1d ago

Russian politician honestly explains the goals of the Ukraine war, admits any peace deal will only be temporary

video.echelon.pl Alexander Borodai honestly explains the goals of the war

Alexander Borodai is a member of Russian Duma and one of the founding fathers of the "DPR" (Donetsk People Republic) under FSB control. Commentary by Maksim Borodin: First, he admits that any cease...

[The link leads to 2 min. video.]

Alexander Borodai is a member of Russian Duma and one of the founding fathers of the "DPR" (Donetsk People Republic) under FSB control.

[...]

First, he admits that any ceasefire for Russia will only be a temporary freeze in the war, because Putin's main goal will not be achieved - taking control of all of Ukraine and establishing a puppet Russian regime. Any independent Ukraine for Russians is "Western weapon".
Second, he admits that Russia has been waging war with the help of people like him in Ukraine since 2014, and in 2022 it only continued with a full-scale invasion.
And most importantly, third, he directly says that the problem is not that Ukraine can be in NATO. The problem for Russians is that they consider all of Ukraine to be their "historical territory" and that Ukrainians "do not exist as a nation at all", and that Ukraine is inhabited by "divided Russians".

13 comments

I believe this is the issue: if there were a way for Ukraine to genuinely believe that Russia would not attack them again, they might accept certain territorial losses—in fact, they might have accepted them long ago. But no one believes that a Russia that wins in Donbas would stop there and not feel emboldened to push for more. Only a Russia that perceives this as a painful defeat might refrain from coming back for more.
- I could plausibly see a meaningful defensive agreement working for Ukraine too. I believe we should back Ukraine to the hilt for as long as they want to fight, but if we aren't going to send in troops ourselves then when and how to negotiate is not for us to decide
  It would have to be sonthing other than NATO thanks to the current American administration, but I do think that an EU + UK agreement with sufficiently strong language - stronger than NATO's article 5 and the EU's mutual defence article, an actual requirement to actively deploy the military to the front - would be deterrrent enough to for Russia
  
  EU accession would cover it. The mutual defence part is fairly ironclad - "obligation" and "by all the means in their power". Definitely less wishy-washy than article 5 IMO.
  edit: Here's the relevant text:
  If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. This shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States.
  Commitments and cooperation in this area shall be consistent with commitments under the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which, for those States which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defence and the forum for its implementation.
  Link to treaty. It's at the bottom.
  Poland and the Baltics would be so excited at the prospect of dishing out some historical retribution so I feel like it would be enough to deter Putin.

He should avoid being near windows, and also eating or drinking.

A lot of people in the West reflexively don't want to admit this, but this the view of the overwhelming majority of the russian population. They are committed and genuine genocidal imperialists.
- It is, as usual, a bit more complicated than that. Of course there are hard-boiled imperialists there, as anywhere. But it is unlikely that even Putin himself is one, he just has his own agenda.
  Russians are a nation with too dark a history in the last couple centuries (and of course before). They were oppressed by their own, killed by their many neighbours in millions, and the memory of this lives deep in them. The major driver for many of them is to avoid harm first of all, powered with fear of their own government and instilled fear of "foreign malign forces" (definition changes by the day, rather easily, driven by propaganda). It is not safe to be against the war, so naturally the majority goes with the flow.
  Do they want to actually conquer neighbours? In a way, there is a sense of pride in belonging to the strongest gang in the hood. As in, it is better to be a part of said gang than be chased by it.
  Source: am russian-born, with a lot of contacts in the country.
  
  Sense of belonging? This is exactly what I am mean by genocidal imperialism being universal among russians.
  You (and other russians) fundamentally do not believe in self determination and will always find excuses to justify violence, occupations, torture and ethnic cleanings. The russians are even OK with being put down and abused by their own regime as long as there is imperial conquest.
  I don't buy the "dark history" narrative. There is nothing inherent (in a physical sense) about russians that leads to degeneracy and debauchery. It's all the choices they make. The somewhat peaceful breakup of the USSR was a unique opportunity for russians and we can see the choices they made.
  Source: I've lived in russia for many years and I speak fluent russian. I've also lived in North America, Asia and Europe and speak other languages.
- Yeah, there’s nothing to admit here. The inherent chauvinism apparent in statements like yours should repel everybody with a little bit of decency.
  
  No chauvinism. These are facts. And you know this. There are even russians who agree with what I am saying, not because they lack decency, but because they actually want their society to change.
  Playing into russian victimhood narratives, treating them like children and coddling their worst instincts is not doing russians any favour.

So water is wet.
Interesting that it comes from the Duma though.
I wonder how this, if at all, will affect the "negociations" and the European involvement.
- The 2014 events were driven by the really nasty people, proper "russian jihadists", if you like. Cut-throats armed by Russia dealt a lot of damage in Eastern Ukraine. Most of them now are either dead or in prison for being too unpalatable for their own. Borodai is one of the few survivors, but he still retains the spirit.
  Not sure if what he says is the real set of ideas behind all the war drama.
  Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the rest of Duma/government are fluffy kittens, just that he is an extremist not necessarily reflective of the majority even in Duma.
  Or maybe I am still too optimistic, after all these years.

13 comments