When partial mobilization order turns into martial law, it's Russia's state of war - Putin hints at using nuclear weapons.
2022-09-27
Category:Russia I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Russia envisions using nuclear weapons
The recent referendum and partial mobilization order in eastern Ukraine appear to be creating the preconditions for the use of nuclear weapons. This does not mean that they are planning to use nuclear weapons, but only as a prerequisite. "If Russia's territorial integrity is threatened, we will use all means to protect Russia and its people. This is not a bluff," Putin stressed.
Russia is not yet at war
Until now, Russia has carried out military invasions of Ukraine in the name of peacekeeping operations. That means it's not a war. Ukraine was attacked by Russia and a general mobilization order was imposed, leading to a war for national defense. If, as a result of the recent referendum in eastern Ukraine, these areas are declared Russian territory, an attack on this area would be an attack on Russian territory. In other words, the phase will be raised to a state of war for Russia.
Read it together
Does Putin mean Pan - Slavism? Security and Ethnic Issues.
Mr Putin initially stated that the reason for the invasion of Ukraine was the eastern expansion of NATO, but using another context that Russia and Ukraine are the same ethnic group, after expressing that NATO will not participate in the war, Mr Putin say the word that we are same ethnic group. On the other hand, there are many statements that they oppose the Naziization of Ukraine. It seems to mean a civil war attack from Ukraine on the Donbus region, which means that Russians in eastern Ukraine are being persecuted. However, it is not well understood whether such a fact exists or not. The problem is that the context has changed. What was initially a confrontational structure between NATO and Russia has been changed to a bilateral issue between Russia and Ukraine by changing the issue to ethnic issues.
It reminds me of pan-Slavism. It is an idea that began in the early 19th century with the aim of integrating the Slavic peoples. The Slavs, said to have lived north of the Baltic Sea, followed a different travel route than the Germanic. The Germanic migration expanded to the present Western Europe due to the population explosion of the people who were in the Nordic region. In many Western European countries such as Anglo-Saxon, Frank, Germany, and the Netherlands, one tribe of the Germanic people occupied each area. It was the Celts, an indigenous people of Europe, who were occupied. Pan-Germanism was born in opposition to Pan-Slavism during World War I. This is an idea that appeals for the unity and unity of the Germanic people. This idea was taken over by the Nazis and became Greater German Solution, and World War II was held with the aim of integrating the Germanic people and building an empire centered on Germany.
It was the Slavic people who became Eastern European countries after the war and formed the socialist camp. Ukrainians, Belarusians, Russians / Slovaks, Czechs, Poles, Croatians, Serbs, Bulgarians, etc. In other words, Putin's context that Russia and Ukraine are the same ethnic group feels like the resurrection of the empire by the Great Russianism. This is exactly the nationalism that leads to Nazism and the former Soviet Union. Currently, many Slavic countries are members of the EU and NATO. Justifying war on ethnic issues is itself quite outdated. The structure has already been dismantled by the collapse of the former Soviet Union.
If there is a state of war, martial law will be declared
In such a case, rather than partial mobilization, martial law would be imposed and the president would assume command powers that go beyond the Russian constitution. The use of nuclear weapons presupposes a state of war and a military attack on Russia, which means that the prerequisites are in place. The key question now seems to be whether Russia will declare a state of war.
Countries must refrain from using nuclear weapons
U.S. presidential aide Sullivan said on the 25th, ``If Russia were to use nuclear weapons, it would have catastrophic consequences,'' and Ukrainian presidential advisor Podlyak said, ``Russia would not be able to respond tactically or strategically based on the doctrine of nuclear deterrence.'' "The international community should clearly declare that if there is an attempt to use nuclear weapons, we will immediately launch a joint nuclear attack on nuclear weapons facilities in Russia. This is a decision made by the global community, not by Ukraine." did. Russian stocks have already plunged in the market due to concerns about the possibility of Russia imposing martial law.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Europe and Russia from World War II.Is a buffer zone necessary or not?
Europe's history is complicated.During World War II, the Soviet Union recorded the highest death toll in the world.It is said to be between 18,000,000 and 24,000,000.At that time, the Soviet Union had a population of 168,524,000, which meant that 13.6 percent to 14.2 percent of the population died in the war.The reason is that the Nazis are so strong that the rest of Europe is helpless.Churchill of England was afraid of the Nazi invasion and called Roosevelt of the U.S. to ask him to participate in the war, but Roosevelt refused and Churchill was unable to move for a while.
It was the Soviet Union that eventually prevented the Nazis from marching.As a result, the Soviet Union paid for such outstanding deaths.In this sense, Europe was saved from the Nazis by the Soviet Union.After the war, the Soviet Union took over half of Europe during the Cold War.NATO, led by the United States, was born in Western Europe.The United States did not participate in the European war and had no results at all.
The United States drove Japan to defeat and became the leader of liberal countries.Japan's death toll during the war was more than one-tenth that of the Soviet Union, or 3.6 to 4.3 percent of its population.You can see how many Soviet deaths occurred.The war in Japan, which ended in the United States, was not actually beneficial to Europe because Asian countries resisted colonial policies and gained independence one after another.
At least the Soviet Union, which achieved great results in the war in Europe, has collapsed since 1991, leaving no socialist countries in Europe.Putin has repeatedly opposed Ukraine's entry into NATO and said he was deceived by Europe.Russia wants Ukraine to remain a buffer zone.Conversely, is Europe planning to deploy NATO troops to the Russian border?Who do you think saved Europe?He may think that.
There is no doubt that Russia's actions this time clearly violate international law, but history gives me a complicated impression.What are the advantages of Ukraine joining NATO for NATO?
Does Putin mean Pan - Slavism? Security and Ethnic Issues.
Mr Putin initially stated that the reason for the invasion of Ukraine was the eastern expansion of NATO, but using another context that Russia and Ukraine are the same ethnic group, after expressing that NATO will not participate in the war, Mr Putin say the word that we are same ethnic group. On the other hand, there are many statements that they oppose the Naziization of Ukraine. It seems to mean a civil war attack from Ukraine on the Donbus region, which means that Russians in eastern Ukraine are being persecuted. However, it is not well understood whether such a fact exists or not. The problem is that the context has changed. What was initially a confrontational structure between NATO and Russia has been changed to a bilateral issue between Russia and Ukraine by changing the issue to ethnic issues.
It reminds me of pan-Slavism. It is an idea that began in the early 19th century with the aim of integrating the Slavic peoples. The Slavs, said to have lived north of the Baltic Sea, followed a different travel route than the Germanic. The Germanic migration expanded to the present Western Europe due to the population explosion of the people who were in the Nordic region. In many Western European countries such as Anglo-Saxon, Frank, Germany, and the Netherlands, one tribe of the Germanic people occupied each area. It was the Celts, an indigenous people of Europe, who were occupied. Pan-Germanism was born in opposition to Pan-Slavism during World War I. This is an idea that appeals for the unity and unity of the Germanic people. This idea was taken over by the Nazis and became Greater German Solution, and World War II was held with the aim of integrating the Germanic people and building an empire centered on Germany.
It was the Slavic people who became Eastern European countries after the war and formed the socialist camp. Ukrainians, Belarusians, Russians / Slovaks, Czechs, Poles, Croatians, Serbs, Bulgarians, etc. In other words, Putin's context that Russia and Ukraine are the same ethnic group feels like the resurrection of the empire by the Great Russianism. This is exactly the nationalism that leads to Nazism and the former Soviet Union. Currently, many Slavic countries are members of the EU and NATO. Justifying war on ethnic issues is itself quite outdated. The structure has already been dismantled by the collapse of the former Soviet Union.
Putin cannot declare martial law across Russia. CSTO - Security system collapsing from outside.
Dismantling the Warsaw Pact
CSTO is an alliance of the former Soviet Union
Border lines and security issues
Martial law limited due to lack of troops
Does CSTO really work
Declaration of war highlights desperate isolation
After democratization, Gorbachev dismantled the Warsaw Pact. Since there is no longer a military alliance to compete with NATO, Russia claims that the West rejected the proposal to disband NATO, and in return there was a secret agreement not to expand NATO eastward, but this is not certain. For some reason, Gorbachev died during the Ukraine war.
What the media doesn't talk about much is the CSTO, a collective security system established in 1992 in the former Soviet Union. Although the size of Russia is that of the former Soviet Union, if you check the CSTO member countries on a map, you will see that Russia geopolitically does not share borders with NATO countries. What disrupted this balance was the Baltic states joining NATO, but their national power was small and their borders were short. Meanwhile, the Georgia War breaks out in the south.
The Ukraine war thus occurred as a result of Russia's opposition to NATO's direct border with Russia. However, this is only Russia's claim. As a result, the invasion of Ukraine led to Finland applying to join NATO, leading to a future in which a vast border bordered the country west of Putin's hometown of St. Petersburg.
President Putin annexed four eastern Ukrainian regions and declared martial law. Russian soldiers were short of manpower, and despite a partial mobilization order, many fled the country. The attack on four Ukrainian regions was considered an attack on Russian territory, and martial law was declared for all of Russia, but it turned out to be only the four eastern regions of Ukraine. Apparently it doesn't work.
In addition to domestic political issues, there is also the existence of CSTO. Of the six member states, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Armenia have declared their neutrality on the Ukraine issue. It is unclear whether this means Russia's neutrality toward special military operations or toward a state of war. I tried looking for something similar to NATO Article 5 regarding the conditions for activating the CSTO collective security system, but I couldn't find anything. Under the pretense that Russia is under attack, Mr. Putin declares a state of war and imposes martial law, and if the CSTO does not take action, this collective security system will collapse.
The focus will likely be on whether Putin declares a state of war and acknowledges that Russia is under attack. The condition for using nuclear weapons is that Russia's survival is in danger, but at least that condition is not currently met. A declaration of war could lead to a hopeless checkmate for Russia.
Mobilization order for 300,000 people issued in Russia - President Putin expands invasion of Ukraine.
Partial mobilization order for 300,000 people
Economic benefits from acquired territory
On a national scale, the lost population will be returned
A meaningless claim that it is okay to give up the country
Ukraine aims to regain territory
Russia has received various criticisms over its decision to issue a mobilization order for 300,000 people. A referendum was held in southeastern Ukraine, which has become an international issue as it violates the United Nations Charter. The least we can say is that in response to the economic sanctions imposed by each country on Russia, Russia will try to recoup its losses by reaping economic benefits from the areas it has invaded in the medium to long term.
Suppose you suddenly acquire 100 m2 of land. If you grow rice there, how much profit will you make each year?If you grow wheat there, how much profit will you make? What would be the cumulative profit if this continued for 50 years? And will economic sanctions from other countries still continue 50 years from now?
Will the 300,000 conscripted soldiers in Russia never return? Suppose they all died in battle. Given the national economy, these 300,000 people will return. After a major war, a region may experience population growth to compensate for the lost population. The first baby boom occurred in Japan. In other words, in terms of the nation, 300,000 people will be revived.
There was someone who complained that the leader of some idiot political party in Japan would be fine if they gave away at least one of Japan's remote islands. That's completely stupid. Humankind's wars have been carried out based on this kind of time axis calculation. Criticism of the war will eventually be adjusted. The core of this is the national land that will benefit us forever in the future.
Currently, the media is reporting that Ukraine is in the ascendant, but the actual conclusion will differ depending on what you consider as a yardstick. The least we can say is that in order to make Russia's war meaningless and null and void, we must recapture all of the Ukrainian territory that was taken by Russia. Russia will only lose and gain nothing.
Putin's approval rating reaches 83% - Contradictions are scattered in intelligence warfare reported by each country by country.
According to a private polling agency, Putin's approval rating is 83%. It is said that this is a survey conducted by a private research company called "Repara Center", a company that usually gives strict survey results to the government. However, it is doubtful how credible it is because it is an opinion poll while information control is being carried out, but there is no mistake that it is rising as a trend, says Yu Koizumi of the Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo. And when watching TV in Russia, it is reported that the war has been successful, such as the invasion of Russia destroying many Ukrainian military facilities, and it is natural that the Russian people support this.
Currently, the Western reports are exactly the opposite, Russia's economic sanctions are in effect, so the economic collapse is imminent, the invasion continues to fail and is in a stalemate, and the anti-war consciousness has increased in Russia, which is Putin. It is reported that the administration will be destroyed. Although there are many doubts in the Russian media, it is only one indicator as an objective fact, but when looking at the Russian economy in foreign exchange, it plummeted to 140 rubles per dollar on March 7, but it has rebounded and is now. Is approaching normal prices with 83.98 rubles . At least it doesn't look like it's on the verge of bankruptcy.
In any case, the war is currently underway, and it seems that the people of the world are in the propaganda strategies of both sides. The people have no choice but to watch over this war while receiving media reports. When looking at the reports of each country including Japan, there are many inconsistencies such as what is reported as an objective fact, the views conveyed by the media, the information conveyed by other countries, and the future direction. In the first place, only the military authorities should have a concrete grasp of the state of the war, and since much of the information is military secrets , we are like a live broadcast. There is no way we can confirm the war situation. At the very least, we have to compare the reports of each country and delete the inconsistent information.
