Food for thought! A very provocative headline! Rubin's short summary of Russia's imperialism and colonialism is very recommendable!
In general, are many smaller, homogenous countries more peaceful than some large countries?
It is odd that Rubin did not mention Stalin and his invasion of Poland, the Baltic States and Finland.
"Key Points and Summary
– ... that forcing Ukraine to cede territory for peace rewards Russian aggression and entrenches imperial ambitions.
-He portrays Russia as a long-running colonial empire whose leaders deny the legitimacy of non-Russian identities.
-The only durable solution, he contends, is Russia’s dissolution into its constituent republics—much as the fall of Austro-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Yugoslavia ultimately enabled more stable politics.
- ... the West to recognize Russia’s ethnic republics as occupied nations, prepare for population shifts, and secure nuclear weapons during any breakup.
-The goal: shrink Russia to its historical core and permanently remove the engine of revisionism.
...
President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, continue to discuss a peace settlement in Ukraine that would have the former Soviet state cede territory in exchange for peace.
It is a shortsighted move that is more likely to spark conflict than extinguish it.
After all, in both 1991 and 1994, Russia had recognized the territory it now demands as Ukrainian. [Plus, the Ukraine gave up all its nuclear weapons for Russian guarantees of territorial integrity and security.]
By forcing Ukrainian concessions under fire, Trump not only rewards aggression but also endorses Putin’s imperialist narrative. ...
The Russian Empire, in contrast, relied upon its armies and expanded along its borders.
In the 16th century, Russia expanded, conquering khanates such as Astrakhan and Kazan, both of which were successor states built on the fragmented remains of the Mongol Empire.
Russian forces then continued into Siberia itself. The 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk set Russia’s land border with Qing dynasty China, confirming Russian control over the Lake Baikal region.
In the 18th century, Russian forces turned west, conquering the Baltic, Poland, and seizing territory from Sweden. Only the strength of the Prussians stopped Russia’s westward expansion.
In the early 19th century, Russian forces wrested the Caucasus from Persia, seizing control over Georgia, Armenia, Daghestan, and what later became Azerbaijan.
Russia’s defeat in the 1853-1856 Crimean War stymied its southward expansion into Ottoman domains, and so its forces drove eastward instead, erasing numerous states and kingdoms from the map. Gone today are the khanates of Khiva, Samarkand, and Bukhara.
In 1860, Russia seized the Amur region from China, reaching the Pacific Ocean.
While the Russian Empire was smaller than the British Empire in total landmass, Russia’s colonial possessions dwarfed those of France.
Russia also distinguished itself with its brutality. It enslaved conquered people like the Aleuts, and displaced or killed more than 95 percent of the Circassians during Russia’s conquest of their territory between 1863 and 1878. Nor were the Circassians alone: Russian troops forcibly displaced Chechens, Tatars, and indigenous Siberians. Cultural suppression was rampant. ...
The subsequent collapse of Yugoslavia into more homogenous units unleashed an era of opportunity if not affluence, once they defeated the rapid nationalism and irredentism of Serbian President Slobodan Milošević. In 1990, Yugoslavia’s per capita income (in current dollars) was approximately $3,700; today, Serbia’s average per capita income is four times that; it is even higher in Slovenia and Croatia. While American officials may see in Yugoslavia’s downfall a cautionary tale about the fracturing of states, the real lesson is opposite: The key to peace is the defeat of irredentism. War was not inevitable when Yugoslavia collapsed; Milošević precipitated it. Putin today is analogous to Milošević. ..."
Russia Must Be Broken Up | American Enterprise Institute - AEI
