# Why wouldn't Putin try to destroy NATO? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 5, 2014, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434 "2014-04-05T20:54:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/141 "2014-04-09T19:34:25Z")
> [@Grim\_Render](#): > > Norway, Sweden and Finland are hardly eastern Europeans. Or Denmark. France tends to be pretty hardass about military responses. The UK on its own cound give Russia a serious fight. Germany has admittedly downgraded its military vastly. But no western country knows what Russia is capable of quite as well as Germany. We shall see what happens after this wakeup call. Germanys military potential is significantly greater than Russias. Fat. Greedy. Weak. That’s the Russian perception of Western Europeans. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/142 "2014-04-09T19:36:05Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Fat. Greedy. Weak. That’s the Russian perception of Western Europeans. If that’s what they think, then they may attack a NATO country, and then they’ll lose in a one-sided war and Putin would likely be ousted. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/143 "2014-04-09T19:38:56Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Fat. Greedy. Weak. That’s the Russian perception of Western Europeans. They would not be the first to mistake a high threshold for going to war with a lack of resolution about it. It tends to be a very stupid mistake. In any case, I would hope Putin has a more accurate perception of the west. He does have access to a lot more information than the average Russian. The danger is that he’ll have surronded himself with so many yes-men that he is losing his grip on what real and what people say to please him. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/144 "2014-04-09T20:26:26Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Also worth considering is the cost of intervening on behalf of Ukraine, when Ukraine isn’t a NATO member: a free-rider problem. If you can get the benefits of membership without the costs or obligations, why join? That’s not a wise message to send about your military alliance. If the strategic benefit to the alliance is large enough, and if the third party wants the defense, then it could make ordinary strategic sense to extend the defense. To put it really crudely, it’s better to let a non-NATO country serve as the battleground, rather than have to fight inside the borders of a NATO country. Mess up the landscape of the third party, not a treaty member. If the third party prefers this intervention to being overrun by the initial aggressor, then it’s good both ways. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2014, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/145 "2014-04-09T21:10:02Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Fat. Greedy. Weak. That’s the Russian perception of Western Europeans. The problem is that Putin (and probably many other Russians) have lost touch with reality as to where Russia actually stands in the world. For example, all the news stories about Russians longing for the glory days of the Soviet Union, but the reality is that the Soviet Union had no glory. Ever. In other words, stop excusing this Russian nationalism and start pouring some cold water on it. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/146 "2014-04-10T01:20:15Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The problem is that Putin (and probably many other Russians) have lost touch with reality as to where Russia actually stands in the world. For example, all the news stories about Russians longing for the glory days of the Soviet Union, but the reality is that the Soviet Union had no glory. Ever. The longing for the “glory days” goes back before the Soviet Union, back to the Grand Duchy of Muscovy. That the expansion of the Soviet Union was almost entirely enabled due to the weakness of post-WWII Central Europe is immaterial to how the Russians see themselves; they’re a culture with a collective inferiority complex about not being considered part of “civiliized” Europe. This is how Putin is justifying the enormous expendature of building up Russian nuclear forces. There is no question as to whether Russia could stand up a conventional war against combined NATO forces; it can’t, and probably never could for an extended engagement even at the height of Soviet power. But it can certainly rattle its saber and wield power over smaller nations without the protection of a modern military. It can bully and harrass smaller nations, even the NATO aligned Baltic states, provided it doesn’t cross a line. And this is a difficult position for NATO, which doesn’t want to provoke open conflict but has to ensure protection of its member states and their interests. The Crimea is this brave new world’s Czechoslovakia; everybody knows allowing it to be annexed is morally wrong, but nobody wants to be the asshole who starts a war over it. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2014, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/147 "2014-04-10T01:26:46Z")
I think Crimea is more akin to Austria, or even the Rhineland. It was made part of Ukraine SSR by the old Soviet government. To me, the equivalent of Czechoslovakia is the Baltic states. Historically part of Russia only through conquest, never through ethnic affinity, and protected by an alliance(as Czechoslovakia was) which some want to fink on, thinking maybe the alligator will eat them last. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 9:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/148 "2014-04-11T09:35:03Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > I think you overestimate Western Europeans. I suspect a lot of hemming and hawing and “strong sanctions” (that in the end turn out to be basically nothing, like the current ones that EU imposed) will ensue, but absolutely no military response. But I hope I am wrong. Baltic states are part of the EU and have been for a while. Letting Russia invade them seems hardly conceivable to me. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/149 "2014-04-11T12:00:17Z")
After reading the whole thread and in complement to my previous post : it’s natural I guess that on an American board people would discuss mostly about a NATO reaction, but as I just said, Baltic states are part of the EU. From my French point of view, they’re primarily members of the EU and only very secondarily members of NATO. I can go to Tallinn this evening, spend my money there and even stay forever if I feel like it. The EU hasn’t much teeth, but it is much more of a reality than some posters here seem to believe. The Union is of the highest importance, and even more so for politicians. An attack against a member of the Union is an attack against the Union as a whole. Other members can’t just let it fly. In practice, despite the existence of an embryo of common defense, a military response would happen under the baner of NATO. But lacking that, it would have to be organized otherwise. And I’m pretty certain it would be. Maybe Malta or somesuch could tolerate such an action by Moscow, I don’t know, but most member states couldn’t. Can you see Poland letting Russia seize forcefully her neighbours’ territory without reaction? Can you see Germany? Personnally I can’t. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/150 "2014-04-11T12:15:09Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > The American people have no moral obligation to sacrifice themselves for the sake of some minor powers on the Baltic. If it’s perceived to be in our geopolitical interest, we’ll do it. If it’s not, we’ll find a way out of it. > > We’re not bound to do anything. I guess the USA might decide not to, but regarding the moral obligation : what is the meaning of the word “treaty”, according to you, then? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/151 "2014-04-11T12:25:21Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > After reading the whole thread and in complement to my previous post : it’s natural I guess that on an American board people would discuss mostly about a NATO reaction, but as I just said, Baltic states are part of the EU. From my French point of view, they’re primarily members of the EU and only very secondarily members of NATO. I can go to Tallinn this evening, spend my money there and even stay forever if I feel like it. > > The EU hasn’t much teeth, but it is much more of a reality than some posters here seem to believe. The Union is of the highest importance, and even more so for politicians. An attack against a member of the Union is an attack against the Union as a whole. Other members can’t just let it fly. In practice, despite the existence of an embryo of common defense, a military response would happen under the baner of NATO. But lacking that, it would have to be organized otherwise. And I’m pretty certain it would be. Maybe Malta or somesuch could tolerate such an action by Moscow, I don’t know, but most member states couldn’t. Can you see Poland letting Russia seize forcefully her neighbours’ territory without reaction? Can you see Germany? Personnally I can’t. How much of your sentiment is due to you being French? I may be wrong, but isn’t France sort of the most ardent supporter of the EU, and that citizens of other countries might not feel the same level of commitment? Obviously, you are going to find the full spectrum of support in most countries, but isn’t the overall feeling toward the EU strongest in France? ---
**Author:** ![Cmoore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Cmoore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cmoore)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/152 "2014-04-11T13:39:21Z")
Russia aren’t interested in taking the Baltic states or eastern Ukraine for that matter. They want to keep Sevastopol as it’s their main Black Sea naval base and they want to keep NATO off their borders, that’s why they’re involved in Ukraine. They clearly felt that the only way to keep Sevastopol was to allow Crimea to rejoin Russia. The fact that US/EU backed Neo-Nazis in Kiev want to exterminate ethnic Russians may have something to do with it too. These Eastern European states would be a drain on Russia economically and militarily, they don’t want them. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/153 "2014-04-11T13:44:21Z")
> [@Cmoore](#): > > Russia aren’t interested in taking the Baltic states or eastern Ukraine for that matter. They want to keep Sevastopol as it’s their main Black Sea naval base and they want to keep NATO off their borders, that’s why they’re involved in Ukraine. They clearly felt that the only way to keep Sevastopol was to allow Crimea to rejoin Russia. Allow? I wasn’t aware that “allow” meant “force”. > [@](#): > > The fact that US/EU backed Neo-Nazis in Kiev want to exterminate ethnic Russians may have something to do with it too. Russian propaganda is not fact. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/154 "2014-04-11T13:52:31Z")
> [@Cmoore](#): > > These Eastern European states would be a drain on Russia economically and militarily, they don’t want them. If by “these Eastern European states” you mean the Baltic countries, I completely disagree. Russia would be much better off if it had Estonian levels of corruption and institutional efficiency. And all three Baltic states have higher Human Development Index ratings than Russia. They would not be an economic drain on Russia any more than Hong-Kong is one on China. Also, neo-Nazis exterminating ethnic Russians? Come on!:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/155 "2014-04-11T14:01:47Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > How much of your sentiment is due to you being French? I may be wrong, but isn’t France sort of the most ardent supporter of the EU, and that citizens of other countries might not feel the same level of commitment? Obviously, you are going to find the full spectrum of support in most countries, but isn’t the overall feeling toward the EU strongest in France? I’m guessing they’re probably feeling the love for the EU in Eastern Europe right now. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/156 "2014-04-11T15:59:23Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > How much of your sentiment is due to you being French? I may be wrong, but isn’t France sort of the most ardent supporter of the EU, and that citizens of other countries might not feel the same level of commitment? Obviously, you are going to find the full spectrum of support in most countries, but isn’t the overall feeling toward the EU strongest in France? France and Germany are the main drivers of the EU, but I don’t see anything indicating that the French in general are more supportive of the union. From a [European Commission report](http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb44/chap2_en.htm): > [@](#): > > **2.2 Support for membership of the European Union** > > Amongst the citizens questioned in the fifteen member states, 53% were of the opinion that their respective countries being part of the Union is a “good thing”, against 15% who consider their country’s membership a “bad thing”. This trend remained unchanged from the previous poll. > > In the cross country analysis it was in Spain that the Eurobarometer recorded (after a drop over several surveys) the greatest increase in positive opinion (+10 percentage points) and in Luxembourg the greatest drop in opinion (-8 points). > > The greatest number of people questioned to consider their country’s membership of the Union to be a “good thing” were to be found in the Netherlands (80%), Ireland (77%), Luxembourg (74%) and Italy (69%). In contrast, those considering their country’s membership to be a “bad thing” were most likely to be found in Sweden (40%), Austria (29%), the United Kingdom (24%) and Denmark (23%). France barely gets mentioned in that summary, so I assume they are pretty middle ground. I have to think that the Europe Union being invaded by Russia has got to be at least as important to Europeans as NATO being attacked. ---
**Author:** ![Batistuta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/58956e/32.png) [@Batistuta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Batistuta)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/157 "2014-04-11T16:43:47Z")
(Maaaaassively off-topic, but I’m surprised that more Swedes than Brits are against EU membership. Interesting finding with many possible readings) ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/158 "2014-04-11T16:58:37Z")
> [@Cmoore](#): > > These Eastern European states would be a drain on Russia economically and militarily, they don’t want them. > [@Batistuta](#): > > If by “these Eastern European states” you mean the Baltic countries, I completely disagree. Russia would be much better off if it had Estonian levels of corruption and institutional efficiency. And all three Baltic states have higher Human Development Index ratings than Russia. They would not be an economic drain on Russia any more than Hong-Kong is one on China. [GDP per capita, per the IMF:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita) Estonia - $23,144 Lithuania - $22,747 Latvia - $19,120 Russia - $17,884 ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2014, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434/159 "2014-04-11T21:54:18Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > After reading the whole thread and in complement to my previous post : it’s natural I guess that on an American board people would discuss mostly about a NATO reaction, but as I just said, Baltic states are part of the EU. From my French point of view, they’re primarily members of the EU and only very secondarily members of NATO. I can go to Tallinn this evening, spend my money there and even stay forever if I feel like it. > > The EU hasn’t much teeth, but it is much more of a reality than some posters here seem to believe. . . . I hope you’re right; and I certainly admit to much ignorance. A great deal of my view of European weakness goes back to the Yugoslavian Wars, where the U.S. had to be a major player. I always felt that Europe should have taken the leadership there, and the U.S. could have stayed out entirely, or else donated forces to be put under European strategic direction. Germany and France and Great Britain should have dealt with that mess, but, as it turned out, the U.S. did most of the dirty work. I hope this wouldn’t be the case in a Russian invasion of Estonia! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-wouldnt-putin-try-to-destroy-nato/685434.md?page=7)