to anything the US has done in the last 100 years is an exercise in false equivalence. One so blatant that it defies any attempt to interpret in good faith.
Are you fucking kidding me? Are you completely ignorant of history? What about Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Iraq?
(Hopefully we'll be careful this time about what is being embargoed, the Russian population is now the best shot of getting rid of Putin, once the horror of what is happening in Ukraine to their friends and family filters through Putin's propaganda.)
It might also help, if it makes a politician think twice next time before calling to invade, sorry "bringing democracy" to a country... (USA, thank you for giving democracy a bad name by the way.)
I don't think it's controversial that Putin deserves to be ousted by a foreign military as much as anyone. He's certainly much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because he can unilaterally end human life on earth at any moment of any day.
> Install anyone else that's not insane, say Navalny.
Well, we definitely couldn't install anyone. We'd have to administrate an open election.
> I read they have 50% of their total combat brigades in Ukraine now.
This is a pretty antiquated assessment of military power. Boots on the ground show only that Russia wants to take Ukraine rather than completely destroy it. They can level the entire country with tactical nukes if they want.
> Installing a leader that is open to integrating with the west, along with India, we could encircle China and force them into peaceful deescalation.
I think it's more likely that we'd make China very dangerous and hostile, and we'd also re-open the world to the possibility of foreign regime change.
If we can decapitate Russia, why couldn't someone say, "Hey, this Biden guy stole the election, we should murder him for the good of the American people!"
Biden didn't steal the election, but I think you see where I'm going with it.
from my understanding of the development of the international oil trade in the 20th century, one of the key advancements by multinational oil in the West was to learn lessons from the British, and do two important things on foreign soil: always back a leader that can hold on with local support; always pay the Nationalist/Military oil interests very well, in addition to making trade rights built-in.
Unfortunately, it seems that the "wild west" behavior of the USA in South America, in the wake of the brutal Spanish conquest long ago, made some enemies (that have oil) that are not easy to talk to now.
>So what? What does that have to do with anything?
Because my reply was to:
>much more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler because
Note the "because", the exact same argument stands for Biden, but we wouldn't argue he's more powerful and dangerous than Stalin or Hitler. I was pointing out the weakness in the "because".
Biden frequently misspeaks or gets confused, and refuses to take dementia tests, so if he really can unilaterally launch then I'd actually be pretty worried about that.
(I think there are other people in the loop in the case of the US president though? Personally I've always been most worried about the Royal Navy's submarine captains, who really do have the ability to launch unilaterally in a very direct way)
True, it's an extremely dangerous situation for nuclear weapons to exist at all.
Biden, however, has not threatened to use them. Nor does he rule over his subordinates on pain of extrajudicial murder, so there's a few checks and balances there. Alas the same cannot be said for Putin.
You probably won’t take this advice, but you should really start making peace with the fact that the US is completely incapable of accomplishing any of these warped fantasies of yours.
The vast majority of the world is celebrating the self-evident decline of US-centric unipolarity. But those of us who live here have some hard years ahead.
That's the thing. Even if we were to suggest that the parent's ideas had merit (big "if"), it's pretty laughable to think that the US is capable of doing this properly. Looking back, it's hard to find American successes in this sort of meddling, all the way back to WWII.
True, and the US didn’t even properly defeat the Nazis (see, for instance: Adolf Heusinger, Operation Paperclip, and the many Nazis who happened to find themselves in positions of power in West Germany).
I don't believe in liberating anyone from authoritarianism that doesn't want to have a free and democratic system. That's why mideast liberation hasn't worked. No one was asking. The Russians want a better life, just ask the ones that come here to study, find mates, and never go back. I know plenty of them from my university, happily married to whoever from wherever, and residing in the US or Canada, working and living peacefully as contributors to society. Russians are quite intelligent people too.
The Russians are probably the least likely to want liberating from what I've seen of all Europeans, but I do think a plurality of Russians would want this. Which justifies it. That said, without this invasion of Ukraine and the danger I feel it presents to my homeland (the US), I wouldn't even be bringing this up. The Russian Federation would be on their own. It's just that the leadership over there is now a danger to everyone else.
Well I think in an ideal world "liberating" would not involve mass murder of the "liberated" population. I am aware that this is a historical weak spot.
Even still - I don't see a problem with countries rescuing other countries from despotism, in principle. I eagerly include my own country in this - if a Putin-like figure arose and I was not permitted to speak out or face death, it would comfort me to know that help was coming. The terror of an oppressive regime is its inescapability.
The ideas have to be out there or they'll never get traction. We have major influence recently. The path of the world was changed dramatically with the election of Biden over Trump. I can't imagine how emboldened Putin would be had Trump won. I realize others say everyone was scared of the rich man's son, but I don't see it. He withheld 400 million in military aid from Ukraine, says it all as far as the path we'd be down.
I’m sure Putin is really afraid of the guy who can barely get a coherent sentence out. Trump reportedly wanted to exit NATO, which would have avoided this conflict altogether.
Russian civilians should consider themselves lucky that the war is only economic for them.