Mr. Ruri Miura said that NATO's eastern expansion was not correct - Useless fanning - Mr. Trump would have been in harmony.
2022-04-09
Category:Ukraine I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Mr. Miura said that NATO's eastern expansion was incorrect.
Ruri Miura, an international political scientist, said, "It wasn't right at all" when asked "Is NATO's eastern expansion correct?" It is a view that goes against the tone of the media. In terms of content, did Russia need to provoke unnecessarily when it was not sufficiently weakened and could still lead to war as a nuclear power? Is saying. In addition, in response to the question "What if Mr. Trump was the president?", He instructed NATO not to expand eastward if he was Mr. Trump, and said that it is highly likely that he had taken Russia's request. The reason is that he is not so interested in Ukraine. At least Mr. Trump wouldn't have gone to at least the invasion of Kyiv. In other words, the United States does not have many interests in Ukraine, has weak trade relations, whould be regarded as a problem in the former Eastern Europe, and NATO does not unnecessarily stimulate it.
Japan has a calm analysis
Japan, like the United States, has little substantial relationship with Ukraine. It is necessary to look at this problem calmly apart from Western countries. Looking at the tone of the media and the internet, this war is only talked about from a sentimental point of view. As Miura pointed out in an interview, "Wars of this scale have occurred many times around the world, but why is the Ukrainian issue the only focus? It is a war between developed countries. . "
As I have posted before, Ukraine's accession to NATO was a very risky attempt to completely siege Moscow. This would require a high degree of diplomatic reconciliation, but no attempt was made. In the opposite position, if a hostile nation deploys a missile ６００ km to the capital of the United States, the United States should invade the military instantly. It is necessary to separate the argument that the war is happening now and that it must be ended as soon as possible and the argument that the cause of the war has started. However, it goes without saying that Russia's actions cannot be justified. Most importantly, the road to the end of the war will only be long if the cause of the beginning of the war is not removed.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
The CIA asked Zelensky to flee the country.Zelensky, who stayed in Ukraine, became a hero.
The U.S. told through the CIA to Zelensky You are Russia's "first goal".The Washington Post (WP) reported that the CIA told that we are ready to evacuate you and your family abroad.CIA Director William Burns is known to have mentioned the above issues to President Zelensky during his visit to Ukraine.In response, Zelensky said he would remain in Ukraine, and in Korea, he was called a hero with courage.Now, let's look at the CIA's request again.This encourages the president of a country to seek asylum abroad.In which world will the president of a war-torn or dangerous country defect abroad?The last time such incidents occurred in Afghanistan, it was clearly considered a renunciation of power.Afghan President Gani fled the Taliban's invasion and fled the country, and the Taliban quickly overpowered Afghanistan.
The president has strong authority.The most important thing is martial law and the authority of the commander-in-chief of the army.If martial law is issued, it will be possible to impose extra-legal domestic regulations.As commander-in-chief of the military, there are many operations that cannot be carried out without the president's permission.In other words, the United States urged Zelensky to relinquish these powers and flee abroad.Does this mean that the president should resign and end the war?
America has been in a third-party position on the Ukurina issue since the beginning.NATO countries responded the same way early on, announcing that they would not send U.S. troops to Ukraine.
Ukraine crisis as seen from Cuban crisis. Cuba protected but Ukraine isolated.
After Castro's successful Cuban Revolution in 1959, Cuba decided to pursue a socialist path and joined the socialist camp, and American capital was expelled.In 1961, President Eisenhauer broke off diplomatic relations with Cuba.Kennedy, the next president, failed in his attempt to overthrow Castro's revolutionary government by organizing Cubans who had defected to the United States to invade Cuba.In response, Castro stepped up his anti-U.S. stance and approached the Soviet Union, while Khrushchev deployed nuclear missiles in Cuba to gain an advantage over the U.S. by deploying nuclear weapons.
In October 1962, a U.S. Air Force reconnaissance plane discovered that a Soviet missile base was under construction.The range covered the entire United States and made it easier to attack the U.S. mainland with nuclear weapons.In a televised address on TV, President Kennedy declared that he would block the waters and airspace around Cuba to prevent the Soviet Union from bringing in weapons and ammunition and supplies used to make nuclear weapons.The Soviet Union was already in the process of sending ships loaded with goods and weapons to Cuba.Breaking through the U.S. blockade of the sea would have resulted in direct clashes, and the nuclear war crisis was imminent.The two leaders negotiated behind the scenes, and Khrushchev told Kennedy that the U.S. would remove its missile base in exchange for not invading Cuba. The agreement was reached on Oct. 27 to avoid a nuclear war crisis.
What is the difference between the Ukraine crisis and the Cuban crisis?The U.S. and Russia are in the opposite position.Castro approached the Soviet Union with the aim of building a socialist country and Zelensky approached NATO as a democratic country.This is also the opposite.And the same is true of the crisis, but why?The biggest difference was that Kennedy and Khrushchev had a conversation to avoid war and were avoided at the last minute.The United States has taken the position that it is not the party concerned this time.
The Cuban crisis was averted by dialogue between the United States and Russia.The U.S. has no intention of negotiating the Ukraine issue, only Ukraine was left behind
Daily cost of invasion of Ukraine is 2.4 trillion yen - Compared with the cost of fighting terrorism.
It is estimated that Russia's daily war expenses due to the invasion of Ukraine will exceed 2 trillion yen. This seems to be based on an analysis by Britain, but it is said that Russia's economic sanctions will come into effect and the war will not be able to continue.
In September 2021, a research team at the University of Brown compiled a report that the cost of a series of wars on terrorism would amount to $ 8 trillion (about 880 trillion yen) in the 20 years after the 9/11 attacks in the United States. .. The breakdown is $ 2.3 trillion (about 250 trillion yen) in Afghanistan and Pakistan, $ 2.1 trillion (about 230 trillion yen) in Iraq and Syria, and $ 2.2 trillion in medical treatment for veterans. It is (about 240 trillion yen). Estimating at 480 trillion yen excluding medical expenses for veterans, it will be 65.7 billion yen per day. If the cost of 230 trillion yen in Iraq and Syria is 8 years and 9 months, it will be about 720 yen per day. It looks like some digits are different.
Of course, if the number of soldiers put in, the fighters used, missiles, the price of ammunition, etc. differ greatly, the war cost will change significantly, but what is the difference in this war cost when those factors are excluded? It also seems to be effective in the sense that it shakes Russian public opinion. If the domestic economy is exhausted due to economic sanctions while spending a huge amount of war expenses per day, it is natural that criticism of the expenses caused by the war will arise. In any case, various information warfare is currently taking place.
How a country surrounded by great powers in history can remain an independent country.The Kingdom of Thailand was not colonized.
Speaking of how a country sandwiched between two major powers manages itself, there is the Kingdom of Thailand, which maintained its independence during the Asian colonial era. The white Asian colonies were ruled by the United Kingdom, which centered on India, France, which centered on Vietnam and Cambodia, and the Netherlands, which centered on Indonesia, so that they were not adjacent to each other.
Due to its geographical condition of being sandwiched between British and French colonial areas, Thailand takes advantage of the fact that Britain and France dislike being adjacent to each other, and does not lean towards either side, but acts as a buffer zone and transit point for both. Traded as land and profited from it.
On the Korean Peninsula, the Treaty of Tianjin was signed after the Kashin Coup, and the Japanese and Qing forces withdrew from the peninsula. This has the same meaning as the neutralization that Russia is seeking from Ukraine, which was confirmed in a treaty between Japan and Qing. However, due to the rebellion of the Donghak Party, Queen Min upset the balance and the Sino-Japanese War broke out. Empress Min thought that she could not control the civil war that had broken out in her country, so she requested reinforcements from the Qing Dynasty.
After the Sino-Japanese War, the Korean Peninsula became an independent country and established the Korean Empire, but it was devoted to Russia and tried to keep Japan and Qing in check. The Russo-Japanese War was the result of Russia's advance southward. In this case, too, it was a war between Japan and Russia.
The Korean Peninsula has no interest in the benefits of being a buffer zone, and has constantly implemented policies that disrupt the balance. As a result, the Korean government, believing that it would be unable to prevent the expansion of Russian interests, signed the Japan-Korea Annexation Treaty. Japan and Korea are not at war here. What is different from the Ukraine issue is that the Korean Peninsula was not subject to military invasion, and the issue was resolved between the major powers involved (Japan-Qing, Japan-Russia).
In Ukraine, a pro-Russian president and a pro-Western president have alternated every election. The eastern part has many residents who benefit from the economy with Russia, while the western part does business with Europe. With regard to domestic economic issues, if a pro-Western president is inaugurated, economic policies will be focused on Western areas, and if a pro-Russian president is inaugurated, economic policies will be focused on eastern areas. It will be done.
Although it may appear to be a security issue, economics has a lot to do with national elections. And while the current Zelensky administration is pro-Western, it has also taken an anti-Russian line. As a result, the security balance in Europe was seriously disrupted by the NATO membership issue.
In any case, times are different now. Russia has faced much criticism from the international community for its military invasion of these issues.
A clever Russian strategy How many scenarios does Putin have for Ukraine?
Putin's purpose is, as he said, to the east, NATO's non-expansion.If you think about the purpose of the Russian troops stationed near the Ukrainian border, how many scenarios are there?How many scenarios did the Biden administration attempt to respond to?
The first possibility is that if Ukraine joins NATO, it will capture Kiev, Ukraine's capital.In response, NATO countries in Europe said they would not send troops to Ukraine, and Biden's administration said they would not send troops to Ukraine.Biden's tone is "all-out war," so he would not send troops.That is, Biden tried to put off the issue by saying Ukraine would not join NATO in the near future.
From Russia's point of view, this is probably an ambiguous solution.However, if NATO forces do not enter Ukraine in the near future, Russia's immediate reason for its attack on Ukraine will be weakened, while the United States will continue to shout that Russia will attack and foreign companies withdrawed from Ukraine.Economic sanctions such as withdrawal at the civilian level have already begun.Russia claims to have withdrawn some of its troops, but the United States claims Russia is increasing its forces.Is this Biden's strategy?
Putin gets only economic blow.Therefore, the second scenario was to recognize the independence of the People's Republic of Lugansk and the People's Republic of Donetsk. We decided to bring back results.Russia is strongly opposed to Ukraine's NATO membership and is negotiating with Europe and U.S, which seemed different from case of Crimea aimed at some regions.Western countries are also responding to NATO versus Russia's all-out war.The theme is to avoid all-out war.
Putin approved the independence of pro-Russian forces after the next U.S.-Russia summit was decided and before the talks.The timing was exquisite.As a result, Putin obtained two cards before the talks.Russian troops will station in Lugansk and Donetsk to pressure the West and Ukraine.Moreover, Russia would try to prevent Ukraine from entering NATO.Since the eastern half of Ukraine is inhabited by many Russians, this method can be used in the future.Did Biden get the card?I think it's the same as the beginning.
President Putin seems to have done better this time.He succeeded in achieving results, and NATO even declared that it would not enter Ukraine.
