UKRAINE | Russian War Reparations?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 06. 2024
- Should Russia pay reparations for its invasion of Ukraine? The Ukraine War has resulted in widespread devastation. As well as the huge loss of life, it’s caused economic devastation. Reconstruction and recovery could cost as much as half a trillion dollars. As the conflict continues, there is a growing call for Russia to pay reparations for the damages inflicted. However, with few signs of an imminent Russian defeat, and as the costs of fighting the war rise significantly, the debate now centres on how reparations could be enforced in real time. But is seizing Russian assets really the way to do it?
There are strong historical precedents for reparations. As well as German reparations after the First World War, Japan and Germany also paid vast sums of compensation after the Second World War. This raises the potential for Russia to be held financially accountable. The human and economic toll on Ukraine has been immense. As well as hundreds of thousands of deaths and casualties, there’s been massive destruction of infrastructure. The idea of seizing Russian assets abroad to fund reparations is controversial, facing significant legal, economic, and diplomatic challenges. Critics argue that such actions could escalate tensions, set dangerous precedents, and potentially undermine investor confidence in the West. As an interim measure, Western countries have agreed to use the interest generated from frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine, though the debate over full-scale reparations and asset confiscation continues.
MY LATEST BOOK!
Secession and State Creation: What Everyone Needs to Know
Oxford University Press global.oup.com/academic/produ...
Amazon amzn.to/2MPY3W2
Audiobooks.com www.audiobooks.co.uk/audioboo...
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
Hello and welcome! My name is James Ker-Lindsay, and here I take an informed look at International Relations, conflict, security, and statehood. If you like what you see, please subscribe. Even better, perhaps consider becoming a Channel Member or supporting the Channel through Patreon. Thank you!
SUBSCRIBE FOR FREE
czcams.com/users/JamesKerLind...
BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER
/ jameskerlindsay
JOIN MY PATREON PAGE
/ jameskerlindsay
VIDEO CHAPTERS
00:00 Introduction and Titles
00:47 Reparations and the War in Ukraine
01:45 The Scale of Destruction in Ukraine
04:44 The Case for and Against Russian Reparations
07:21 The Wider Problems of Reparations
09:43 The Dangers of Confiscating Russian Assets
12:34 Using Russian Assets to Help Ukraine
SOURCES AND FURTHER READING
Ministry for Restoration | Ukrainewww.mtu.gov.ua/en/
World Bank | Ukrainewww.worldbank.org/en/country/...
Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians Act (REPO)www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr...
Russia’s Frozen Assets Present a Policy Dilemma
carnegieendowment.org/russia-...
Ukrainian Economy after 2 Years of War | European Parliament
www.europarl.europa.eu/RegDat...
EQUIPMENT USED TO MAKE THIS VIDEO
kit.co/JamesKerLindsay
MAP CONTENT
www.themaparchive.com
DISCLAIMERS
- The contents of this video and any views expressed in it were not reviewed in advance nor determined by any outside persons or organisation.
- Some of the links above are affiliate links. These pay a small commission if you make a purchase. This helps to support the channel and will be at no additional cost to you.
#Russia #Ukraine #Reparations
This week, I’m looking at the controversial question of Russian reparations for Ukraine. Should Russia be made to pay reparations for the death and destruction it has caused? Or do you think it will complicate efforts to end the war? And is it time for a general principle of reparations? More to the point, should Russian assets be confiscated to cover the huge costs, even though this could have very serious broader consequences? As always, I look forward to your thoughts and comments below.
(By the way, there’s a bit of family history with the subject, and there’s a little easter egg in the video. My great-grandfather makes an appearance. He was the British delegate on the Reparation Commission after the First World War. But can you guess which one he is in the photo?)
Grandpa is in the bottom row, second from the right. Let me know if I got it right? 😁
No, I don't think Russia should. My reasoning is that the idea itself of reparations is a type of block to the progress of peace. The government and the people need an easy way out, being told that once the war ends, they'll be forced to pay X amount of dollars makes people even more entrenched in their views. Peace is what's ultimately important and we have to make it as easy as psychologically possible for Russian people to want that, that's what I believe.
That's a very cool family history, your great-grandfather is in the front row, second from the right. Weren't all these opposition concerns about reparations also the same concerns given in the past? Russia is already seizing western assets, maybe not governmental but certainly from the private sector. I don't see why the west can't go to the court beforehand and get a decision?
I think the west has been walking on eggshells this entire time only to eventually cave and grant what they have been resisting. How many lives could have been saved if the west had some kahunas on day one and supplied all that Ukraine needed. Have a great weekend Prof. hope the weather is nice in your neck of the woods.
PS your great-grandfather would be proud of the work you do; you certainly are appreciated during these times.
I don't think Russia or NATO should pay for rebuilding Ukraine. The CIA should be responsible for that.
🌝🌝🌝🌚🌚🌚🎃🎃🎃
The same people who are advocating reparations for Ukraine from Russia are very silent on the same question regarding the Vietnam war and the USA. Silence on the USA in case of Grenada in the 1980s. Silence or complete aggression against the idea of reparations for descendants of the victims of slavery and the Atlantic slave trade. Silence on European colonial powers (France, Great Britain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Germany) and their destruction/raping of former African, Caribbean, Asian, and Pacific Islands colonies. Why the righteousness now?
Reparations are something imposed on a defeated nation, so selling the lion skin before the beast is slain.
It's important to consider what framework is appropriate beforehand given the side doing the contemplating is concerned with how well whatever they impose is in accord with the good functioning of the current international system.
@@professorquarter you current framework is wishful thinking🤣
@@CGplay186 Perhaps, but it's best to have this sort of contingency thoroughly debated beforehand so that the most just action can be taken if needed.
Russia has to pay, why make other nations pay for repair?
Russia is already seizing assets , they’ve already done the worst : if Russia doesn’t pay, then who does pay?
Will American and British government pay Libya Syria Iraq Niger Vietnam Sudan Afghanistan China Serbia
I live on a railway where no train has run for 50yrs...pehaps you could start your repreations to Vietnam there or perhaps a thousand other places or pay for the 300 Vietnamese that are killed every yr from your unexploded ordinance
Yes.. And the Vietnamese did nothing to Americans.
@@richiesd1 ага, так это вьетнамцы вторглись в США? Вот в чем дело, оказывается!
@@williamridgeway4315 , haha. Why don’t you ask the Vietnamese? Or does everything in the world go by the American/Western perspective?
Btw, I talked to many Vietnamese in Vietnam. Americans bombed civilian infrastructure and deprived civilians of water, electricity for decades.
@@richiesd1 Do you mean "the NORTH Vietnamese did PLENTY OF HARM to the SOUTH Vietnamese and South Vietnam found a mighty champion in the USA" or are you happy to peddle cheesy myths instead ??
I am not sure who is the ‘you’ is in the comment. I am not American. I am British. We had nothing to do with what happened in Vietnam. Britain sat out that war.
There is definite credence to the claim of selective reparations. No clearer example than Iraq.
To be fair Biden has created a fund to be given to Iraqis and Afghans
but he doesn't want to give it to them now because he knows it will just be taken by the current governments of both of those countries
because the current governments are both of those countries don't give a crap about the welfare of their own citizens so that fund is just sitting there frozen and accumulating interest
Iraq is an entirely different case, as is the current war in Gaza, if you need another example. Iraq is a very poor example.
@@toby9999😂😂😂😂
- "No clearer example than Iraq."
If that's the clearest example you have, then your case is pretty weak. Ukraine is a peaceful democracy that wasn't a threat to Russia or anybody else. Iraq was a brutal and aggressive dictatorship that was a threat to the (already weak stability) of the region.
I'm not arguing for or against the war in Iraq, but just pointing out the silliness of your example. Iraq also would never even consider demanding reparations, as it would very soon face stronger cases against itself brought by Iran, Quwait and other countries it attacked in recent history for no reason. Also brutally repressed ethnic groups inside Iraq could very well make demands of their own. Because of the invasion the Iraqi people also got rid of a cruel, long standing dictator who held the country under his iron fist. They probably couldn't have done that themselves.
@@adoatero5129Ukraine is a democracy 😂😂😂 it's a perfect joke since even zelensky himself is a comedian. Ukraine a democracy 😂😂😂
If you look at history, it's always the losing the side who has to foot the reparations bill.
*Looks at Marshall Plan*
@@m.a.118 You don't have the slightest idea what the Marshall Plan is and why the US empire installed it, do you?
They shall pay, after the US has paid their reparations for the 2nd Iraq war.
@@m.a.118Marshall plan was nothing close to a reparation. It was aid used to create industries to boost the economies of European countries allied to the US to counter Soviet influence.
America lost in Vietnam, arguably in Iraq & Afghanistan too.
Ukraine stands a good chance of paying for post conflict reconstruction of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.
I see the russki ruble patrol is alive and well. Take your 15 rubles and drink lots of vodka comrade. I mean lots of it all at once until you see your ancestors
@@atomm3331 вы по себе людей не судите. Русские не платят за грязные комменты. Это прерогатива страны которые развязала десятки войн. Начиная с коренного населения Америки.
Of course, this talk of -reparations- goes over well in the West but for many people beyond the West, they want to know: When does the US pay operations to Iraq, Syria, Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghanistan, and more. They ask why the US is exempt from the -Rule-based order- that it talks about so much? Because Ukraine is on the border of RUssia, its pretense for invasion is far more plausible than the US invasions.
The US pays considerable amounts in aid money. This is often forgotten. And this money doesn’t just go to countries that have been affected by wars where the US played a part, but also helps to rebuilt many countries affected by conflicts it wasn’t involved in.
@@JamesKerLindsay this is a lie. US gives loans with an interest which do not cover the incurred damage
@@JamesKerLindsay Prof James, your perspective, and that of Western elites, is finding no traction in the Global South. That should be cause for reflection regarding Western double standards in international relations. Deep reflection.
I disagree with you on this point as well @@JamesKerLindsay
Crickets is you answer. Same way, when you ask how is kosovo allowed to be independent but Crimea not. 🤡
Vietnam? Laos? Cambodia?
I have never heard of a single family who received compensation from USA and the West.
The US pays vast amounts of money in development aid.
@@JamesKerLindsayno it does not. It uses organizations like IMF to loan in $ in return for market reform so US corporations can exploit those economies
@@JamesKerLindsayWe all know USAID is more of a bribe with lots of strings attached, similar to what China does with their "friendly loans", than reparations...
@@JamesKerLindsay , that’s not the same as compensation to actual victims of bombing and killings. - people whose houses very destroyed and family members murdered. Think about it objectively… for example China built Laos a modern high speed train, 5G mobile networks, etc… what has the USA done to improve people’s lives?
Plus discretionary development aid is not the same as humiliating, legally mandated reparation payments to victims.
Russia may also take action against European monetary assets
Already has, there are currently no European monetary assets in Russia, which remain in European hands.
@@Vordigon1 It's strange, why didn't the "lights of democracy" like my comment, which was deleted? He's probably not "democratic" enough... lol...
First Russia has seized European assets without compensation before the war began through nationalisation of joint ventures, etc.. Second it's a question of value, Russian assets in Europe are greater than European assets in Russia. Third European governments can afford to compensate European investors, Russia cannot do the same since it's out of money, the seized assets are largely state owned, and the private assets belong to those that run the country in the first place.
Hahaha because Russia is such a weak little cowardly bully, that because it started an illegal war it thinks Europe are attacking it by donating weapons to the attacked country.
@@Matt_The_Hugenot Can tell you in more detail exactly WHICH assets Russia seized and WHEN?
This "civilized" American-European monkey house has imposed sanctions against Russia since 2014
Unless you can get nato boots on Moscows red square I don’t believe Russia will pay a single ruble.
Yeah and when that happens then we will be living real life Fallout
@@t.c.4321 this will never happen
And if NATO manages to billet itself in the Kremlin, nobody will want rubles.
There are the frozen Russian assets in Europe.
@@ferencdeak8784 the author explained that it is risky
Have reparations for Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, etc been paid? How about the actual instigators of this Ukraine war? No?
The US has an enormous aid budget. It has spent hundreds of billions on reconstruction and recovery in many countries, often in states destroyed by conflicts it wasn’t involved in. The US rebuilt Europe after WWII. Russia has no such record.
@@gorantamburic2000 You are just a bot.
@@JamesKerLindsay I mean that's literally untrue. The Soviets had the Molotov Plan after WW2 which was of course less succesful than the Marshall Plan but you cannot deny its existence. Also the Soviet Union subsidized the economies of the Eastern Bloc nations during the Cold War and the collapse of this relationship partly led to the economic downturn after the collapse of the Eastern Bloc.
@@TSEliot1978 I would hardly assess the Soviet reconstruction in the same way. One just needs to look at the outcome. The Soviets effectively occupied most of Eastern Europe (albeit accepting that British, France and the US occupied West Germany). And the Molotov Plant was only introduced used after the USSR rejected the Marshall Plan for areas under its control.
@@JamesKerLindsayIf USA had rebuilt the Europe that was conditional prof. that they should only buy American products . It was not a selfless obligation. US needs a stable and prosperous europe because of soviet threat. Why US didn’t involved itself in Africa? Latin America? Because as part of their hegemony they only wanted to overthrow democratic elected governments. You are truly a hypocrite shame on you
Thanks for a balanced discussion but I think you missed one important economic argument against confiscation. The use of the dollar as the international currency is already threatened and setting aside property rights would definitely hasten that outcome. It would be an own goal of historic proportions .
Thanks. Great point. I did touch on this, albeit indirectly. As I mentioned, there is an expectation that the EU and US are safe havens for assets. That would be put at risk they confiscated assets. And you are right, this could have very serious knock on effects for the dollar and the euro. This was why Lagarde also warned against eroding the international legal order. But it is good that you spelled it out.
@@JamesKerLindsay Hey James. I love your channel. Could you do an video on what would happen if the dollar stopped being the reserve world currency, so people can finally see what a dangerous game they're playing?
@@rickb9327 Шикарно было бы снять видео о том,как штаты развалятся после отказа всех стран использовать доллар ,грязную зеленую бумажку)))
Africa also are waiting for reparations. No to double standard.
Reparations from the Arab nations for 1000 years of arab slave trade?
For?
@@DerDop US CIA interventions and neocolonialism in form of the IWF debt trap.
They get enough. It's called international aid. And it was Africans that sold the slaves to Europeans, and Arabs of course but you probably chose to forget that part. So why reward them for enslaving their neighbours ?
@@DerDop for France's colonization. France really sucked a lot out of Africa, not just snails out of their shell.
If the West wants Russia to pay, is the NATO going to pay reparations to the Iraqis?
I think it is worth pointing out that the US has paid vast amounts of development aid to Iraq. And it still does. The invasion may have been wrong, but the US has paid large sums towards reconstruction and recovery. But the question here is about Ukraine. How should Russia be made to pay?
@@JamesKerLindsayI don't think that will bring back the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died as the result of the US-UK invasion.
Or pay reparations to Serbia, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, and DOZENS more.
No, it won’t. But let’s not also forget that these countries weren’t peaceful democracies beforehand. And let’s certainly not forget what happened with Iraq under Saddam Hussein, a man who caused the deaths of millions by starting the Iran-Iraq war and then invaded Kuwait. He also tortured and killed his own people and carried chemical weapons attacks on Kurds. He was a threat to international peace and security and to Iraqis.
@TheTobs50 Again, the US and EU has paid vast sums of aid to many of these countries.
Why US did not pay any reparations for the death and destruction during their war operations in Livia, Siria, Aphganistan, Irak? Is it time for a general principle of reparations to these countries?
I don’t think I have an opinion as to whether the assets should be seized or not. However, any argument, the West makes as to the morality of the situation is laughable. After what the United States is allowing to happen in Gaza, we have lost the moral high ground to such luminaries as turkey and South Africa. Any claim to any sort of moral right by the United States is, on its face, not worthy even of contempt.
As I point out, I think we need to be careful with the ‘what about the US argument’. We are discussing reparations. The US has a history of paying for reconstruction and recovery, often in conflicts that it had no part in. It is one of the largest aid donors in the world. You can find the data here. www.foreignassistance.gov/cd It includes Palestine. (Under the heading West Bank and Gaza.)
@@JamesKerLindsay Sir, Do you think charity and reparations are the same?
@@crackpot0236excellent,he is totally confused professor for real ,he keep pointing out nonsense so called charities the USA is dumping to zeep their 👄.
He knows better .
I sense a "two weighs, two measures" attitude, once again. I mean: did we, the West, pay for all the damages of the wars we've engaged in?
Yes, in a way. The US, Britain and EU pay vast amounts in development aid. This not only goes to countries where they have been involved militarily, but also goes to rebuild many countries destroyed by conflicts where they played no role. I think we need to be careful. It’s easy to present the West as bad. But it is only honest also acknowledge the part it plays in helping many countries.
It doesnt matter if all of it goes corrupt leaders.@@JamesKerLindsay
You should know that Russia took a lot as reparation from countries it occupied after WW2. It is only just it is too made to pay reparations. You only know the history of Western countries, so you only compare with that, but if you informed yourself on what happened after WW2 to countries abandoned beyond the Iron Curtain, you would find out how they were economically despoiled (is this the correct word?) by the Russians , who even relocated entire factories as spoils of war. As a Romanian, I would also like to bring to your attention that in WW1, whyle being allied to the Russian Empire, we send 94 traincars full of gold from the National Bank reserve for safekeeping in Russia, together with art treasures and the crown jewels, only to never see them again, with the exception of a few much to famous to be kept. To this day they have not returned our treasure!
@@mimisor66 I agree with Russia paying reparations but that doesn't mean the west shouldn't.
@@JamesKerLindsay The question was not if they provide development aid - after all, Russia also gives development aid, so, again, that same reasoning could be used, then. It's about paying for all the damages they do when waging war. And the answer to that is a definite no. You know this as well as I do. If you don't believe me, ask Vietnam.
BTW, I'm from the West myself. I'm not portraying "them" as bad. I'm portraying "them" as hypocritical. And rightfully so. Just like all the rest, I don't give our own politicians any slack, just because they're "ours". Russia is no saint, but neither are we, and I'm getting pretty sick of our constant one-sided arguments and excuses, why we can do what another can't. I value the logic and rationality of an argument above a tribal feeling of "we're the good ones and they're the bad ones, and therefor everything we say goes" mentality.
United Kingdom, as a part of NATO military, invaded the following countries, just in the last 25 years: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya (air space invasion), Syria.
All mentioned invasions are illegal under International law, as United Nation's Security Council never approved any of those invasions.
Yes, James Ker-Lindsay - a UK citizen makes a video about Russian reparations.
What about reparations of upper mentioned countries taken from UK?
It is called hypocrisy. A core principle of NATO.
He literally mentioned this. Did you not even watch the video before commenting?
Here is a list of countries russia has invaded the past 30 years Russia occupied Transnistria. ...
1992-1993 - Russia provoked the Abkhazian war. ...
1994-1996 - first Russian-Chechen war. ...
1999-2009 - second Russian-Chechen war. ...
2008 - Russian-Georgian war. ...
2015-2022 - Russia's invasion of Syria.
And obviously Ukraine and Georgia
Is Boris Johnson going to go to jail for tearing up the signatured Istanbul peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia in 2022?
What has this got to do with reparations? (By the way, the Ukrainians have strongly denied this point about Johnson. As they point out, Zelenskyy has consistently proven that he is his own man. And latest reporting based on the documentary evidence shows that there certainly wasn’t any common ground for an agreement.)
The idea Johnson or UK matter is laughable. Brexit has seen to that. Turkey is a far more important actor. Tories & Johnson make a show of it trying to wash the stench of Russian corruption with Ukrainian blood.
No, because he didn't do it.
@@nigelgarrett7970
Ukrainians and Russians BOTH said it was drunkard Boris Johnson.
@@fastpistonx Evidence? Because David Arakhamia, one of Ukraine's negotiators in Istanbul, directly contradicts you.
Lets just take exemples for other conflicts
1) US war in Vietnam :
Did the US pay war reparations to Vietnam? No, they did not.
2) Did the US pay war reparations to Iraq/ Vietnam? No, they did not.
3 ) Did israel pay war reparations or help rebuild Gaza for the infinite times they have destroyed It, never, in fact they have asked arab countries to pay, and now with the last gaza genocidal war, Israeli elites when they talk about after they dont consider paying anything…
3) Did Israel Pay syria for war reparation and for the seize of Gollan Heights ? No they didn’t…
So if on the previous conflicts caused by the West, we have never heard of reparations payment, why would russia pay now ??
Should Russia pay reparations?
This question in return reflects many so-called war circumstances; for example, should the U.S pay all reparations for the great losses of Vietnam War, Iraq war, Libya, etc and should German pay reparations for the losses of the world war II? Should Islael pay reparations for brutal killing Palestinians and destruction of Gaza? Should Ukraine pay reparations for killing more than 14,000 people in Donbass? so on and so forth.
I covered all this in the video. But if you believe that the US should pay elsewhere (and in many ways it has through vast amounts of aid money) then I presume that you agree that Russia should also pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine, through direct reparations or also by channeling aid money to the country?
Stop dreaming! Days of western hegemony are gone!!
There used to be a time when this channel would get interesting and intelligent discussions even if people disagreed. One of the saddest things is the way these sorts of comments have proliferated. I am all for having a serious debate. So, why not try to engage with the question and the deeper issues rather than post such infantile responses?
@@JamesKerLindsay I was wondering what your response would be before I opened your comment. Thank you for staying true to professionalism and not stooping as low as some people do.
@@AlexxAmadeo "as low"? The guy is literally a professional war crimes apologist. "Yes, we bombed them and f... up their country, but we kinda paid them afterwards and they were not a peaceful democracy (have the US been a peaceful democracy at least one day in their existence? wtf even is a peaceful democracy, if NATO can't keep the f... out of non-NATO countries?), so it's okay! No, you can't do that. No, you can't say I am hypocrite, that's whataboutism"
@@JamesKerLindsay If you get too many low quality comments, you can either ignore them or delete them. Both are reasonable options.
When will US pay for its incessant wars ? It did not for Vietnam Afghanistan Yougoslavia
Russia is on the way to make the usp a usual country. And after that the usp will pay for everything they've done historically.
Afghanistan? The Russians also have to pay there.
Please make a video about the Palestinians right to get reparation from Israel, USA, Britain, German, and all of the other former colonial powers who have stolen their land, forced them to live under apartheid m, keep selling weapons to Israel, and the over 75 years of torture and unaliving they endure.
My oppinion is that, this analyse should be modified by this way: 1) instead of word Russia to use word NATO, 2) instead of word Ukraine to use word Serbia (or FR Yugoslavia), 3) instead of years 2022, 2023 or 2024 to use year 1999. And only with those changes this "analyse" would have sence. Serbia has sufered "illegal agression" from NATO countries (without permission of UN SC and without attacking any NATO member state) and had over 150 billion material war damage plus over 3000 people dead and many more wounded, plus plus even more people died from uranium munition used during bombing of Serbian towns. When FR Yugoslavia officialy asked from UN Court of justice to force NATO to pay war compensation, the answer of the Court was that the Court is not autorised to such a legal process. And that is a message to whole free world about fairness and principness of western legal bodies under UN umbrela.
You do realise that the United States and EU have given vast sums of development aid to Serbia after Milošević was ousted? I work on the Balkans. (And I was critical of Kosovo’s independence.) But, I find it interesting that when Serbs are asked who has helped them the most they list Russia. In fact, it’s nowhere near as much as the West. And I think that many Serbs also selectively forget what Milošević did. He is responsible for much of the chaos and destruction as Yugoslavia collapsed. Many feel that Serbia is the country that should be paying. All this is to say that while I accept that Serbia feels aggrieved, it only tells itself part of the story. Many in ten country tend to forget the damage it caused, and overlook how much assistance it has received since then, including significant EU money to help with European integration.
@@JamesKerLindsay Changing the thesis is not an answer, it's rather avoiding of the argumented answer. The main point of the author's video analyse is "Justice", "Legality", "Morality" on the confiscating of Russian property from the Western countries in order to make Russia to "pay" for its "aggression war" against Ukraine. When I changed the names of the subjects by remembering on the case of 1999 aggression of NATO 19 countries against one single Yugoslavia which was unpunished by any world court, or any other institution, what I got as an answer is "Serbia got financial help form West after Milosevic was thrown down (not saying that we got 90% of that help as credits with interest rate 4% and up, not saying exact amount of 15 billion € what is just 10% from war demage that NATO caused to Serbia while throwing 75.000 tons of bombs on Serbian towns). By following that same logic of thinking Russia is very willing to give Ukraine a credit of few billions $ as "financial help" after President Zelenski is thrown down from power and Ukraine accept the fact that they shouldn't challenge the "great power" in its geopolitical agenda.
@@bakisastilom Please remind this forum what Serbia had been doing in Kosovo prior to the NATO intervention. Did NATO intervention occur in a vacuum? Were there diplomatic efforts to resolve issues prior?
Let's also not forget what Serbia had been doing in Bosnia earlier too.
@@nigelgarrett7970 I am very glad to explain, it's not hard when the facts are transparent for any check. To explain the case of Bosnia and Kosovo man must return into 6th century when Serb south Slavic tribes came to Balkan peninsula from Carpathian mountains, they settled themselves on the current territory of Kosovo, central Serbia, North Macedonia and Bosnia. Since 6th century until 13th century Serbs were investing blood and hard work in protecting those lands from neighbouring powers. In 13th century Serbs were the only Balkan nation to confront to enormous Turkish Otoman army. After the battle of Kosovo 1389 when 50% of Serbian male population died as a soldiers who were defending its land, its christian religion and Europen continent we lost the battle but we killed Turkish sultan and more then half of its army. From 13th century until 1912 we were submitted to genocide, ethnic cleaning and religious convertion into Islam from Turkish authorities. Many times we were raising rebellions against Turks and every time were supported in every means only from Russian Empire. In Balkan wars 1912-1913 Serbs have finally liberated our people on Kosovo and North Macedonia. The Albanians who were Turkish supporters and collaborationists for about 7 centuries (from 13th until 20th century) were submitted finally to the same regim of life like they were making to Serbs. In the first World war Serbian people lost 1.3 million of its population from the genocide made by Austrians, Germans, Albanians and Bulgarians (40% of total population). Serbian aim was primarily creation of "6th century Serbia" or some are calling it "Great Serbia" but the Croatian and Slowenien Slavic brothers were pleasing us to create a joint state of Yugoslavia because their lands would be otherwise shared between Hungary and Italy. We helped them unfortunately. In the Kingdom of Yugoslavia brother love broke very fast and we Serbs were seen as a oppressors in stead of saviours from Italy and Hungry. In the Second world war we Serbs lost 1.7 million of our population. Croats, Albanians and Bosnian Muslims were main collaborationists of Nazy Germany in commiting genocid against Serbian people. After WW2 newly established Communist Yugoslavia led by Croat Josip Broz Tito wanted to stop serbian revanchism and they have split country into 6 republics with strong federal government in Belgrade. Under the policy of "Weak Serbia - strong Yugoslavia" inside Serbia were created two autonomous regions (Vojvodina and Kosovo and Metohia). Each of 6 Republics had its constitution in which were precisely described how they can leave Yugoslavia and become independent country. 1/3 part
@@nigelgarrett7970 part 2/3
According to the Constitution of Socialist Republic of Slovenia, the people of Slovenia have right on self-determination if they want it. Slovens have used their right according to Socialist Constitution and President of Serbia Slobodan Milosevic was not against that. In the federal Yugoslav government led by Croat Ante Markovic they decided to send Yugoslav people's Army to stop Slovenian secession. Milosevic was very furious when he heard about Jugoslav Army Intervention in Slovenia and he was the one who has all credits for peaceful withdrawal of Yugoslav Army from Slovenia. Later came Macedonia, according to the Constitution of Socialist Republic of Macedonia, the Macedonian people just like Slovenian people have right for independence. In Macedonia was referendum for independence 1991 and again thanks to Serbian President Milosevic Jugoslav Army has peacefuly withdrew from Macedonia. Than came Croatia, in Croatia were living 25% of Serbs (1.000.000) and in WW2 Croats killed 700.000 Serbs in concentration camp called "Jasenovac", Yugoslav President Tito (1945-1980) has made Croatian Socialist Constitution on very specific way. There was written that Croatia is a Republic of Croat and Serbian people and each decision can be made only if 51% of Croat parlamentaries and 51% of Serbian parlamentaries vote YES. In the Constitution of Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina were written that any decision can be made only if 51% of Bosniaks (Muslims), 51% of Serb and 51% of Croat parlamentaries vote YES. In 1991 Serbian President Milosevic was very relaxed cause he knew that by such decision making system Croatia and Bosnia will stay in Yugoslavia. The war started when Croats supported by Germany and US were ignoring Serbian vote NO in Croatian Parlament, same happened in Bosnian Parlament, Serbian vote NO was ignored. Therefore President Milosevic had to help Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia in order not to be genocided third time in history. (next part 3/3 Kosovo 1999)
what about reparations for 🇵🇸 stop the hypocrisy!
The level of hypocrisy displayed by them is truly astounding, as they have revealed themselves to be both frauds and hypocrites. However, it is important to note that the situation in Ukraine cannot be compared to the horrific events in Gaza.
Hypocrice..!
Well..
Here ,we must thank the Russian foreign minister mr.Lavrov.
Right with the beginning of their illegal invasion against Ukraine, the man mentioned about the Cyprus issue, and how all those western countries hypocrites are still have their eyes,ears and Mouths completely shut about. !
Thank you sir..! .mr.Lavrov
Cypriot
You can ask the Israelis about that. But then in return Palestinians should probably also pay for the terrorist attack by their government
I absolutely sympathize with the Palestinians and I think the war is horrible. But why is Hamas so hell-bent on continuing the war???
The are sacrificing their own people and they know it and don't care. Even if Israel stops, Hamas won't.
@@achmedaan government? i thought humus was a trrrrr group?
Did America give reparations to Afghanistan, Iraq?
Not directly. But it has paid huge amounts in terms of aid to the countries.
@@JamesKerLindsay РЕЕ on "great" brittain 😂
Hasn't Russia already confiscated Western assets?
It has frozen a lot of them as well. I don’t think it has confiscated them as yet as it knows it would invite retaliation.
@@JamesKerLindsayit has confiscated many companies under forced / compulsory purchase and confiscated $10 billion of planes belonging to Ireland alone- there were hundreds more.
Any future re-entry of Russia to global economy & lifting the sanctions will be contingent upon reparations to all affected.
Correct me if I am wrong but is it not important to win the war before file for any reparations?
Thanks. That’s the interesting point about the current debates. In the past, this would have been the case. But the modern international system is highly interconnected. Russia has many assets in the West. Some have suggested that these should be seized now to pay for the war. This is the why the discussion over reparations is happening now. Ukraine needs funds and there is a way to get hold of this money. But, as I explained, it carries serious questions.
@@JamesKerLindsay well that is a mambo jumbo thing.. unless the defeated side signs any reparation agreement ending a conflict... taking money us simply theft or confiscation at best..
The US owes Ukraine reparations. This war would not have happened without NATO eastern expansion. Good luck trying to get anything.
A likely scenario is that the war will only end with a ceasefire. The part of Ukraine under American, Western influence will be rebuilt with Western money, while the West will not contribute to the reconstruction of the part under Russian administration, it will be Russia's task and financial burden.
Did the US pressure countries to join NATO? Or did they choose to apply?
GAZA?
Please, please, please can we focus on the topic at hand? Gaza is important. I have made many videos about it. But this was about Ukraine. Really, I appreciate comments, but can we try to keep them focused. It becomes impossible to manage if on every topic people just shout "Ukraine", "Palestine", "Kosovo" in response to any and every issue.
@@JamesKerLindsay Yes agree, lets keep talking about RUSSIA/CHINA/IRAN BAAAAAAD, and please ignore everything else.
Wait a minute you telling me 200,0000 Russians soldiers died and only 31 ,000 Ukrainian soldiers died come on you make no sense at all
No. Listen again. I said that the 31,000 stated by Zelenskyy has been widely disputed.
Please do a video on whether America should pay reparations on their invasion of Libya,Iraq and Afghanistan.
I have addressed this many times already in the comments.
You do you think you are to demand a nation pay reparations?
Strange comment. I am someone who looks at international relations and key issues going on in the world. Many people laughed that Russia should pay reparations for Ukraine. I explored the complexities of that. I’m not sure you understand this CZcams thing.
why do you care my little russian bot
The whole idea of international law is pretty weak. Its an anarchy out there. In practice, the fact that China and Saudi Arabia oppose seizing Russian assets seems like a good argument that it is the right thing to do. The general idea of reparations from a country is pretty sketchy. Do the populace bare responsibility for actions taken by the state? It seems more plausible to break up states that engage in wars that would lead to reparations.
Breaking up such states would certainly serve as a much harsher example for would-be aggressors. However, it would be necessary to take good care of the security situation while doing so.
Will Israel pay to rebuilt Gaza??
Another question, for another video. This is about Ukraine and Russia.
No, western wars are good and just. All other wars are bad. Especially if western countries don't make money there.
it's a mute point until there is a resolution.
Thanks. But as I mentioned, it is already being discussed. The problem is whether to confiscate the assets, or merely use the interest and profits earned on them.
stealing the interest is still theft, not a compromise
Tell that to your countrymen stealing fridges, wahshing machines, and toilets.
Seizing Russian assets in the West as payment for reparations is no doubt very tempting now but I agree it will undermine confidence in the West in a real way. Using the lifting of sanctions as a way is a better option, imo.
The US lost against Vietnam and never ended up paying reparations. Why would we expect Russia, currently gaining ground in Ukraine, to be made to pay reparations. It's not even clear that European countries want to keep the current sanctions against Russia, let alone force it to pay reparations.
Gaining ground? You mean how Ukraine is retaking the territory that Russia spent thousands of soldiers to gain? Also the US supported an internationally recognized state against it's enemy (and internal guerillas). You might think it was right or not. But that is the fact. The US didn't invade north Vietnam to make it the 51st state, did not kidnap thousands of children and, as far as I know, didn't steal Vietnamese toilets to take them home
And Europe is pretty united to keep the sanctions against the last European nation that abolished serfdom, since the country of putlerism is bent on reinvading both Poland and the Baltic states
@Konstantin2004 how many Vietnamese civilians did the Americans kill? Let me know when the Russian total gets somewhere near that total. I dont expect to hear from you
Moscow has also lost a total of 15,319 armored combat vehicles, 7,984 tanks, 19,078 vehicles and fuel tanks, 857 anti-aircraft warfare systems, 359 military jets, 326 helicopters and 28 warships as of 06/19/24. Glorious🎉
The double standard aka hypocrisy
Tento tárajko žije na Marse? Naozaj netuší význam slova realita ?
Ты для начала победи Россию, клоун...)
Истинно.
Even handed summation, thanks prof
Thank you.
James, great topic and you covered the "two edge sword" impacts of Russian owned assets outside of Russia extremely well.
Freezing of aseests was a wise move at the outset of this situation, but we must address that most of these "assets" are property own by individuals who are Russian. If the assets are soverign holdings of the Russian state, it falls in a different catagory of consideration. Regardless of owernship these assets are in numerous countries and fall under the individual jurdistiction of the property rights laws in those locations.
The rights to the ownership of property (land tenure & title) are a cultural foundation to the success of Western nations. Appropriation of assets who happen to be individuals who are Russians, must follow established legal processes in each nation where they are located. Even the seizure of intrest earning from this property must also be fully adjudicated by individual state's legal processes.
Russia is the Aggressor State in this situation, however the issue of assets is highly complex & nuissanced. Defense of Western liberal values is equally applying the law to the situation regarding property owned by Russians or the Russian state outside of Russia.
Retrograde legislation passed by nations after Russia's invasion of Ukraine that targets Russian property is only a mechanism of legal theft. These kind of actions undermind the concept of property ownership in the West. Doing so is a betrayal of the idea of Western values, and smacks of convenient hypocrisy.
In the United States the ACLU has famously defended evil characters right to free speech despite the evil speech being vile to all of society. But as in that situation the individual "right" is more imporant then the person. So we must acknowledge that despite Russia's evil actions in Ukraine we in the West must adhear to the concept of property rights of Russian individuals & the Russian state and any processes to sezie property MUST be adjudicated legally with the laws in place prior to Russia's invasion in February 2022. Undermining that concept of the safety of property ownership, as you well stated, opens up Pandora's box and in effect is a contributing factor to the destruction of liberal Western values, prosperity and success. Excellent topic to present. As always thanks for the great platform your podcast provides.
Very good take! I agree.
Thanks, Andrew. I agree. We do need to be very careful when considering these situations. I just wish there more thoughtful comments like this. Sadly so much has been whataboutism, often from people who clearly didn’t bother to watch the video.
Don't dreams too much that Russia pays.
Its too bad you dont see when the west does the same or worse, some objectivity wont hurt
No. I see it. But I also see that tje argument is more nuanced than many would like to present it as being. The West is by far the largest aid donor in the world. The US has done bad things. But it has also paid huge sums to countries across the world, often to help rebuild countries after wars it had no part in.
@JamesKerLindsay their money won't bring the dead to life or repair a society they have broken, with some things money doesn't help.
Marshall Plan Mk II?
Unless Russia lose this war and surrender without conditions, you cannot force them to pay war reparations.
I mean the US lost the Vietnam war and paid no reparations.
Well you can, if you want to sell gas, then this duty is levied on it for example.
Let me dispel this mythology right now, because I can't believe people have forgotten what actually happened. The US did not "lose" the Vietnam War. The US left Vietnam in March of 1973 with a treaty in hand that stated that North Vietnam and the Vietcong would respect South Vietnamese sovereignty and the issue of Vietnamese reunification would be resolved through a democratic, diplomatic process. So when we left Vietnam, we did so understanding that our mission of defending South Vietnamese sovereignty had succeeded. Therefore, we didn't "lose" the Vietnam War, we left it thinking that we had won. The Nixon Administration even actually called March 29, 1973, "VVN Day." Just shy of two years later, in December of 1974, North Vietnam reneged on the treaty, invaded South Vietnam and, by April of 1975, had conquered it. So what most call "The Vietnam War" was actually two wars. The First Vietnam War, which started in 1954 and ended in 1973, was a victory for South Vietnam and its allies, at least inasmuch as they prevented a North Vietnamese conquest of the South. And the Second Vietnam War, which started in December 1974 and ended in April 1975, was a victory for North Vietnam and its allies, as it conquered South Vietnam. The United States took part in the First Vietnam War as one of South Vietnam's allies, and in that war our side was victorious. Right or wrong, the United States was not a participant in the Second Vietnam War, so we actually didn't lose anything.
I understand, there was an American military presence in Saigon at the beginning of the 1970s, but by mid decade, the American military presence was gone, the place was under a communist flag and it had been renamed "Ho Chi Minh City." I can definitely see how a someone unfamiliar with the details can interpret that as a defeat. But to do so is to forget the specific events that took place and their chronology. But back to the point, we actually did NOT lose the Vietnam War, so we owe no one reparations for anything. Thank you.
@@benjauron5873 No matter how hard you try to spin it, it was a loss. If it was up the US, they would have never back down. They accomplished and gained nothing in this war. So yeah they signed an agreement that didn't make them lose the face but it was definitely their loss.
@@benjauron5873 that is the most cope response I've ever seen 🤣
@@donrog5035 oh look another "UNitEd StateS Badd SOo RuSsIa NooT bAdDD" .. well by your logic why should germany pay reperations after ww2 because russia hasnt paid ukraine for starving over a million of its own people.. . do you realize how ignorant your OG comment is? or do you just love ruzzia that much?
РЕПОРАЦИИ ПЛАТИТ ПРОИГРАВШАЯ СТОРОНА.
That means as from you.
Thanks as always Prof 👍🏻🇦🇺👍🏻
I know you try to be impartial and not bissed, but i think it would be great if at the end of the video you give your opinion and view on the topic.
Thanks. But I was deliberately trying to highlight what a complex problem it is and how there aren’t in fact easy and straightforward answers. I support the idea of reparations in principle. But I can see the whole range of problems that they create, especially if we get into the territory of confiscating assets.
@JamesKerLindsay I think a video on Reparations as a whole would be good. It seems to me a very western concept where the winning side can enforce it. When has a losing side or lesser power nation gotten reparations from a great power?
Where the heck you got the info from???? Let me laugh a little 😅😅😅
A strange and immature comment. I show the sources for the information I provide. If there’s anything you feel is inaccurate, point it out and provide alternative sources for that information. That’s what serious, grown up people do when they are trying to have an informed debate.
Were there war reparations after the Vietnam war ended ? Vietnam , Cambodia and Laos were never compensated for damages suffered in the wars against France and USA ! How about Yugoslavia , Iraq , Libya , Afghanistan ? The NATO countries never paid a dime ! How about Israel , will they be force to pay war reparations ?
You forgot all the countries where Russia waged war. If so, then everyone should pay, or not
I thought the obvious answer was Yes Reparations. But you’ve put a lot of extra light on the subject and displayed just how complex this really is. Very well done!
Thank you so much. I thought it was important to open up the debate. I support reparations. But I can also see the problems associated with them, as well as the difficulties of some of the ideas being put on the table.
If not Russia then who? Who will pay for the damage? The victim? The west?
Very very good video and points raised.... Thank you very much. It's good to see and he all the different thoughts and histories explained so clearly and unbiased and caly with long term and wider issues and diff9 points of view of other countries pointed out. I think these are often. Missed or. Misunderstood. I wish everyone could be as informed as you... Makes us... And hopefully leaders.... More thoughtful in our decision making, seek what is really a best resolution. And be fair in applying rules. I hope the war between Ukraine and Russia ends soon and both countries and their people are able to heal... Emotionally mentally and physically and that over time better more positive relationships grow. No one wants destruction of another but we look around the world and it's full of so much aggression and self seeking for power and control. When you are the 1 that started it it's hard to back down and loose face and position but if you want to bring about good and safety for ordinary people theres times you have to. That would apply to a number of world's leaders. But hey we sabre rattle on! 🙏 For. Peace. Having said that... When you look around there are so many wonderful exams of ordinary people stepping up for each other... Being kind. Helping people they don't know just because it's the right thing to do and doing good brings goodness back. So there's hope for humankind ❤️😊.
Thank you. I appreciate it. I just wish that other viewers had taken the time to watch it and consider all the points before jumping in with comments that showed they hadn’t watched it. The issue is far more complex than many people might like to believe.
Amazing coverage as always. Props to you james
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. I just wish the comments weren’t quite as full of the abuse, trolling and “whataboutism”, but what can one do.
@JamesKerLindsay such is life. Online platforms such as CZcams only enable such vapid responses. And if you're getting alot of push back, it only indicates that you are challenging preconceived views of the conflict. Keep it up.
Thanks. A great way of putting it! :-)
7:59 they may be inevitable but rather unjustified. Russia started a war of aggression against Ukraine but Israel was the one attacked on 7.10. What kind of message will it deliver? Ukraine is definitely not Gaza..
Yeah exactly, why are people so inclined as to reward terrorism?
As he says in the video, that isn't NECESSARILY the most important thing. You only have to read comment sections on this channel to see comparisons drawn with other conflicts, including those that Russia and China have little interest in other than around this question. Whether those comparisons are justified or not, it seems evident that a very large number of people do believe that something like the NATO bombing of Serbia falls under the same category as what Russia is doing in Ukraine. That is an important consideration.
@@professorquarter I understand. That's why I said even though some ppl may equate Ukraine to Gaza, that comparison isn't true.
yah but the United States accused Israel of crimes against humanity before the 7.10 attack. From that perspective the 7.10 attack is a response to crimes against humanity
@@MarkVrem there are no ifs and buts for the types of rape, kidnappings & tortures by Hamas. Don't excuse their behavior.
It seems to me that the time for discussion of reparations is at the peace negotiating table. Seizing assets is a good way to make sure that nobody trusts you with their money. It seems like a shortsighted decision to me.
- "It seems like a shortsighted decision to me."
Commenting without knowing what you are talking about is short sighted. The assets haven't been seized (did you even watch the video). They are only frozen, and the accumulated interest is going to be given to Ukraine.
Frozen and utilised to fund a war against the asset's original owner - if that's not effective seizure idk what is.
We'd be doing X and calling it Y. No one believes it my guy.
@@adoatero5129 Stealing the interest is still a theft
@@aleksandrpulnikov684 I studied the matter a little more, and what to my understanding (as a non-lawyer and non-economist) actually is given to Ukraine now is a loan against the accumulated interest, not the interest itself. What will happen in the future is that international court will either decide that Russia will have to pay reparations for the damage caused by its illegal war against Ukraine, or that it doesn't have to pay. If Russia has to pay, and Russia pays, the frozen assets with interest will be unfrozen after full payment of reparations. If Russia doesn't pay them, the assets will be legally confiscated and loans given to Ukraine will be paid from them. Especially Europe (where large majority of the funds are) wants everything to happen legally, so it's likely that that's also how they will happen.
@@adoatero5129 Any manipulation with assets without the owner's consent is a theft. You won't fool anyone. So watch how money flows out of Europe. Congrats, this is already happening.
Regarding legality, NATO has been stealing daily 80% of the Syrian oil production for over 10 years. this is an open theft conducted by NATO and approved by NATO. why am I not surprised that none of international courts all located in NATO countries sees absolutely no problem with the NATO's theft of vital resources of the independent country of Syria?
The greatest damage is the lives lost and lives destroyed. If you ever traveled in much of the Former USSR you know it is mostly old soviet apartments and buildings which needed to be torn down. You can buy a summer home (starting at) $1,500 a village home for 8 K and an apartment in a medium-sized apt in city for 15k (East Urakne 2020)
Это может прозвучать забавно, но в России очень следят за терминами, и если и ждать от России в будущем каких-то денежных переводов, то не под видом "репараций", поскольку проигрыша армии как такового нет (да и сам проигрыш российское государство никогда не признает при любом исходе), а путём, например, заключений выгодных для Украины контрактов по транзиту газа (не опять, а снова), или, скажем, закрытия её долгов перед внешними партнёрами в знак "доброй воли" и, что более вероятно, в обмен на снятие санкций. Изъятие активов же приведёт к раздражению тех международных игроков, которые считают коллективный Запад не меньшим виновником этой войны.
Спасибо, Профессор, за видео! Посмотрел до конца и всем рекомендую!
Thank you.
Wow I never knew the concept of reparations to be so complicated because I was one of the initial supporters that yeah it seems right to me make Russia pay but I didn't know it could potentially have for reaching consequences that could affect all of us in negative ways
Thank you so much for enlightening me
Thanks. It is indeed a more complex problem than it seems, isn’t it? I am reminded of what happened with Germany. As I mentioned, my great-grandfather was the chief British delegate on the reparations commission. I remember my grandfather always used to tell me that his father felt that France was going too far. It was obvious at the time that it was too punitive. On the other hand, how can a country launch a war of aggression and not be forced to pay something towards it?
Professir James never fails to deliver
Thank you so much!
Забудьте о выплатах как страшный сон! Вам Россия ничего не должна и ничего не будет выплачивать!!! Кто вы такие чтобы вообще открывать рот! Вы должны выплатить всему миру!!!
uh are we salty
Дорогие друзья, очевидно репарации выплатит поверженная сторона, в данном случае это,союз Европы.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 And even if they win, Russia is gone. The entire ethnicity is gone. Can you move?
Why is Libya often mentioned in the same context as Iraq and Afghanistan? The military intervention in Libya, which did not involve ground troops, was authorised by the UN Security Council. It followed a civil war triggered by a popular uprising against the country's dictator.
Haha, what are xou talking about dude? This was not based in UN decision, they overstepped massively, and it's laughable to use the "oh it was a civil war so it's ok" when there was an 8y war in the Donbas that you ignore.
In Libya, NATO exceeded the UN mandate, it only concerned the protection of civilians, not regime change.
By the way, with a broader outlook, there was also some kind of civil war situation and humanitarian crisis in Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Georgia, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine before the direct intervention of the great powers. In each of them, an excuse could be found for the attack.
@@ferencdeak8784 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 authorised the establishment of a no-fly zone and the use all means necessary short of foreign occupation to protect civilians. That's exactly what the UK & French airforce did.
@@Sasha-mdib the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 authorised the establishment of a no-fly zone and the use all means necessary short of foreign occupation to protect civilians. That's exactly what the UK & French airforce did.
@@AB-zl4nh 1973 resolution gave the right for the 2011 intervention? Really? Are you serious?
8:00 Of course this cases are very different. Russia has already paid for most of decommunized infrastructure when it was build. I dont say that it is good, but obviously it is different situation.
First USA, France and UK should start paying back to places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, CFA Franc nations, India and every damn meddling they have done, then perhaps Russia should consider.
Yes of course. The west owes a lot more in damages. Double standards
It's kind of funny. The assumption is that Russia will lose, which isn't going to happen. So it's a fairy tale to expect them to pay.
In any case, what can putler do against the west confiscating Russian properties (like the Ruzzians have done with western properties)? Also, how is Russia supposed to "win" when they can barely take a couple of km or frontline? And need north korea to send them antiquated weapons?
@@Konstantin2004But taking the assets by the west will only make stronger in the future as most of the rich will keep the money in Russia instead of investing it abroad
@@Konstantin2004 Take a look at the frontline and numerical reports; it's beyond ridiculous to expect Ukraine to handle a front of that size, even with all the help they receive. Second, the world isn't solely the West, which seems to be overlooked. Assessing this war is incredibly complex, but one thing is clear: Ukraine cannot achieve the victory that the West anticipates.
@@boombang857 it's also ridiculous to expect putler to be able to take all, or even just slightly more or Ukrainan territory than they already have considering their problems getting even slight advances
@@boombang857 also, except the iranians mullahs and Kim jong un, what other nations are actively supporting Ruzzia?
Everything will be compensated, sooner or later.
What about Georgia? They need to pony up for the same invasion of 2008
It is a bit different, because then Georgia was the aggressor, they attacked South Ossetia and killed 8 Russian peacekeepers there. Thus, the Russian intervention was justified from an international legal point of view, although it is true that the response was excessive and disproportionate.
@feremcdeak8784 Legally, Georgia was in fact entitled to try to take back its sovereign territory. As Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh, Sri Lanka against the Tamil Tigers, and Croatia against Krajina all show, states have the right retake breakaway parts of their territory by force. Whether it was wise to try to do so given the Russian presence is another question. But this did not in fact give Russia the right I seize more territory, let alone recognise the independence of two proxy statelets.
@@JamesKerLindsay Basically I agree. The bombing of the base of the Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia and the killing of the Russian soldiers can be considered as aggression against Russia, I referred to this. The USA, UK would not tolerate an American, British base being bombed in Kosovo or anywhere in the world. From this point of view, Russia only launched a counterattack, but it was disproportionately heavy. The recognition of the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in August 2008 was a response to the fact that the NATO powers recognized the unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo in February. The right to secession, the recognition of the independence of breakaway states is still controversial from an international legal point of view. You have also made good videos on this topic.
My opinion is that with these steps, the great powers began to dismantle the post-World War II world order, which is based on respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries.
@@ferencdeak8784 Thanks. I think we both can agree on that. I was critical of Western handling of Kosovo precisely because I was worried that it would have serious knock on effects internationally. Once the West started to violate international law, no matter how good it felt the reason for doing so were, then others would follow.
@@ferencdeak8784 And nothing happened in Georgia prior to this? This came out of a vacuum? No Georgians killed by Russian artillery? No Russian troops illegally entered South Ossetia?
This whole discussion makes me think of the Versailles treaty put upon the German government after WW1. The payments along with other factors (Looking at you France) helped drive extremism in Germany and was used as much political fodder for Hitler's rise to power. It also hobbled the nascent democratic-ish government there. That's why I think it's much better to use the funds now and hurt an aggressive Russia during the war rather than wait for the shooting to stop and hobble whatever government led to a peaceful outcome.
This.
Thanks. This is a really great argument. Imposing reparations on a defeated side can indeed set in place the sense of victimisation. Maybe it is better to find a way to impose the costs on an aggression while they are doing it. The only problem is that this carry deeper risks for the US and EU. If they confiscate the funds, then they will lose their reputation as a safe place for assets. This could strengthen other places. Then again, there are only so many places where it could go.
@@JamesKerLindsayExactly. And that's why I think the "losing trust" argument is not a very good one.
@@JamesKerLindsay where would capital flow to? The PRC where the CPC can do as it pleases, with China having closed financial markets? Brazil, India, South Africa...now we are getting into laughable territory. The only markets deep enough, liquid enough with enough trust is the USA, and to a lesser extent the EU euro-zone.
@@JamesKerLindsayJust look at mBridge progress and BRICS, look at the price of gold.
The reputational damage has already been done. Now its but a matter of timelines
As soon as we’ve paid full financial reparations to Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam and all our colonial conquests….then we’ve every right to ask that of Russia for Ukraine.
I think you’ll find that the US has paid vast amounts of development aid to these states. Also, the US has a long history of paying aid to many other states, including the reconstruction of warm-torn countries that it had nothing to do with. Just consider the Marshall Plan for Europe after WWII. The US has down wrong, but we should also bear in mind that it has helped a lot of countries. Far more - both in absolute and relative terms - than Russia ever has.
@@JamesKerLindsay Understood, but one might argue that this is simply a clever form of economic imperialism. In Iraq, for example, the US oil companies took full and enduring control of the Iraqi oil industry, post the conflict. Look also at the scale of US interests now in Japan, Germany and South Korea. Unconditional aid, reparations and spoils of war are very different things.
The alternative is that the US does nothing. Then it would be accused of selfishly ignoring world problems. Unfortunately, this isn’t a debate that it can ever ‘win’. In reality, it is a complex issue. But it would be good if those who shout against the US and the West in general would consider the broader debate. And, again, it’s worth remembering that Russia gives almost no aid, and China is notorious for linking its aid to development projects that it can step in to seize when the country in question can’t repay its debts. In many ways, this is far more exploitative than US development assistance.
@@JamesKerLindsay I’m no Putin fan or apologist, but I happen to believe that the West’s whole approach in Ukraine is also misguided, immoral and dangerous….but you’ve already responded twice so I’ll leave it there, with due thanks and respect for this and all your work. 👍
@@hisdadjames4876 Thanks. I know we differ on this. I think Russia is fundamentally undermine international law in a way that is dangerous for the entire system of international security. But always happy to have a polite exchange. Sadly, it’s become rather rare on the channel, to the point that I am seriously considering whether to even continue with it.
Сначала ЕС должна выплатить репарации России за неудобства. )
Let's begin to compensate Iraqis, Syrians, Serbians, Afghanis, and Lybians. After we can talk about Russia. Forget double standards.
Perhaps take a look at the US and EU aid figures to these countries - and to many more countries where they have never been involved. (And, just as an aside, the. compare with the paltry Russian aid to these places.) If we’re going to have a discussion, let’s at least consider all the factors.
I have said this many times already, but Western countries have in fact paid significant amounts in development aid. This is often overlooked.
@@JamesKerLindsay Professor, while I agree with you that the developmental aid is given, it's not the same. Aid is always targeted for specific projects. Typically chosen by the donor country. In essence you have outside control of your development. Paying reparations removes those restraints.
James is master of critical thinking, one of the best. In was enjoyment to listen
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. This is one of those topics where the answer seems really straightforward, to both sides, but is far more complex than most realise. I hope I at least brought out some of the issues.
Not always though
A comment deficient in critical thinking....
Я начала ненавидеть английский язык! Учите русский!
Hey Professor. Why do most agriculture and food system based podcasts often prioritize leaders of random food companies and nonprofit organizations instead of small-scale farmers, fisherman and other frontline workers in the agricultural sector?
How about trying sanctions relief to reparations, reparations that could then be paid from the frozen assets.
Thanks. That is a really interesting suggestion. Something like that could be part of a settlement.
The US has spent huge amounts for reconstruction in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The money was not called reparations but it was many billions of dollars Probably not that well spent or managed, but huge amounts all the same.
Thank you. That's what I said.
It is not true concerning Iraq. The US and UK paid only inadequate funds for the reconstruction of the country after their unjustified full-scale invasion of the country, in which up to 1 million people lost their lives and the country was(and still is) heavily devastated.
@@hplarsen34 Are you some kind of internationally known expert on these matters? Search for getting-reconstruction-right-and-wrong-lessons-from-Iraq on Google (I can't post a link here)
There is a very notable difference in taking someone elses money, and spending it on your own contractors and spending your own money, largely - again - on your own contractors (as done by the US in Iraq).
Да, да пришло время. Кто проигрывает, сдается, капитулирует - тот и платит репарации.
А кто-нибудь вообще верил, что Украина выиграет?
Пенсию Джонсона и Байдена надо направить в счет репараций.
Vollhorst
salty russian! 🍿🍿🍿🍿
@@pinktfatrabbit Salty Anglo-Saxon?
Though I don't expect this to happen, if Russia wins the war, will it not be responsible for rebuilding Ukraine?
how about Russian oil and gas reveues could a partion be given to ukraine
Dream on!
Let's be frank here. Reparations would serve to be "just" to Ukraine as a secondary objective. Firstly, by forcing Russia into a Weimar-esque situation, throwing the Russian economy into the furnace, it will massively destabilize Russia and likely lead to a "grassroots" chain of protests leading to regime change. Fomenting this process has been the US' MO since the Arab Spring, HK umbrella movement, and Maidan, (and a failed attempt in Belarus). This has quietly been the wests objective with Russia since 2008 I suspect as well. Not only to "get rid of Putin", but deprive China of a massive strategic ally, member of BRICS, and counterpart to China within the SCO. Since Russia is politically stronger than it was in 1996 (When the US interferred in Russian elections by supporting Yeltsin), economically straving Russia is only way to try and oust Putin, which that has been the end game for over 15 years now.
Can you give me a link to where you buy your tinfoil hats?
@@AlexxAmadeoWell if we can assume Russia interfered in the 2016 election, backed the freedom convoy movement, and is involved in subversive activities... What makes you think the US isn't? it's not a tin foil hat if you've actually read a history book about US clandestine operations since 1945. Go ahead, look up "US involvement in Russian election 1996" or Operation Mockingbird, or The Department of Strategic Influence, or pretty much any point of Latin American history... You know actually being crititical doesn't make everyone an Alex Jone when you actually *read* up on the history of US foreign policy.
@@AlexxAmadeoSadly I left that at home. But I have several books on the history of US foreign policy which was part of my degree.
@@m.a.118 Ah yes, you’re college-educated, just like the “Queers for Palestine” crowd. Good for you, buddy, good for you.
Russia should not pay for anything, simple.
Why not? Serious question.
@@JamesKerLindsay Because your little "country" will pay, simple 🤡
Good one 👍 Thanks!
Thank you so much! That’s incredibly kind. I wanted to take a look at the issue for a while. It is such an interesting debate and far more complex than many realise. Have a great rest of the weekend. Best wishes, James
Seizing Russian assets will not undermine the sense of investor security. If they are seized, it would not send the signal that investments are not secure, just investments made to support a country that conducts such egregious violations of international order and peace. Investors are not stupid; they understand this.
@@dimushka383 They will know that if they engage in illegal operations like Russia, then yes, they will know that their funds will be seized. Are you saying that those non-European countries are intrinsically corrupt? Smart investors will not invest in countries that will do that. And they shouldn't.
Всем пожелателям российских компенсаций следует захлопнуть свою ненасытную варежку. И открыть ее не раньше, прежде чем Россия предъявит счет за разрушенный Донбасс, за 8-летнюю экономическую блокаду Крыма и Донецкой/Луганской народных республик, за ущерб от НЕЗАКОННО введенных санкций
cry more!
If the sanctions are never lifted, it's 100x worse than reparations.
And why should they.
Funny joke! Russia is growing and becoming more self-sufficient in all areas with the help of its BRICS partners. It is right now in the transition phase to become fully independent from the west. It is the best thing, Putin said, what could ever happened to Russia.
It's not 1995 anymore. Russia of course lost its best markets (EU) but they found new one in Asia. They will survive just fine.
Russian economy is growing by over 3% per year, which is an answer in itself.
@@TSEliot1978there is an opportunity cost which was correctly pointed out by the OP.
Don't pay & "survive just fine" vs pay & resume normal global trade relations.
The choice will be up to them.
Remember, North Korea is also surviving just fine.
@@jacqdanieles same goes for Ukraine. They can negotiate a peace deal and eventually go back to normal, or continue fighting and be just fine. Only it will be a lot less fine than Russia
Thank you for the very interesting episode! The rules based order seems to be unraveling anyway and I don't think that the confiscation of russian assets would by the biggest nail in its coffin. Moreover, there wasn't an effective international body to really enforce it and it was upheld mostly by the heft of the "collective West" and mainly the USA. If they decide not to enforce it, in order not to push countries away from the idea of having common rules for everyone, then I'm afraid the effect will be that the rules would remain intact but devoid of any meaning. I.e. everyone would say that they are FOR the rules, but would break them with impunity anyway, because there are no real consequences.
Thank you. You make an excellent point. It would be far better to have a multilateral way of dealing with this. The problem is that we just get back to the UN system where Russia could block it, it you’d create a council that would be dominated by countries calling for Western reparations, and ignoring the wars started by others. It really is a bleak picture at the moment, isn’t it!?
In the unlikely case where reparations were possible, I would suggest that they be contained to returning the nuclear force that was given to Moscow when the USSR disintegrated. It would provide Ukraine with a strong deterrent by promising they would unleash enormous devastation in the event of another attack.
you know what the difference was in ww1 and ww2? they didnt decide to make them pay until surrender terms were imposed. not stealing it from them so that ukraine can pay for the war itself. why does there seem like a whole lot of unprofessionalism going into this from the west?
If Russian assets are seized say good by to US dollar hegemony.
My biggest issue with reparations is that they represent a form of collective punishment against the people of a country. That wars are generally started by autocrats with little accountability to those people makes it even worse.
Having said that there are sustainable ways of enforcing reparations. One example would be tariffs on exports, in Russia's case this may be the best choice since it's economy is based on resource extraction. I envisage creating an international commission to set and review such tariffs based on what Russia can afford to pay.
As for confiscation now I don't think it's a good idea largely because it's of dubious legality and might even be thrown out by domestic courts on the countries where it's attempted. However there is nothing to stop countries choosing to lend Ukraine money against the value of the currently frozen assets pending legal seizure later.
I think we can dispose of the argument that reparations are a deterrent to peace. Russian leaders are not wholly stupid and know that Ukraine will pursue compensation by whatever methods it can for many years to come and they will have powerful support.
Good video Professor. To say the least, it would seem that the reach of your weekly uploads has an inverse relationship with the quality of discussion that ensues. It is unfortunate that online discourse on international affairs frequently and quickly devolves into sophomoric whataboutisms. Perhaps it’s always been this way even in the most exalted chambers of debate!
Since you believe whataboutism to be sophomoric , do you believe in the selective application of laws , rules and norms . Do you also believe certain topics are worthy of discussion but others are not ?
Thank you so much Lucas. Unfortunately, the views are right down on this video. (Sadly it seems to be happening a lot at the moment. Many other creators have noticed it as well. There are all sorts of theories, including the saturation of poor quality AI videos, YT trying to push Shorts, and algorithm changes to try to boost newer creators to keep them engaged and not giving up.) But generally, I’ve also noticed that the quality of comments has also taken a tumble. It seems that I can’t post anything without being deluged by Russian trolls and whataboutism (often Middle East or Balkans based). I am thinking of posting something about all this (views and comments) for members. I’d be keen to get your feedback. Something needs to be done. But I’m not sure what.
@@JamesKerLindsay In order to avoid whataboutism arguments, why don't you do a video on whether "Making Netanyahu pay?" . Arguments for and arguments against. Yes , you did a video on rebuilding Gaza and you said expecting Israel to pay won't happen. But should it be made to pay? Should the west consider seizing its assets ? If not, why not ? A discussion on the recent ICC opinion would also be welcomed . How do you assess their opinion ? How do you assess the US' reaction? Did the ICC go too far with regards to Netanyahu ? Is Israel merely exercising its "right to self -defense " and well casualties and destruction in war inevitably happen and Hamas are using civilians as human shields ? Or was Khan being brutally honest when he said the ICC was for Africans and Putin ?
@@mouniash1. International scholars have long debated the efficacy of international law. 2. The Professor covers Israel-Palestine frequently and the discussion there is never “What about Russia/Putin?!” 3. You’re decrying my complaints about whataboutism with a whataboutism.
@@JamesKerLindsayProfessor, regarding the frustrating downturn in traffic, you might consider clipping a minute of each week’s video to release as a short. Many diligent and hardworking creators (ergo not content farmers) in the international politics space on CZcams do so. You could cover the primary points of the main video and link to the week’s full length release. Your channel might put out a short follow-up on Monday to steer engagement back to the video after the weekend’s passed. As for the nature of discussion ANYWHERE online that concerns international affairs, this bout in the Israel-Palestine conflict will subside, one day. By that time, the world’s attention will be trained elsewhere.😅
Reparations are for the winning side. and to say that Ukraine is gonna win even with all of the western aid is not backed by any factual numbers behind it. That’s just my realist perspective on things
Lots of good arguments for both wiews here. To me it all boils down to what kind of relation do Russia want to have with EU, UK, USA, and other democratic western nations that have paied for the survival of Ukraine, after the war is over. To me is obvious that they can not run from this bill.
The winner can do what they like
Let’s not forget that Ukraine would probably spend a considerable amount of its budget on the military even after the war.
Ukraine would for many decades distrust the Russians. And spend hundreds of billions in the military.
Excellent point.
Yes, it is a difficulty, especially if Ukraine has to remain neutral. This is why Ukraine wants to join NATO, then it would be enough to maintain a smaller army due to collective defense. It's just that NATO expansion was one of the root causes of the war, so it's not certain that this is the solution. Perhaps other security guarantees could be a solution, which would be acceptable to both Ukraine and Russia.
It’s delusional to expect Russia to pay.
there's going to be some sort of duty levied on Russian/EU trade I imagine.
@@edc1569More Russian central bank assets being seized
There are two issues which should be separated. One is the war of aggression, which is essentially a political act, and which is discussed here. The second issue is the barbarous way in which Russia has prosecuted the war, and which seems to be too easily forgotten if not forgiven. Mass abduction of children, physical and sexual abuse of civilians in occupied areas, inhumane neglect of prisoners of war, acts of environmental vandalism all need to be addressed and deterred. This is not considered here.
Thanks. You are absolutely right. This looked at the reparations issue. The war crimes dimension is another very important but separate debate. (Although, as I mentioned, reparations do touch on issues of justice.) I’ll try to tackle this in another video.
You have no evidence of these accusations except from propaganda. Contrast that with the genocide in Israel. In Ukraine the number of civilians killed in two and a half years of fighting is estimated to be at 10,000 from both armies including 500 children . In 6 months of fighting in Israel 32,00 killed including 16,000 children. America killed 2 million people in Vietnam and 1 million in Iraq. suggest you get your priorities right. American troops are raping Japanese girls in Okinawa today in peace time and are shipped back to America to avoid prosecution.
❤PUTIN ❤