To help provide context and analysis of the 🇺🇦-🇷🇺 War that is grounded in international relations scholarship, here is an updated 🧵of the threads I've written over the past few months (and years) offering perspective on the 🇺🇦-🇷🇺 relationship and conflict.
[THREAD]
First, it's critical to understand that a war b/w Russia and Ukraine has been long in the making. Since the early 1990s, observers of the region recognized that Ukraine represented the key post-Cold War flashpoint in Europe
Second, some claim that "the West" exacerbated an already tense relationship (see above) by pushing NATO expansion after the Cold War. In particular, it's claimed that the USA promised the USSR that NATO would never expand. Is that true? Partially.
Third, even if you don't buy 🇷🇺's claims about a pledge, you could still say that @NATO pushed the limits of expansion (poking the bear?) when it admitted the Baltic states (🇪🇪🇱🇻🇱🇹) in the early 2000s. How did that happen?
Fourth, important to remember that this war is really an escalation of a internal conflict (and proxy @NATO-Russia war) that has raged in Eastern Ukraine since 2014. Indeed, USA aid to Ukraine to help fight that war made Ukraine highly dependent on the USA
Finally, the current war solidifies a lesson I've long shared with my students (and have shared here on Twitter many times): Russia is THE central player in the major wars over the past 200+ years.
Addition 1: There are concerns that the war has gone from "a crisis with nuclear powers" to a "nuclear crisis". Here I lay out reasons to there are concerns nuclear weapons could be used
Addition 4: 🧵with my counter-argument to the "US/West is to blame for Russia’s invasion" claim.
I claim that an alternative IR theory -- offensive realism -- offers "a better" (not necessarily "best") explanation (& point to the irony in my claim).
Addition 6: In this threaded response, I elaborate on why the sustainability of the sanctions (i.e. holding the coalition together) is my primary reason for questioning whether the sanctions will eventually prove effective.
Addition 7: Determining when this war becomes (or already is) a "World War" (or, at minimum, a war between major powers) requires defining "participation": is it only when a country's troops are involved in direct, sustained fighting?
R2P is "the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity". This means nations can't hide behind the barrier of "sovereignty" to stop interventions.
The House passed a defense supplement for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.
Ukraine aid was the most controversial portion of the supplement and might cost Speaker Johnson his leadership position.
Why did he do it?
[THREAD]
As is being reported, Johnson stated “To put it bluntly, I would rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys. My son is going to begin in the Naval Academy this fall....This is not a game, this is not a joke.” cnn.com/2024/04/21/pol…
While it's partly personal for Johnson, his remarks emphasize a larger point, one that I raised in a recent @WPReview column: cutting off US aid won't end the war. Instead, it would embolden Russia. worldpoliticsreview.com/us-ukraine-aid…