• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I think it’s important not to fall for the whole great man theory here. Putin undoubtedly played a role in shaping Russia, but the reason somebody like Putin got in charge was rooted in the historical and material conditions after the collapse of USSR.

    I do think you’re right that if US treated Russia differently during the period after collapse, and actually helped Russia then the relationship could’ve been very different today. Sachs talks about this a lot incidentally.

    There was a fundamental difference in perspective however. Russia didn’t see itself as being defeated by the west. They initially saw dissolution of USSR as a peaceful gesture, and a step towards finding a common ground with the west. However, they quickly found out that the west wasn’t interested in that and was looking to dominate. That’s when the relationship started to turn sour.

    Sure Turkey is embattled, but it’s restrained. That’s the point. By allowing Russia to slip out of NATO’s grasp Russia doesn’t have the same restraints.

    It’s true, but a big difference here is that Turkey was never in the same class as Russia which the biggest nuclear power with a huge military. The two can’t be meaningfully compared.

    Marcon’s unpopular policy decisions such as raising the retirement rate, and neoliberal economic reforms wouldn’t even raise an eyebrow in Russia with the public.

    They very much would I assure you. Labor rights in Russia are still in a far better state than most western countries as a legacy of USSR, this is a great post on the subject https://archive.is/9tMtq

    In 1995-2003 Russia would not have represented a real shift away from US manufacturing given your previous observation and my agreement with that Russia is in fact a gigantic strip mine for natural resources.

    I agree with that, but I do think the real issue is that Russia sees itself as a sovereign power. That’s where the similarity with China lies. The US can only deal with vassals, and they see sovereignty of other countries as being fundamentally unacceptable. So, I do think you are correct that the problem largely lies on the US side of the equation. Ultimately, the west would have benefited greatly from treating Russia as an equal and using it as a counterbalance to China.