Panel Interview of the historians that have eaten the context by the spoonfulls society.
Lucian Kim, Kennan Institute presents his new book.
Fiona Hill, introduces him to the public, as one of her main sources, then watches over his statements.
Lucian Kim, then starts to give a historical rundown, of how the war came to be.
Here is the structure of his argument:
I remind you, not my words, his.
- Everything was swell the border was open, people went back and forth between russia and ukraine, people had a jolly good time.
- Then Selenskyj was voted into power. At first, he was seen as a russian tool, because he wanted to make a deal with russia, but then his views changed. [No reason named, why his views changed, well some ULTRANATIONALIST protests outsides of some government buildings maybe - I’ve heard those can, on occasion, ruin your day! On France 24. By a documentary filmmaker. *cough* (link not at hand, but it was one of those 4 pundits and a moderator debate panels they do, with the only intelligent moderator, go and find it for me, please - it was this year, only a few weeks, maybe months ago)]
- Then of course Selenskyj HAD to reneg on Misnk II he simply had to renegotiate the agreement.
- But Putin didnt want to renegotiate Minsk II, partly because of Sevastopol where the russian fleet was stationed, which was of strategical importance in his thinking.
- So Ukraine didnt want to follow the Minsk II agreements, while russia was in violation [change of argument, previously Selenskyj wanted to reneg Minsk II], there was no reason for Ukraine to fulfill Minsk II.
- Then Putin used the troop movements as a pressure tactic
- Then Selenskyj put Wiktor Medwedtschuk under House arrest, so russia lost all of its remaining soft power.
- Also about 5 minutes earlier: Putins decision to attack was made at some point in 2021, Putin didnt want this war to go on for over 3 years, thats why he called it a special military operation [again not my words, Lucian Kim]
AT THAT POINT FIONA CARES TO INTERJECT.
Yes, you see - there are many things people see as reasons for why various developments happened since 2014 [we were in the years 2021-2022 in the retelling of the story, mind you], and Putins reasoning shifted [names them, then disregards them as not important], but there also is something evolutionary, not devolutionary about Putin, because look at what Putin said about the history, how do you think his idea of history was shifted!?!=?!?! Are there people who shaped that?
And now quote:
Lucian Kim: “Thats a great question! Of course everyone is always trying to get into Putins mind. [no, not everyone - just Fiona], but if you think about where Putin was when he started his term in office and where his mind was in 2022, when he started, Putin was thought of as a pragmatic leader, inside of russia, but also, certainly in Ukraine, he was actually a very popular politician in Ukraine, and certainly in the West people thought of him as someone you could make deals with, mutually beneficial deals with, and it appears that Putin was interested in some sort of national revival […] and what I try to describe in my book, one of the characters that came into play here was Igor Girkin, former FSB officer, that played a key role in the takeover of Crimea, and in forming the insergency in the Donbas, and I describe him as - ahm, an ULTRANATIONALIST, someone believing in russian autocracy, in russian empire, .. and even at that time, he was a freak, and he was used by the Kremlin, he was used as a usefull figure by the Kremlin, and even became the defense minister of the socalled Donezk Republic [WOOW! LOOK AT THIS THOUGHT LEADER! (Kremlin puppet)] and when the Kremlin didnt need him, they droped him, they made clear, that he was doing his own thing, and the seperatists in the Donbas needed their own separatist leaders… And at that time Girkin was a freak on the fringes (2014) […] and at the end of that peoriod he would actually say a lot of things, that Alexej Nawalny would say, national revival of russia, … I describe Putin going across the spectrum. We are all in this spectrum of russian nationalism. But going from Alexej Nawalny who had a european vision over to Girkin, who had the vision of empire … […] Thats how I would describe his [Putins] path.
REASON GIVEN: NONE WHATSOEVER
Let me interject for a moment here, in October of 2021 Ukraine was using US delivered Javelins in the Donbas, and gave US Military journals interviews, that they were highly effective at fighting the separatists there.
Which Chomsky made surface as an argument in the international debate.
22. 11. 2021: the-drive.com (some military news website): Ukrainian Troops Have Been Firing American-Made Javelin Missiles At Russian-Backed Forces
Ukrainian Brigadier General Kyrylo Budanov talked about the operational use of Javelins as part of a recent interview with Military Times, which he conducted through an interpreter. Budanov, who runs the Chief Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine, also known by its Ukrainian acronym GUR MOU, used the opportunity to call for more help from the U.S. government as he sounded like the alarm about the Kremlin’s unusual deployments of large numbers of military units to areas opposite Russia’s borders with Ukraine in recent weeks.
src: click
That enough of a reason? I mean, losing all soft pressure tools, having the military pressure of units at the border not work, and foreseeably losing the Donbas to Ukrainian troops, because they used US made Javelins for the first time? In the Donbas. Where Girkin formerly was the russian installed “defense minister”? Because of yeah, that thing, that strategic importance of Sevastopol you mentioned earlier.… (Crimea can not be secured, when Ukraine holds the Donbas -- Sluice Gates, all water needed for irrigation (grain, corn, ..) are in the Donbas.) And Ukraine didnt want to stop after regaining the Donbas. Kinda obviously.
Yeah just lets not mention that the military power balance was overturned (russian backed seperatists, not the full russian Army against the Ukrainian Army, now with Javelins, no biggy… It was just the former Ukrainian Defense minister who said the following on 24.11.2019
The aid, including counter-artillery battery radar, night-vision gear and patrol boats, has since [in the later parts of the Trump administration] been unfrozen and is making a real difference to Ukrainian forces fighting Russian-backed separatists in eastern districts.
But it is the Javelin which appears to be a game-changer, Ukraine’s defence minister told CBC News.
“In certain areas, they can make a critical difference,” said Andriy Zagorodnyuk.
src: click)
-- oh and by the way - they werent allowed to use those Javelins until the US cleared them for use inside of Ukraine, even when russia hadnt invaded (“officially”) in December of 2021. Yeah, I have no Idea, why Gurkin could suddenly convince Putin, that the Kremlin should change strategy, …
No idea, whatsoever.…
That factoid, just slipped my mind.
And Lucian Kims, for that matter.
During a phone conversation on 2 January 2022 between the US and Ukrainian presidents, President Biden declared that the US and its allies ‘will respond decisively if Russia further invades Ukraine’. Already during his candidacy, Joe Biden was outspoken about Ukraine’s role in US foreign policy and acknowledged the possibility of providing security assistance and weapons. President Zelenskyy visited Washington in September 2021 and met President Biden. The Joint Statement on the US-Ukraine Strategic Partnership reaffirmed US support for ‘Ukraine’s right to decide its own future foreign policy course free from outside interference, including with respect to Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO’. Moreover, President Biden announced a US$60 million security assistance package, including additional Javelin anti-armour systems and forthcoming joint hardware production through Ukroboronprom. Washington recognises Ukraine as ‘central to the global struggle between democracy and autocracy’. In late December 2021, defensive military aid worth US$200 million was approved, with deliveries already arriving. In January 2022, the US approved the sending of American-made anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles to Ukraine by the Baltic States.
edit: On the point, that Putins goal with the military invasion was to install a puppet candidate in Kiew, I agree. Might likely still be his goal (sabotage the independence of Ukraine). But. Ukraine with Odessa and the Donau harbors can possibly retain independence economically. Issue then becomes, military pressure, military control over black sea trade, and soft power influence over a “forced neutral” Ukraine. All but the last one can be solved by security guaranties. Last one could be solved by “partial Ukraine” becoming a member of NATO and the EU, but not if Selenskyj keeps insisting, only the entire Ukraine can become part of NATO.
edit: Erste Publikumsfrage von Nataliya Gumenyuk (1|2)! Meine güte Zufälle gibts! Ich glaube das wurde von Russland sicher positiv gelesen!
edit2: Atlantic Council BLEH from June 20 2024, on why Ukraine REALLY needs the Donbas. If you havent guessed it by now, its because of Hilter…
Of course, there is an ocean of suspicion between Moscow and Kyiv. Ukraine deeply distrusts Russia, as Russia’s 2014 seizure of Crimea, support for the Donbas insurgency, and 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine violate the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which Russia agreed to respect Ukraine’s borders and sovereignty.
Worse, some possible peace terms, such as granting Russia permanent control of the economically valuable and militarily important Donbas region, would shift the balance of power in Russia’s favor. Ukraine would be especially unlikely to accept this kind of deal, because it would expand a strengthened Russia’s incentives to break the deal down the line. This was one reason why Churchill refused to negotiate, as he feared that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler would demand British colonies and naval disarmament in any peace deal, leaving Britain helpless to resist eventual German demands for total British capitulation.
src: click
