That Putin is threatening - or, to be more exact, appearing to be out, to invade Ukraine is a "fact" on the ground.
His attempt, thereby, to bring the NATO to the negotiating table and make it concede to - at least some of, his demands as regards the NATO and its deployments - in the eastern part of the Europe in particular, has not borne any fruit as yet. Yet, he is maintaining the threatening posture and, in fact, incrementally intensifying it. Obviously, such an action cannot be without some (considerable?) cost to the Russian Federation. The point is why? One explanation could be that he's gradually tightening the grip around Ukraine for the final assault. That's what the US is selling. An alternate explanation could be that he, thereby, wants Ukraine to bleed and bleed and make its government too unpopular so that it can be replaced by a pliable regime - as had been the case earlier, by engineering popular protests spearheaded by the Russian speaking population. Or make the current regime itself buckle and be ready to toe the Moscow line - in order to survive. These two approaches are not strictly mutually exclusive. Leaving aside the issue of political and moral legitimacy of such an approach, things have, undoubtedly, turned too dangerous. The peace movements can only (i) essentially appeal to the conscience of the feuding big powers - the active players, urging them to step back and (ii) build public opinion towards that. The problem is that it's likely to have very little impact on one of the contending sides. Nonetheless, we must keep trying; there's just no other go. Even a relatively Swift and successful armed takeover of Ukraine - eschewing an apocalyptic nuclear conflict, may, nevertheless, tum out to be a pyrrhic victory for Putin. The successful military occupation of Afghanistan would, eventually, not only lead to the ignominious withdrawal later, but, also be followed up with the crumbling down of the Soviet state itself, not too long thereafter. In sharp contrast, the humiliating withdrawal from Vietnam or, just the other day, Afghanistan did little to undermine the stability of the US state itself. There's no way to know whether Putin has duly factored that in. The following excerpt offers at least some room for optimism. The European countries, for very obvious reasons, are a tad or two (or even more?) less resolute as compared to the US vis-a-vis Putin. Let's see. <<Macron's trip to the Ukrainian capital comes after Putin told him Russia would "do everything to find compromises that suit everyone", raising the prospect of a path to de-escalating the volatile situation. Putin said several proposals put forward by Macron at talks on Monday could form a basis for moving forward on the crisis over Ukraine. "A number of his ideas, proposals... are possible as a basis for further steps," Putin said after more than five hours of talks at the Kremlin. He did not provide any details but said the two leaders would speak by phone after Macron meets with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.>> (Excerpted from: < https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220208-live-macron-heads-to-kyiv-as-putin-says-prepared-to-compromise >.) For a sum-up of the situation obtaining on the ground, right now, through Western eyes: < https://www.vox.com/22917832/vladimir-putin-ukraine-military-invasion>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/greenyouth/CACEsOZjZVr78R%3D5_ZJXA6xWxANk8QJNjw1FUsos6XbGrpNB%2Bag%40mail.gmail.com.
