Comments by "Peter Jacobsen" (@pjacobsen1000) on "UnHerd"
channel.
-
25
-
@petefrys545 I don't know where you're from, but Nazi-, Fascist-, White Power-, Nationalist groups started growing all over central and eastern Europe very quickly after the wall fell. I remember this clearly on a visit to Budapest in 1992, where I was faced with some of those people. Widespread youth unemployment and a general feeling of despair led some young men to join these movements. This was, and is, a trend we saw all over the east, including in Russia. Fortunately, these groups are generally a small minority everywhere, including in Ukraine.
As for Russia, I don't expect the Russian authorities to clamp down on these groups because they often serve the governments interests. Russia is a spiritually rotten wasteland, let's just make that clear.
3
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
Really good conversation, and good interview style. Fundamentally, though, I do not agree with Mearsheimer's analysis.
His analysis rests on the basic assumption that a Ukraine allied with the US/West is unacceptable to Russia to the extent that Russia is willing to risk its own existence over it. In other words, Russia is willing to risk mutual nuclear annihilation over Ukraine, rather than the alternative: Staying whole and intact, but without Ukraine as a buffer state. This seems to me to be a self-defeating choice.
Obviously, Russia hates the idea of possibly having NATO troops and missiles on their very long border with Ukraine. This is very understandable. But that is a far step from accelerating the possibility of mutual destruction before this even happens.
In a way, Russia is engaged in a 'preemptive strike' which was the Bush doctrine. 'Preemptive Strike' only works if you're a superior power certain of success. Maybe Russia thought they were certain of success. I don't think they are, and I don't think they are willing to risk their own existence to keep NATO away. They'll go far, but not that far.
1
-
1