Kamil Galeev Profile picture
Nov 21 10 tweets 4 min read
👇When we are talking about a truce or even peace, we should keep in mind that Russia won't be honouring it. Any ceasefire will be used for regrouping, restocking and then attacking again with a better chance of success. Notice that they compare Russian situation to Khasavyurt
First Chechen war 1994-1996 ended with Khasavyurt Accords. Russia withdrew it forces from Chechnya. Independence of Chechnya remained an open question which had to be determined by 2001 Image
Next year, in 1997 Russia signed a peace treaty with Chechnya. President Yeltsin agreed on "rejecting forever the use of force" and "developing relations on the norms of international law". Many viewed it as the de facto recognition of independence Image
"Forever" lasted for two years. In 1999 same president Yeltsin who signed the treaty invaded again. This war played a key role in Yeltsin to Putin transition, allowing Yeltsin to boost the heir his family chose from a nonane to the national leader just in a few months Image
Interestingly enough, it was around 1997 when Russia stopped its effective de-militarization continuing since collapse of the USSR (mostly for the lack of funding) and started figuring out how to rebuild it - now on much more limited resources. 1997 can be seen as a turning point
Post-Khasavyurt era was characterised by the massive promotion of state security to the upper echelons of power. All three Yeltsin's last Prime Ministers were state security officers. Putin's succession was no accident, it was a deliberate choice of Yeltsin to hand power to KGB Image
One could argue that the Khasavyurt did not deescalate the situation, it escalated it. In Russia this truce still serves as an epitome of cowardice and betrayal. It is a dishonour that can be cleansed only by a new offensive

Second Chechen War was predetermined in Khasavyurt Image
The same way that the Khasavyurt accords of 1996 and the peace treaty of 1997 predetermined the second war that started already in 1999, now ceasefires or peace treaties will predetermine the next Russian invasion. It will only buy Russia the time to regroup, like Khasavyurt Image
Appeasers assume that Russia will honour a treaty. What they don't get is that from Russian perspective it is *honouring* such a treaty that would be seen as shameful and dishonourable. Breaking it would be seen as an act of national redemption. Like it happened in 2000 Image
Putin's reputation as a national saviour was earnt by *breaking* a peace treaty. Treaty is shameful = breaking it is seen an act of national redemption. Same will happen this time, too. After all, as Sergey Kirienko pointed out, "Russian state is not based on treaties". The end Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kamil Galeev

Kamil Galeev Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kamilkazani

Nov 23
On a highway leading from Chechnya to Dagestan there is a traffic light. It is always red. Every day thousands of cars have to drive through this 24/7 red light to pass from one region to another. This isn't a mistake, but a well-organised system. Look at the arc on the right 🧵 Image
This monumental arc marks a checkpoint leading to the Hosi Yurt (now Akhmat Yurt) - the native village of Kadyrov. Akhmat Yurt is guarded all around its perimeter, much like any of Putin's residences. Only the natives of a village are allowed in Image
Honestly nowhere in Russia have I seen another place with such a concentrated aura of personal power. Security measures are really impressive: from the armed guard to the radio jammers. You can notice it when your mobile network stops working in a few kilometres from the village Image
Read 36 tweets
Nov 20
I'd say that is a false dichotomy. Logic may help to do what you do in a more or less efficient way. But *what* you choose to do - this choice is arbitrary. You may pursue your goals in a rational way, yes, but the choice of a goal is irrational. Refusal to choose - also a choice
Still, if we have to compare, most Russians tend to be more pragmatic than most Westerners. So using your term, *more* logical. They're more oriented to pursue earthly, material goals. It's just that the planning horizon is very short, so this behaviour seems to be "irrational"
Example - send your sons to the war, so you can get material benefits. Absolutely rational, pragmatic behaviour with a short planning horizon. They absolutely do count, they just count badly and do not look forward too far. That doesn't mean they're not pragmatic, they are
Read 4 tweets
Nov 20
Great question. Dumb, but that makes it only better. Short answer: in the recent decades manufacturing digitalised. In 1991 90% machine tools were conventional (mechanical basically). Now most are computer controlled and very software dependent, especially for precision machining
So yr understanding of industrial machines is sorta adequate to how most of them worked 30 years ago. Back then they were kinda autonomous: you buy them and they work. May be you need to buy spare parts, but that’s it. Because they were mechanical. No computer -> no disconnection
Modern machines are different. Computer control. Graphical User Interface. You don’t need to control it with your hands like 30 years ago. You may not even need to code like 15 years ago. You can often pick button on a screen -> I want *this* component design from the online bank
Read 7 tweets
Nov 19
It was revealed to me in a dream that producers of key cruise missiles and components for them (engine producer ODK Saturn for example) have been actively expanding their workforce -> They most probably work 24/7 -> Western suppliers didn't disconnect machines they sold to Russia
Russia can produce precision components in massive quantities -> It is a strong indication that Western suppliers of industrial machines did *not* disconnect their products. It's highly likely they're updating software and maintaining them remotely keeping Russian army afloat
Western = Western European (primarily German) + the role of Asian Tigers (Taiwan, Korea) increased in the last years. Out of American companies - HAAS plays a major role. There is a bunch of small suppliers: Australia, Brazil, Turkey and mainland China but they do not matter much
Read 5 tweets
Nov 18
Now repeat after me:

Sanctioning individuals doesn't bring you anywhere. It gives you a cheap dopamine boost, an illusion of doing sth. But it isn't efficient at all

"Mother of all sanctions" would be cutting the supply chains of the Russian military industry
In a sense, navalnist nonsense is structurally similar to the Mearsheimer's nonsense. In both cases you dismiss any evidence contradicting your priors. In your case that would be:

They're all "crooks" and personal profits is their primary motivation

Counterpoint - February 24
Navalnist Theory of Putin is wrong, not because it is 100% false (same for Mearsheimer - some of his arguments may be correct), but because it is absurdly reductionist

They steal -> They're "corrupt" -> Money is all they're about

Sorry, that's not how it works
Read 5 tweets
Nov 17
The Poverty of Realism

This interview illustrates some key fallacies, shortcomings and outright intellectual dishonesty associated with Mearsheimer's realist approach. And since his authority is instrumental in legitimising the appeasement advocacy, I will discuss it in detail🧵
Let's start with dishonesty. Mearsheimer denies that Putin hold any intention to conquer Ukraine before this war. He even quotes Putin's article of July 2021 as an evidence of Putin "recognising the Ukrainian sovereignty". This is a highly inaccurate representation of its content
Let's open the original text of Putin's article kremlin.ru/events/preside…

Putin argued that modern borders of Ukraine are illegitimate. They had more territory leaving the USSR in 1991 than they had joining it in 1922. Justice would require Ukraine to give it all away [to Russia]
Read 30 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(