Ep 128: Stephen Kotkin on Russia and Ukraine (War in Ukraine #1)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 июн 2024
- Stephen Kotkin, Kleinheinz Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and contributor to War in Ukraine: Conflict, Strategy, and the Return of a Fractured World, joins the show to talk about the war in Ukraine and what the endgame might look like.
Times
• 02:24 Introduction
• 05:09 Four victories
• 11:48 “Winning only on Twitter”
• 22:36 10/7 and Ukraine
• 28:27 Regime change in Russia
• 37:03 Keeping allies
• 45:24 Renting
land armies
• 55:01 “European culturally but not Western”
Thank you for having Stephen Kotkin - he is one of the best analytical minds of our time and, well... loveable.
Can we get a kotkin and marsheimer debate?
You want to see Kotkin wipe the floor with John Mearsheimer? What would be the point?
@@MarcosElMalo2 yes
@@MarcosElMalo2to prove JM is an absolute fraud
To clearly demonstrate to the Russian sympathisers that the west is not to blame.
@@MarcosElMalo2probably the other way around
Time spent listening to Stephen Kotkin is time well spent.
Time wasted you mean
You provoked Russia by surrounding it with your weapons.
You can't bear to see the largest country in the world with the most natural resources, prosper
Ukraine/ Zelensky is your puppet
All success to President Putin his people and growing # of allies
Down with western imperialism hegemony deception hypocrisy double standards bullying and unethical sanctions
You can fool some people some of the time but NOT all people all of the time
No. Listening to Mr. Kotkin is an exercise in self-delusion. I used to think that he knew what he was talking about, but it is now clear that he is just another self-important, self-deluded, self-indulgent Neocon academic who is dragging the United States of America into the abyss of the ash heap of history.
I don’t think so.
Yes, even when Kotking turns inot just another neocon Zionist and says nothing about how Israel is committing literal genocide and Nazi-level atrocities on a daily basis but will happily misquote the Palestinian resistance, one-sidedly present Iran as a threat to Israel, evne though the fact is the exact opposite. And not to mention the fact that Kotkin will claim the moral high ground in pretending to stand for justice and democracy, the right to people to freedom and self-determination by aserting the right of the ukrainian people to resist an illegal occupation - but in the very next sentence will deny another group of people these same set of basic rights. There is a word for POSs who apply specific right to people based on their race, religion and/or ethincity...
There was no way Russia would have agreed to an armistice in the fall of 2022. This would have been seen an utter capitulation on the part of Putin and would have led to his demise in one way or another. Putin would have never agreed to such a humiliating deal.
The armistice would have stopped the fighting at a time when Russia had captured several Ukrainian oblasts but hadn't had the time to consolidate the wins. The armistice was absolutely in their interest at the time since it would have given them time to harden their defense.
I agree. There is no way Russia would accede to one now, let alone in past months/years.
@@hugo2964 Armistice in the fall of 2022 wouldn’t make any sense to Putin because it would have been seen - and correctly so - as a defeat for Russia, as an utter failure to complete what was launched on February 24, 2022. In fact Putin ceased all serious offensive operations in Ukraine in the fall of 2022 and, while hostilities continued, Russia de facto stopped pursuing territorial advancement in Ukraine and concentrated on defensive preparations. At the same time Moscow continued to subject the entire territory of Ukraine to substantial regular missile strikes thus maintaining some offensive pressure as well. Armistice would have disabled that capability on Russia’s part.
Basically, Putin understood back in early March 2022 that the initial plan of the SMO had failed. He needed to recalibrate the entire enterprise - on the one hand, he needed to show to the domestic population and to his international sympathizers in the developing world that he was intent on prosecuting this war all the way to victory (whatever that means); on the other hand, he needed to minimize fighting and control escalation in order to allow Russia to dig in and transform the war into a defensive posture. He managed to achieve these goals WITHOUT a formal armistice.
@@BuddyLee23 Formal armistice is not in Russia’s interest so far because it undermines Putin’s main instrument in this war - to maintain a mixture of defensive power AND offensive intentions and pressure. We clearly see since at least the fall of 2022 that Putin is not particularly interested in making significant territorial gains in Ukraine. But he is interested in making Ukraine over-exert itself in a war effort. And he is interested in exerting pressure on the West through Ukraine. A formal armistice would have made this impossible.
@@Yasen99the greatest weakness of analyzing the Ukrainian war is that it never made sense. In 2014 they got Crimea, they got a Ukraine that wouldn't join NATO, they got a Ukraine that wouldn't join the EU. At no point was this war in Russia's interest. If your theoretical network, of grand strategic interests, can't describe the start of the war, then why do you think it would be particularly useful predicting the end?
We'll never know how negociations might have gone in the fall of 2022, but I don't think Putin was anywhere near ready to stop. He still isn't.
Agreed. Putin will be stopped by force, nothing else. Scaring him with the threat of a counter offensive may or may not have worked but it would be a gamble.
Based on what? Assertion without evidence=0
@@casteretpollux well hard conclusive evidence will probably forever be impossible to find. But judging from the past 25(!) years of behaviour from Putin it's also pretty hard to make the opposite case.
CNN told him so @@casteretpollux
Russia had been proposing peace negotiation every fucking month. It's Zelesnky that outlawed such. Stop being delusional.
Every I listen to one of his lectures/podcasts, I learned something new. A new perspective on geopolitics.
I have to say I like his public speaking engagements and tune in when I can, as well as having read a couple of his books. Still I think I also learned a lot by reading honest criticism of his work. He doesn't recognize other theoretical frameworks, he doesn't fully seem to accept that some people really believed in communism for example. That's not the best for a Stalin biographer.
I also find that he does repeat jokes, which we all do I guess. But his jokes are either not funny to me, or I don't get them.
True, does he really believe US diplomacy is a way out of WWIII?
If so we are fucked.
@@jtothecc2421thats not what he said. Je was talking about use of diplomacy as part of a bigger strategy that uses projection of force as well, a perfect dynamic blend, using diplomacy as a tool when appropriate and useful
@@dmitryshusterman9494 yes I heard that, but it's still the case the US is incapable of any sort of diplomacy. I mean just look at the failure of the recent Swiss peace summit.
@@jtothecc2421 what would you call success for that summit. Did you prefer us strongarm Ukraine into giving up their territory in the name of peace?
When he first started talking I was thinking Joe Pesci for a moment.
All his life
I can’t unhear this shit now lmfao 🤣
It's well known that Joe Pesci is just his stage name as an actor
@@benf1111 Common reaction, but if you continue listening to his talks, you get past it.
Prof Stephen Kotkin is such a joy to hear! I always learn something novel from him!
Even General Ben Hodges got carried away by the counter offensive which surprised me considering The total lack of airspace control whilst trying to get through those defensive lines we allowed the russians time to build...16:07
Indeed, with a wholly inadequate quantity of Western armour. A handful of Challenger's? The Abrams not yet in theatre? Simply not enough Leopard 2s and Bradleys. Significant numbers of the latter two were lost, although their quality was proven by the number of Ukrainian crew men who survived to fight another day. To be successful, far greater quantities were needed, plus combat engineering vehicles, and at least a modicum of air support. The West helped set up Ukraine for the summer offensive to fail.
I can't help but feel that we are in for a similar failure once the F-16s are in theatre. These are old aircraft, and they will be used under circumstances that the US and it's European allies wouldn't dream of operating under. When was the last time Western air forces were in combat against a peer-level enemy? Excluding Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, we're looking at Korea in the 1950s. (Vietnam doesn't really count, since N Vietnam was not a peer of the US.) The unwarranted hype surrounding the F-16s is liable to be blown asunder once they start operating in theatre in the next few months. And the Western media and Putin's useful idiots will have a field day with the story. All because of the absence of any leadership in the West to provide Ukraine with the quantities of weaponry it needs. It's no wonder Putin believes he is on course for eventual victory.
@@EdwardRLyons Brave Ukraine💙💛 should get all the systems it needs from the collective West. No argument from me.
The defensive lines were poorly built. What surprised everyone were the mines.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD the budgets for Ukrainian defensive lines were stolen, sure. The russian defensive lines were beutiful in their effectiveness, though.
Our four stars aren’t so smart
It’s actually amazing that a serious person like Steven, conjectured a narrative about some “favorable armistice” in 2022, without any evidence of such a possibility existed.
The fact was, that no one in the West was ready to put their signature on the same document as Putin, that was the whole problem.
@@john.8805 That reality exists solely because Putin's signature has been rendered worthless by his own decision to break a litany of agreements on sovereignty and territory at issue in this war of conquest.
Why then did Milley "break charakter"? Something must have happened we are not supposed to know.
@@john.8805
No signature of the West was needed for Ukraine to make peace.
If you ignore the actual deal that has been presented in camera and the multiple diplomats from multiple countries that witnessed the document being signed and finally ignore how the Ukrainian that signed it was summarily executed by Ukraine shortly afterwards, yeah.
Excellent discussion. Professor Kotkin is among the greatest historians of our time. You may disagree with his conclusions, but if you think you understand something he doesn’t, you’re just wrong.
Great podcast. Best wishes from Taiwan.
Hi from Pingtung!
appeasement is a big NO for this situation as putin is the new hitler. that is why it should not be used. just crosscheck the putin's speaches with hitler's..
Great podcast.....Stephen Kotkin is one of the best contemporary historians
Propagandists not a historian
Some things cannot be solved with discussion. Nor can we realistically expect to influence internal Russian politics. This issue can only be solved with Putin losing power or Ukrainian victory.
If he loses power, what can happen is that someone even more radical and extreme takes over.
I think most observers think that most Russians & most of the Russian policy thinkers/actors are as, or more alarmed by the eastward progression of NATO and its missiles.
It's true that Putin is a dictator, but he has been consistently warning the West since ~2004 that Georgia/Ukraine will Not join NATO.
Kotkin says the four victories should have been taken off the table but doesn’t explain what that means. Putin was unlikely to agree to an armistice after the humiliations of 22 as he claims. Putin was and is committed to maximalist goals and isn’t likely to back off. Putting Putin’s grip in power at risk is far harder than Kotkin claims. Increasing Russia’s costs in terms of lives in Ukraine may do more to endanger his grip on power as happened to the czarist regime in 1914-17.
Rubbish.
Playing with other people's blood.
That's all they do. It's diabolic and it's been working for them so far.
The players asked to play the game. They can stop at any time.
The claim that the USA does not operate in the political sphere is not serious.
"we're getting accused of this so the time but we don't do it!" 🙄🙄🙄 apparently CIA has ceased to exist and operate in China and Russia! nevermind that American "acting in the political sphere" in Ukraine is precisely what precipitated this war. but what can you expect from The Hoover Institution?
Sanctions. Of course, failed miserably. Your point is correct.
Excellent commentary - thank you for publishing this interview
I love Pr. Kotkin, always happy to listen to him
Kotkin gives a huge portion of misconceptions, misunderstanding and idiotic ideas.
Russian nationalists do believe that Ukraine along with baltic states should return back to the Great Russian Empire, as been in 19th century.
You wanna some bridge to them? To the people blaming Russian gov for being too soft and cautious?
Are you sure?
Yes, Kotkin is unscrupulous enough to use these “angry patriots” for short-term gain (destabilizing Putin’s hold on power) and arrogant enough to believe that these people wouldn’t see through it.
A huge chunk of this argument holds on the premise "it was only riot police in Kharkiv region".
Well first of all it is not true, albeit there were troops made out of riot police. But let's for the sake of the argument put that away. This only increases suggestion that russia should have been beaten on the battle field, since they left one hell of an important logistic hub, namely, Kupyansk to fall since they were that stupid as not to leave anything but riot police not covered by artillery etc as per Kotkin.
Cool story, prof
The conclusion that counter-offensive was a bad call may well hold. Just to underline that this particular argument is terrible in many respects
Kotkin is an expert on Stalin. Kotkin is a poor analyst when it comes to russo-ukrainian war thou. And his remarks on Kharkiv counteroffensive only prove that.
Kotkin is also an anti-Putinist.
@@thisoldgoat3927 lol. Huh?
Great listen, I stumbled upon your podcast and wanted to hear what Kotkin had to say. I find myself agreeing to a lot of what he says. I thought you asked some very interesting questions that forced him to expand a bit more on things. Just a really good listen, thankyou. I'll have to check into more of your podcast. Kotkin has already sold me the first installment of Stalin, I'm sure I'll buy the other two when I complete the first...big book.
Bit snobby.
we sure escalated putin into invading georgia in 2008 with the same rhetoric. "At the time, Russia accused Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili’s regime of committing atrocity crimes, and claimed to be intervening to save lives, prevent genocide, and protect Russian citizens living in Georgia." history repeats itself.
Saaskhavilli was stupid for invading South Ossetia, but with Bush finishing his term he rolled the dice and maybe hoped he would get some US support but he read the situation wrong as the Russians were aiding us with Afghanistan and we didn't need more problems. Michael Kofman had a decent piece on the great Georgian blunder but he thinks the Russians lured them in. Whole region is a mess. Numerous ethnic groups in Georgia and most of them hate the Georgians. Should just have a seperate country for each of the different ethnic groups. It was clear in the early 90s with the civil wars that Ossetians, Abkhazians, and Georgians can't live in one country. Was not about protecting Russian citizens though mate (North Ossetia is in Russia), it was protecting the Ossetians (Alans) but in reality while the Ossetians want protection from the Georgians the Russians aid them mainly to keep NATO out of Georgia.
Stephen Kotkin speaks. I listen.
I would love another interview with Stephen Kotkin specifically about Korea.
Thank you for that great interview. Every couple of weeks I google Stephen Kotkin and seek for his latest interviews. I have gladly subscribed. Just wondered about the picture of the channel thumbnail. It’s quite brutal. What’s the idea behind it? Thanks and best of luck from Warsaw
Mr. Pesci is a NOTED Russian historian. He isn"t considered ANYTHING remotely close to a military analyst, or an expert on strategy, logistics, evolving capabilities, tactics and the political dynamics of the EU. He is also a thespian of the first order which doesn't add to his resume as an observer/analyst of the Russian war on Ukraine. Period.
I second this. I would have to review and rewatch what he discussed but I remember hearing a few points which didn't really make sense.
One of them being this constant talk of 'russia is winning'. What on earth does he mean by "winning"?
It needs to be pointed out that both sides are losing.
It also needs to be pointed out that he seems to understand little of attrition pinch points for this war like air defence and artillery.
Constant talk of numbers and attrition and how 'russia has more'.
Well provided political will keeps up, ukr has the entire West's productive capacity behind it.
If you want logistic….the it’s Ben Hodges !!
@glenn5328 I struggle to find specifics with ben hodges I disagree with but I take issue with his "vibe".
I find his vibe to lean a bit too much toward optimism and viewing the ukraine crisis as existential for u.s.
Aside from signalling to the world around how reliable the u.s. is S a security partner, unfortunately the ukraine crisis barely matters on a global scale and I find ben to lean towards overplaying the importance of this conflict - it stinks of rabid anti russia sentiment.
It's certainly justified anti russia sentiment, I just feel like it may bias his judgement and analysis. He is also rather shallow on detail and specifics.
he isn't bought and paid for therefore bad!
You can't be serious. How much of a clown you must be to refuse the reality on the battlefield
The weakness in the argument that we could have cashed in the four victories of 2022 with an Autumn armistice is quite plain: Putin and Russia *would not have accepted an armistice under such terms*. It is simplistic to argue that it could have been done, and I'm surprised that Kotkin seems to believe that it was possible.
Agreed. Putin was no more likely to stop fighting after Ukraine made him look bad than Hitler after Stalingrad or Tojo after Midway. Once leaders and their entourage embark on a military adventure they can’t back down and survive. Saddam Hussein being a notable exception.
I wish I had as much faith in the new DIE US Military as Professor Kotkin has.
@@timthompson468 You should do that, Ivan.
3:39 Stephen starts
I have read both his books on Stalin two times. It takes at least that many times to start to absorb all he is saying. It is so well thought out. Strength and Diplomacy is the best. Study "The Art of War." The best is to win the war and no one dies, or minimal losses. True then, True now.
Having read the comments I see I'm not the only skeptic regarding an armistace had Ukraine not conducted their failed offensive. Plus all the "investors" were pushing for results. Finally the only people who could have foreseen the Putin birthday present was, sadly, Israel who had solid intel regarding the Hamas murder spree. Horrific times...
Nice interviewer. You just got a new subscriber!
Additionally we didn’t ‘rent’ the Russian or Chinese army in WW2. They were invaded by bullies and we assisted them because it was in the world’s best interest to do so. Just as now it is in the world’s best interest that we ‘rent’ the Ukrainian army to defeat a bully. We should be willing to pay as high a ‘rent’ payment as it takes to avoid having to ‘rent’ other armies defeat the other bullies that will be emboldened, if we appease Russia. Appeasement doesn’t need a PR make over as the host suggests, it needs to be clearly understood as the failure that it is when diplomacy has broken down. It’s extremely easy to figure out when diplomacy has failed, it has failed when a country is invaded.
God bless Stephen Kotkin.
This is overall a very good and thought provoking discussion but on a second relisten I just caught the part at 42:45 where he said Ukraine is being "destroyed like Gaza" then a few seconds later catches what he's saying and has to scramble to redirect and change the subject. Just a funny lil moment.
Kotkin!!! Boonk Gang
I love to hear professor Stephen Kotkin on history about Russia and China, but God, he is out of contact with reality regarding war in Ukraine. Especially since the war is on multiple fronts: arms, political, economical, etc.
I didn't notice anything unreasonable. And he's certainly aware of the comprehensive range of conflicts the Ukraine war entails.
Can you provide an example?
What did Steve forecast for the Black Sea Fleet? The Ukrainians should eddecide on the terms of any armistice. Which treaties does Steve believe the Russians have honoured?
The other problem is that Crotkin though right about four victories didn't notice the message that Russia sent with first minutes of the conflict which is that you cannot come near Black Sea with your aircraft carriers. Indeed US diplomacy is as good as F35s. Yet with Russian hypersonic weapons they are not as good as he believes. The diplomacy must recalibrate to take this into account and concessions must be accepted re. Russia and China and to trade again.
I have to disagree with the professors characterization of the response to the kharkiv offensive. sure. the ukrainians played it up as is their right to do so but watching that in real time it was very clear that the Russians were thin and in disarray and that the ukrainians had somehow managed to surprise them. The line was very long. the initial invasion force was severely depleted amd their reserves had not been sent into theater yet, so it was an opportune time. there were also lots of reports of captured equipment which maybe the professor is saying was untrue? but when they ran into against a prepared defensive opponent was obviously considerably different. but I still think you have to test the Russians. will the Russians preparedness in this case? they were very well prepared but you cannot win if you do not try.
Did you listen to?
I had the same thought. I think it's important to being realistic in our assessments of the war, and neither be overly optimistic or pessimistic, but I think the professor here was fairly uncharitable.
Some of Kotkin's remarkes make it sound like he is in some kind of a dream-world-bubble.
Complete lack of recognition of the politics and thought process of putin/russia.
(half way through the podcast and Im signing off)
Excellent interview. I love when the interviewer gives the interviewee time to talk about their ideas and to explain their theories. Thank you.
Mr. Kotkin sounds like a pretentious Joe Pesci and doesn’t seem to recognize that in the counteroffensive the West basically asked the Ukrainians to do combined arms without giving them the aircraft, ATACMS, or requisite number of shells to do so. Also, like many others have noted, if the West had given the Ukrainians everything they needed for a summer or fall 22 counteroffensive then Russia might have suffered strategic defeat instead of just strategic humiliation.
Were you not listening?
The three echelon defences could have been obliterated if Ukraine were supplied with weapons for the purpose.
if kotkin was president after pearl harbour was hit by japanese. he would likely have made peace with japan and gave them hawaii with the promise the japanese would not attack the us or any other country, and he would believe them and be stunned when they hit the us mainland with a base in hawaii.
Joe Pesci setting the bar high on historiography, as always🙂
Would you recommend armistice with Hitler in 1939?
It is now 2024.
Russia has a lot of resources gas minerals oil gold etc that a lot of people want there hands on, nothing new there.
Russian Stalingrad strategy.
Stephen talks about a "moment of vulnerability" for the US, particularly in the Asian theater, but I could argue that applies even more to China. I'm on board that China has all the problems being attributed to them, financially and socially, but they've also built an industrial juggernaut that right now can arguably out produce the rest of the world combined. China's future may well hit the fan within the next 10 years, but if the US and China are building up our respective militaries over the next 5 years, I would say there's a good possibility that China moves ahead faster than we do and closes our advantages considerably. I am NOT advocating a military conflict with them - that would be disastrous. Just commenting on Kotkins comment that we should bide our time to build up OUR military.
Our diplomacy currently sucks! Confused. This is not George Shultz or Kissinger running things.
Kotkin enthusiasts mobilise!
I cannot believe that Stephen Kotkin thought, continues to think, that - at any point - Russia would have allowed a treaty where Ukraine could join Nato,
I mean, no one can be blamed for not geting the future right, but he cannot see the past, which is supposed to be his area of expertize.
Russia will never allow Ukraine to join NATO. That was - and still is - probably the main reason for doing this invasion. It is also about reclaiming Russian areas,. It was never about occupying the Western part of Ukraine, and certainly not about rolling over Europe.
My goodness so many contradictory statements in this interview… leads me to believe the current strategy is probably not that bad
That causality makes no sense. My girlfriend flip flops on what she wants for dinner, therefore our current hunger levels are best maintained.
I'm a big fan of Kotkin - have read both volumes of his Stalin bio, and watched many of his interviews/presentations with great interest. But he's not that insightful on the current war.
Where does Kotkin get the belief that Putin would ever be a good actor to any armistice with Ukraine, or that he was ever even looking for an armistice since Feb, 2022?
Kotkin doesn't sound like he has TDS. That's admirable and productive.
Never ceases to amaze me how sturdy the bubble is that some people live in. This talk is a prime example of bubble-dwellers.
Kotkin's usual Russophobia is on display.
Troll!
Anyone at all familiar with Kotkin knows you're talking rubbish.
Soon Kotkin will see how many casualties the actual Korean solution will take in a new Korean war. Instead of waiting for Ukrainian success with 40 downgraded abrams tanks from US 1 year into the offensive hype, US could avoid hyping and waiting for 1 year and give what Zaluzhny asked for. In that moment, before surovikin’s line was built, it was a real possibility to kick russia away from Ukraine. But Kotkin says it doesn’t make sense to liberate the territory for the country that was invaded by the aggressor.
Beautiful thank you. The West has to rethink think its relationship to the truth. This is a contribution.
Very interesting thank you from London
The problem for Mr Kotkin, moving limited arguments fails. Soldiers, like myself in Nam, are unwilling to die as chess pieces. Elegant concepts fail. Halfway fails. Clarity is needed.
I can discern five (5) distinct but interrelated wars going on in Ukraine:
1. Civil war between Ukrainian ultra right wing nationalists including the neo-nazis (right sector, Svoboda, C14/S14, National Corpus, Azov batallion, Aidir brigade) in the West and ethnic Russian Ukrainians in the East. This conflict has been smoldering since the days of Stepan Bandera in the 1930s and had been suppressed by the Soviet and then Ukrainian governments. It was brought to a crisis by the US sponsored Euro-Maidan Coup of 22 February 2014 in which a legitimately and democratically elected but pro-Russian government of Viktor Yanukovych was ousted by a pro-US president (Arseniy Yatsinyuk) selected by Victoria Nuland, Joe Biden and Jake Sullivan during the Obama Administration.
2. Local conflict between Russian and Ukrainian governments resulting from Russian incursion of 24 February 2022 as a consequence of (1) above. This is NOT the real conflict; it is a PRETEXT for the real conflict described in (3), (4) and (5) below. Resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict in and of itself WILL NOT END THE WAR, because this is a proxy war for (4) below.
3. Efforts by the US Government to forestall and obviate an emerging synergy between Europe (primarily Germany) and Russia. This synergy, which began in the early 1980s, was the result of European know-how and talent combining with low cost Russian energy, minerals, metals, and manufacturing capacity. This was weakening the US Sphere of Influence in Eurasia and threatening American primacy (hegemony) over Europe. Ever since the early Reagan Administration, the US has sought to foil mutually beneficial industrial projects between Russia and Europe. This is well described in Antony Blinken’s 1987 book, “Ally versus Ally.” The culmination of these efforts was the 26 September 2022 sabotage of the Nordstream pipelines by the Biden Administration. This is an extremely important and relevant but often overlooked factor.
3b. Another important point is that the European Union (EU), based in Brussels, wants to assert political sovereignty over the entirety of Europe. Even though it is composed of non-elected bureaucrats unaccountable to the people of Europe, the EU wants to rule them. Germany, being economically the strongest country in Europe, is in a position to resist the diktats of the EU. For that reason, any synergy between Germany and Russia is inimical to the “sovereignty” of the EU. It is therefore in the interest of the EU that Germany be de-industrialized so as to facilitate its subordination under the EU. The German “Green Party” appears to want German government to be subservient to the EU. That is the only way that I can fathom Mr. Scholz and Ms. Baerbock’s bizarre behavior.
4. War instigated by the United States against Russia using Ukraine as a proxy for the purpose of overthrowing the Putin regime; dismembering Russia into 3-5 smaller statelets that are easy to dominate; gaining political and economic control over the energy pipeline infrastructure running from Siberia to Europe, the geostratigic Eurasian territory in Ukraine and Western Russia including all of its hydrocarbon, mineral, and agricultural assets; and using those energy and mineral assets to exert US hegemony over Eurasia.
5. Cold war between the United States and China: As over twenty war games run by the RAND Corporation have unequivocally demonstrated, China would prevail over the US in any test of strength over Taiwan. The US wants Taiwan because it is an unsinkable aircraft carrier that can be used, along with Air and Naval bases in Japan, Korea, Guam, Singapore, and the Philippines, to constrain, intimidate and dominate China and thereby maintain US hegemony in East Asia, including the South and East China Seas, the Indian Ocean and the Straits of Malacca. Chinese DF series hypersonic missiles have rendered US aircraft carriers useless and obsolete in such a conflict. Russia is an important supplier of energy, minerals and raw materials to China that is difficult for the US to interdict. By attacking Russia in Ukraine, the US also indirectly weakens its other rival, China. The balance of global power is shifting away from the US and toward China and the US wants to stop this.
For a geostrategic explanation of why dominating Russia and Ukraine is so critical for maintaining US hegemony in Europe and Asia, I refer you to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 Foreign Affairs article “A Geostrategy for Eurasia” and his 1997 book “The Grand Chessboard.” These are difficult reads because Brzezinski couches his extreme antipathy for Russia in euphemisms and circumlocutions, but they are definitely worth reading as long as you understand Brzezinski’s intent. I call your attention to Page 60 of his Foreign Affairs Article which shows a map of a Russia divided up into three separate countries: A “European Russia,” a “Siberian Russia,” and a “Far Eastern Russia.”
In short, the war in Ukraine is about preserving US global hegemony at the expense of Russia and China. It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Ukrainian “freedom” or “democracy.” Unless you understand this war at all five levels, it is impossible to make sense of it.
Kotkin can propose all the plans he wants, at the end of the day putin cannot back down and will not back down. Not an inch. It takes two to tango, and putin won't.
Kotkin makes a lot of sense and kudos to him for being able to make any sense of what Maersheimer says because he lost me since he keeps insisting Russia never planned to take Kiev. Maersheimer should stick to political analysis and leave the military analysis to others.
How many soldiers do you need to conquer a city of 3 million people?
@@martinbrezina575 well not sure exactly but a rough rule of thumb that made sense before the invasion was Sevastopol, a city of half a million taken by probably a couple thousand Russians. So extrapolating I would say 10.000 Russians seemed reasonable before the Russians realized Ukranian babuschkas were making molotovs instead of surrendering.
@@pierman4858 To occupy Kiev you would have needed at minimum a million troops. Roughly 1 for every 3 civilians. Even that would have been pushing it. With the initial invasion of roughly 170K, I can see where Mearsheimer is coming from. The intelligence failure and subsequent battlefield debacles has forced Russia to alter their strategy.
@@martinbrezina575 Not that many if you think there will be little to no resistance. Russia took all of Crimea with 20-30,000 troops.
@@pierman4858 However, Sevastopol did not prepare for a Russian attack for 8 years with the help of American advisors.
Putin rejuvinated NATO and its finances, bravo.
South Korea and the Philippines were actively rejecting American bases and influence, now they welcome America, bravo Xi.
So... if you have nuclear weapons you are allowed to never lose a war? Did America "win" any war except for the cold war since 1945?
This wasn't one of Kotkin's better interventions. 😥
I appreciate Kotkin’s intelligence and expertise, but disagree completely with his stance on armistice. That is appeasement, plain and simple. We have unique opportunity to defeat a bully and stop future conflicts from happening. Russia has to be defeated completely in Ukraine. The message to the world’s other bullies has to be that the west will not tolerate this kind of aggression. It will be punished and it is not an option.
RESPCT,
STEPHEN HOLDS NO ELEMENTARY EVALUATIONS OF A TIME PERIOD , HIS OBSERVATIONS EVOLVE IF NEW EVENTS CAN
PERIODICLY AFFECT AN EVALUATION PREVIOUSLY APEARED TO BE CUT IN STONE....
HE HAS IDEAS THAT CAN CHANGE , THIS IS ONE REASON I LOVE LISTENING TO HIM.
WE LOVE YOU STEPHEN..
SOUTH PHILADELPHIA, OUT🔱⭐.
But was it worth the blood spilled and shattering of Ukraine?
Waaaay too bias
Thank God that Stephen Kotkin was not Head of British Government in June 1940!
Homie needs to stick to hindsight his prescription aint great
This is not the first time I have listened to Kotkin's presentation. It's quite surprising how, with such a poor and unrealistic analysis, he can be considered a leading specialist on Russia. extremely disappointed. It seems he is more concerned with holding onto his position in the academic community than with truth and honest, objective analysis.
Your criticism is empty
@@peterruane9220bot
Kotkin, Snyder and a bunch of emigre NPCs are what passes for "Russia specialists" these days. It's a damn shame, given how deep that academic bench once was. It's also terrifying, since these clowns are advising policy makers in a genuine crisis.
Kotkin is a smart man and very knowledgeable within his sphere but like most civilians he lacks any real insight into military capability. We may have lost Vietnam, but never lost an engagement in Vietnam. He trivializes US accomplishments while emphasizing inadequacies. He has become too comfortable with speculation and mistaken his confidence with competence.
Russia must be stopped. Ukraine must be supplied whatever it needs.
Outstanding conversation! Thank you.
I’m sorry but a lot of the things Kotkin says are wrong, ignore other factors, or exaggerates the reality.
Why the interviewer “doesn’t like” Professor Mearsheimer is irrelevant. You agree or disagree with peoples’ arguments and not the person themselves or you’re guilty of the ad hominem fallacy.
Well Maersheimer has so many biases himself. Can we just say the man talks a lot of nonsense a d therefore we don't like him.
@@pierman4858Saying you don’t like him after the fact because you don’t want to do the intellectual work of refuting his arguments is getting the cart before the horse. We want to start with evidence and arguments and not with conclusions-that’s how science works.
@@caylynmillard look you are apparently really taken in by Maersheimer and don't like people criticising him. So listen to the man all you want. I am not going to convince you that Maersheimer has many falacies. I you are really open for discussion as you suggest there are many excellent criticisms online of the man that you can Google easily.
@@pierman4858 take care
@@pierman4858Name single one fallacy from Mearsheimer?
lol did not expect him to make excuses for the bs gradualism failure...
So Princeton's not the best university when it comes to history?
Yale, Harvard, and Stanford are far superior?
I think Princeton specializes in economics; history isn't its forte.
Princeton and Yale did have a strong Russian/Slavic studies tradition once upon a time. It's all gone now. Literally no serious scholars left in the field. It's terrifying.
@@f.e.dzerzhinsky Donald Kagan was an extraordinary historian.
When I hear lifetime Russia learners such as Kotkin so blatantly incompetent and ignorant in their assessments and recommendations, I’m getting very pessimistic about American ability to provide any constructive strategy in that part of the world
Ah yes, the great "Kharkiv Counteroffensive was actually just a planned withdrawel excuse. When doing so made capturing the Donbass akin to a bloody crawl over a span of years, and the Ukranian Army was able to literally absorb several brigades worth of captured Russian mechanized units in their maintenance depots." This guy just forgets to mention the Kherson Counteroffensive, cause it genuinly was a combined arms operation that worked utterly in its mission to liberate Kherson City. Now, while I will give him credit in his observation of the lack of current battlefield victories- I'd hesitate to call Russias snail pace crawl across certain stretches of fields in and around Avdiivka, into areas that are tactically important, but not strategically vital, as war winning? So far, the Russian Army/State has yet to actually find an effective strategy to effect the strategic outlook of the enemy they face. Instead, they just keep zerg rushing defensive positions, and using sheer weight of numbers to gain a couple yards in a few weeks, with a cost in men and metal that would make Orthodox Jesus weep.
Lol, The human wave tactics??
You seem to listen Bbc and CNN too much dude ??
This is a war of attrition, and Russia will always win a war of attrition because it is authoritarian in nature so losses mean nothing because there is no free press. Also the west will not support Ukraine indefinitely especially if there’s no end in sight. $500 billion and more territory is lost daily. Are we still going to be talking about this in 3 years when the number is $1 trillion+ on this war?? Of course not, the people in Ukraine and the West will negotiate
@@abdirahmanahmadalifarah926 Have you seen drone footage of Russian frontline attacks? It's literally just rushing a defensive position with mass amounts of men and mechanized material, damn the artillery and drones defending that position. It's the epitome of wave tactics.
@@josephhernandez5386 Yep I watch them form professional jhon mershimer , Scott ritter, Douglas macgregor Not from CNN and BBc propaganda dude
@@abdirahmanahmadalifarah926 Ritter is a convicted sax offender.
Spin Doctor .. he first says it was a ruscist police force with batons and hand guns and next way the ruscists are dug in 3 fold across the Dinipro.. to be a good liar you need a good memory 😂😂
Really hoped for something new, but just more shilling.... oh well
13:00 not true. Ukraine did capture something close to 100 pieces of equipment in Kharkiv region. A lot of videos of soldiers ecstatic about the tanks Russians left behind. You seem not to understand the basic difference between Ukrainians and Russians. We don't do fakes, it is considered humiliating in our culture to lie. It wasn't Rossgvardia, but regular troops who didn't fortify their positions. Russians learned from this mistake, and created the Surivikin's line later.
Kotkin tells that successful Ukrainian operation in Izium was against rosgvardia and tanks in warehouses. He clearly is out of his mind and didn't follow the situation. One column of rosgvardia trully was destroyed in the February 22, but the whole Izium-Kupyansk-Lyman operation was against regular army in September 22. I stoped watching after this, Kotkin is crazy.
Kotkin seems to exaggerate how weak Russian defense was and how easy it was for Ukrainians. But the broader point that the offensive of the fall of 2022 shaped the expectations for the counter offensive in 2023 stands. However I don't think expectations were generally that high. I remember even my mom doubting if anything could be achieved at all while I was cautiously optimistic.
@@pierman4858 he does not exaggerate, he knows nothing and make assumptions based on false information.
Maybe I remember incorrectly, but I think on some of kotkins other panels and podcasts he has made the distinction clearly that he is not a military guy and generally refused to comment on specifics and operation/tactical points of conjecture. Maybe I'm remembering thr hoover institution panels where H.R. McMaster is a regular contributor and fields those questions. A little disappointed he didnt include the disclaimer here, or refuse to opine on it.
Moskva is the best submarine
Tet (Vietnam) and Russia. give me break. not even in same universe to compare. a fool just blabbering away.
And what is your military or state craft experience?
@@davidl.7317 Well, he understands the difference between the barefoot VCs and the world's foremost land power for a start.
@@stavroshadjiyiannis6283 Well the Russians are wearing sneakers which is a downgrade from boots. Just saying.
You could have never cashed those chips Kotkin. They all crossed Russiam redlines. Your assumption tyat the russians would accept is wild goven all theor public statements all go against your assumption
Delusional. The Navalnaya thing in itself shows that interfering in the political sphere is an official policy.
Joe Biden and Lindsay Graham have both spoken of regime change in Russia Steve. Nice to know your hands are clean on this.
Revisionist history so soon.
Kotkin->click
😅😅😅
Russia did not capture Kiev… wut? They never tried… west revivified? Wut?? Strategic humiliated? How? Signing off, stupid podcast.
So Russia is a genicidal state, make peace with Hitler….Kotkins philosophy.