Why Putin had no choice but to invade Ukraine
Hug the Panda, Club the bear.
Club the Bear
Vladimir Putin's war on Ukraine is a vicious failing attempt to preserve the illusion that corruption as governance with an authoritarian autocrat on top of the stinking pile of corpses is the only viable governing option for Russia and other Slavic countries. The existence of Ukraine as a functioning democracy, with a growing economy, personal liberty, and a rule of law court system, poses a direct threat to Putin's carefully crafted narrative that only he can bring progress and stability to Russia. What can I say? I am subtle as a gun.
Putin's mafia-as-governance, characterized by cronies, corruption, and brutal repression, claims to be the only effective way to govern a country like Russia, namely the entire slavic world, and then some: more, always more, such is the dictatorial appetite. The Ukrainian example, a functioning Slavic Orthodox democracy, undermines Putin’s claim and proves by its mere existence that there are alternative paths to development and prosperity. It is a direct threat to his rule, and as such must be crushed completely and mercilessly, even genocidally.
The Threat of Alternative Governance Models
Ukraine's success is a threat to Putin's legitimacy and the legitimacy of his system. Because Ukraine is succeeding at good governance exactly by rejecting Putin's corrupt sistema of authoritarian thievery and lies, it is a direct threat to Putin’s rule in Russia. The existence of a free and democratic Ukraine provides a beacon of hope for Russians who are dissatisfied with their own government, and potentially inspires them to demand more from their leaders. As far as Putin is concerned, this light must be extinguished.
Putin's response to the threat Ukrainian democracy and law represent is to destroy Ukraine: To make it look like democracy, freedom, and law are unworkable and even dangerous. Every Russian missile is a message that alternatives to Putin's rule are not viable, that they are not worthy of consideration, that they are not worthy of life.
Gaslighting and Propaganda
Putin's strategy also relies on gaslighting and propaganda in a vain attempt to convince the Russian people and the rest of the world that Ukraine is responsible for the suffering Putin is inflicting. Blaming his victim, Putin’s propaganda machine claims that Ukraine is somehow responsible for his illegal unprovoked invasion and on-going war crime. Putin aims to shift the focus away from his own aggression and onto the supposed flaws of the Ukrainian government, or the West, or someone, anyone other than Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. It’s the Jews fault! Especially the gay Nazi Jews! Honest! Nothing to see here, move along!
Putin’s murder and intimidation of Ukraine and Ukrainians is nothing other than a reflection of exactly the way Putin has dealt with domestic opposition, where critics and opponents are often traitors and foreign agents and meet unfortunate “accidents” tragic “suicides” or “sudden mysterious illnesses”. The goal is to create a sense of confusion and uncertainty, to make it difficult for people to discern fact from fiction, and to ultimately undermine the legitimacy of any opposition to Putin's rule. The goal of the Putin mafia is not to convince others what to believe, it is to convince us that there is no truth or at least that the truth cannot be known and thus: learned helplessness, for easier victimization.
Putin's aggression towards Ukraine is a paradox, as it is both a manifestation of his weakness and a demonstration of his strength. On the one hand, it reveals his deep-seated insecurity and fear of alternative governance models. On the other hand, it showcases his ability to use military force and propaganda to achieve his goals, at least in the short term. This highlights the inherent instability of Putin's system. His reliance on aggression and propaganda to maintain power creates a sense of perpetual crisis, where the Russian people are constantly reminded of the need for a strong leader to protect them from external threats. This is an inherently unstable foundation for government, and is ultimately unsustainable in the long term.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Putin's aggression towards Ukraine is a failing attempt to preserve the illusion that authoritarian corruption-as-governance is the only viable option for Russia and other Slavic countries. The existence of Ukraine as a functioning democracy poses a direct threat to Putin’s claims, and Putin's response is to destroy the Ukrainian example and create a sense of confusion and uncertainty. However, this strategy is ultimately self-defeating, as it reveals the inherent instability of Putin's system and creates a sense of perpetual crisis that will eventually undermine his rule.
Free eBooks today only
last day for the free eBook: More free eBooks after the Essay. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DHXTTV58
Hug the Panda
The notion of a new Cold War between the United States and China is a misguided concept, rooted in a false equivalence between the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. This comparison overlooks the significant differences between the two nations, their ideologies, and their approaches to international relations.
As someone fluent in both Russian and Chinese, I can attest to the distinct characteristics of each nation's language, culture, and history. The Soviet Union was a Marxist-Leninist state that actively sought to export its ideology through military interventions, proxy wars, and state-sponsored terrorism. In contrast, China's approach to international relations is guided by a unique blend of Marxist and nationalist principles, with a strong emphasis on economic development and cooperation.
A closer examination of China's actions reveals a stark contrast to the Soviet Union's behavior during the Cold War era. Since 1980 China has not engaged in any of the following war like behavior:
1) Guerrilla wars
China has not supported or funded guerrilla movements in other countries, unlike the Soviet Union's backing of leftist insurgencies worldwide.
2) Military interventions
China has not invaded or occupied foreign territories, unlike the Soviet Union's invasions of Afghanistan, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary.
3) Proxy wars
China has not sponsored proxy forces to fight on its behalf, unlike the Soviet Union's support for communist militias in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
4) State-sponsored terrorism
China has not been linked to terrorist organizations or activities, unlike the Soviet Union's support for groups like the Palestine Liberation Organization.
5) Assassinations
China has not been implicated in targeted killings or assassinations, unlike the Soviet Union's notorious use of wet work.
Instead, China has focused on economic development, trade, and diplomacy, often through institutions like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). This approach has allowed China to build relationships and influence without resorting to coercion or violence.
The United States, on the other hand, has rampaged throughout the Islamic world like a mad bull elephant for 20 years wasting three trillon dollars with nothing to show for it but failure after failure. From the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to the mismanagement of the Arab Spring. It is unlikely that China will be provoked into foolish actions, and more likely that the United States will continue to alienate its allies and undermine its own foreign policy efforts.
China's leaders are not stupid, nor are they prone to reckless behavior. They are calculating and strategic, with a deep understanding of history, ideology, military science, economics, every element of international relations. China’s international actions and reactions are, especially in comparison with the USA, reserved, nuanced, selective, in short: appropriate. The United States would do well to adopt a similar approach based on accurate perceptions rather than distorted projections. The USA must recognize China's unique characteristics and engages with it on the basis of mutual respect and cooperation as opposed to unilateralism based on misperceptions such as equating China to Russia. They don’t speak the same language, go to the same religious centers, and their people don’t even look the same. Perhaps their politics are also different?
Time to learn Chinese!
last day for these free eBooks
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1719060746
Chinese Vocabulary Builder
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08KSRKZMQ
MANDARIN CHINESE VOCABULARY BUILDER
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B5FXV4LB
Word of the Day: resupply
1. English: resupply (v/n)
2. French: réapprovisionner (v)
3. Spanish: reabastecer (v)
4. German: Nachschub liefern (v)
5. Estonian: täiendama (v)
6. Russian: пополнять (v)
7. Ukrainian: поповнювати (v)
8. Mandarin Chinese: 补给 (bu ji3) (v)
Sentence translations:
- "The Ukrainian army needs resupply."
- French: "L'armée ukrainienne a besoin d'un réapprovisionnement."
- Spanish: "El ejército ucraniano necesita reabastecerse."
- German: "Die ukrainische Armee braucht Nachschub."
- Estonian: "Ukraina armeel on vaja täiendust."
- Russian: "Украинской армии нужно пополнение."
- Ukrainian: "Українській армії потрібне поповнення."
- Mandarin Chinese: "乌克兰军队需要补给。" (Wūkèlán jūnduì xūyào bǔjǐ.)
Final line: The Ukrainian army is in need of supplies. (L'armée ukrainienne a besoin de fournitures. / El ejército ucraniano necesita suministros. / Die ukrainische Armee braucht Nachschub. / Ukraina armeel on vaja varustust. / Украинская армия нуждается в поставках.)
Nailed it