Former ambassador MK Bhadrakumar writing at Indian Punchline
Interesting analysis, thanks for sharing :caught-in-4che: it's refreshing to see how the rest of the world views this conflict
This time things will definitely change quickly and in a direction I can both predict and approve of.
What isn't gonna happen is that Russia defeats Ukraine and then NATO just ceases to exist (nor do I think he's suggesting that it will, just making sure nobody's deluded), but I think Bhadrakumar is picking up on the growing faultlines between western and eastern European countries.
Ignoring all the media hype and official statements of "We're all totally united against Russian aggression!" and looking more at behind-the-scenes things, as we often do in the news megathreads, for anybody watching European leaders for the last year it's patently obvious that people like Macron and Scholz have rather different views on what the end stage of the war will be and what Russia's role will be in the world after it, compared to eastern European leaders. The former are much more diplomatically oriented, while the latter want more sanctions, more weapons, more aid to Ukraine, even if it destroys their economies and governments in the process. And America (under Biden at least, though I can't imagine even Trump would deviate much from what he's told to do if the orders are given to him by big strong generals) and the UK also seem firmly wedded to the eastern European stance.
Perhaps extrapolating these cracks eventually becoming chasms that break apart NATO is too much, and as zifnab25 astutely puts it below, things never go according to plan and especially not on the timescale we hope, but it's not something to easily dismiss I think. I expect that what will happen is a years, maybe even a decade(s)-long saga where a TON of diplomacy and arguments happen behind the scenes, and every like, three months, we get an article in some outlet with a headline like "Tensions between Germany and Poland are simmering after several arguments over the last several weeks reveal wildly differing viewpoints in the post-war landscape". And then another five months goes by and then we get an article like "Eastern European leaders discussed NATO at EU meeting after European countries reached an impasse". etc etc.
And it's also difficult to see exactly how these tectonic plates move, separate, and crash. Do the western European countries leave NATO and form their own nuclear umbrella under, say, France's nuclear arsenal, and form an uncomfortable peace with Russia and restore relations to ensure a supply of oil and gas? Do instead the eastern European states, seeing the inability of NATO to defeat Russia in Ukraine, leave NATO and form their own alliance, even more strongly anti-Russia, maybe backed up by UK nuclear weapons? Does Trump, a wildcard, sweep in and withdraw America from NATO? Or do individual countries just start leaving NATO randomly? Or does NATO continue to exist but is forced to pull back its forces and nukes from the ex-Soviet states under some big peace deal?
The United States effectively stepped in an destroyed Russo-Germanic relations.
Any potential salvage was dismantled by the US and the UK, which sticks far closer to US interests than the rest of Europe is comfortable with.
You think Germany wanted NordStream blown up? NordStream even existing is a threat to US power in the area, material benefits to the people of Europe be damned.
Legitimately I can see an outcome where Russia seize a lot of Eastern territory and then what's left of Ukraine joins the EU but not NATO.
One of my least favourite parts of this last year has been watching me and my family's economic future slowly get yoinked away for seemingly no reason. Also, getting my 3rd or 4th rent increase since I moved into my appartment 18 months ago has been a real fucking treat.
