1/12 History has a habit of repeating itself for the reason that history consists of human action and human behavior. A person with a given mentality reacts to a given stimulus in a given manner, regardless of time and place.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603097189395333124
2/12 Since the number and relative incidence of mentality types is limited and constant, we see similar action and behavior throughout history. With similar results.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603097337311674370
3/12 As said many times before, the West has performed much better this year than anyone could have predicted. Many say that Putin made grave miscalculations. He certainly did miscalculate his own military strength and the willingness and ability of the Ukrainians to resist.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603097462474145792
4/12 But it may be incorrect to say that he miscalculated the Western response. Rather, he made the very reasonable assumption that the West would do what it almost always does: issue timid condemnations, find excuses for non-action, and submit to the fait accompli.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603097585887154185
5/12 This was not only Putin's prediction. It was our own prediction up until the invasion. The scope and determination of the Western response, however insufficient it is, is much greater than any of us could have imagined less than a year ago.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603097732914286597
6/12 But defeatism, appeasement and "Realpolitik" are still lurking right below the surface, trying to poke out their ugly heads. Mr Macron recently said Nato should give "security guarantees" to Russia and that Russia's legitimate concerns should be recognized.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603097857233682432
7/12 Russia says Nato is a threat to its security. Does recognizing this concern as "legitimate" mean that Nato is planning an invasion of Russia? It would be nice to know before we join. Against whom are we supposed to give Russia guarantees?
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603098061491896321
8/12 In reality, Russia is of course not concerned about its security. If it were, it would hardly have withdrawn most of its military units from its western borders and thrown them to Ukraine.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603098168048091140
9/12 For Russia, "security" means having a veto on the borders, orientation, sovereignty and existence of its neighbors. This is not something anyone can respect or recognize.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603098356490080256
11/12 Both signaled to Mussolini they do not have interests in Ethiopia, thus encouraging him to start his war. Once the war began, they proposed a "a plan to give most of Ethiopia to Italy, with the rest in the Italian sphere of influence, as the best way of ending the war".
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603099027046031362
12/12 This sounds very much like what we have heard from certain circles since 2014. Putin had a reason to assume this school of thought would gain the upper hand also after a full-scale conquest. To his surprise and the surprise of us all, it did not.
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603099308990947328
10/12 I have been reading about the Italian invasion of Ethiopia in 1935-37. The conflict resembles Russia's war in Ukraine in many obvious respects. One of them is the attitude of the great Western powers of the time, France and the UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Italo-Ethiopian_War#Public_and_international_reaction
🐦🔗: https://n.respublicae.eu/Halla_aho/status/1603098491181764608