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.
Zelensky said he would die because of NATO.Next, all three Baltic countries. Zelensky urged Western countries to strengthen their military support for Ukraine, saying, "If Russia overcomes Ukraine, it could invade Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia next time."In response to NATO's denial of the possibility of establishing a no-fly zone in Ukraine on July 7, he said, "Many people will be killed because of NATO."The Baltic states are NATO members.Let's look at Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
North Atlantic Treaty
Article 5
Contracting States agree to regard armed attacks against one or more Contracting States in Europe or North America as attacks against all Contracting States.Accordingly, in the event of such armed attack, the Contracting States shall exercise their individual or collective right to self-defense (including the use of forces) as they deem necessary to restore and maintain security in the North Atlantic region.
The aforementioned armed attacks and all measures taken as a result shall be reported immediately to the Security Council.Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council takes necessary measures to restore and maintain international peace and security.
It can be seen from this that attacks on NATO members are considered attacks on NATO as a whole, and that the right to collective self-defense will be exercised.Russia's invasion of Ukraine was caused by Russia's reluctance to allow NATO troops to move near the Russian border, so Russia wants to create an environment that will not lead to war with NATO.Most importantly, Russia invaded Ukraine before NATO joined because it understood that Article 5 would be invoked.NATO's consistent stance of not entering Ukraine and not establishing a no-fly zone are aimed at avoiding an all-out war between Russia and NATO by exercising the right to collective self-defense.
Russia's next target is Moldova and Georgia, non-NATO members around the Black Sea, not the Baltic countries.
Russia is suppressing southeastern states in order to get the Black Sea.Non-NATO members around the Black Sea may be at risk rather than attacking NATO members.
70 fighter jets to Ukraine - Bulgaria, Poland and Slovakia.
The Ukrainian Air Force announced yesterday that it will receive 70 fighter jets and attack planes from Bulgaria, Poland and Slovakia.It will receive 16 MiG-29s and 14 Su-25s from Bulgaria, 28 MiG-29s from Poland, and 12 MiG-29s from Slovakia.If you look at the number of aircraft, it is highly likely that almost all of the fighter jets of the three countries that provide them.Poland then granted permission to use fighter jets for operational purposes.It is unclear whether this would be participating in a war, or just a permission to use fighter jets and airports, but is it true that most of the air forces of the three countries are available?
The MiG-29 was developed by the Russian MiG Design Agency and will be the main fighter in the Russian Air Force with more than 300 aircraft.The MiG-29 is simple and small for local use in the frontline air force, and the Su-27 for long-range use in the air defense force is complex and large.Of course, the Su-27 is superior in armament and fuel loading, especially the MiG-29's low fuel loading.However, in terms of war with neighboring countries, the disadvantages of fuel shortages are relatively small.
The U.S. and European countries have been supplying weapons, including ammunition, anti-tank guns, and portable anti-aircraft missiles, but this time they are said to be very expensive and provide weapons to the air force.
The provision of fighter jets this time is shocking, but even more shocking is the number.Poland's permission to use the airport is close to participating in the air force.
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 will the Ukraine issue end?What's the possibility of a Russian withdrawal from Ukraine?Is there a way to solve it?
What is the root of Ukraine's problem?At first glance, Russia, angry at Ukraine's commitment to the West, launched a military invasion, but this is essentially a matter of military demarcation.NATO included Ukraine in its group of "future participants" in 2008.Membership is subject to unanimity of the Member States.Among them, Zelensky, who strongly urged NATO participation, was elected president in 2019, strengthening his influence on Europe and the United States.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said at a press conference after an extraordinary meeting of the North Atlantic Council (NAC) in April 2021, "Ukraine has the right to apply for membership".Russia strongly criticized the USS (DDG-71) Ross, a U.S. naval missile destroyer, for entering the Black Sea on June 26 in the name of military exercises.
If Ukraine joins NATO, Europe's military demarcation line will be drastically changed.It is about 920 kilometers by land from Stapa, a city near the Romanian border, to Shotoska, a Ukrainian city near the Russian border.In other words, the military demarcation line will move at least 900 kilometers.NATO has repeatedly argued that this is Ukraine's intention, and NATO is on the side of accepting it.
For example, what would Japan say if Russia announced that it would build a large-scale military, naval and air base in the northern territories?Please, it can't be helped because it's Russia's right.I don't think so.The difference is that Japan does not take military action, but Russia tries to stop it by taking military action.This is Russia's mistake and to be criticized, but the war has actually begun.
The problem seems to be Ukraine's, but it is fundamentally NATO and Russia's.Joining NATO is own to Ukraine's will, NATO said it would not send troops to Ukraine, maintaining a third-party position.In a sense,NATO want to say this is not a NATO issue, but a Ukraine issue.Is that really the case?
What is the specific way to stop Russia's invasion?Currently, the world is imposing economic sanctions on Russia.How likely is this to stop Russia?It is said that the ruble has plummeted, but it has fallen by about 20 percent.Russia's main industrial structure is resource trade, making it more difficult to default than that of processing trade-oriented countries.The key is how long Russia's economy will last, but what is the time axis?
Anti-war demonstrations are taking place around the world.While they are effective in calling for a coalition of liberal countries and arousing international public opinion, the key is how much they can influence Russian public opinion.Russia is not a country with freedom of expression, and anti-war protesters in Russia are being arrested one after another.Only the Russian people can oust Putin.But Russia's next presidential election will be 2024.
Ukraine is negotiating a ceasefire with Russia. Will this stop the war?One of the conditions Russia is proposing to Ukraine is "demilitarization."I don't think Ukraine will drink this.And, as mentioned above, it is doubtful whether Ukraine is an opportunity for Russia and a negotiating partner.Russia has always said the problem is NATO's expansion to the east.
If this is a matter of military demarcation, who is involved?That is NATO and Russia.The most fundamental solution is to reach a truce agreement through consultations between the two parties and Ukraine.But NATO will not change its position as a third party.International public opinion is moving toward anti-war movements based on sympathy for Ukraine, but another direction for international public opinion is to bring NATO to the negotiating table, regardless of whether it is good or bad.
Ukraine is not a NATO member, so I understand that Western countries will not participate in the war, but will they never sit at the negotiating table?If not, there is a high possibility that the invasion of Ukraine will not stop.
Negotiations on Ukraine broke down.Russia's goal is to neutralize and demilitarize Ukraine.NATO provides logistical support.
Negotiations on a ceasefire between Ukrainian and Russian delegations ended for five hours in Gomeri, southeastern Belarus, near the border with Ukraine.Ukraine has already notified of unconditional negotiations, and what this means is that it does not object to the recognition of independence of Lugansk and Donetsk.Russia seems to have offered conditions.
Russia's conditions are "neutralization" and "demilitarization" of Ukraine.This may seem like a peaceful settlement, but it is a completely different request."Neutralization" means Ukraine's non-NATO membership, and Ukraine's current intentions may be put aside but it would be accepted.However, "unarmed" means that there is no military, and that having an army is a legitimate right under international law included in a country's right to live, which means that it will no longer be a sovereign state.In other words, Russia has offered unacceptable conditions.As a result, the negotiations broke down and the negotiations were decided to negotiate next time.
Russia's original demand is NATO's non-expansion to the east.This has not changed since the beginning.So why can't Ukraine compromise on the terms of "neutralization" that it can accept?This also seems to mean that there will be no will of Russia to negotiat with Ukraine.Russia has taken military action against the possibility of NATO's eastern expansion to Ukraine and the deployment of NATO forces near the Russian border.In other words, it is fundamentally a matter of NATO and Russia.
NATO has consistently said that it is up to the will of the applicant countries to join NATO.In other words, NATO's passive stance is that it is the will of the applicant countries rather than the will of NATO.However, the war is continuing.Perhaps what Russia wants to negotiate is NATO troops.NATO wants further commitment to the non-expansion of the East.In this sense, Ukraine may not be Russia's negotiating partner.NATO is trying to stop the Russian military by imposing economic sanctions and arousing international public opinion.
If NATO agrees on non-expansion to the East ,and Ukraine as a neutral country, Ukraine's sovereignty and peace will be maintained, and both Russia and NATO will have important buffer states.If NATO or Russia sends troops to Ukraine, it will be a war between NATO and Russia.Then the military balance will be maintained.Indeed, for NATO, Ukraine's membership has little advantage.Therefore, Western countries immediately announced that they would not send troops to Ukraine to avoid war.
In Japanese history, there is a Tianjin Treaty signed with Qing in 1885.This means that the two sides will withdraw from the Korean Peninsula in order to ease tensions between Japan and China after the Kim Ok-kyun Gapsin Incident.In other words, the Korean Peninsula is considered a neutral military zone of military neutrality.As a result, Queen Min, who failed to suppress the Donghak Party's rebellion on the Korean Peninsula, asked Qing for reinforcements, which triggered the Japan-Qing War.Without such a blunder, Ukraine could become an independent country, and on the contrary, a stable and protected country between Russia and NATO.
Russia's request is simple and nothing has changed.NATO Western countries have become third parties to economic sanctions without participating in the war.Will NATO negotiate with Russia?
