Historical Combat, War, Geopolitics History and Analysis

[Nilgiri]

So, just in 2021 when forex was increasing positively, somehow they got a very funny idea of pouring forex money into unnecessary expensive 'infrastructure' development. And then comes the war, skyrocketing energy price coupled with tremendous corruption and mismanagement got us where we are today.

It was by design, they didn't suddenly get the idea. The forex increase (if you look at current account being small net accrual yearly at best) was driven by foreign loans, bonds etc (i.e capital account side). i.e it wasnt export driven (given pressing needs of imports that propelled side by side with RMG rise etc).

India and lot of developing countries in general have this same (capt account driven forex rise) phenomenon, but the key difference is the credit rating you have and expat/diaspora size + their wealth pool (in forex that you want to tap in to) and overall investment climate/reliability and so on.

That leads to India using NRI bonds significantly for example and ability to get loans/bonds past that at larger amounts, lower rates and longer maturities etc. Along with what India gets on the FDI and FPI side....that BD doesnt get in any sizeable amount but somehow BBS shows a sizeable bump to BD gross capital formation (I guess to show results of the loan intake catching and converting to domestic investment push) according to its estimates.

So BD "forex rise" had higher rates and shorter maturities and the loans as you say were overpriced w.r.t what they delivered as well given things like the below average quality BD bureaucracy, lack of technical expertise pool locally, conglomerates of scale to bid on infra and so on (i.e its relative monopoly-autocracy situation at its core).

So the maturities and rates intensely coming to bear with the post-covid world economy (and US using fed rate as it does now that soaks up lot of world latent investment compared to before) means forex attrition that you see now as nothing really structurally changed and set in beneficially during the rise phase.

If you question it, the lady is threatening to shut everything down:

I would shut everything if they talk much: PM Hasina

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has criticised the individuals critical of the government and its handling of forex reserves and warned that she would shut everything down and observe the aftermath if they talk too much. In a press conference at Ganabhaban, she said, If they talk too much, I would...

en.prothomalo.com

Even Sri Lanka has managed to increase their forex from near zero to 3.5 billions or something in just two years. So, this Ukraine war excuse is mostly bullshit. I am no expert but I think, just with the right management alone we can be right back on the track within a year.

Maybe we will have to see. The loan market internationally is not going to go back to the 2009 - 2019 climate (post finance crisis pre covid) this decade at least IMO. Loan model on same credit rating and investment climate BD has as before becomes much harder to pull off.

BD needs deep structural change.

About tax, afaik 7 millions out of 170 millions are only registered and even then, only 60% of these 7 millions actually pay their taxes in full.

The base is very small, revenue is anaemic and not growing at rate that BBS estimates GDP is growing by.

I don’t know much about economics, hence my question would be, how does more tax help here? Specially considering that anything defence related require USD or Euro.
Or is it about overall development?

When the country is in defence import heavy reliance phase, true the tax revenue (in Taka) doesnt have as much meaningful impact like forex does.

But it does grow options for everything that can be done or developed at some proximate ease with resource and asset pool you already have in domestic Taka (salaries, procurements etc relevant to these)...and setting up everything to do more of that later with end-end Taka for defence production, RnD etc.

Past that higher tax revenue means better credit rating and virtuous cycle starting from a deeper onion layer (since you put that much off the loan-monopoly-autocrat reliance table etc for investment and growth, and investors do take note of this better "competition" so to speak and give better rates, amounts, maturities etc and even increase FDI and FPI with time too as those routes later take hold too). That will have indirect role on forex sustainable rise for the country.

 

[Afif]

Go read what happens to Banu Qurayza

My friend, That quote is exactly from the Banu qurayza incident.

While I do not claim any authority, I would say that I have degree in Islamic studies. So I have my fair share of academic knowledge on this.

Just for basic inforomation only, you can read it from Wiki. I think they wrote a fairly accurate description.

"According to Mubrakpuri, Stillman, Peters and Adil and Muir, when Sa'd arrived, his fellow Aws pleaded for leniency towards the Qurayza and on his request pledged that they would abide by his decision. He then pronounced that "the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives". Prohpet Muhammad approved of the ruling,

The Sunni hadith do not give the number killed, but state that one woman and all pubescent males were killed."

Note- Even that one women was killed because she participated in combat an killed a muslim soldier

Siege of Banu Qurayza - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

And respectfully, I would say the verse from Quran that you are quoting should not be interpreted this way.

 

[Gary]

My friend, That quote is exactly from the Banu qurayza incident.

While I do not claim any authority, I would say that I have degree in Islamic studies. So I have my fair share of academic knowledge on this.

Just for basic inforomation only, you can read it from Wiki. I think they wrote a fairly accurate description.

"According to Mubrakpuri, Stillman, Peters and Adil and Muir, when Sa'd arrived, his fellow Aws pleaded for leniency towards the Qurayza and on his request pledged that they would abide by his decision. He then pronounced that "the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives". Prohpet Muhammad approved of the ruling,

The Sunni hadith do not give the number killed, but state that one woman and all pubescent males were killed."

Note- Even that one women was killed because she participated in combat an drilled a muslim soldier

Siege of Banu Qurayza - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Let's say you are right and I'm doing this to shorten the debate about the status of a commoner. That one woman you mentioned is killed because...he killed a soldier right? Do you know that Israeli women are part of the army as part of the conscription system in Israel, by that measure alone they are a legitimate target of retaliation, even discharged ones.

How does the Palestinian knows, if let's say during her active duty, that she has not harmed anyone?

And respectfully, I would say the verse from Quran that you are quoting should not be interpreted this way.

So how should I interpret it ? It's very clear that verse. Do as they did.

 

[Afif]

That one woman you mentioned is killed because...he killed a soldier right? Do you know that Israeli women are part of the army as part of the conscription system in Israel, by that measure alone they are a legitimate target of retaliation,

Okay, I will give you that, this has slipped my mind.

It would be interesting to know what international law says about this.

 

[Afif]

Past middle east recently, many millions have left Afghanistan (2 million or so just since the taliban takeover).... 2 million rohingya or so will be permanent part of Bangladesh again by Burmese action to permanently demographically change Arakan area.

About- Rohingya crisis, i am gonna be more assertive here and say that your prediction is wildly of the chart. Even though it looks that, we lost spectacularly and forced to swallow the Rohingya crisis, Bangladesh has the materiel means to flip the coin At its time of choice. Its economy is six time bigger and it has access to western weapons and technology. Myanmar is heavily sanctioned pariah state and going through civil war, and if this continues to the end of this decade, this regime will be considerably weaker. For analogy I say, this crisis is more like Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, which is for now kept frozen in the deep fridge. But, if there is legal democratic government in Dhaka, I can bet you that there will be strong political will (which current government lacks for obvious reasons) and with long term strategy, it is feasible for Bangladesh to build up its forces leveraging its overwhelming economic size (compared to Myanmar) and its access to Western military hardware. Just the way Azerbaijan did, and it looks like that if we are willing to make certain compromises with regard to PRC, USA is ready to be very much in bed with us with regard to Myanmar.

I am not saying there will be complete transfer of 2 millions Rohingyas into Myanmar again. But we can definitely reverse this total loss and make partial.

Maybe there would some repatriation or we can do some military punishment like the way Turkey does in Syria. Because as I said, we have the material and financial means to do so. Myanmar cannot win a conventional arms race with BD in the long run just like BD cannot with India. (Indian economy is 8 times bigger than BD and BD's economy is 6 times than that of Myanmar)

 

[Nilgiri]

About- Rohingya crisis, i am gonna be more assertive here and say that your prediction is wildly of the chart. Even though it looks that, we lost spectacularly and forced to swallow the Rohingya crisis, Bangladesh has the materiel means to flip the coin At its time of choice. Its economy is six time bigger and it has access to western weapons and technology. Myanmar is heavily sanctioned pariah state and going through civil war, and if this continues to the end of this decade, this regime will be considerably weaker. For analogy I say, this crisis is more like Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, which is for now kept frozen in the deep fridge. But, if there is legal democratic government in Dhaka, I can bet you that there will be strong political will (which current government lacks for obvious reasons) and with long term strategy, it is feasible for Bangladesh to build up its forces leveraging its overwhelming economic size (compared to Myanmar) and its access to Western military hardware. Just the way Azerbaijan did, and it looks like that if we are willing to make certain compromises with regard to PRC, USA is ready to be very much in bed with us with regard to Myanmar.

I am not saying there will be complete transfer of 2 millions Rohingyas into Myanmar again. But we can definitely reverse this total loss and make partial.

Maybe there would some repatriation or we can do some military punishment like the way Turkey does in Syria. Because as I said, we have the material and financial means to do so. Myanmar cannot win a conventional arms race with BD in the long run just like BD cannot with India. (Indian economy is 8 times bigger than BD and BD's economy is 6 times than that of Myanmar)

I sympathise with BD strongly on the issue.

We will have to see.

I only brought it up as looser example of compelled move....it is foreseeable permanent (or semi-permanent) to me, but it can change for sure.

But that will involve making a new hard border by BD blood spill (different to quasi border status in PA territories), and the factors involving that are nebulous to me compared to vast amounts of material I have read at depth regarding Israel and US doctrine and long debate on what steps to take with Palestinians on carrot and stick given quasi border status. Its the stick that's going to come there now and the scale of this will simply mean earlier precedent the West used itself in Europe, notably after WW2 (this is why parts of their approach wr.t. Russia today in Ukraine surprise me somewhat too, but thats another topic anyway).

 

[Marlii]

About- Rohingya crisis, i am gonna be more assertive here and say that your prediction is wildly of the chart. Even though it looks that, we lost spectacularly and forced to swallow the Rohingya crisis, Bangladesh has the materiel means to flip the coin At its time of choice. Its economy is six time bigger and it has access to western weapons and technology. Myanmar is heavily sanctioned pariah state and going through civil war, and if this continues to the end of this decade, this regime will be considerably weaker. For analogy I say, this crisis is more like Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, which is for now kept frozen in the deep fridge. But, if there is legal democratic government in Dhaka, I can bet you that there will be strong political will (which current government lacks for obvious reasons) and with long term strategy, it is feasible for Bangladesh to build up its forces leveraging its overwhelming economic size (compared to Myanmar) and its access to Western military hardware. Just the way Azerbaijan did, and it looks like that if we are willing to make certain compromises with regard to PRC, USA is ready to be very much in bed with us with regard to Myanmar.

I am not saying there will be complete transfer of 2 millions Rohingyas into Myanmar again. But we can definitely reverse this total loss and make partial.

Maybe there would some repatriation or we can do some military punishment like the way Turkey does in Syria. Because as I said, we have the material and financial means to do so. Myanmar cannot win a conventional arms race with BD in the long run just like BD cannot with India. (Indian economy is 8 times bigger than BD and BD's economy is 6 times than that of Myanmar)

Bangladesh having access to western technology is never a given. Don't forget US had sanctioned RAB some time ago all it takes is some human rights issue and you would be on the cutting board as well. With all the economic and diplomatic significance india has it still has a ban on small arms from both belgium and Germany.By the economic metric pakistan is 10 times smaller than india but they have a military that is half the size. Its the seriousness that matters and add to the fact that Myanmar is now china's ally and india would be indifferent at the best case scenario.IF Bangladesh is not serious about its defence then it may have hard lessons for it in the future with a myanmar that is now more rogue than ever

 

[Afif]

Bangladesh having access to western technology is never a given. Don't forget US had sanctioned RAB some time ago all it takes is some human rights issue and you would be on the cutting board as well. With all the economic and diplomatic significance india has it still has a ban on small arms from both belgium and Germany.By the economic metric pakistan is 10 times smaller than india but they have a military that is half the size. Its the seriousness that matters and add to the fact that Myanmar is now china's ally and india would be indifferent at the best case scenario.IF Bangladesh is not serious about its defence then it may have hard lessons for it in the future with a myanmar that is now more rogue than ever

First of all, they didn’t sanction on RAB as a whole organisation, they sanctioned few individuals. But again, this is quite different with Military hardware and National security. Even few days ago USA was asking us to sign GSOMIA.

There are two preconditions I mentioned.

First- There has to be legal democratic government in Dhaka. (which won’t cause serious human rights violations in the first place)

Secondly- If we make certain compromises with regard to PRC, USA would be on board with us. (The signalling is very clear from their side)

But again, by access to western technology I meant mostly Turkey. (As more and more they are offering all Kind of solutions)

When it comes to the matter in between BD and Myanmar, India doesn’t have that much say either. Yes, it is in India's interest that BD and Myanmar doesn’t go to war. But if tries to actively help Myanmar militarily or sanction BD (far fetched ideas) during any potential conflict, it is gonna be a strategic blunder on India's side. First of all, BD is a much bigger trading partner than Myanmar, secondly, last thing India needs is permanent hostility on its three borders at once.

Maybe @Nilgiri can share his thoughts on what India's response would be or should be in a serious diplomatic and military stand off between BD and Myanmar. Previously he mansions that, he thinks in this Rohingya issue India should strongly support BD.

 

[Afif]

@Jackdaws

 

[Marlii]

First of all, they didn’t sanction on RAB as a whole organisation, they sanctioned few individuals. But again, this is quite different with Military hardware and National security. Even few days ago USA was asking us to sign GSOMIA.

There are two preconditions I mentioned.

First- There has to be legal democratic government in Dhaka. (which won’t cause serious human rights violations in the first place)

Secondly- If we make certain compromises with regard to PRC, USA would be on board with us. (The signalling is very clear from their side)

But again, by access to western technology I meant mostly Turkey. (As more and more they are offering all Kind of solutions)

When it comes to the matter in between BD and Myanmar, India doesn’t have that much say either. Yes, it is in India's interest that BD and Myanmar doesn’t go to war. But if tries to actively help Myanmar militarily or sanction BD (far fetched ideas) during any potential conflict, it is gonna be a strategic blunder on India's side. First of all, BD is a much bigger trading partner than Myanmar, secondly, last thing India needs is permanent hostility on its three borders at once.

Maybe @Nilgiri can share his thoughts on what India's response would be or should be in a serious diplomatic and military stand off between BD and Myanmar. Previously he mansions that, he thinks in this Rohingya issue India should strongly support BD.

My point still stands if BD is not serious about its defence then it cant do anthing against a military junta. Their airforce is quite superior to that of BD presently. Even in the naval front Myanmar is launching indigenous ships.if those modernisation plans dont get a serious boost then it will be hard

 

[Afif]

I'm VERY aware of this. Just like in Palestine where we watch people cheer for muslims getting killed, I know for a fact my "compatriots" wished me and the muslims harm. A simple scroll on Indonesian social media is all I need.

They will figure out the hard way eventually that we will eventually pay them back.

Interesting, if you are willing to discuss, I would like to know more about it.
didn’t know Indonesia has such division. Who are these 'compatriots'?
What is the political ideology behind it?

 

[Gary]

Interesting, if you are willing to discuss, I would like to know more about it.
didn’t know Indonesia has such division. Who are these 'compatriots'?
What is the political ideology behind it?

Long story short there's a rising (display) of Islamophobes in Indonesia now that they know they would get away with it.

They know they have powerful friends in the higher ups

 

[Afif]

@Nilgiri Interesting stuff, certainly he did anticipate a full scale war is going to break out within next two years. Also, it echoes the fact that he was ready to accept the political solution till the last moment.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri Interesting stuff, certainly he did anticipate a full scale war is going to break out within next two years. Also, it echoes the fact that he was ready to accept the political solution till the last moment.

He was overall quite fair minded and reasonable....but the die had already been cast in many ways as to the problems inherited by the speed and intensity of the Pakistan movement and impact on populations with limited education, resource and institution to handle it and rectify it to mould it better and mitigate early stark polarisations/divisions that had near inevitable potential to cascade (vis a vis the small elite population in the position to do this in quite insular way).

There were a multitude of ways to achieve autonomy and proper checks and balances between the two sides while retaining federal structure. Same goes regarding partition to begin with. Sometimes I wish they cloned me a thousand times over and insert me and people like me at the crucial junctures in the forks in the road to make robust system that balances all concerns well and applies a comprehensive "trust but verify" institutional rule of law. Many lives would have been saved and the region would be far more developed than it is today given the progress that would have happened as people are able to build trust slowly instead of fear. Balancing freedom and freedom of expression with absolute respect of individual rights within largest net that is inherited and could be cast in the greater good for all.

But in the end there are always strong grievances found in any nationalism that stay in long residual time always ready to resurface as a package of all other identity fellow travellers (many coming from grievance/fear)....i.e there are moral compromises it has made with the human "id". Divisions are ultimately easier to find and harness (in small timeframes) than bridges that take a lot longer to build and traverse over reliably with praxis.

You may find this article by Tagore from 1917 quite interesting to read, it came up in discussion elsewhere I am at (when I mentioned my own deeper problems with nationalism, in that I desire a nationstate largely triumphant over its identity-grievance issues and has put functionality to the forefront instead and that I see the "modern" nationstate era as transitional one itself in the end, though its going to stay for a very long time in human civilisation's progress.... and a friend brought up that it sounded much like Tagore).

Nationalism in the West

The Atlantic covers news, politics, culture, technology, health, and more, through its articles, podcasts, videos, and flagship magazine.

www.theatlantic.com

PDF: https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/archives/1917/03/119-3/132219075.pdf

 

[Afif]

There were a multitude of ways to achieve autonomy and proper checks and balances between the two sides while retaining federal structure. Same goes regarding partition to begin with. Sometimes I wish they cloned me a thousand times over and insert me and people like me at the crucial junctures in the forks in the road to make robust system that balances all concerns well and applies a comprehensive "trust but verify" institutional rule of law. Many lives would have been saved and the region would be far more developed than it is today given the progress that would have happened as people are able to build trust slowly instead of fear. Balancing freedom and freedom of expression with absolute respect of individual rights within largest net that is inherited and could be cast in the greater good for all.

You can porbbaly guess that I would disagree. (I think most of our generation from all sides of the borders would)

But I can tell you something, interestingly enough, my father thinks along these lines. While I do not disagree with his (and your) conclusion that, a federal system with certain degree of autonomy for individual states with right kind of institutional checks and balances in place, would have much more prosperous for the subcontinent and of course, we would have saved many lives, I just don't think it was practically possible at that time. (Even if you can somehow go back in time) Our societies were already too divided and fractured in so many ways, also at a very early stage of modernity. On top of it, many politicians were in it for themselves, so they didn't have any problem exploiting what was an already severely deteriorated environment.

I think it comes down to two different positions. One is, all of these could have been avoided and only occured because of our politicians shortcomings, incompetence, tribalism, inability to see the greater good and the historic mistakes they made at crucial junctures. In a nutshell, they failed at their duty. Or perhaps, our societies didn't deserved any better, while the enormous loss of life is always regrettable and more measures should have been taken to avoid it, however, partition was necessary to effectively move forward. (Realist view)


My father is probably little biased on this topic as he spent few years of his youth in India while studying, or perhaps this is becuase our ancestors came from Murshidabad. Or maybe, I will end up changing my view in time, as I grow older and read more.

 

[Nilgiri]

You can porbbaly guess that I would disagree. (I think most of our generation from all sides of the borders would)

But I can tell you something, interestingly enough, my father thinks along these lines. While I do not disagree with his (and your) conclusion that, a federal system with certain degree of autonomy for individual states with right kind of institutional checks and balances in place, would have much more prosperous for the subcontinent and of course, we would have saved many lives, I just don't think it was practically possible at that time. (Even if you can somehow go back in time) Our societies were already too divided and fractured in so many ways, also at a very early stage of modernity. On top of it, many politicians were in it for themselves, so they didn't have any problem exploiting what was an already severely deteriorated environment.

I think it comes down to two different positions. One is, all of these could have been avoided and only occured because of our politicians shortcomings, incompetence, tribalism, inability to see the greater good and the historic mistakes they made at crucial junctures. In a nutshell, they failed at their duty. Or perhaps, our societies didn't deserved any better, while the enormous loss of life is always regrettable and more measures should have been taken to avoid it, however, partition was necessary to effectively move forward. (Realist view)


My father is probably little biased on this topic as he spent few years of his youth in India while studying, or perhaps this is becuase our ancestors came from Murshidabad. Or maybe, I will end up changing my view in time, as I grow older and read more.

It is just obvious to me that Jinnah was very removed from reality of what he was doing. If he was deadset on partition in his last 10 years etc (especially after the elections that were not going his way), yet to the very last requesting Nehru to keep his house in Bombay safe and is buying stocks in Air India etc....while at same time trying to support other separatist movements in India to strengthen his hand.

He obviously didnt understand the ground reality of what partition would look like (or he did, and he didnt care which is worse) in that he expected a longer term relationship to exist for elites and populations between the two with time...at least he set his example on it.

This is a lawyer in the end, not a leader...representing his specific clients in a short term case for own legal triumph legacy (as Hoodbhoy put it), and not concerned with the impact of the case on the ground reality when things are set into motion at the time or the longer term.

So the arc of history could have gone differently in those years with different people given this insularity and reposing of great power in just a few people. Or conversely if institution building was done in comprehensive way to prepare for federalism long term (so things are not reliant on just a few people) with the required checks and balances (including recognised constituent nations that could seek referenda if certain conditions met in political deterioration etc), rather than push a partition border overnight so drastically no matter the cost.

i.e things like creating a federal structure with maximum autonomy for constituent regions that allows parting of ways over time in various tiers if things dont work out in various ways and how to design this.

I mean there's a reason why there was a separatist movement in my state (TN), before during and after partition era w.r.t India. But this was worked out and smoothed out over time as there was no real popular support for it and there was other functional institutional focus prioritised by the (non-congress, pro autonomy/separatist) TN leaders over time.

But lot of people in end in subcontinent were just never given a chance in first place (how to have autonomy in a federal system), they were just coerced or worse in zero-sum way that certain dividing identities matter the most for a nationstate over other connecting identities. Things that cascade and take form of their own once you set things rolling from whichever spokespeople/leadership that has asserted itself on the mantle for that identity (whatever the actual identity thinks in the end, especially in the longer time frame). Then this approach weighs everything down as it creates a new set of grievance legacy....and people inevitably convincing and socially conditioning themselves that the bed made now is better than any alternative that could have happened. What ifs are more or less a privileged exercise of thought in the end after all, its not really what most people care about to do anyway....I understand why people overall like to defend the reality that now exists.

But the deeper thing I speak of came to roost in East Pakistan's case again due to the haphazard expedience and reliance on elitism instead of comprehensive approach to things with a sound federal check and balance. If the argument holds for two-wing Pakistan (w.r.t its own partitioning), it extends to a wider context as well especially given a very large majority of Muslims remained within India (including many of their elite leaders, many patriotic Indians), refusing to migrate. It was not a zero-sum absolute thing for a nationstate at all. It just depended how the leaders packaged and harnessed things.

You can make a partition out of almost anything in the end (and the way leaders project it and organise each end of the argument for it), its a complex debate with and among the Quebecers here too (Duplessis vs Goudbout vs Trudeau sr. for example, their different argument and approaches w.r.t Quebec autonomy/separatism within Canadian federalism given severe backdrop of discrimination and prejudice against the Quebecers after the 7 years war result).

 

[Afif]

Very interesting…….It seems Rural Russia is totally stuck in the previous century.
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

 

[Ryder]

Very interesting…….It seems Rural Russia is totally stuck in the previous century.
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

I watched this documentary.

It was pretty good to be honest.

Lets be honest if Russia was invaded its these rural people who will fight back and die for their country.

Urban dwellers will easily surrender. In the Turkish independance war guess what Istanbul our capital easily surrendered to the Allies. Most of our soldiers came from central Anatolia and the Rural areas.

There is a reason why Ataturk went to Samsun and Eastern Turkiye rather than building up resistance in Istanbul and Izmir.

 

[Heartbang]

Lets be honest if Russia was invaded its these rural people who will fight back and die for their country.

In the case of Russia, I have my doubts.

Russians(and people in their influence sphere) are, in general, some of the most apathetic people I've ever met. And since the fatcats in Moscow and St. Petersburg acts almost like they don't exist(both in terms of administration and interpersonal sense), I reckon they won't show much resistance unless the occupiers do some egregious stuff towards them.

BTW, this also extends to Communist China, to some extent. (About 75 percent through.)

 

[Nilgiri]

Very interesting…….It seems Rural Russia is totally stuck in the previous century.
@Nilgiri @Ryder @Gary et al.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention along with the larger channel.

Though really in the end, there is nothing truly new here for me as I have long talked about with others what the Russian psyche was, is and will be....and that it should be handled with great care compared to how it has been by the US and West since the cold war end, i.e one that has been "foreign policy for sake of foreign policy" rather than a longest term view of ones (security, economic et al) interests and applying the right balance of caution while arguing merits of your liberalism to others.

(Russian/Soviet psyche and others misunderstanding/misjudgement of it) stuff I have talked about with @Deliorman and @UkroTurk as well outside of here.

I forwarded this to another group I'm in with @Saiyan0321 with my addendum:

The whole thing just depresses me whenever it comes up now. How can I summarise the upstream? There was a heavy misunderstanding of the Russian psyche, lived experience and its legacy on the old, middle, young society today....by the insular elite living far away (especially in the US). They really should have known a lot better, as educated and thus knowing the "tread carefully" rule when there is another entity of great power but not the same as you in fundamental ways that matter. You cannot supersede so casually that liberalism takes supreme precedence over realism and Marxism in such a brazen way. Realists tend to understand this better than the other two, even when assuming genuineness over self-professed/inauthentic for sake of argument for all (or at least practically apply it regardless). If you do not have a songs as deep and heartfelt about war like "polyushke polye", you should probably stick to James Baker promise "not one inch east" rather than push and experiment. But then again the elite in the US is removed in sufficient capacity from even its own population. Its always about transgressing for the sake of doing so (then acting all shocked and temperamental when something gets spit up by some red line that wasn't clear enough), without a steady look at anothers perspective on something with some basic pause to think and reflect.

Polyushke Polye: