What is Putin's problem with Ukraine?

I don't follow it but if there's one thing we should have learn from being involved there, it is politically toxic.

Can someone explain?

Here is a blog post that I wrote in 2014 while I was in London visiting a friend.  

The Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and today’s Russia based their grand strategy (defensive) on the fact that there are no natural land barriers to invasion. Focusing on the western borders, the Great European Plain has been a historical invasion route from Western Europe into Asia (a well as the reverse). Since there are no natural barriers to invasion, Russia must have depth. In the past, Russia achieved this by annexing territory, or otherwise controlling it.


During the Cold War NATO was 1600 kilometers from St. Petersburg. With the end of the Cold War and the accession of the Baltic States (Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia) to NATO that distance dropped to 160 kilometers. Depth…. That leaves Belarus and Ukraine as buffers (and Belarus is solid pro-Russia). Ukraine is 480 kilometers from Moscow at its closest point. Depth…. Return to the quote above and you will see what drives Russia today. It isn’t the paranoia that western media blames Putin’s behavior on: it is history and geography. [Hat-tip to STRATFOR for the distances.]


Today, Russia can easier achieve this depth through soft power- i.e. diplomatic pressure, economic treaties, etc. This is why I don’t think that Russia will invade Ukraine (beyond Crimea, I will address that later). If Russia does invade Ukraine it is not to annex it, but rather to use it as a diplomatic pawn to give away for other concessions (and perhaps to end the conflict with public approval on its side).  [Added today- one of Russia’s main goals in Syria is to obtain concessions in Ukraine.]


So Russia’s goal is for Ukraine to remain an independent state, although with deep internal divisions that render it neutral in the West – East debate. Even better, Ukraine would elect another pro-Russian government. But what Russia will not allow is a strong pro-Western government, and most certainly not a government that seeks NATO membership. That, to Russia, is an existential threat and a casus belli for war.


About Crimea: Russia still feels disrespected by the West. Russia didn’t need Crimea to secure its Black Sea Fleet; Russia has a long-term lease securing that base. The Crimean people and government are very pro-Russian, so Russia didn’t need to annex it. Russia did it for Russian pride. It was a calculated risk that the west wouldn’t go to war over Crimea (historically Crimea is Russian anyway). I don’t think that Russia will take that same risk with Ukraine; although the west is unlikely to respond militarily, Russia doesn’t want to have to rule over the pro-western portions of Ukraine. And as I argue above, they don’t need to and they can’t afford it.

i disagree. Crimea has huge gas deposits that with the changing of hands of crimea, were no longer obliged to honor the operator. Exxon. this is in part why Exxon stopped all developement for exploration in the arctic ocean.

Putin does not have a problem with Ukraine. Ukraine has a problem with the EU.

He wants dems hot Ukraine womenz fa hisself!

The US has ordered the families of all American embassy staff in Kyiv to leave Ukraine amid heightened fears of a Russian invasion.

The US State Department told the dependants of staffers at the US embassy in Ukraine's capital that they must leave the country and said that non-essential employees could also leave at government expense.

US officials stressed the Kyiv embassy will remain open and that the announcement does not constitute an evacuation.

In a statement, the State Department noted recent reports that Russia was planning significant military action against Ukraine.

However, the Russian Foreign Ministry has accused NATO countries of escalating tensions around Ukraine with disinformation.

People told not to travel to Ukraine

US citizens have also been advised not to travel to the country due to the "increased threats of Russian military action and COVID-19", the US State Department said.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/us-orders-families-of-all-american-embassy-staff-in-kyiv-to-leave-ukraine-amid-fears-of-russian-invasion/ar-AAT4kUa?cvid=90da2d972b9d4c09a492b895f5c32b4b&ocid=winp1taskbar

Putin does not have a problem with Ukraine! IMHO, it all boils down to Putin wanting the Soviet Union to be as great as it once was. I would just about bet that somewhere in Putin's mind, he believes that conquering Ukraine will cause it to become part of the Soviet Union thus making the country and population larger.

Conquering Ukraine would also ensure that it does not happen to go the way of democracy and/or the U.S. as well.

the soviet union was great once??????? odd. culling the masses on a yearly basis doesnt make your pissant nation great.

Peter1469 wrote:Here is a blog post that I wrote in 2014 while I was in London visiting a friend.  

The Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and today’s Russia based their grand strategy (defensive) on the fact that there are no natural land barriers to invasion. Focusing on the western borders, the Great European Plain has been a historical invasion route from Western Europe into Asia (a well as the reverse). Since there are no natural barriers to invasion, Russia must have depth. In the past, Russia achieved this by annexing territory, or otherwise controlling it.


During the Cold War NATO was 1600 kilometers from St. Petersburg. With the end of the Cold War and the accession of the Baltic States (Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia) to NATO that distance dropped to 160 kilometers. Depth…. That leaves Belarus and Ukraine as buffers (and Belarus is solid pro-Russia). Ukraine is 480 kilometers from Moscow at its closest point. Depth…. Return to the quote above and you will see what drives Russia today. It isn’t the paranoia that western media blames Putin’s behavior on: it is history and geography. [Hat-tip to STRATFOR for the distances.]


Today, Russia can easier achieve this depth through soft power- i.e. diplomatic pressure, economic treaties, etc. This is why I don’t think that Russia will invade Ukraine (beyond Crimea, I will address that later). If Russia does invade Ukraine it is not to annex it, but rather to use it as a diplomatic pawn to give away for other concessions (and perhaps to end the conflict with public approval on its side).  [Added today- one of Russia’s main goals in Syria is to obtain concessions in Ukraine.]


So Russia’s goal is for Ukraine to remain an independent state, although with deep internal divisions that render it neutral in the West – East debate. Even better, Ukraine would elect another pro-Russian government. But what Russia will not allow is a strong pro-Western government, and most certainly not a government that seeks NATO membership. That, to Russia, is an existential threat and a casus belli for war.


About Crimea: Russia still feels disrespected by the West. Russia didn’t need Crimea to secure its Black Sea Fleet; Russia has a long-term lease securing that base. The Crimean people and government are very pro-Russian, so Russia didn’t need to annex it. Russia did it for Russian pride. It was a calculated risk that the west wouldn’t go to war over Crimea (historically Crimea is Russian anyway). I don’t think that Russia will take that same risk with Ukraine; although the west is unlikely to respond militarily, Russia doesn’t want to have to rule over the pro-western portions of Ukraine. And as I argue above, they don’t need to and they can’t afford it.

""I don’t think that Russia will take that same risk with Ukraine; ""

The Ukrainians are still smarting over their treatment by Stalin, a million or so starved to death , a lot of history in that region

The west need to flood the Ukraine with weapons for their defense against Russian aggression

Beijing will sit back and do nothing or he will do the exact opposite of what he should do so that a war breaks out between Russia and the US. It's what the Democrats have wanted all along to take the focus away from their illegal and unconstitutional shenanigans. HRC talked about it and hoped it would happen long ago.