The Daily Populous Sunday August 25th, 2024 morning edition
Authored by geoconver.org and submitted by Benkei87

Russia's military heritage is one steeped in history, valor, and national pride. For centuries, the Russian army has been a formidable force, defending its vast territories against external invaders and expanding its influence across Eurasia. From the triumphs over Napoleon in 1812 to the victories in World War II, the Russian military has been a cornerstone of national identity, celebrated for its resilience and strength.

This deep-seated pride in military prowess is not merely a historical artifact; it is ingrained in the fabric of Russian society. The Russian people, by and large, hold conservative values and view their military as a symbol of national greatness. Despite the complex and often negative international perceptions of Russia—often seen as a nation to be feared—many Russians embrace this image. Being feared is not a stigma but a badge of honor, a testament to Russia's power and influence on the global stage.

However, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine has challenged this narrative in unprecedented ways. When Russian forces launched their invasion in 2022, many expected a swift and decisive victory. After all, Russia was the larger and more powerful nation, while Ukraine was seen as a smaller, less capable adversary. Yet, what has unfolded since then has been anything but swift or decisive.

The Russian military has faced significant challenges in Ukraine. The Ukrainian forces, bolstered by Western support and driven by a fierce determination to defend their homeland, have not only resisted but have managed to reclaim large portions of the territory that Russia initially occupied. This has led to a protracted conflict that has drained Russian resources, exposed vulnerabilities in its military strategy, and tarnished the image of the once-invincible Russian military.

This situation is not just a military dilemma for Russia but a profound existential crisis. The myth of the mighty Russian army is starting to fade as the world witnesses a superpower struggling against a nation it once considered inferior. This has led to widespread ridicule, with memes and jokes about Russian military inadequacy circulating widely, further damaging the country's prestige.

For Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian people, the idea of admitting defeat in Ukraine is unthinkable. The implications of such an admission would be devastating not only for the current regime but for the nation's self-image. The loss would be seen as a humiliation, not just by the international community but by the Russian people themselves, who take great pride in their country's strength.

The historical context of Russia's view of itself as a superior power, especially in relation to the former Soviet republics and Eastern European countries, further complicates the situation. Russia has long seen itself as the natural leader of these regions, a protector, and a model for others to follow. To withdraw from Ukraine, especially after such a costly and high-profile conflict, would be to relinquish this role and admit that Russia is not the unchallenged power it once was.

Furthermore, the domestic consequences of admitting defeat could be severe. The Russian government has invested heavily in a narrative of inevitable victory, fueled by a relentless propaganda campaign. This narrative is not just about Ukraine; it is about Russia's place in the world. Admitting defeat would undermine this narrative, potentially leading to widespread disillusionment among the population and weakening the government's grip on power.

This is why, despite the mounting costs and the increasingly apparent military shortcomings, Russia continues to push forward in Ukraine. The idea of retreating is more than just a tactical decision; it is a question of national pride and identity. For Russia, the consequences of defeat extend far beyond the battlefield. They strike at the heart of what it means to be Russian in the 21st century.

In the face of these challenges, the Russian government has doubled down on its efforts, seeking to rally the population around the idea of a long and difficult struggle. This strategy, while effective in maintaining public support for the war, has also placed Russia in a precarious position. The longer the conflict drags on, the more resources are drained, and the more Russia's international standing is eroded.

Yet, the alternative—admitting defeat—is seen as even more disastrous. If Russia were to withdraw from Ukraine, the repercussions would be felt for years, if not decades. Ukraine and the international community would likely never let Russia live down such a defeat. The narrative of the Russian military might be shattered, and the country would face significant challenges in rebuilding its reputation and influence.

Moreover, the Russian leadership is acutely aware that admitting defeat could have serious domestic repercussions. It could embolden opposition forces, both within and outside the government, and lead to increased instability. In a country where the government relies heavily on its image of strength and control, this could be a dangerous tipping point.

Russia might consider emulating China's exit strategy from the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War, where China declared victory and withdrew despite limited success. However, the landscape has changed drastically since the 1980s, when information could be tightly controlled due to the absence of the Internet. Today, the internet ensures that global and domestic audiences would heavily scrutinize any claims of victory. A "Peace with Honor" approach similar to the U.S. exit from Vietnam might be an option. It carries the risk of Russia being perceived as the loser, just as the U.S. was. This comparison highlights the profound difficulty Russia faces in crafting a narrative that maintains its dignity while confronting the harsh realities of the conflict.

While a significant portion of Russians support the war, driven by national pride and the desire not to see their country defeated, there is also a notable minority who oppose the conflict. Some Russians have even risked their lives to protest against the war in Ukraine, facing harsh crackdowns and severe penalties. These individuals represent a growing discontent within the country, yet they remain a minority. Despite any personal misgivings about the conflict, the majority are still unwilling to accept the notion of losing the war. The fear of national humiliation and the deep-seated belief in Russia’s military prowess continue to drive public sentiment, making the idea of defeat unacceptable to many.

OPUno on August 25th, 2024 at 00:46 UTC »

> For Russia, the consequences of defeat extend far beyond the battlefield. They strike at the heart of what it means to be Russian in the 21st century.

That's what it has to change, because Russia is acting like a 19th century colonial power, and that's no longer acceptable. "But what about their national pride and their precious feelings" was not a serious argument when it came to France, much less for Putin's Russia. What this says is that Garry Kasparov is correct when he says that Russia needs the imperialism beaten out of them.

Russia will have a nuclear NATO umbrella that will keep their borders under international law and all their former colonies forever out of their reach. They will have to get over it.

OldPyjama on August 24th, 2024 at 23:29 UTC »

The more I see this clusterfuck, the more I realize Russia wouldn't be a superpower if it didn't have nuclear weapons.

Benkei87 on August 24th, 2024 at 22:20 UTC »

For Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian people, the idea of admitting defeat in Ukraine is unthinkable. The implications of such an admission would be devastating not only for the current regime but for the nation's self-image. The loss would be seen as a humiliation, not just by the international community but by the Russian people themselves, who take great pride in their country's strength.