Search results

I think it's the same issue. can you analyse russian actions using the same frame you would use to analyse us actions wrt iraq or Afghanistan?

and what is that difference? the us invaded two countries and set up client states in both places, which later failed. I dont think that's massively different from what's happening here

yes but in the us, like Russia today, there was not much opposition. which doesnt mean they belong in a different category of international relations

so do we agree that the opposition in the us to the invasion of iraq and Afghanistan was not great? but you dont view them as belonging to a different IR category - states that cant be analysed rationally or negotiated with

if you're saying that there were huge protests in the us against the invasion of Afghanistan then I'll take your word for it, I have no idea. but it was certainly not apparent from the other side of the atlantic at the time. similarly, from my perspective, russia seems fairly unified behind the...

clearly the situation is not good, and in my view not getting better, but I think it's too easy to see this as something which was external and inevitable rather than something with which europe and the us were intimately involved and which represents at least a strategic and political failure...

was there a lot of negative public sentiment about Iraq or Afghanistan in the US at the time? that's def not how I remember it

my understanding is that the invasion of Ukraine has a good level of public support in russia. why that is seems like an interesting question, but I dont think that fact, assuming it is a fact, means that it can't be considered to be a rational actor who can be negotiated with or thought about...

but the point is that, within recent memory, the US felt threatened, and then it went and invaded a bunch of other countries in response, aided by an array of western allies. so it's simply false to say that we're above all this stuff whereas the russians are prehistoric barbarians and cant be...

OIC I agree to some extent. I think trade and industrial policy will increasingly come to the fore. One reason for that is to pursue energy transition and climate targets, and you could describe this as a kind of "eco-socialism". I think we'll also see a lot more of the "de-risking" approach...

Watched the first ten mins. As a critique of realism, I don't think it's very effective, bc I'm not persuaded by the distinction they attempt to draw between Western states, operating in a "rules based international order", who can be analysed rationally, and Russia, who operates according to an...

define eco-socialism, sir

v important speech in terms of understanding the changing geopolitical climate. neoliberalism is cancelled at the highest policy levels in the us govt. what is replacing it?

ok I'll try to carve out some time. I also have some critiques of realism, which I've linked to elsewhere in this thread. but realism remains an important perspective which can provide a lot of insight, much of which is counterintuitive from a "mainstream" POV.

is there a tldr for this?

the view from the biden admin:

excessive drug and alcohol use has been my main approach so far

it's kind of obvious that war with russia has made us weaker, how could it be otherwise

would we be better off, in an economic sense let's say, if the ukraine war had never taken place?

russia can do badly from the war in the ukraine alongside everyone else, it's not mutually exclusive