Re: <nettime> The War to come ...

[carlo von lynX <lynX@time.to.get.psyced.org>]

Back to Patrice' original post:

On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 01:20:23PM +0100, patrice riemens wrote:
> Option Zero: There will be no war. Putin will enslave Ukraine after having laid it to waste, annex part of it, and transform the rest in a vassal state, or whatever 'solution' he has in mind after achieving 'victory'.  And 'we' in the West, will accommodate with the new situation and try to make the best of it, even if it won't be fun at all on many front.  And yet I would feel insanely optimistic if I gave it half a chance of happening - or even less than that.

Just wanted to point out that, if the points made in my previous
post titled 'Legit Brutality & Myth of Wealthy Russia' are
correct, then this military intervention has the same purpose as
the ones he ran on neighboring vassal states and in Syria: to
re-affirm the grip on power by the respective vassal leaders and
thus Mr P himself.

In other words, this war is necessary for Mr P himself to stay
in office until death, following the example of Stalin. He
prefers to commit a lot more war crimes rather than to risk
being sentenced for previous war crimes, should anyone else
become in charge of Russia and hand him over to Den Haag like
it happened to previous despots.

> Moment 1: The situation in Ukraine becomes so dire, the 'Grosnyfication' of Ukrainian cities so blatant, the masses of refugees into Ukraine's neighbours, fleeing the violence under the bombs so colossal, that 'in the West', populations, politicians, media, and even the military brass get so agitated as to decide that enough is enough - and that 'we will be next' any way.

As the previous analysis shows, there is no reason to expect 'we
will be next'. P isn't interested in a break-neck attempt to
rule the planet which he can only lose. He just wants to make
sure he'll never go to jail during his lifetime, but rather keep
on having the super-rich lifestyle he is currently enjoying and
will continue to enjoy even if Russia's wealth slowly collapses.
The crushing of Ukraine seems to be a necessity to achieve that.

> Moment 2 happens if Putin indeed achieve his goals in Ukraine, at whatever cost to the Russian and to the Ukrainian people without NATO actually intervening, it having be paralysed by the fear of consequences Putin has repeatedly, and unequivocally threatened with. In which case there is no reason whatsoever to assume he will stop at that and now will go to menace, and, if unsuccessful,  attack both ex-Soviet, but not NATO members Moldova and Georgia. Russia annexing Moldova will make Romania very angry and very anxious, doing the same with Georgia will rattle Turkey to an even larger extent, and greater consequences. And both Romania and Turkey are NATO members. At which stage the same 'we'll anyway be next'  conclusion might prevail after all ...

He may need to strategically impose himself on Moldova and Georgia
indeed, which is why it is crucial for him that these vassal
states do not adhere to NATO or otherwise get too wealthy, which
would turn Russian population against him. But so far it is not a
threat to his presidency if there are wealthy EU or NATO countries
*behind* the vassal states that act like an isolator, like a
firewall. This may be the real reason why NATO expansion is indeed
a threat to him. It is a threat not to Russia, but to him as a
despot maintaining power in his own post-democratic country! He
might not give a sh*t about Russian leadership and wealth as long
as he can have a peaceful remaining lifespan. That's just how he
needs to sell it to his peers and population.

> ... or not. Moldova and far-from-Europe (if not from Turkey) Georgia will be left to their fate of post-Soviet & pre-Imperial vassal states, whether they have resisted invasion (& be destroyed in the process) or not.

It is not a healthy idea for NATO to challenge P's personal
needs, even if they involve the fate of so many neighboring
countries, as he might indeed pick the nuclear option when
his personal physical safety is in danger. So, the chances
are highest that he will ultimately have a lot the way he
wants it, including keeping Kiev in poverty. Once that is
ensured, Pax Putinia will return.

> I am aware that there are a lot of holes that can (and will) be shot in my presentation. The most obvious one being whether Putin can hold Russia together as it is dragging it into a fratricidal annihilation war with Ukraine - with the economic disaster that it entails. And whether he can hold his power (and even his life) in the face of possible (probable?) mounting discontent, both of the Russian people and of his own clique.

The points made in the previous post suggest that the
mounting content is higher than the mounting discontent.
Remember how just months ago the Russian population wasn't
adopting the Sputnik vaccine, simply because they didn't
trust him? He had less of a grip on his populace last
year than he has now. Isolation and sanctions may make him
stronger, and we may actually be glad about that, as him
losing power is a bigger problem.

> Conclusion: We - and this time without speech marks - are toast. Sorry.

I can still imagine one scenario by which we are toast:
He may have had to launch this offense *because* he was
about to lose the grip on his presidency. He had to do
*something*. Should this choice of something fail and
his population indeed turn against him, then he might
still pick the nuclear option.

He may very well not be a madman, just the world's most
powerful egocentric. And he doesn't bother sacrificing
thousands of lives for his own personal well-being. May
be better to think of him as a Stalin rather than a Hitler.

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: