Collisions: The Origins of the War in Ukraine and the New Global Instability

Please join the CSIS Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program for a live, online-only event on Thursday, May 2, 2024 from 9:30-10:30 AM EDT.
Maria Snegovaya will moderate a conversation between Michael Kimmage and Mary Elise Sarotte about Dr. Kimmage's latest book, Collisions: The Origins of the War in Ukraine and the New Global Instability.
Michael Kimmage is a Senior Associate non-resident fellow with the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at CSIS, and the chair of the department of history at Catholic University. Mary Elise Sarotte is a professor of historical studies at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, and the author of Not One Inch: America, Russia, and the Making of Post-Cold War Stalemate.
Copies of Michael Kimmage's book are available for purchase from Oxford University Press.
This event was made possible thanks to the generous support of the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
---------------------------------------------
A nonpartisan institution, CSIS is the top national security think tank in the world.
Visit www.csis.org to find more of our work as we bring bipartisan solutions to the world's greatest challenges.
Want to see more videos and virtual events? Subscribe to this channel and turn on notifications: cs.is/2dCfTve
Follow CSIS on:
• Twitter: csis
• Facebook: CSIS.org
• Instagram: csis

[@RegCostello]

It is paradoxical that deterrence can be seen as provocation, and Putin was very successful from 2014 onwards in his narrative that whatever the west might propose to defend Ukraine and deter Russia would be extreme provocation.

[@Adept893]

8:20 to skip the intro music.

[@normiphile]

Gigachad

[@The1DUIGuy]

Thank you!

[@dewetmaartens359]

Thanks bro

[@ansonbrooks101]

can you imagine driving down 95 near Baltimore and the only vision you had was your rear view mirror, better than nothing i suppose. i appreciate you guys, i love hearing clear and cohesive thought trains. i like a clear understanding of a series of unfortunate events that got us here, but from the perspective of a marriage counselor. we have to be the people who can solve this. we have to be the people who can solve this. we have to be the people who can solve this.

[@AndreasUmland]

All very interesting. However, it may overestimate the Western role in all of it. The late General Aleksandr Lebed did in 1992 need neither NATO nor the EU to legitimize his 14th Army's armed intervention in an inner-Moldovan conflict. Many more such examples could be listed. Aggressors will often frame their actions as motivated by outside provocation, external disrespect, existential interests, legitimate self-defense, etc.

[@paulkillinger5915]

I can take only so much "revisionist" history at a time. Re. the author's primary thesis.. If the Rus were so adamantly interested in dominating Ukraine, then why did they give it away..?

[@AndreasUmland]

PS: On Mary's speculations about 7 October and birthday gifts: On 7 October 2022, Putin's 50th birthday, the CSTO was founded in Chisinau (Moldova is still not a member of the CSTO).

[@ActFast]

Kimmage is worth the intro music. Just finished the book and it describes the tectonic shifts in the geological landscape.

[@jaymacpherson8167]

Great point on establishing definitions on terms.

[@maxheadrom3088]

34:00 I also grew up during the cold war and she's probably younget than me - the 1980s was nothing compared to the 1950s-early 60s. I only learned about the NATO war game and the phantom radar missiles recently and never got worried about nuclear war.

[@maxheadrom3088]

An interesting discussion! Snegovaya and Kimmage are serious people! One thing I don't understand is why these analysis never mention the 1990s ... Putin was Yeltsin's VP and Yeltsin was there because the US supported his coup and later threw tons of money into his candidacy. The horrors of the 1990s were such that they turned Prof. Jeffrey Sachs from a neo-liberal into a keynesian! I had never heard of a neo-liberal economist who changed his mind before that! Here's a presentation by the authors of "Taking Stock of Shock": kzbin.info/www/bejne/iV7LfHVveNV9adE

[@rogerwilliams1566]

Fascinating discussion thank so much

[@jacobjonker6218]

No book would be publishable if it were to expose the hidden hands orchestrating world affairs. Hence, I have no intention of reading this book, though I intend to see the rest of this video. Briefly, this is a European war- an EU war in fact- no matter who were behind the cultivation and fomenting of it. Since there are always powerful global, regional, national, etc., interests wishing for armed conflict somewhere, and working constantly with like-minded interests to make that happen, or rather, to make it continue to happen, and since these interests can only be inferred and identified in what is being publicly said, written and put into action, it is better and ultimately more fruitful to identify the entities which have an interest in a world where peace reigns and the individual's rights and personal sovereignty are assured and protected by a democratic system of governance. This means such countries as answer that description would have a strong and effective defence force and alliances with like-minded nation-states. The EU controllers, whoever they are, presumably they who control the EU Council, have certain covert aims which can not be known, but the result of which cn be seen in what they do, allow to be done, refrain from doing and stop others from doing. The dismal record of defense policy in EU nation-states, with and without reference to their NATO relationship, is well-known. France is the only ountry of substance in Europe which can be said to have made a moderately good fist of it. Next is the EU reaction, or lack of, to the invasion of Crimea by Russia in 2014. Again the EU reaction and lack of substantial action during the lead-up of and after the invasion of rump Ukraine by Russia in 2022. Are the leaders of EU member states daft, past their use-by date, treasonous, doing the bidding of US geopolitical operators, non-compus mentis, operating a devious plan in choots with Putin, all of these above, or are the EU Council comprised of a very clever bunch of people with a very clever plan for the future of the European peoples as they are currently constituted? Evidently, the electorates in the EU member states think it is the latter. The peoples in EU member states keep voting as if the EU leaders hve a very clever plan for their future. Let's hope they are right. But now, how to stop the killing and destruction in Ukraine without escalation of this war and without allowing the permanent occupation of Ukraine, or parts there of, by Russia. Answers on the back of a postage stamp, please.

[@stuguy2]

Whatever medication you are on, it's messing up the signals to your brain. Do you understand me? The system is way beyond your comprehention. Take a university history class on the classics and it will open your mind to how the modern world was formed and keep studying the eastern world to crimea say 2000 years ago and move forward to 1400 to 1880's...post first world war and then Stalin and then 1991. Then the development of Ukraine 2004-2022. Only then will you be able to be objective enough to understand how the 2022 war started.

[@SuperElborbah]

👍

[@ActFast]

Is the intro music really necessary? It’s jarring 😅.

[@RBurns80]

Mary Sarotte said nothing of value. Michael Kimmage sounds like an expert, but working for the US State Department, his views are skewed. With that said, Europe includes Russia(at least parts of it). But the EU is not Europe.

[@irongron]

I saw an interview press conference, sometime after Russia took Crimea in 2014, and a bunch of journalists were asking him was it American intervention in Syria i.e "Assad must go" and whether that spurred him to make the decision on Crimea, when the Syrian troubles started in 2011/12, and he got angry with them and told them all to pipe down and he said angrily "...it wasn't Syria, it was Yugoslavia!!!" (i.e. NATO bombing Serbia BUT mainly Kosovo being taken from Serbia). He then went on to tell them "that's when I made the decision to take back Crimea one day in the future" (paraphrasing). So he had this plan brewing since 1999 when he was still Prime Minister.

[@maxheadrom3088]

31:30 well ... Korea, Vietnam, many wars in Africa, Guatemala and many others were all during the Cold War. I wonder why Ukraine causes more preoccupation than Korea and Vietnam, for instance. EDIT: I got it - it is, indeed, more direct.

[@RegCostello]

How about because Ukraine is now but Korea and Vietnam are history?

[@martavdz4972]

People are forgetting that Ukraine came when Covid-19 was still going on. People were stressed out, pi**ed off, wanting nothing more than everything to go back to normal, and used to watching LOTS of videos on social media during lockdowns. Put those things together, the fact that Ukrainians are good at recording and uploading war videos - and you get Being Seriously Pi**ed off about Russia Invading Ukraine.

[@maxheadrom3088]

25:00 and we should not forget Putin's astrological map!

[@PeterA650]

44:50 Russia's pending demographic collapse pretty much guarantees this it's not going to be a 100 year problem. It's more of a "this lifetime" problem. 52:30 Establishing a secure portion of Ukraine as the West Germany of the 21st century make a ton of sense and it's in fact the right approach. Collapse is very much in the cards for Russia as soon as Putin dies and the various factions start fighting each other. When the people in Eastern Lugansk look at how people in Drinpro will live by that time, after Russia has sucked them dry of resources and sent tens of thousands of their men to die for nothing, they are going to wish to be part of that.

[@tonymitchell1461]

Odd: this was promoted as a discussion about the origins of the war but despite the chair persons prompting neither speaker wanted to directly address the now famous thesis that NATO provoked this conflict by enlargement.

[@martavdz4972]

Probably because Putin started speaking about Russia´s greatness and mentioned several famous tzars when Tucker Carlson asked him about the reason for the war. So that´s that reason off the table. Had he said "We were concerned about our security, full stop, nothing else", I would actually have believed him. He blew that.

[@therealuncleowen2588]

That was very interesting. I am fully in support of Ukrainian victory. It does seem unlikely at this time that Ukraine will be able to completely eject the Russians from all their land back to the 1993 borders. The idea of admitting Ukraine to NATO under a formula similar to how West Germany was first admitted is a great one that I would fully support after all reasonable efforts to get back the entire country have been exhausted. When that time comes will be Ukraine's decision to make, and Russia's because sadly, the enemy always gets a vote.

[@sa-nn1ny]

Ukraine can't and won't win. Russia has nuclear weapons.

[@erichert1001]

@@sa-nn1ny And if they use them they'll lose...everything.

[@sa-nn1ny]

@@erichert1001 How? Ukraine is not in NATO. It will be suicidal of the west to retaliate with a nuclear weapon.

[@felipe-vibor]

Not an inch east ~ James baker. Once bitten twice shy

[@stuguy2]

@@felipe-vibor Background. The title of the book comes from an offhand mention by Secretary of State James Baker in February 1990 during a pre-preliminary discussion of possible negotiation points, as summarized in a cable to the White House. However, this was rejected by President George H. W.

[@Os_man8903]

Baseless accusations and claims.

[@wilvanveen3290]

why not acknowledge Russia's legitimate security concerns and keep ukraine neutral. We in the west want to feel secure, so does Russia. The way the west is going now will only result in catastrophy.

[@ayoungethan]

Because it was a shell argument. Ukraine is not a bargaining chip between Russia and its alleged bogeyman "the west." By accepting that premise you are outing yourself as an unwitting mouthpiece of Russian maskerovka amd you participate in denying Ukrainian sovereignty. "The west" naively taking Russia's earlier claims of a "legitimate security interest" at face value only gave Russia permission to escalate.

[@Brodraugen]

His first point seems like a teutology. Russia invaded Ukraine because of a long standing desire to dominate Ukraine? That doesn't explain anything.

[@Mike-br8zt]

It makes perfect sense. Russia 'lost' Ukraine when the Soviet Union collapsed and wanted it back. In other words, to dominate.

[@velvetmagnetta3074]

I want to point out that Putin has been airing his grievances with "the West" (namely, Europe and the US) quite openly and publicly for many, many years. All the way back just after the collapse of the USSR, when we asked Russia to join NATO (I think in the 90s), and because we wouldn't give Russia special treatment or status in the alliance (everyone has an equal vote in NATO), Russia turned us down, but it left a scab of insult Russia kept scratching til it turned into a scar of revenge. After Communism fell, experts in economy from Europe and the United States met with their Russian counterparts to implement a complete overhaul of Russia's economic system. Russia turned out to be way more corrupt in, I believe, unexpected ways unfamiliar to Capitalist economists and sociologists at the time. As a result, Russia's economy crashed like many so-called "post-Soviet" countries. But the difference was the outer empire states and the ones closer in geography to Europe did struggle but eventually thrived. So the further from the imperial core, the more manageable the Soviet-style post-break-up corruption seems to have been. And Putin has been whining ever since about the unfairness of all those mean European states that wouldn't let him sit at their lunch table, and the betrayal of the United States that wouldn't fix all of Russia's internal problems, and the awful rejection of the love of Russia's life, Ukraine, by Ukrainians simply wanting to live a better, wealthier, freer life with new friends and liberal values and to shed the old Russian ball & chain once and for all. Notice during none of these many missed opportunities did Russia take responsibility for its own fate.

[@plorubi]

"NATO enlargement instead of expansion" lol what a hack

[@vj82]

All the countries in Europe that joined NATO in 1999 and later did it volunteraly not because the pressure of the NATO /not like in the Warsaw Pact/. These countries wanted a guarantee to prevent the history repeat itself and Moscow that regained its power after the 90's, expand its influence/dominance again . These countries never want an open conflict with Moscow but history taught them a lesson. Even Sweden and Finland who stayed neutral for a very long time had concern about the future intentions of Moscow, so they saw better to joined the NATO.

[@plorubi]

@@vj82 Maybe so but when they try to play these dumb language tricks it kind of gives up the game... what is the functional difference between the English words 'enlargement' and 'expansion' here? There is none, well I should say there is none, but the real answer is that to these people when the so-called collective West tries to grow its borders it's enlargement and when anybody else does the same it's expansionism and imperialism. People like Victoria Nuland help topple the government in Ukraine and then act shocked when the neighbors in Russia aren't happy about it even though every American school boy knows that back in the days of the Cuban missile crisis the world came to the brink of nuclear war over a similar situation instigated by the USSR in Cuba. It is completely rational for the Russian government (people?) to dislike NATO and friends when they haven't proven that they have the best interests of the average Russian in mind. If there is a military alliance on your border that you are not a part of well... when you throw sand in people's eyes it's foolish to act shocked or upset that they might react negatively. How did Europe really think this was all going to go? The Russian government and population of 144 million post-USSR was just going to sort of disintegrate and not want to have any say about any of the behavior of the countries around it? It's so funny to me as an American to listen to the most irritating parts of our press and intellectual class kick and scream like children as the "American-led international order" starts to come apart after they wrote all these books proclaiming the end of history and the beginning of the 1000 year American reich. This isn't really about 'democracy', 'Ukrainian sovereignty' or 'international law' and 'human rights' anymore, to the extent that it ever was; this is just about spending as many lives as possible in a sad, desperate attempt to maintain the credibility and careers of a lot of loser politicians, bureaucrats, and 'idea' guys. I'm sorry if you're a European living in a country that is threatened by Russia but I'll say that since I was a little kid on the internet I've had Europeans from every country over there mocking me for not having better domestic programs while basically expecting the US to just foot the defense bill for Europe forever. So in some sense it's kind of incredibly funny and satisfying to hear you guys screaming for help now. Russia? Ukraine? What? Who? also lol at the violence on special dates thing "ooo, Joe Biden wake up, it's Putin's birthday, Joe Biden wake up, something's gonna happen, 9/11, 9/11, remember what happen last time"

[@PeterA650]

Do enlighten us with your genius, you Great One, by all means, let's hear it. /s

[@Mike-br8zt]

Botnik

[@felipe-vibor]

Mary real spoke nothing

[@nicholas3139]

on the optimism of the 90s, i don't think they take into account the rapaciousness & cronyism that capitalist/neoliberal ideologies inevitably manifest in their application, especially in a colonial context, how that doublestandard/exceptionalism would be interpreted by russians, & how it played directly into the hands of the mafia/kgb in their (i.e. putin's) consolidation of power. i see nievete on both sides, one on russian culture & it's norms, & the other in a 'benevolent economics' that is ultimately disingenuous.

[@daniel8728]

Sad how the tribe used Ukraine against Russia

[@Mike-br8zt]

Sad how Russia used Ukraine against the tribe.

[@JP71165]

Invasion of Georgia, but Russia didn’t take over Georgia. Regards to Syria, Russia didn’t want Syria becoming another Libya next to the caucuses.

[@samsungtap4183]

Ask yourelves a simple question. In Ukraine where does the opposition to conscription come from ? Western Ukraine is mostly untouched by the war and life is good. The war is in the East where Russian speakers are killing Russian speakers and that's good. All we have to do is count yankee dollars and invest them in Europe but conscription no way not my son...never my son. It was almost hilarious conscription in Ukraine was for more than 6mths a hot potato no one wanted to own it. Their army is being destroyed and no one wanted to own the potato. When the bill after 4.000 amendmends was passed it was in a almost empty chamber hilarious How do i know this ? I saw it in my own country...VIETNAM

[@martavdz4972]

Life isn´t good in western Ukraine. Do you think it´s hermetically closed off from the rest of the country? Even there, there are air raids sometimes, though less often than elsewhere. Some of the power outages reach there, too. And there are lots of refugees there from eastern Ukraine with PTSD, people hear about relatives and friends dying all the time, charities are exhausted, hospital staff is exhausted by treating less serious war injuries and doing rehabilitation of war veterans. I know a guy in western Ukraine and he has a pretty serious case of PTSD.

[@NathansHVAC]

Definitely has nothing to do with nato expansion or putting u s bases on crimia

[@munnychinni5386]

American propaganda 😂