I really don’t think that the potential massacre tipped the scales here. Realpolitik requires that you let people die if the consequences of intervening threaten national security.
From what I read, Russian intelligence could no longer assure that the activities of NATO were not preparations of nuclear kill chain capabilities. This, I believe, is far more likely to be the cause of the SMO launching when it did and the genocide of ethnic Russians was the legal and moral pretext that aligned with Russia’s national security profile.
Different people can have different reasons for doing things, and often there is not a single reason. For some in the Russian government what you say was probably the main reason, for others it may have only been one of multiple reasons. Either way, that is the most important reason for me to support this operation. And it is the reason which in my opinion best explains the timing. If it was only about NATO activities then the timing doesn’t necessarily make sense. Why not earlier or later?
It’s also not just a matter of not letting people die, it’s about the severe political consequences of doing so and the impact that such a massive political and refugee crisis would have on Russia and Russian society. Something like that has the potential to topple a government and bring real hardliners to power instead.
As i said, this is just my opinion. I don’t think we can know for sure until someone deep inside the Russian government writes their memoirs and tells us.
I agree with your main points. I just don’t think saving lives at the expense of national security makes sense. I think national security was the main driver and saving lives was part of the process and part of the calculations.
As for the timing, I think the timing was very interesting from an intelligence perspective. The US was warning about an imminent attack and Ukraine was saying there was no intelligence to support it and then Russia invaded the next day. To me, that says the Russians were testing the West’s intelligence capabilities and launched when they thought they had the element of surprise. I think they were correct and the ensuing first day of battle gave the Russians good intelligence on what was and wasn’t known by the West. It is very useful to know what your opponents know (and what they don’t know), so I think timing was partially urgency and partially opportunity.
I really don’t think that the potential massacre tipped the scales here. Realpolitik requires that you let people die if the consequences of intervening threaten national security.
From what I read, Russian intelligence could no longer assure that the activities of NATO were not preparations of nuclear kill chain capabilities. This, I believe, is far more likely to be the cause of the SMO launching when it did and the genocide of ethnic Russians was the legal and moral pretext that aligned with Russia’s national security profile.
Different people can have different reasons for doing things, and often there is not a single reason. For some in the Russian government what you say was probably the main reason, for others it may have only been one of multiple reasons. Either way, that is the most important reason for me to support this operation. And it is the reason which in my opinion best explains the timing. If it was only about NATO activities then the timing doesn’t necessarily make sense. Why not earlier or later?
It’s also not just a matter of not letting people die, it’s about the severe political consequences of doing so and the impact that such a massive political and refugee crisis would have on Russia and Russian society. Something like that has the potential to topple a government and bring real hardliners to power instead.
As i said, this is just my opinion. I don’t think we can know for sure until someone deep inside the Russian government writes their memoirs and tells us.
I agree with your main points. I just don’t think saving lives at the expense of national security makes sense. I think national security was the main driver and saving lives was part of the process and part of the calculations.
As for the timing, I think the timing was very interesting from an intelligence perspective. The US was warning about an imminent attack and Ukraine was saying there was no intelligence to support it and then Russia invaded the next day. To me, that says the Russians were testing the West’s intelligence capabilities and launched when they thought they had the element of surprise. I think they were correct and the ensuing first day of battle gave the Russians good intelligence on what was and wasn’t known by the West. It is very useful to know what your opponents know (and what they don’t know), so I think timing was partially urgency and partially opportunity.