Ukraine VS Russia. Ideological or Economical conflict

[DVlog]

If you dive deep into the past incident then you will see the real reason behind the Ukraine Russian war is economic not ideological or security concern.

This war is an economic loss for Russia? There is 3 main economical reason behind the Russian attack on Ukraine.

1. Russia's gas transit problem with Ukraine?

We all know how much Europe depends on Russia for its energy to power up their country to survive the winter. Gas from Europe first goes to eastern Europe through Ukraine and then all over western Europe. On 1 January 2006, Russia cut off its gas supply to Europe due to a transit problem with Ukraine. Ukraine was demanding more transit fees from Russia than the global rate. When Poland charged 1$ per 1000 Cubic meter gas to transit 100 KM Ukraine demanded 2.5$ for the same amount of gas. Not only that, Russia found out that Ukraine was stealing some gas from the supply route by diverting it for their personal use. This was the beginning of the whole problem.



2. why did Russia annex Crimea?

a) There is a trillion dollars worth of gas reserve found in the basin of Crimea which Russia wants. This was the main and first reason behind the Russian occupation in Crimea.

b) Crimean seaport Sevastopol didn't freeze in winter which makes it unique from most other seaports in Europe. This means Russia can operate business even in winter through this seaport. Not only that it can be used as a naval fleet for the Russian navy the whole year. And its location gives Russia the power to conduct any naval operation to the whole of Europe.



3. Why attack Ukraine?

We can see how important Crimea is for Russia but Crimea has a very serious problem of its own and that is it doesn't have any natural source of drinkable water. Its water comes from Ukraine and after the occupation of Crimea Ukraine cut off its water supply. So only having Crimea without any water supply isn't sufficient enough.

Many of us think that Russia's attack on Ukraine is due to its joining NATO which I think isn't valid because Russia has a border with two other NATO members. The main reason is economic not ideological or security concerns. Both sides have some responsibility behind the conflict but that hasn't given Russia the right to annex Crimea or attack Ukraine. Did I miss any points here?

[1714184901]

1714184901

[1714184901]

1714184901

[1714184901]

1714184901

[Tytanowy Janusz]

Ukraine VS Russia. Ideological or Economical conflict?

Same religion, similar language, same ethnolinguistic group (Slavic). Ukraine was even part of ZSRR 30 years ago. So there is no Ideological difference. Its only economic and strategic/military reason for conflict. Economical reason was pointed out by OP. Strategic/military reason is that Ukraine was tryign to join European Union and NATO which would enable NATO to place their military bases and missiles 450KM from Moscow. It is unacceptable if you consider your country to be one of the top 3 powers where everyone else is your enemy (that's what Russians seams to think about themselves)

[hatshepsut93]

2. why did Russia annex Crimea?

a) There is a trillion dollars worth of gas reserve found in the basin of Crimea which Russia wants. This was the main and first reason behind the Russian occupation in Crimea.

b) Crimean seaport Sevastopol didn't freeze in winter which makes it unique from most other seaports in Europe. This means Russia can operate business even in winter through this seaport. Not only that it can be used as a naval fleet for the Russian navy the whole year. And its location gives Russia the power to conduct any naval operation to the whole of Europe.

That gas from Crimea is very hard to extract and there's no active extraction going on now or anytime soon. And Russia is already a major fossil fuel producer, adding Crimea is like adding a drop to the ocean.

Russia already had access to the Black Sea, so it wasn't exactly a great geopolical victory.

Many of us think that Russia's attack on Ukraine is due to its joining NATO which I think isn't valid because Russia has a border with two other NATO members. The main reason is economic not ideological or security concerns. Both sides have some responsibility behind the conflict but that hasn't given Russia the right to annex Crimea or attack Ukraine. Did I miss any points here?

Now consider this, Russia has committed economic suicide with their invasion, their currency crashed, they lost access to a portion of their reserves, western countries and their allies refuse to do business with Russia, so Russia will have to do it on worse terms with China and India. Things will only get worse and worse from now on. Was it worth it?

Ideology is the main and only reason why it has happened. It was Putin's personal ambition to conquer Ukraine and be remembered as a great leader.

Same religion, similar language, same ethnolinguistic group (Slavic). Ukraine was even part of ZSRR 30 years ago. So there is no Ideological difference.

You clearly have zero knowledge on Ukrainian and Russian history. At least try to read Wikipedia or something.

[Jody.Drummer]

3. Why attack Ukraine?

We can see how important Crimea is for Russia but Crimea has a very serious problem of its own and that is it doesn't have any natural source of drinkable water. Its water comes from Ukraine and after the occupation of Crimea Ukraine cut off its water supply. So only having Crimea without any water supply isn't sufficient enough.

Many of us think that Russia's attack on Ukraine is due to its joining NATO which I think isn't valid because Russia has a border with two other NATO members. The main reason is economic not ideological or security concerns. Both sides have some responsibility behind the conflict but that hasn't given Russia the right to annex Crimea or attack Ukraine. Did I miss any points here?

Maybe true, maybe not. To be honest, we who are not from conflict countries can only rely on information from the media of the two countries, in fact, we still haven't found out that this conflict is related to ideology. Apart from all those relationships, because anything can have a relationship with each other.

Both economic, political, religious, and maybe also social on both sides. I certainly don't understand deeply about the conflict between the two countries, even about Crimea, which now no longer gets clean water from Ukraine because it has become Russian territory, while Crimea depends on this water source.

In conclusion, every issue that is said to be an internal conflict will have the potential to be linked to Politics, Economics, and even to raise the issue of Ideology, all to achieve their respective goals.

[Baofeng]

I would agree that the NATO membership was just an excuse from Putin to attack Ukraine.

And it could be ideological, he believed that it is still with Russia, and since the government is anti-Putin, it has to be reminded that it was once was a part of Russia. And we may say that Putin has a nationalistic idea that he takes very seriously and no one can stop him from fighting for it even if it means attacking Ukraine and getting condemnation from the West.

[laredo7mm]

I would agree that the NATO membership was just an excuse from Putin to attack Ukraine.

And it could be ideological, he believed that it is still with Russia, and since the government is anti-Putin, it has to be reminded that it was once was a part of Russia. And we may say that Putin has a nationalistic idea that he takes very seriously and no one can stop him from fighting for it even if it means attacking Ukraine and getting condemnation from the West.

I do not think Putin will gamble on Russia's economy only for an ideological reason. One state attack another state generally for two reasons. Either out of fear or greed. Most of the time greed played the main role which is also valid for Putin. Putin doesn't want to lose the EU market for their fossil fuel and Ukraine was creating problems by diverting gas from Russia's gas pipeline and overcharging for transit as mentioned in OP. I think Putin was desperate and played that gamble.

[kryptqnick]

This war is deeply ideological. Russia, throughout history, occupied Ukrainian territories. Russia also appropriated OUR history, trying to make it theirs. Putin repeatedly said he doesn't see Ukraine as a separate state, doesn't see Ukrainian people as separate from the Russian people. Only someone very out of context could believe that the war is economical. So yeah, you missed a lot of points. But, of course, with ideological tensions came also economic and generally political tensions. But this war is NOT about Russian gas or water to Crimea. And I honestly can't believe some here are saying there's no ideological difference between Russia and Ukraine, after everything that happened. Ukraine values freedom over everything, which is why it's fighting so fiercely against a much bigger army. Russian people clearly got used to whatever's going on, and they are not fighting for their freedom, not even leaning towards democracy. There's a huge difference, and, one way or another, it has been there for centuries.

[DVlog]

This war is deeply ideological. Russia, throughout history, occupied Ukrainian territories. Russia also appropriated OUR history, trying to make it theirs. Putin repeatedly said he doesn't see Ukraine as a separate state, doesn't see Ukrainian people as separate from the Russian people. Only someone very out of context could believe that the war is economical.

So you are expecting Putin to first announce that he demands Crimean gas and oil reserve along with free gas transit through Ukrainian territory then attack Ukraine? Georg W Bush first said Iraq has weapons of mass destruction then provoked other nations to join his side to attack Iraq which later proved that this attack was only for sucking Iraq's oil reserves. Superpower throws fear or ideological cake to people to justify their wrongdoing and gain support. You just can not say a state give me your wealth or face destruction. It's not the roman or Mongol era.

Putin has done a similar thing which has done in 2003 when the USA and their allies attack Iraq. Also, you must have known that 35-40% of Ukrainian are pro-Russian, especially in eastern Ukraine and that's a big number. They have a historical and cultural connection with Russia so what Putin said is not totally wrong after all.

[cabron]

It all consolidated and Russia wouldn't stand having a hostile country that blocks the water stream going to them. They see the dam was created mainly to cut off thier supply of water and then the Russian speakers in Donetsk and Lugansk prefer to be independent of Ukraine them experiencing the genocide from the Ukrainian government. It's both ideological and economic. 

Belarus experience the same since they are blocked from accessing waters in Crimea which is worse than sanctions they get. They'd use all thier might to get what they need while NATO is forcing them to do exactly what they need to do.

[Darker45]

This invasion is neither ideological nor economical. This invasion is simply born out of a folly. Arguing that this invasion is either ideological or economical is dignifying it. At the bottom of it, this is nothing but a decision of a deranged man. Putin is becoming a crazy dictator who is living in a world of fantasy. The problem is that he has so much power and he is a mad man. Everybody is afraid to confront him and tell him he is out of his mind. I know for sure that even some of those people in his inner circle do not approve of this stupidity.

[Moneyprism]

Ideological or Economical conflict? I don't think it's both.. more like a political issue...we know that Putin doesn't want his country to be influenced by the west. And by joining Ukraine to Nato or Europe this could be a threat to their country..

... especially Putin doesn't like Zelensky who is too pro-western

[DVlog]

This invasion is neither ideological nor economical. This invasion is simply born out of a folly. Arguing that this invasion is either ideological or economical is dignifying it. At the bottom of it, this is nothing but a decision of a deranged man. Putin is becoming a crazy dictator who is living in a world of fantasy. The problem is that he has so much power and he is a mad man. Everybody is afraid to confront him and tell him he is out of his mind. I know for sure that even some of those people in his inner circle do not approve of this stupidity.

How do you so sure about Putin's mental conditions? Do not forget he is a former KGB agent that gives him a cold-blooded mind. Putin is not in fantasy nor it is his own will that is going on right now. The Russians have carried out many military operations outside the country since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Georgia (2006), Crimea (2014), Belarus (2020), Kazakhstan (2022), and then Ukraine (2022). But in reality, from Russia's point of view, these campaigns are not the military adventures of a single individual. Behind each expedition is comprehensive integrated thinking of the future geographical plans of the Russians. To understand Russia's ongoing militarism, we must turn our attention away from Putin to Alexander Dagan, one of Putin's advisers.

Alexander Dagan's own book where he talk about his new ideology. "The Fourth Political Theory"

Dagin thinks that equality is an invalid concept. Europe must now focus on establishing the ‘Eurasia’ empire, in which the Russians will be the heroes. In other words, it will be a 'Greater Russia', an empire dominated by old religions and political structures.

This talk looks like a fantasy but I am afraid that he is exactly doing everything for it at least all these Russ military expeditions point towards that. he is the man behind all these military interventions of Russia and he is using Putin. Putin has a very close relationship with Dagin and is influenced by his ideology.

War on Ukraine is part of a long pre-planned picture which can be proven from a statement of Degan in 2006.

During the Russian invasion of Georgia, Dagan visited South Ossetia and, in support of his country's military operation in Georgia, said, "These territories, including Tbilisi, Crimea, and Ukraine, belong to the Russians."

I am not sure in the long term Russia could succeed or not but it will make the whole of Europe a continent of ruins.

[davis196]

"Ideological" is not the right term.This isn't some "communism vs.capitalism" or "nazism vs.communism" type of conflict.There aren't any ideologies being preached by both sides.
The conflict is geopolitical,not ideological.Geopolitics and economy are deeply linked together,so there's no choosing between two options.The conflict is BOTH geopolitical and economical.
I didn't know that there any gas reserves in Crimea.I don't think that Crimea is the main reason for the conflict.
You are forgetting about eastern Ukraine.
The gas transit isn't a reason for the war,because Russia has Northern Stream and Turkish stream,so the Russian gas can reach Europe without going thru Ukraine.
The main reasons for the conflict are these:
1.Putin wants more territories.
2.Putin wants to put Ukraine under his control in one way or another.The possibilities of USA deploying nuclear weapons in Ukraine or Ukraine joining NATO are just a silly excuse for Putin to attack Ukraine.

[lovesmayfamilis]

This invasion is neither ideological nor economical. This invasion is simply born out of a folly. Arguing that this invasion is either ideological or economical is dignifying it. At the bottom of it, this is nothing but a decision of a deranged man. Putin is becoming a crazy dictator who is living in a world of fantasy. The problem is that he has so much power and he is a mad man. Everybody is afraid to confront him and tell him he is out of his mind. I know for sure that even some of those people in his inner circle do not approve of this stupidity.

The most stupid post I've read about Putin. Who do you think would appoint a madman to the presidency? Do you know the population of Russia? Or maybe you forgot what time you live in? Is this medieval?
Try to shift your eyes to Russian resources and read what is the demilitarization of Ukraine and the denationalization of Ukraine. Try using a translator. Type in the search the genocide of the Russian-speaking population of Donbas for 8 years. Read about the Gorlovskaya Madonna. Do you know what Nazism is? This is exactly what was the reason that the operation began by the Russian authorities. Liberation of Ukraine from Nazism.
Although I understand that all words are useless while there is a mass mailing of fake news. But history always shows that sooner or later people will find out the truth, it takes time.

[bakasabo]

2. why did Russia annex Crimea?

a) There is a trillion dollars worth of gas reserve found in the basin of Crimea which Russia wants. This was the main and first reason behind the Russian occupation in Crimea.

b) Crimean seaport Sevastopol didn't freeze in winter which makes it unique from most other seaports in Europe.

Do you know that technically, Crimea belongs to Russia? It was a part of Russia for a long period of time, until Nikita Khrushchev (First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union) signed an agreement to transfer Crimea to Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, to support USSR region and to decrease population of Tatars there. Some people believe, that Khrushchev simply presented part of Russian land to Ukrainians. That is why Russians celebrated that much when "they got their land back". People disagreed why someone "distribute their land to others just for nothings". That what I think triggered all that disagreements between Russia and Ukraine long before war, annexation and etc.

[NeuroticFish]

So there is no Ideological difference. Its only economic and strategic/military reason for conflict.

With Ukraine opening towards EU and NATO and turning their back to Mother Russia, I find it quite a big ideological difference.
And yeah, it's somewhere between military reasoning - attempt to get Russia's borders towards natural barriers, big seas and mountains - and somebody's wet dream to become the tzar of a new era's Soviet Union.

Clearly the coal from Donbass, the oil and gas from Crimea and Black Sea and the great plains just perfect for grains are also a big point in all this.

[laredo7mm]

2. why did Russia annex Crimea?

a) There is a trillion dollars worth of gas reserve found in the basin of Crimea which Russia wants. This was the main and first reason behind the Russian occupation in Crimea.

b) Crimean seaport Sevastopol didn't freeze in winter which makes it unique from most other seaports in Europe.

Do you know that technically, Crimea belongs to Russia? It was a part of Russia for a long period of time, until Nikita Khrushchev (First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union) signed an agreement to transfer Crimea to Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, to support USSR region and to decrease population of Tatars there. Some people believe, that Khrushchev simply presented part of Russian land to Ukrainians. That is why Russians celebrated that much when "they got their land back". People disagreed why someone "distribute their land to others just for nothings". That what I think triggered all that disagreements between Russia and Ukraine long before war, annexation and etc.

There are many countries that were once a part of Russia. So now Putin will reclaim all those countries? Crimea was part of Ukraine On 19 February 1954 even before Ukraine got independent. Basically, Crimea also got independent from the former soviet union as a part of Ukraine. Crimea consists mostly of pro-Russian people which is another matter.

[Darker45]

~snip~

How do you so sure about Putin's mental conditions?

We all know nothing about Putin's mental condition, you and I. We can only surmise. So we may be looking at the same man waging an invasion in a sovereign country, dropping bombs on parks and schools and homes and malls and everywhere, but we could still have different opinions of him.

I am seeing a madman and a devil. Others may see a completely sane man and a prophet.

Behind each expedition is comprehensive integrated thinking of the future geographical plans of the Russians. To understand Russia's ongoing militarism, we must turn our attention away from Putin to Alexander Dagan, one of Putin's advisers.

He is the man behind all these military interventions of Russia and he is using Putin. Putin has a very close relationship with Dagin and is influenced by his ideology.

War on Ukraine is part of a long pre-planned picture which can be proven from a statement of Degan in 2006.

During the Russian invasion of Georgia, Dagan visited South Ossetia and, in support of his country's military operation in Georgia, said, "These territories, including Tbilisi, Crimea, and Ukraine, belong to the Russians."

I am not sure in the long term Russia could succeed or not but it will make the whole of Europe a continent of ruins.

So why even attempt to explain everything as if they're economical?

~snip~

The most stupid post I've read about Putin. Who do you think would appoint a madman to the presidency? Do you know the population of Russia? Or maybe you forgot what time you live in? Is this medieval?
Try to shift your eyes to Russian resources and read what is the demilitarization of Ukraine and the denationalization of Ukraine. Try using a translator. Type in the search the genocide of the Russian-speaking population of Donbas for 8 years. Read about the Gorlovskaya Madonna. Do you know what Nazism is? This is exactly what was the reason that the operation began by the Russian authorities. Liberation of Ukraine from Nazism.
Although I understand that all words are useless while there is a mass mailing of fake news. But history always shows that sooner or later people will find out the truth, it takes time.

1. Is it unimaginable for an entire country in these modern times to elect a madman? Look around. Or does a people even elect?
2. This is the modern era. As such, it shouldn't be an era when a country would rape another country for whatever selfish reason, may it be economical, ideological, religious, geopolitical, and so on.
3. I don't know much about the Russian population. What I'm almost sure of, though, is that they prefer peace rather than war.
4. I don't trust much the western media and the resources made available by them, but I think it's much harder for me to trust the Russian media and their resources.
5. Please, you cannot bomb innocent little children because a purported genocide happened 8 years ago, can you?
6. Can you talk of demilitarization and denationalization and Nazism and liberation and bomb children and helpless women and old people?

[NeuroticFish]

1. Is it unimaginable for an entire country in these modern times to elect a madman? Look around. Or does a people even elect?

Russia didn't make the step to proper democracy. And even in a (young) democracy, it's not unimaginable at all to elect a madman; it can easily happen because of lacking actual choices.
The thing is that in a democracy the pillars of the state are not linked/interconnected, hence they won't allow a man (or even a small group) rule.
Since Russia is not a proper democracy, there's no other power in the state that could veto any of the president's actions.

And since this situation is there for too long, I expect that anybody even daring to question his actions is basically doomed. So it's a totalitarian state (weakly) disguised in democracy.

[bakasabo]

There are many countries that were once a part of Russia. So now Putin will reclaim all those countries? Crimea was part of Ukraine On 19 February 1954 even before Ukraine got independent. Basically, Crimea also got independent from the former soviet union as a part of Ukraine. Crimea consists mostly of pro-Russian people which is another matter.

I am reading through Crimea history on wikipedia, and I see it was part of Roman Empire, part of Tartary, Armenians and Greeks, were involved, Adyghe and other indigenous ethnic group, part of Russian Empire, and in 1954 Khrushchev joined Crimea to Ukrainian SSR. I dont see where it was "part of Ukraine before 1954".

In short, for most of Russians, Crimea is sort of a gift to Ukraine to help it to develop. But as soon as it became developed, Russia waiter for Ukraine to return Crimea. At least that is the idea that is presented to most of Russians.

That sounds wrong. If we are going back in past, then if Russia took it back, Turkey should take it back either.