Let me also join this discussion with a position I believe I have already expressed earlier.
I agree that with his so-called “special military operation,” Putin did not intend to occupy the whole of Ukraine, but rather to change the existing government, remove Zelensky, and install a pro-Russian leadership there. All of Putin’s actions since 2014 have aimed at preventing Ukraine from joining the EU, because EU membership would mean that Russia — that is, Putin and his oligarchic system — would lose its political and economic influence in Ukraine. Putin clearly considers Ukraine part of Russia’s sphere of influence and has acted consistently to strengthen pro-Russian forces within it. NATO membership, at that time and in the foreseeable future, was not a realistic option, since several NATO members would never have agreed to it. Putin believed this could be achieved relatively easily and judged the international situation to be favourable for such a move — that was his strategic assessment. A few words about the Minsk negotiations. Immediately after the Maidan events, Putin reacted by annexing Crimea. He also exploited the anti-Maidan protests (which would have been entirely legitimate had they remained peaceful protests) by intervening and supporting armed actions that led to the violent seizure of power by pro-Russian forces in parts of eastern Ukraine. The Ukrainian government decided to try to retake these areas by force (whether this was the best decision remains open to debate). Ukrainian forces succeeded in regions further from the Russian border, but failed in Donetsk and Luhansk, where Putin introduced Russian military forces that inflicted defeats on Ukrainian troops. It should also be mentioned that far-right units were present within Ukrainian forces, something Putin used extensively in propaganda claims that Russians in Donbas were threatened with “genocide” by Nazis. Without Putin’s military intervention, Ukrainian forces would most likely have restored control over the entire Donbas with relatively limited casualties. The conflict in Donbas then developed into a civil war–like situation. Ukraine, as the weaker side, was compelled to enter negotiations and sign the Minsk agreements. It is correct that these agreements envisaged referendums and the continued existence of these territories as autonomous regions within Ukraine. One of the central disputes concerned the sequencing: Ukraine insisted that Russian troops must withdraw first before any referendum could take place, while Russia demanded that referendums be held first, followed by withdrawal. What was Putin’s objective in the Minsk process? Even if Donbas had remained formally within Ukraine as autonomous regions, Putin would have retained effective influence over them and used that leverage to block Ukraine’s integration into the EU — a role somewhat comparable to that played by Republika Srpska within Bosnia and Herzegovina. I would also add that it is worth reading the previously shared interview with Taras Bilous, paying particular attention to his remarks regarding the Ukraine–Russia negotiations in Istanbul, alongside the broader arguments he makes in that interview. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#40855): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/40855 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/117833155/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
