Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.
- 36
- 4
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
What is the general consensus about the war in Ukraine? I had a sense things were going very badly until I read Anders' post here:
https://woodfromeden.substack.com/p/world-war-2-could-learn-something
The argument is that the situation was always awful, but if you compare what happened in Ukraine to the Nazi invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland, things went far better because of the semi-illegibility of everybody's strategy against Russia:
"For Ukraine it is of course a catastrophe to be invaded by Russia and an even worse catastrophe to capitulate after a long and ruinous defense. Just as it was an unmitigated disaster for Poland to be invaded and occupied by Germany in 1939.
But for the world the only thing that matters is that the aggressor loses more from military action than they gain. This is certainly true for the Ukraine War. The war might have been a disaster for Ukraine, but it is also a disaster for Russia. Even if the Russians eke out a win in the end they will be weaker at the war's end than at its start. Not only does this limit Russia's abilities to invade other countries, it also serves as a signal to other potential aggressors to think twice before they act.
This is undoubtedly a win for the international community."
Things are still going very badly. What's "a win for the international community"? If the war ends with Russia exhausted and Ukraine [ruined](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ruin_(Ukrainian_history)), what will be the lesson other countries will draw from it? "Unless a smaller country is in a literal defensive pact with the hegemon, they will treat it as a disposable bear trap. This will deter rational aggressors, but won't deter batshit insane ones." More specifically, if you're a smaller country, it's better to surrender if the aggressor is acting batshit insane: the end result will be the same for you. If you're a large aggressive country, it's better to behave irrationally to convince everyone that you are ready and willing to march into the trap, sacrifice your economy, but win despite the heavy costs.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link