this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
576 points (96.6% liked)

World News

38979 readers
3150 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

President Volodymyr Zelensky believes that Ukraine's partners "are afraid of Russia losing the war" and would like Kyiv "to win in such a way that Russia does not lose," Zelensky said in a meeting with journalists attended by the Kyiv Independent.

Kyiv's allies "fear" Russia's loss in the war against Ukraine because it would involve "unpredictable geopolitics," according to Zelensky. "I don't think it works that way. For Ukraine to win, we need to be given everything with which one can win," he said.

His statement came on May 16 amid Russia's large-scale offensive in Kharkiv Oblast and ongoing heavy battles further east. In a week, Russian troops managed to advance as far as 10 kilometers in the northern part of Kharkiv Oblast, according to Zelensky.

MBFC
Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 29 points 5 months ago (4 children)

This is and always has been a proxy war and a siege meant to exhaust Russian resources slowly and without rapidly escalating to more destructive methods.

[–] retrospectology@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately this is a big part of why the first big summer counter-offensive by Ukraine stalled; NATO delayed aid by just enough that it guarunteed the war would drag out.

Personally I think it's about money for the industrial military complex. If the war had ended quickly while Ukraine had men, momentum and the initiative it would mean less money for industrialists.

Even US generals like Patreaus were predicting the delay by the Biden admin on F-16s etc. would lead to a massively protracted conflict.

It makes one ashamed that when our country finally does have a righteous cause for our massive military complex our leaders are still playing grab ass trying to make a buck while Ukrainians are fighting to exist. It's one of Biden's (and NATOs) biggest failures.

[–] abracaDavid@lemmy.today 13 points 5 months ago

The insane amount of power that US military industrial complex has over our country and therefore the world is completely fucked.

Eisenhower was right.

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 37 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Siege of whom? Normally, a siege ends when the sieger goes home. If russia wants to stop bleeding, go home.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Ukraine is currently under siege. That's who is being sieged. The proxy war is because no one in the West wants a direct conflict between two nuclear powers. Russia is being bled by a thousand cuts here. They've lost over 70% of their stockpiles, probably more like 80-90% at this point, so far and every day that Putler continues his war, it adds more years of Russia ceasing to be a global power at any level.

[–] InternetPerson@lemmings.world 33 points 5 months ago (4 children)

How is it a proxy war if it was russia which started it?

[–] StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org 21 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it started as a proxy war. Russia just decided to be stupid, but at this point it may very well be a proxy war in fact.

It's to pretty much everyone's benefit (except Ukraine's) for this to drag out for a nice long time. The more manpower and material Russia and their allies burns up in this stupidity, the longer the rest of Europe can breath freely. It gives them time to rebuild the armies that they have allowed to atrophy. There's probably more to it and it's callus as fuck, but that's the math I see.

[–] leviathan3k@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 months ago

It is very much to Ukraine's benefit to drag out this war if the alternative is Russian subjucation.

If on the other hand the alternative you are seeking is flooding Ukraine with Western-provided weapons to the point that they annihilate the invaders and win quickly.. yeah, that would be better for Ukraine than a drawn-out war.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 18 points 5 months ago

It's a kind of mix of a proxy war. Russia is involved itself but Ukraine is used as a proxy by the west I guess?

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

People forgot quickly how hesitant the European countries were, and still are, to send equipment to Ukraine. Germany didn't send anything but helmets for a long while. They also cancelled North Stream, leading to increased inflation and lessened economic competitive viability. If anything, the proxy war is exhausting both Russian and European economies, with the US and China ready to scoop up the scraps in preparation for their intensifying trade war.

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Why would they? Much of Eastern Europe expects the US to step in for defense, and use that fact to justify lowering expenditure on their own military.

Sweden has that shit figured out though

Don’t fuck with the Swedish

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The European countries bordering Russia, i.e. the Baltics, Nordics and Eastern Europe, contribute a far bigger percentage of their GDP to aid Ukraine than the others (if you ignore the new policies of Slovakia and Hungary). The US and UK gives/sells the most weapons, but Ukraine is pretty much bankrolled by the EU/EEA.

The point is that the EU has sustained big economic losses from cutting ties with Russia, leading to movement of industry and production away from Europe and over to the other biggest economies.

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, it’s a difficult situation. I haven’t looked at the recent numbers regarding European countries contributions and their own militarization, I’m sure they’ve drastically increased since the war started

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yes. Germany and many other European countries had little to none political support for investing in their militaries. Now they do, and it is going to be a problem later on. Capitalists want return on their investments, after all.

The EU is very much on the top of the global neocolonial food chain, but they were mostly (looking at you France) not doing like super a lot (looking at you UK and US) of "interventions" to secure their interests all over the world.*

* Most Western powers are part of NATO, which is its own can of worms. Still, Russia invading Ukraine has made support for NATO much more popular (see Sweden and Finland as case studies), and now the bloc is more consolidated than ever. The timing could not be worse with respect to the overtly fascist leaders gaining traction in the very same countries.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

great point re: contribute a far bigger percentage of their GDP to aid Ukraine than the others

Slovakia and Hungary

Will be fascinating to see what happens next with Slovakia. And Georgia's protests don't seem to be dimming either. Hungary... eh....

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Everyone in Europe knows really well that there is a reactionary wind blowing through the lands. Historically, this has been conducive to conflict and war. The conditions are different right now than then, but I fear not enough.

I would love a different world order based on international cooperation in lieu of exploitation, but I do not see this as a probable outcome of tensions rising and reactionaries taking power.

It is definitely worth keeping an eye on the protofascist and overtly fascist movements gaining traction, since they pretty much tell us exactly how they are going to fuck things up.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

yep. The only hope I see for international cooperation is for tens of thousands to die from weather related catastrophes, and even then, it's only a 'maybe we can get our shit together....?'

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Different... Participants... View... Conflicts... Differently?

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

a proxy war and a siege meant to exhaust Russian resources slowly and without rapidly escalating to more destructive methods.

funny how Putin started a siege on russia by invading a country they were treaty-bound to protect..... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

[–] rusticus@lemm.ee 5 points 5 months ago

Yes and in return Ukraine eliminated all nuclear weapons. This will be an example used for the future for why countries will NEVER agree to denuclearize regardless of the language in a “treaty”.