The years of 2022-2025 are historically pretty much like the years of 1918-1921. In the years 1918-1921 there was a civil war in Russia: the so-called Reds (the Bolsheviks) fought against the so-called Whites (followers of the ancient regime) for power. The Whites were supported by the Western world: in particular by the United Kingdom, France, but also many others, and Japan. Western troops would occasionally land in the ports of Arkhangelsk or Odessa or – for that matter – Vladivostok before the interventionists were ultimately ousted.
The years 2022-2025 are witnessing another civil war: one Slavic nation fights another Slavic nation. The war between Ukrainians and Russians is something like the war between the Whites and the Reds. They speak the same (or almost the same) language and occupy roughly the same territory as their belligerent predecessors: that of medieval Rus’, that of the Russian Empire, that of the Soviet Union. Also today, just as a hundred years ago, there are interventionists from the West: in particular the British and the French, but also Americans and other European countries. Though they haven’t as yet landed their troops on Russian or Ukrainian soil, they have fielded lots and lots of volunteers and they are supplying Ukrainians with all sorts of aid, not only military.
Today’s interventionists have not as yet put their boots on the ground, but they are very much itching to do so. France has been playing with the idea of occupying Odessa on the Black Sea, while NATO (read: the United States) has recently revealed plans of capturing the Kaliningrad oblast, a relatively small splinter from mainland Russia that is locked between Poland and Lithuania, and washed by the Baltic Sea. A hundred years’ span and as if nothing has changed whatsoever.
Now, all this talk of controlling Odessa or Kaliningrad is idle talk. Though Russia’s president exercises much restraint while considering retaliatory steps, he might lose his patience one of these days when he learns that NATO troops have invaded the Kaliningrad region or the French have landed in Odessa. An attack on any piece of Russian territory might trigger a nuclear response, which is, by the way, clearly stated in Russia’s military doctrine. The West should have second thoughts about taking such and similar steps. It is precisely because Washington and London did not believe that Russia would strike back that they instigated Kiev to be under arms and to defy its big neighbour. Are we in for a repeat?
In the years 1918-1921 there were no nukes nor were there intercontinental missiles. Paris or London, or Tokyo, indeed, could send their troops while their respective populations could continue going about their everyday business. This has, however, changed.
What would NATO members say to the idea of annexing the Kaliningrad oblast? Why, NATO has been created for defensive purposes… Still, one can always construe law and legal stipulations in such a manner that the interpretation fits the current desires of the decision makers. How? Like: we needed to carry out a pre-emptive strike because the Russians were poised to attack Europe within days. In other words: it was a defensive measure.
Is not the 1941 attack carried out by the Third Reich against the Soviet Union explained away in the same way? At least by some?
