Re noribori's comment below, I would just go with my comments here, not his.
"> but in 1948, when Britain and the U.S. took unmistakable steps towards setting up a separate West German state
At this point, an alternative version of the course of history should be discussed: what would have happened if Germany had been made a "neutral" buffer state between the blocs after the Second World War, as the USSR envisioned. How long could this "neutral" state have lasted anyway? After all, this is precisely Putin's demand, and also Gorbachev's regret: the states between Poland and Ukraine should have remained "neutral".
> As in 1963-75, easing the crisis would turn the competition between Putin and the West into a political one, and that is a competition that the West should be able to win.
That’s not a solution, that’s the problem.
Putin is NOT threatened by the NATO, not at all. Putin and other autocrats (who ask Putin for help, such as the belarusian dictator Lukashenko) are threatened by political aspirations for more freedom and democracy among their populations, which seek their salvation and protection in stronger ties to the West. In extreme cases, this can be NATO, it can be the EU, but it can also simply be economic and cultural influence. Putin does not want the West to offer a perspective to the aspirations for more freedom and democracy. Putin wants the West itself to end this perspective, once and for all. In the Cold War, the flight to the West was stopped by the construction of the Wall. What Putin is demanding of the West today is basically that this time the West itself builds a new wall.
Did the former wall between the blocs make peace possible? Yes, it made it possible that the cold war did not turn into a nuclear world war. Does the West agree to a new wall behind which the autocrats feel safe? That is the question." noribori
No comments:
Post a Comment