Russia’s diplomats were once a key part of President Putin’s foreign policy strategy. But that has all changed.

In the years leading up to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, diplomats lost their authority, their role reduced to echoing the Kremlin’s aggressive rhetoric.

BBC Russian asks former diplomats, as well as ex-Kremlin and White House insiders, how Russian diplomacy broke down.

  • socsa
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s actually hilarious how millennials are refusing to shit themselves in fear over hollow threats of nuclear apocalypse like the boomers did for decades.

    Like, I’m going to die a slow death from microplastic poisoning. My kids will slowly cook to death as the earth warms. Instant death by fireball sounds pretty nice.

    • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      idk, I think I prefer the constant fear, at least compared to the bloodthirsty calls for nuclear war to begin over Ukraine because ackstually Russia’s nukes don’t work anymore, and also nuclear war isn’t really that bad anyway

        • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’ve seen this on reddit and other hellholes from time to time

          most people tend to have a degree of separation from it, like early on in the war when people were calling for a no-fly zone over Ukraine (which would have necessarily meant NATO strikes into Ukraine or Russian territory, which would put us at the closest humanity has ever been to a nuclear exchange); about mid-way through the war when some countries were trying to form a “coalition of the willing” (article is more recent than when I was thinking though) to enter Ukraine that wasn’t technically NATO forces but like, my god, you’re really cutting it fucking close there; and some people nowadays are musing if F-16s could be used from NATO territory

          there’s also been some vague threats from time to time over Kaliningrad but luckily that’s never escalated to outright military rhetoric, at least not yet.

        • Piye@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          NATO wants nuclear genocide to happen against minorities, they brag about genociding minorities all the time in fact

    • ArthurParkerhouse@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The young scions of our age find themselves in a curious juxtaposition to their forbearers, who once trembled at the thought of world-ending calamities unleashed by the fiery engines of the Autarch’s weaponry. These newer souls scoff at such fears, deeming them hollow echoes of a past era, perhaps because they have been raised in the shadow of subtler, yet equally inexorable, dooms. To them, the threat of slow ruin wrought by the invisible maladies that pollute our waters and air, or the gradual inferno that the Sun’s ever-increasing wrath promises to our world, hold more tangible dread. For these youths, the prospect of instantaneous annihilation in a blaze of cosmic fire seems almost a reprieve, a quick severance of life’s Gordian knot, sparing them the prolonged suffering promised by the ills that plague our slowly deteriorating Urth.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your sentiment is not, in fact, new. It existed back then as well.

      millennials are refusing to shit themselves in fear

      Started good…

      Like, I’m going to die a slow death from microplastic poisoning. My kids will slowly cook to death as the earth warms. Instant death by fireball sounds pretty nice.

      …And then you wrote this. I see contradiction.

      I’m really sorry to piss on your little eco-statement here, but climate change fears are relevant for decadent rich societies only. Most of the actual humanity is still more concerned with poverty, illiteracy, hunger, epidemics and genocide.

      But I agree that those threats are hollow now, because people who’d never actually fulfill them are voicing them. Mostly thieves from the Russian “elite”.

      In 1984 the threat would be voiced by bureaucratic leaders of a block occupying large part of the globe which was more or less designed from the ground up for playing “Global Thermonuclear War”, you can see than even in the way Soviet military in its every component was being developed starting from the 50s. Those leaders were not even that corrupt, usually (well, such famous Politburo members as Boris Yeltsin and Heydar Aliyev obviously were, but still), what they owned officially and unofficially is upper middle class level, in Western terms.

      So maybe boomers were not so cowardly, yes?

  • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    It might be hard to imagine now, but Mr Putin himself told the BBC back in 2000 that “Russia is ready to co-operate with Nato… right up to joining the alliance”.

    “I cannot imagine my country isolated from Europe,” he added.

    Back then, early in his presidency, Mr Putin was eager to build ties with the West, a former senior Kremlin official told the BBC.

    Gotta wonder how Russia never ended up being able to NATO despite this.

    • xill47@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Declassified (by the US) documents mention that Putin wanted to join without waiting in queue with “insignificant countries” (in early 2000s, who would that be? Baltic countries?), and as late as 2012 there was a contract for usage Russian airport as transit hub to Afghanistan (https://m.gazeta.ru/politics/2012/06/29_a_4650373.shtml, was looking specifically for pro-Russian media as a source)

      • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Putin wanted to join without waiting in queue with “insignificant countries”

        this is the dumbest excuse ever trotted out in explanation for why Russia wasn’t allowed to join. because the largest military and nuclear arsenal in europe should for some reason wait in a “line” in joining an allegedly defensive alliance, when they’d be the greatest possible contribution to common defense? why on earth would there be a “line” to enter an alliance in the first place? surely they had more than a single clerk doing nations’ paperwork to join?

        • xill47@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Something about “you should apply” vs “you should invite us”. Noone wants to bow to another and then tension raised over it. Seems pretty believable to me, especially with what was going on domestically

          IMO, the new council they have made in Rome in 2002 (NATO-Russia Council) and its predecessor (Permanent Joint Council, 1997) existence should have stopped the farce with “oh no, they are expanding”, and a start of joint cooperation. Maybe not as NATO memebership, but as a new working alliance. Right after founding of NRC though, Russia decided that it wont proceed with NATO membership

          Quotes of Putin from Ukraine joint press conference, 2002 (source: http://www.en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/21598)

          Russia does not intend to join NATO. Russia, as you know, is engaged in a very constructive dialogue with NATO to create a new Russia-NATO structure “at twenty”, in which all twenty countries will be represented as nations, each having one vote, and all the issues will be solved without prior consultations, without any prior decisions on a number of issues being taken first within the bloc.

          And a curious snippet

          I am absolutely convinced that Ukraine will not shy away from the processes of expanding interaction with NATO and the Western allies as a whole. Ukraine has its own relations with NATO; there is the Ukraine-NATO Council. At the end of the day the decision is to be taken by NATO and Ukraine. It is a matter for those two partners.

          Guess money and power do change people.

      • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have secret intelligence that the actual reason Putin didn’t join NATO is because he was angry that Romania joined first because he wanted to be the first country starting with R in NATO. NATO officials begged, pleaded with him to join the organization, but he’s just such a petty man.

        • xill47@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I do not get your take. It is obvious that early 2000s Russia wanted special treatment. It is also obvious that it was not getting it, ever. If it did not take a stance of “special treatment country”, Russia would most likely be a NATO member without “special” priveledges (I assume that most notable is selling war assets to allied countries). Still, the intent was to cooperate, as late as 2012. Internally, there was even a promise of Visa-free access to Schengen

          • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course Russia should get special treatment! They were America’s greatest foe in the Cold War!

            The US not letting Russia into NATO might be their single greatest error. Ever.

      • severien@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Russia / Putin didn’t want to follow standard procedure, feeling entitled for a special treatment.

          • theotherone@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            NATO, as an alliance, requires that its members follow rules. A country that has difficulty following rules may not come to the aid of its allies when needed. Do you really think NATO came out a loser in that deal? It sounds like they dodged a bullet in not having to rely upon a capricious dictator.

            • Piye@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Turkey literally never follows any rules whatsoever and yet you still shill for them

        • Piye@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Like when the US illegally invades Iraq and murders millions of civilians against UN orders

          • severien@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Lol, what a fine example of whataboutism. We’re talking about a procedure to enter NATO and you whatabout Iraq. How about we talk about the crimes of Ivan the Terrible instead?

      • what_is_a_name@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The factual link you posted (not the commentary on CATO, lol) says the opposite. NATO cut ties after Putin began turning aggressive as Ukraine began gaining independence.

          • what_is_a_name@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            CATO is a bunch of crazies posturing as a think tank. Their opinions are ideological and not fact based. They make the Heritage Foundation (I think they rebranded to Heartland Institute) sound like a reasoned logical bunch.

            CATO is not a trustworthy factual source. It’s a trustworthy source if you want to justify oligarchy and fascism, though.

          • what_is_a_name@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            And yeah. You keep posting links that contradict the statement “they laughed them out of the room” you originally posted. NATO opened up to Russia. Russia decided it was not worth their effort.

                • OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You didn’t indicate so. You just laid out a claim on thin air and then went ahead to deny all I said. So…

              • Holyginz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Your links keep contradicting your own point and your response is that we are confirming our own bias? The mental gymnastics and cognitive dissonance you go through on a regular basis must be a real removed lmao

          • krolden
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Responds to criticism of a Cato link with a google amp link…

              • krolden
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m not arguing at all I’m just pointing out some cringe behavior.

  • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nah, Russian diplomacy is at their highest once they realize they could write off the West as a loss instead of sucking up to them, who sees the Russians as Asiatic orcs anyways. Russia is somehow able to be friends with both India and China, they have made huge diplomatic (and military) strides in Africa, and they’re not doing too shabby in SEA or WANA either. That’s almost two continents right there.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Only Russia is not a friend for India and China. Its capabilities are not sufficient to be one anymore. It’s just begging them to make some appearance of friendship for cheap resources and various concessions which can not go on forever.

      The USSR is still breaking up. Russian state as it exists now is not sustainable. It was a complete nightmare in the 90s, yes, and was apparently becoming better in the 00s and even 10s, but now we will see what is going to transpire inside Russia after cessation of hostilities with Ukraine, and that is not yet a thing.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      So it was ‘sucking up’ to the west but is ‘friends’ with India and China? Delusional much?

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Russian diplomats were a key part of Mr Putin’s team, helping resolve territorial disputes with China and Norway, leading talks on deeper co-operation with European countries, and ensuring a peaceful transition after a revolution in Georgia.

    But as Mr Putin became more powerful and experienced, he became increasingly convinced he had all the answers and that diplomats were unnecessary, says Alexander Gabuev, the director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, who is living in exile in Berlin.

    A year later, when Russia invaded Georgia, Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reportedly swore at his UK counterpart, David Miliband, asking: “Who are you to lecture me?”

    In 2009, Mr Lavrov and the then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed a giant red “reset button” in relations, and the two countries seemed to be building co-operation - especially on security issues.

    But it soon became obvious to US officials that their Russian counterparts were simply parroting Mr Putin’s growing anti-Western views, says Ben Rhodes, deputy national security advisor to former US President Barack Obama.

    Mr Bondarev, who used to work for Moscow’s mission to the UN in Geneva, recalls one meeting where Russia blocked all proposed initiatives, prompting colleagues from Switzerland to complain.


    The original article contains 1,612 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 88%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Piye@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The British Bullshit Corporation is one to talk, they’ve been seething about India gaining Independence now for decades, and despite them literally going to the moon they still can’t bring themselves to show any measure of respect

    Also lets just magically all forget all these NATO trash “diplomats” walking out of Lavrovs speech at the UN like 13 year olds having a tantrum instead of actually engaging in the one thing they were supposed to do, “diplomacy”. The west is the entity that didn’t even want to negotiate with Russia, NATO is the one who decided to egg Russia on until this happened, despite Ukraine not even being a NATO member.

    But yeah sure, whatever BBC, it’s totally Russia’s fault you acted like babies and backtracked on all your agreements

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      did someone put polonium in its tee?

      No but that’s how Putin kept trump in line, polonium laced tees ready at a moments notice for his many impromptu golf trips. Must be what Kishner used that secret Russian channel for

  • PolandIsAStateOfMind
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    50
    ·
    1 year ago

    Russian diplomacy is actually pretty good with many successes, but to notice that you should look at something other than USA and EU.

      • PolandIsAStateOfMind
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        For example continuing cooperation and expansion of BRICS, recent Africa summit, increasing relations with countries in LatAm, many trade relations which were in large part able to replace everything lost on NATO embargoes, etc. etc.

        • El Barto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          But that’s just being nice to those who are automatically nice to them. Why don’t they do the same with those who oppose them? They just keep doing “no u, no u, no u.” In that respect, other countries such as Saudi Arabia and China have better diplomacy.

          • zephyreks@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because modern diplomacy says to be nice to your allies and not nice to your enemies? That’s why the US keeps on throwing sanctions at China.

            • El Barto@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sure, sure. But China is not full “I will nuke you!” with the U.S. I don’t even like the Chinese government. But their diplomacy is better than the Russian one. That’s all my point.

          • PolandIsAStateOfMind
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            But that’s just being nice to those who are automatically nice to them.

            That’s part of a diplomacy. Also ask yourself, why are they being nice to them, especially places being plundered by wester colonialism for centuries. For example something like the current situation in Niger where French diplomat get his credentials and visa revoked over not even pretending to be doing his job + ignoring the government he was ambassador to + inflammatory speech of Macron worsening the situation. Which leads to the curious problem of westerners, including a lot of people in this thread, having weird definition of diplomacy as dictating ultimatums to kneeling nonwhite people. USA and EU are now doing exactly this: dictating ultimatums, and are bewildered when other people don’t want to hear this.

            Also, it’s not olny being nice: there are a lot of treaties being signed, a lot of gound prepared for further ones - this is how you gauge diplomacy.

            Why don’t they do the same with those who oppose them?

            You mean Russia? West is only speaking to Russia with ultimatums and loaded “propositions”. I guess the revelation of how France and Germany treated the Minsk agreement was a big bucket of cold water for Russia, they stopped believing what NATO says.

            They just keep doing “no u, no u, no u.”

            Again, what does west expect when they aren’t even engaging in a good faith? Non hostile countries hear something vastly different, as proven by the examples i cited earlier.

            In that respect, other countries such as Saudi Arabia and China have better diplomacy.

            Idk about Saudis, but China recently vrokered a deal between Iran and Saudis, two of the most traditionally mutually hostile countries on Earth, i would call this stellar diplomacy.

    • Alaskaball [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sorry kiddo but we’re talking about our garden and our yards in front and behind the house and not the jungle right outside our pristine whitewashed picket fence

      did they fix the emoji thing yet?

      maybe-later-honey porky-happy maybe-later-kiddo

      • zephyreks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why exactly do you think that pretty much the entire Global South has not placed significant sanctions on Russia? Why do you think so many countries want to join BRICS?

        Must be because of poor Russian diplo. Meanwhile, African countries are literally committing coups for their government staying too close to European colonial powers.

        • severien@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Joining sanctions necessarily incurs a cost in trade. It’s understandable that poorer countries which have smaller stake in the war don’t want to participate.

          Why do you think so many countries want to join BRICS?

          They want to join to get funds from the development bank. Not much more.