232
submitted 1 year ago by deconstruct@lemm.ee to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

Russia's diplomats were once a key part of President Putin's foreign policy strategy. But that has all changed.

In the years leading up to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, diplomats lost their authority, their role reduced to echoing the Kremlin's aggressive rhetoric.

BBC Russian asks former diplomats, as well as ex-Kremlin and White House insiders, how Russian diplomacy broke down.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 1 year ago

It might be hard to imagine now, but Mr Putin himself told the BBC back in 2000 that "Russia is ready to co-operate with Nato... right up to joining the alliance".

"I cannot imagine my country isolated from Europe," he added.

Back then, early in his presidency, Mr Putin was eager to build ties with the West, a former senior Kremlin official told the BBC.

Gotta wonder how Russia never ended up being able to NATO despite this.

[-] xill47@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Declassified (by the US) documents mention that Putin wanted to join without waiting in queue with "insignificant countries" (in early 2000s, who would that be? Baltic countries?), and as late as 2012 there was a contract for usage Russian airport as transit hub to Afghanistan (https://m.gazeta.ru/politics/2012/06/29_a_4650373.shtml, was looking specifically for pro-Russian media as a source)

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago

Putin wanted to join without waiting in queue with "insignificant countries"

this is the dumbest excuse ever trotted out in explanation for why Russia wasn't allowed to join. because the largest military and nuclear arsenal in europe should for some reason wait in a "line" in joining an allegedly defensive alliance, when they'd be the greatest possible contribution to common defense? why on earth would there be a "line" to enter an alliance in the first place? surely they had more than a single clerk doing nations' paperwork to join?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago

I have secret intelligence that the actual reason Putin didn't join NATO is because he was angry that Romania joined first because he wanted to be the first country starting with R in NATO. NATO officials begged, pleaded with him to join the organization, but he's just such a petty man.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Deceptichum@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

It’s simple, they never actually asked to join.

[-] severien@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Russia / Putin didn't want to follow standard procedure, feeling entitled for a special treatment.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] what_is_a_name@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

The factual link you posted (not the commentary on CATO, lol) says the opposite. NATO cut ties after Putin began turning aggressive as Ukraine began gaining independence.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] zephyreks@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

CATO as a source is worse than RT lol. Talk about arguing in bad faith.

[-] socsa@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 year ago

It's actually hilarious how millennials are refusing to shit themselves in fear over hollow threats of nuclear apocalypse like the boomers did for decades.

Like, I'm going to die a slow death from microplastic poisoning. My kids will slowly cook to death as the earth warms. Instant death by fireball sounds pretty nice.

[-] SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

idk, I think I prefer the constant fear, at least compared to the bloodthirsty calls for nuclear war to begin over Ukraine because ackstually Russia's nukes don't work anymore, and also nuclear war isn't really that bad anyway

[-] BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago

Who is calling for nuclear war exactly? Isn't the whole reason NATO boots are not on the ground because nobody wants a nuclear war?

[-] SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've seen this on reddit and other hellholes from time to time

most people tend to have a degree of separation from it, like early on in the war when people were calling for a no-fly zone over Ukraine (which would have necessarily meant NATO strikes into Ukraine or Russian territory, which would put us at the closest humanity has ever been to a nuclear exchange); about mid-way through the war when some countries were trying to form a "coalition of the willing" (article is more recent than when I was thinking though) to enter Ukraine that wasn't technically NATO forces but like, my god, you're really cutting it fucking close there; and some people nowadays are musing if F-16s could be used from NATO territory

there's also been some vague threats from time to time over Kaliningrad but luckily that's never escalated to outright military rhetoric, at least not yet.

[-] Piye@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago

NATO wants nuclear genocide to happen against minorities, they brag about genociding minorities all the time in fact

[-] ArthurParkerhouse@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

The young scions of our age find themselves in a curious juxtaposition to their forbearers, who once trembled at the thought of world-ending calamities unleashed by the fiery engines of the Autarch's weaponry. These newer souls scoff at such fears, deeming them hollow echoes of a past era, perhaps because they have been raised in the shadow of subtler, yet equally inexorable, dooms. To them, the threat of slow ruin wrought by the invisible maladies that pollute our waters and air, or the gradual inferno that the Sun's ever-increasing wrath promises to our world, hold more tangible dread. For these youths, the prospect of instantaneous annihilation in a blaze of cosmic fire seems almost a reprieve, a quick severance of life's Gordian knot, sparing them the prolonged suffering promised by the ills that plague our slowly deteriorating Urth.

[-] socsa@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Pretty good

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago
[-] zephyreks@programming.dev 20 points 1 year ago

Haven't you heard? The West IS the world!

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago
[-] o_d@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago

Hamburgers, anyone?

[-] deconstruct@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Diplomacy isn't just cozying up to nations that are your friends and and insulting others, it's having cordial relations with all nations.

[-] Vampire@hexbear.net 27 points 1 year ago

Diplomacy isn't cozying up to nations that are your friends and and insulting others

Yes it is.

it's having cordial relations with all nations.

No it's not.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago

cozying up to nations that are your friends and and insulting others

You've literally described western diplomacy here.

[-] zephyreks@programming.dev 22 points 1 year ago

No one does this, though?

If that's diplomacy, then we're living in a world of the opposite.

[-] jackmarxist@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago

I agree with this take. But very few countries follow this kind of diplomacy.

[-] socsa@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

"Socialism is when multipolar sharia law."

  • Karl "not Lenin enough for Stalin" Marx
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Weslee@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Was it ever alive to begin with?

[-] severien@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Soviet diplomacy was actually pretty strong.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 11 points 1 year ago

Nah, Russian diplomacy is at their highest once they realize they could write off the West as a loss instead of sucking up to them, who sees the Russians as Asiatic orcs anyways. Russia is somehow able to be friends with both India and China, they have made huge diplomatic (and military) strides in Africa, and they're not doing too shabby in SEA or WANA either. That's almost two continents right there.

[-] vacuumflower 3 points 1 year ago

Only Russia is not a friend for India and China. Its capabilities are not sufficient to be one anymore. It's just begging them to make some appearance of friendship for cheap resources and various concessions which can not go on forever.

The USSR is still breaking up. Russian state as it exists now is not sustainable. It was a complete nightmare in the 90s, yes, and was apparently becoming better in the 00s and even 10s, but now we will see what is going to transpire inside Russia after cessation of hostilities with Ukraine, and that is not yet a thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 7 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Russian diplomats were a key part of Mr Putin's team, helping resolve territorial disputes with China and Norway, leading talks on deeper co-operation with European countries, and ensuring a peaceful transition after a revolution in Georgia.

But as Mr Putin became more powerful and experienced, he became increasingly convinced he had all the answers and that diplomats were unnecessary, says Alexander Gabuev, the director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, who is living in exile in Berlin.

A year later, when Russia invaded Georgia, Moscow's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reportedly swore at his UK counterpart, David Miliband, asking: "Who are you to lecture me?"

In 2009, Mr Lavrov and the then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed a giant red "reset button" in relations, and the two countries seemed to be building co-operation - especially on security issues.

But it soon became obvious to US officials that their Russian counterparts were simply parroting Mr Putin's growing anti-Western views, says Ben Rhodes, deputy national security advisor to former US President Barack Obama.

Mr Bondarev, who used to work for Moscow's mission to the UN in Geneva, recalls one meeting where Russia blocked all proposed initiatives, prompting colleagues from Switzerland to complain.


The original article contains 1,612 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 88%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Piye@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The British Bullshit Corporation is one to talk, they've been seething about India gaining Independence now for decades, and despite them literally going to the moon they still can't bring themselves to show any measure of respect

Also lets just magically all forget all these NATO trash "diplomats" walking out of Lavrovs speech at the UN like 13 year olds having a tantrum instead of actually engaging in the one thing they were supposed to do, "diplomacy". The west is the entity that didn't even want to negotiate with Russia, NATO is the one who decided to egg Russia on until this happened, despite Ukraine not even being a NATO member.

But yeah sure, whatever BBC, it's totally Russia's fault you acted like babies and backtracked on all your agreements

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
232 points (96.0% liked)

World News

32287 readers
1191 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS