Their book will be worth reading, but I’m not sure of the parallel of Kim’s and Putin’s wars: it may be that Putin has made Russia Great again simply because all eyes are on him fighting a war.
His economy is on a war footing, and his armed forces on the front foot; not only does he not need to negotiate, he doesn’t want peace.
That’s not to say his major objective is territorial; it’s hegemony, which means Ukraine cannot be in the Western or European sphere of influence. While he is pounding Ukraine into the dust, the EU won’t want to pick up the ever-increasing tab, and NATO (that is, because of Trump, European NATO) won’t want the escalatory commitment of Ukraine’s membership.
This picture is a very different one to that in Korea.
There are lots of similarities, especially in the hubris of the initial attack and in the length of time that it took/will take to secure a deal to end the fighting. All wars are different; we’re certainly not suggesting that these two are the same, but the similarities are worth highlighting
Agreed, and your book, which I've ordered and not just because we are both alumni of John Garnett, Ken Booth and John Baylis, but because it's a forgotten war for Britons, and every generation should have the chance to reinterpret the living past. Has the government released all the papers?
Your 2 papers on substack touch on the Chinese perspective. It's interesting to see how PRC has changed its interpretation of the war that started less than a year from its own creation. Very interesting would be to have a Putin-versteher and Jinping-er in open round table discuss China-Russia relations, political, economic and military-technical before and during the war :-)
Their book will be worth reading, but I’m not sure of the parallel of Kim’s and Putin’s wars: it may be that Putin has made Russia Great again simply because all eyes are on him fighting a war.
His economy is on a war footing, and his armed forces on the front foot; not only does he not need to negotiate, he doesn’t want peace.
That’s not to say his major objective is territorial; it’s hegemony, which means Ukraine cannot be in the Western or European sphere of influence. While he is pounding Ukraine into the dust, the EU won’t want to pick up the ever-increasing tab, and NATO (that is, because of Trump, European NATO) won’t want the escalatory commitment of Ukraine’s membership.
This picture is a very different one to that in Korea.
There are lots of similarities, especially in the hubris of the initial attack and in the length of time that it took/will take to secure a deal to end the fighting. All wars are different; we’re certainly not suggesting that these two are the same, but the similarities are worth highlighting
Agreed, and your book, which I've ordered and not just because we are both alumni of John Garnett, Ken Booth and John Baylis, but because it's a forgotten war for Britons, and every generation should have the chance to reinterpret the living past. Has the government released all the papers?
Your 2 papers on substack touch on the Chinese perspective. It's interesting to see how PRC has changed its interpretation of the war that started less than a year from its own creation. Very interesting would be to have a Putin-versteher and Jinping-er in open round table discuss China-Russia relations, political, economic and military-technical before and during the war :-)