When my daughter was at school, she’d often run into trouble with various teachers. That night, in a quiet moment, I’d ask her, “Why do you think so-and-so got pissed at you?” You know, just to try and promote some self-reflection. Had she behaved well? Badly? Maybe with the passage of a few hours, my daughter might see things from the other side? Maybe she might even have deserved whatever punishment she’d received?
But the most I used to get was “Because they hate me”.
And I would realise that self-reflection was a non-starter. It was black and white for her. But especially in an education setting, the teacher would have had to conform to all sorts of rules regarding their punishments, probably had to document everything just in case it came back to haunt them. But as far as my daughter was concerned, it was hate. Even if they did hate the child, no way could they allow their emotions to come into their professional judgement. Whatever had happened, my daughter would have done something.
The reason I mention this anecdote is because of the situation in Ukraine at the moment.
Certainly in the UK, the media is almost unanimous in its dislike of Putin. When anybody broaches the subject of the invasion of Ukraine, there’s this overriding narrative “Putin invaded, therefore we should help to kick him out”. There’s this almost blind desire to support Ukraine, even as far up as our Prime Minister.
But when we get to the deeper question, why did Putin invade in the first place?, the answers are much less convincing. It’s got to be more than him just being “a vicious madman” or “wanting to rule Ukraine”, surely?
Dare I say, this sounds very like my daughter’s “because they hate me”. Maybe Putin did invade because he’s a vicious madman, but what if that’s not the case? What if he had such a fear of something that he calculated, decided that his best move was to invade? Even despite the losses? Especially at the moment, as we’re starting to talk about a “lasting peace” in the region, I think Russia needs to feel sufficiently secure that it will not simply re-arm and re-invade. So, we need to address that question, surely?
During the Cold War, a frequent refrain of the Left was “why on earth would the USSR want to invade the UK, when the mess in our country would simply cause them an enormous headache?” I haven’t forgotten that argument and I think it still rings true. Ruling a country means taking on its problems, so taking a decision to invade anywhere is a big deal. So why did Russia do it now?
I’ve got a lot of time for the argument “he went in illegally, he needs to be kicked out”, but I think that’s just the start of the story. Once he’s kicked out, how do we ensure Russia leaves Ukraine alone in the future?
All of a sudden, things like the USA talking exclusively to Russia, then Trump rowing with Zelensky at the White House, they all make perfect sense.
Mister Bump 
There is another aspect to Putin‘s war mongering (not only with Ukraine, but in general): he uses the diversionary tactic of a conflict abroad to rally the Russian population behind him and/or deflect from domestic issues. As for your question how anyone can ensure that Russia will stay out of Ukraine after this war ends: with dictators such as Putin you just can’t…
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s possible, yes. The other thing is his fear of NATO expanding east. But I think these things all have to become issues to be talked about/understood, and we’re nowhere near there yet.
I don’t necessarily buy that Putin will always turn toward aggression. Whatever happens in Ukraine, it has done immense damage to both their economy and to the reputation of the Red Army, So next time, Putin’s got to be thinking, “maybe there’s a smarter approach?”
I think there are bound to be a lot of things that we don’t know, because it’s their history and not ours.
LikeLike
In 2005, Putin called the collapse of the Soviet Union the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th Century. That said, he’s long believed Ukraine to be an historical and cultural part of Russia, and he wants it back.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Do you think it’s that simple? I’m not so sure. But in any case, that would mean that he won’t stop un til he has conquered Ukraine, so whatever happens now, he’ll be back.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Maybe not, but I believe it’s a major cause.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for sharing your daughter’s experience with her teachers, and your reflections on the war in Ukraine, which acontain some of my doubts, too
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting to read your perspectives on this situation. Thank you, Pete.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nothing that is happening is surprising me tbh. But if Putin does not now play ball, what does Trump do?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Time will tell…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I do not know for sure, but my theory is that most dictators or questionably elected head of the states simply do not have the concept of human life. For them their control and hold on the country matters the most, even if it comes at the cost of hundreds of thousands of people dying simply because of their apparent disllusion.
Another is that these people need to keep the country distracted and engaged in environments where it makes it difficult for opposition and new leaders to arise.
LikeLike
Doesn’t bode well if you’re Ukrainian
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting post Pete, I’ve never really thought about it from Putin’s perspective.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When you get into it, the history is fascinating. Same kind of timescales as Britain and Ireland. A thousand years.
LikeLiked by 1 person