Play Call of War for FREE on PC, iOS or Android: 💥callofwar.onelink.me/q5L6/x8chqdun Receive a Unique Starter Pack, available only for the next 30 days! Armchair Historian Video Game: store.steampowered.com/app/1679290/Fire__Maneuver/ Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/armchairhistorian Sign up for Armchair History TV today! armchairhistory.tv/ Promo code: ARMCHAIRHISTORY for 50% OFF Merchandise available at store.armchairhistory.tv/ Check out the new Armchair History TV Mobile App too! apps.apple.com/us/app/armchair-history-tv/id1514643375 play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tv.uscreen.armchairhistorytv Discord: discord.gg/thearmchairhistorian Twitter: twitter.com/ArmchairHist
Demonetized for what? He's not saying anything controversial, just regular western perspective on the conflict. If anything he might get support from official sources.
It's always been interesting to me that Russia has never seemed to understand how repulsive they are to former Warsaw Pact countries. Like as an American, I understand why Central and South Americans hate being on the receiving end of US foreign policy.
“Lessons from history” would be an awesome 2nd channel. I would love this format discussing current issues in the context of similar events that occurred in different periods from our history.
Loving this new content. Absolutely brilliant. Even though this is a history channel, we are living in a time where history is being made. Keep it up Armchair Historian team 👍
@@konstantinmedvedev-zj7qy There were casualties between the Americans and Canadians, but not remotely close to half. It wasn't even 1%. That Russian math of yours.🤣
My highest respect on trying to display an unbiased, historical perspective on what happened after the USSR around 1989. (and for the use of the 'wilhelms scream') In times like these that is sadly quite rare.
@@bradsanders407 yep, it's still the most unbiased piece of content i saw about Ukraine. He forgot to mention how ukrainians were bombing civilians in Donbas since 2014 tho
One thing you missed is that the naval base of Sevastopol was legally being use by russia following the [Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet] (until 2014), and you could have also explained the situation on Transnistria and Moldova. Still, great video as always.
You can't put every detail in a short video like this. Including every important point in this whole conflict would require a complete documentary of at least an hour or two long.
i was surprised. i was expecting a much greater bias toward the western narrative, but while it was still there, it was fairly light. The madon coup needed more attention though. it was a major catalyst.
@@jacegmn3309 They didn't, they didn't need to rig it lol, just because BBC/CNN says anything that goes well for Russia is rigged and what doesn't was a fair vote, doesn't mean it's true lmao
The wars slowed down after Vietnam. The next 2 wars in the 70’s were decisive US victories, in South Zaire and Afghanistan, the next time the US and the Soviets faced off was in Grenada, where the defenders lost in 4 days.
Another great video from Griffin! However, they’re are some errors: At 0:20, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, instead of North Atlantic Trade Organization. Also, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Warsaw Pact didn’t only fight over Europe, but for the whole world. The Collective Security Treaty Organization was created to counter the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as they were still enemies.
We live in a time were new generation of historian can picturized the story easily with computer, and also at the point were we can report the future significan historical event in real time.
An embarrassingly high percentage of Americans polled believe Russia is still communist, so yes you're right that soviets are still living in Americans minds. The effects of the red scares are palpable here.
It didn't end calmly and fast, it was dissolved against the will of the people, there were numerous massive demonstrations and protests and even after it was dissolved the last remnant of popular will was destroyed by Yeltsin in 1993 with military force, cheered on by the West
The USSR collapsed not because of the desire of the citizens of the union, but because of some incomprehensible few people whose desires to break up the union were not supported at the All-Union referendum on the existence of the Soviet Union. So why would people suddenly forget about what was taken away from them?
I think we can use a similar video about the new Cold War between the US and China. About how Mao established a new destiny for China, Nixon’s visit to the country, the aggression towards Taiwan, the South China Sea disputes with China’s neighbors, the Belt and Road initiative, and the development of Chinese intelligence gathering in the West.
Your comment is already biased so hopefully his video "if he makes it" also mentions the strategic island chains around China, us military personnel designed in the 1950s. Both sides are partly at fault.
@SlavicUnionGaming just because someone doesn't want to be your friend doesn't mean you need to threaten them, as long as you don't understand that more countries will apply to join
You're grossly over-valuing the significance of Finland. They pose essentially no threat to Russia's interests, the same could never be said for Ukraine.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” - Sun Tzu Clearly Putin needs to work on his knowledge of certain classic literature works, since he was totally unaware of how Europe views him and his Russia and seriously miscalculated the military capabilities of both Russia and Ukraine. Anyway, those extra study sessions shouldn't be too hard: he has a Chinese friend to help him out. He might lure him in with a bit of honey ;)
14:49 "Bereft of its network of buffer states, the Russian Federation sought to manage the admission of former Soviet republics to NATO, lest top be surrounded by potentially hostile neighbors in service to its rival." Simple, clean, and unbiased. So much it even fits both side's narratives! Bravo, Historian. Bravo.
I hope that people will understand that there is no good and evil, that everything that happens is the fault of both blocks. I hope that people will stay human and everything will be fine soon. Greetings from Russia.
@@Cosmo-re9jyi agree with that, although you gotta remember that there are always lighter shades of grey than others. It's an important balancing act to keep in mind: no country is completely morally good, but some are clearly better than others.
@@Cosmo-re9jy Well there is good and evil. Murdering, raping, and oblitarating cities is certainly evil - and thats what russian army does in Ukraine right now. If you want this war to be over soon just pull out your troops from Ukraine - just "be humans" and stop the war. There was peace and cooperation before Russia started her war in 2014 - Ukraine was one of the most pro-Russian countries in the world. That's why the NATO was essential for survival of Eastern Europan countries - without NATO Estonia, Latvia, Poland - alone could not be able to defend themselves from Russian threat. NATO guaranteed peace in those lands - unfortunately Ukraine was not lucky enough to join NATO early enough - and now houndreds of thousands pay the horrible price of this mistake.
@@Cosmo-re9jy Nah, russia didn't learn anything, they are mad that their former slaves have freedom and have better living condition than their fascist hell hole. ;)
He's extremely bias and just parroted the Western rhetoric........ He cherry picked events and missed others to form a false narrative. For example, he missed the months long diplo ref NATO expansion between Baker & Gorbie when there's documents like "Not one inch eastwards" and "Nyet means Nyet" instead says "nothing about nato expansion", direct lies, missed the 2014 Ukraine coup backed by the US, Minsk agreements, he's insanely bias wake tf lol
I've heard and read from multiple places that the referendum in Crimea only had two choices. Option A was to break away from Ukraine and be an autonomous region within Russia or option B was to break away from Ukraine and formally join Russia fully. I'm curious on the sources that say there was an option on the ballot to stay part of Ukraine
@@GhostScout42 Lancaster is paid by the Kremlin. If you want unbiased reports, read the UN stuff, and from other neutral entities. Even then things are not so clear.
Excellent work, with the background information starting from the former Yugoslavia's breakup that sows the seeds of mistrust between Nato and Russia until today.
Minor thing, I believe that the Crimean Referendum was NOT able to vote to rejoin Ukraine. It was either be Independent or join Russia, if I recall correctly
Imagine if China had a military alliance with Cuba, with bases installed all over the island - and that's still only a potential to blockade US shipping from the eastern coast. They'd still have the western coast left. This is the modern situation of China - US has bases across the whole Pacific island chain, giving them the potential to blockade Chinese shipping any time they wanted. It's also why the US freaked out so much when Cuba allied itself with the USSR.
There was NO official agreement between Baker and Gorbachev, let alone their conversation wasn't talking about Eastern Europe. Gorbachev literally admitted this. There was also no ballot option to remain in Ukraine in the Crimean Referendum.
@@tetraxis3011 And the 1992 constitution option is extremely vague and practically makes Crimea independent, not really part of Ukraine at all other than symbolically. My point still stands, there was no status quo option.
Sto your stupid whataboutism. War in Ukraine was never about Nato. It was always about Putin's ego and his sick idea to annex Ukraine. Putin says Ukraine is not a real country ad Ukrainians are "little Russians". Russia does the same thing over and over again. Russia keeps invading and annexing its smaller neighbours to annex them just because it can and everytime it can. NATO IS BS EXCUSE for Putin. Nato is not annexing. Countries ask to join Nato and Nato never invaded Russia. If Russia was a good neighbour, many former Warsaw pact countries would have no need to join Nato. USA did not annex Mexico and Canada. They are partners while Russia treats other countries like its slaves. Russia thinks it is entitled to own Eastern Europe. Cold War era is over. Eastern Europens decide on their own and Russia is not their master. Russia has nothing to say. Putin hates Nato because he can invade and annex non Nato neighbours only. He blames his past and current victims for calling the police.
@@Blanka1100 Putin ego is are mirage of your widest imagination, sonny. Try to seek an common photo with Putin and former ukrainian president Kuchma at 2009 in Crimea. Just two people are standing in each other's arms and smiling. An theese time Putin's russia sold cheapest gas to Ukraine. And no one challenged Ukraine and Crimea. Also get to see an famous Putin's Munich speech '07. Putin had saying nothing new from that time and not doing any unexpected and insidious. Perhaps your thoughts about russian desires are wrong in common.
@@yurikropotov3135 Putin says Ukraine is not a country. What else do you need? Kuchma was Lukasenko 2.0. When was the last time Russia was invaded by its neighbour? When was the last tme Russia invaded its smaller neighbour? Oh wait...
0:00: 🌍 The conflict between Russia and NATO stems from the aftermath of World War II and the promises made during German reunification. 4:11: 🌍 The post-Soviet world witnessed Russia's struggle to transition to democracy and its opposition to NATO expansion. 8:24: 🌍 The rise of New Nationalism led to conflicts between NATO and Russia, with Kosovo declaring independence and Russia annexing Crimea. 12:42: 🌍 Tensions between NATO and Russia continue to escalate, with Russia invading Ukraine and NATO expanding its presence in the region. Recap by Tammy AI
The idea of a new "cold war" is largely Russian propaganda meant to add legitimacy to the conflict they are causing. The cold war was based on ideology, whereas this is an imperialist invasion from a former empire that saw its influence over it's former territories slowly eroding and jumped at the last opportunity it had to remedy that
@@LogieT2K There was much hope in the west that relations with Russia would improve post-cold-war era. START II, The Kremlin Accords, the joint Space Shuttle missions, International Space Station, G8, Winter Olympics, World Cup, Nordstream, etc, etc. But alas, Putin happened.
@@AbdulGoodLooks Pretty sure it's probably more than just "Putin", It's probably messier than just because of one world leader. But either way we're in Cold War 2.0, History did not in fact ended as one infamous quote once said. It will continue on as long we all are around I guess.
Russia: **Threatens former Soviet and Warsaw Pact States** Former Soviet and Warsaw Pact States: **Joins NATO for protection from Russia** Russia: How could NATO be so perfidious and betray us like that?!?
I think this was more about russia stepping in on behalf to the dpr and lpr to end the civil war that started in 2014. Yes, nato has been aggresivley expanding, but it was the shelling of east ukraine that brought russia into the ukraine
@@GhostScout42 Bacause Russia starts arming them in 2014... No one would let that happened. We knew how Russia react about this situation in Chenchen. Seem odd that all those seperatist starts appearing as soon as Russia ready to intervene.
Baker never said that there wouldn't be any NATO expansion. All he said was that in his personal opinion it would likely not be necessary to put NATO troops into East Germany. Even that doesn't make sense because a unified Germany would be part of NATO
Well, nonetheless this, that NATO Troops wouldn't be stationed in Eastern Germany (the former GDR), became part of 2+4 agreement. And even to this day, although it doesn't really matter anymore, since NATO Troops get stationed a lot closer to Russia in Polan and the Baltic States, this treaty is honoured, NATO troops are not being stationed in Eastern Germany. Imho, as a German, the 2+4 agreement should be revised, these limitations to our armed forces and the stationing of NATO troops should go, since Russia very obviously hurt the spirit of this agreement, ending the (I dare to say 1st) Cold War and uniting Europe in Peace and Friendship.
Exactly, Baker never said that. Also because....where would NATO expand? all the other countries were part of the Soviet Union, it doesn't make sense for Baker or Gorbachev to even think about that, no one though the Soviet Union would collapse
Gorbatsjov has confirmed in an interview that no such guarantee was provided. If it would, USSR would have insisted that it would be included in a treaty, such as the 1993 Budapest treaty. This video is a great example of the false 'both sides are bad' argument, which is one of the messages being spread by Russian trolls
@@nelsongoncalves8565 There were Eastern European nations not part of the Soviet Union but under their influence that could've been seen as future NATO members even back then. Even if the impending Soviet collapse was unpredictable, the Iron Curtain was already falling, and indeed some of them have joined NATO by now.
Most of these "talking head" TH-cam channels are just an actor reading a script written by a team, and the harder they're forced to work, the more basic errors like this show up.
"NATO expansion" is a russian talking point. Countries applied to be accepted, so maybe we can talk about "NATO enlargement". Cause all eastern Europe countries know who the russians are. Who can blame them for wanting some peace and quiet?
I think it's a bit of a subject of semantics, "enlargement" or "expansion", either way NATO has grown and Putin didn't like that, that fact remains regardless of how we describe it. It was a voluntary growth, that is something that is absolutely worth highlighting, but it is important to recognize, that this exact fact is what makes Putin and other Russian politicians feel insecure, because their grip on these countries has slipped away and they find themselves increasingly without the means to exert control over their neighbors.
@@NiiRubra While I completely agree with you, I must add that the word "expansion" has a slight negative implication to it - usually used in context of conquest and imperialism. This is why Russian officials like to use that word so heavily to frame NATO as aggressive in their propaganda
@@NiiRubra Russia has no soft power to keep these countries under their political control. Their economy is a joke compared to the EU. Neither is their military willing to help other countries. They have nothing to offer to ex-Warsaw pact countries.
There was never a promise, neither formal nor informal, by any NATO official to any Russian official, that NATO would "not expand eastward". In fact it wasn't even talked about. There's absolutely no record of this happening.
Minutes of the talks were declassified in 2017 or so, you can find them with Google. There is a statement that at least can be mistaken for a promise when read in the context of today. But at the time the USSR and Warsaw Pact still existed, and the talks were about German reunification. Some say it only meant that NATO would have no bases in the territory of East Germany, and this promise has in fact been held until today. So I tend to agree with you, and I certainly do not agree with the video on this point. But I have to say this is quite subtle. But really, how much sense does it make that "no eastward expansion" of NATO into Eastern Europe was a condition for German reunification? Why should the USSR have been able to block German reunification? (If they had blocked it, then certainly reunification would anyway have happened after the collapse of the USSR.)
Moreover, later written agreements between Russia and NATO, such as the Budapest memorandum have a lot more of a clear record as to their existence, yet were not mentioned.
@@imperatormaximus8952 Very good point. If Ukraine staying out of NATO was so important for Russia, they should have included this in the Budapest Memorandum. (I don't think NATO was a party to the Budapest memorandum, but that is beside the point. NATO was not a party to the 2+4 treaty either. Although it is an interesting question whether a treaty state, e.g. the US as NATO member, can legally bind itself towards a third state, e.g. Russia, to block certain NATO decisions, e.g. admission of Poland. I would think treaty partners should ensure they can deal with each other in good faith in the future. I don't know if there is such a concept in international law though. If the US (and France and the UK) could not have in good faith have agreed to vetoing any future proposal to admit former Warsaw pact countries into NATO, then that would be a very strong indication that they did in fact not agree to this.)
@@drew3758 I know that Finland can potentially threaten some areas of Russia, although about 10x less than Ukraine, as I said. Also, hopefully, the NATO warmongers will not manage to start a war between Finland and Russia.
Nothing imperialistic about now wanting the current world superpower that is openly hostile and wants to destroy you, to keep a fair distance away from ~ In fact, that's defense, just morally wrong when measures are taken at the expense of other nations, welcome tog eopoliics.
@@popal_prerogative 🤣🤣🤣 France IS one of the allies. France also left Nato for 10 years before joining again. All the others applied for membership. Stop spreading lies kid 😘
@@popal_prerogative und immernoch konnte Frankreich die Nato verlassen 😅. Tja kindchen, Tatsachen lassen sich nicht leugnen. Ist mir egal wie die Amis reagieren würden. Fakt ist die Ukrsine wollte Schutz vor Russland und sobald der Krieg vorbei ist wird sie denn auch bekommen. Russland ist am Ende. Und gut so. Dieses korrupte Pack unter einem Diktator braucht keiner.
@@sH-ed5yf The US openly has stated it is directly involved in coup's, government overthrows, propaganda and influence funding through NGO's and historically has done so. So yes, countries are pushed and influenced by the US, have you never studied history? The US literally backed a far right/ neo nazi coup in Ukraine to overthrow the democratically elected government. Like they did sponsoring Islamises and Islamic terrorist organisations in Afghanistan and Syria. Wake tf up ~
Russia is the best salesman for NATO. Shooting itself in the foot must be their national pastime (both figuratively and literally as young men try to avoid being drafted).
if NATO isn't pushing on Russia it'll be reformatted to push on China, Iran, and any other belligerent states. NATO is a tool for American imperialism.
Only 1 country joined nato and swedan is already trying save there ass by joining nato tell me a entire organisation vs a single country alredy west is a hypocrite poking around in Africa UN is fking useless like u r people who are saying this we call it proclaim
It's so nice when a good history channel covers this stuff, because it feels like it has very little bias in it. While Anything you see on TV (at least of what I've watched here in the US) feels like a subtle nod to join the US military at best, to being more or less an ad for the military and such a big fat pat on the back to themselves
Ruzzia did not say that Finland is free to join. They literally stated 2 months before the war that Finland is part of Ruzzian influence and shouldn't be allowed to make alliences.
@@karantikoo9302 zz is there to avoid comment from being shadow removed since youtube doesn't like the original word and in some context bans comments with it included. Seems like your IQ wasn't high enough to understand it and instead you tried to mock something which ironically hit on your own back.
I take it that neither of you understands youtube algorithm thus make fun out of someone avoiding comment being removed by using Z over S. Funny how uneducated both of you are.
I think its more that no one wants to cover an ongoing topic which might be considered very controversial due to that fact, which if you look throught the replies on the comments here is sadly proven right
@@randomka-52alligatorthatis34 This is what I get anytime I explain to people why Putin invaded. I get accused of being a "Putin apologist" for simply pointing out that the invasion didn't come out of nowhere. I don't believe it was justified but Putin warned he would if NATO kept doing what they were doing but NATO didn't listen.
@@slayermill8621 It didn't come out of nowhere, it came out of Putin's imperialist dreams to expand Ruzzian empire. "I don't believe it was justified but Putin warned he would if NATO kept doing what they were doing but NATO didn't listen." NATO literally did nothing and Okraine has nothing to do with NATO.
@@Tespri This proves my point that you, like many others, haven't taken the time to evaluate the events over the past 20 years to see this didn't happen randomly. Conversations alone about Ukraine joining NATO is something Putin warned against yet NATO continued. Most of the reason Ukraine wasn't admitted into NATO is because they couldn't satisfy even the minimum requirements about corruption within their government. Had it not been for that Ukraine may already be a member and we'd have WW3 on our hands. This doesn't end good for anybody.
I just want to say I love your channel and your neutral approach (most of the topic covered at least) to those sentitive geopolitical thingy. I'm glad I'm not watching another "The Kremlin and Beijing are the bad guys and NATO and friends are heroes and destined to save the world" video. You actually told us why Russia had to take actions (ofc they are highly controversial) rather than "it's February 24th 2022, Putin woke up from his sleep and decided to invade Ukraine".
If Russia wasn’t the shadiest country in all of European history maybe all their neighbors and former satellite states wouldn’t have begged to join NATO.
i do not know how i am not subscribed to you yet but i have been watching your content for maybe a year now.. it never came to my for me to sub... but now i subed!
I really love your videos. You and your team work so hard. Wether it's old history or current. You bring all facts. Thank you for all your hard work. Every one involved.
Очень интересно читать комментарии западные пользователей, чего тут только нету. Нато оборонительный союз... Советский союз подавал заявки в НАТО, но его не принимали. От чего же оборонялось нато? Вам ссут в уши.
This is ridiculous, the US didn’t expand NATO, the candidate country needs to pass a thorough application process. The countries that joined did it democratically, according to their strategic interests and most were protecting their national sovereignty in doing so. Russian propaganda is insidious and very easy to propagate through the media, who somehow just repeat these talking points without any serious reflection about the geopolitical implications.
@@Дэвид-т7й The only foreign military bases on Ukrainian territory up until 2014 were Russian. And yet NATO managed to not start annexing large parts of Ukraine. Russia is ruled by criminal degenerates.
Lacking context for a lot of aspects. As example, "russian interest" (in fact right to colonise Ukraine) is stated as something acceptable. Ukrainian people and their desire not recognised as separate force, ignored as part of "bigger game". Which is weird as Ukraine is not much smaller state comparable to Russia when we compare as example population. Also it's pretty funny that Putin once per month saying that he didn't recognise Ukrainians as nation and their right to have own state, Russian army making ethnical genocide on occupied territories, russian state services moving Ukrainian kids to Russian families to change their identity. But some folks still talking about "Nato provoked Russia".
When you only hear Pro NATO news Ukraine broke the Minsk agreements and bombed civilian in Donbas for 8 years, Azov battalion destroyed businesses belonging to Russian-Ukrainians Etc. No side is innocent.
@@tetraxis3011 8 years ago Donetsk was occupied by Russia. A lot of my friends who lived their happy life there have been moved from there: to not be killed by will of drunk jerks like "hero of Russia" "Motorola". Check video's with him :)
@@VictorSchepanovsky Yea no. That’s not what happened. Russian separatists occupied Donetsk. Then Russian military personnel moved in to train the Donetsk people’s army. Then Ukraine started bombing the crap out of the place.
@@tetraxis3011 nope. Russian army occupied Crimea, then Girkin with other Russian citizens (covered by Russian Security services, how otherwise you will pass border with equipment) occupied Slovyansk. Then Russian Army come to area and occupy it on eastern Ukraine. Without Russian aggression there would be no conflict.
It's sad seeing countries selected for future battlefields. Its citizen chosen to be future soldiers, due to the will and actions of leaders outside of their own countries
There were not only Donetsk and Luhansk, but also separatists were active in Odessa, Kharkiv and Dnipro. Yet, only in Donetsk and Luhansk russian military and FSB were deployed.
imo most of the stuff that russia did was to defend itself? sounds dumb but its becoming weak and it knows it and also it knows it got lied to by NATO during the soviet union days
@@AbdulGoodLooks The truth is somewhere in between these stances. I dont think this is so black and white. - in case you're interested mearsheimer had a good presentation on the topic. Good day otherwise ^^
There is literally video of Gorbachev saying there was never any such back room agreement that there won’t be any NATO expansion. There is also video of a signing of actual documents that Russia will respect Ukrainian sovereignty and territory for them giving up their nukes.
@@Silver-eb7zm They actually didn't. They could've kept hold onto them - but it would have antagonized the US, France, and Russia, who all wanted to limit proliferation. That paired with "Moskau" basically looting Ukraine and leaving it with an economy that could not sustain itself, not to mention an army that it couldn't hope to maintain, meant that nuclear weapons would have been an extremely steep price to pay to maintain. Ultimately Ukraine was coerced into that decision, sure, but they could've hypothetically given the nukes to another country easily. Either way, Russia reneged on its treaty several times and has demonstrated that it doesn't care about written or spoken deals.
@@Silver-eb7zm wtf is “moskaus”? Lol they never had to give them up it was the third largest nuclear arsenal at the time. Ukraine never had independent control over them but could still have refused to give them away and decommission all their launch silos.
@@hzmt12 5 billion?? 🤣 kremlin propaganda really got you with that. Even if that was true how do you even compare sending some money to a country vs sending your army to invade and occupy territory.
If Sweden’s membership happens this year, I believe this will be NATO’s final size in Europe: - Ireland, Switzerland and Austria don’t need the alliance, since they have no hostile neighbors and there are many buffer NATO countries between them and Russia. Austria’s constitution forbids joining any defensive alliance anyway. These three will probably remain NATO partners but not members. - Ukraine was always out of the question for Russia, as recent events have shown. Belarus is another red line for Kremlin, but its NATO membership won’t even be a consideration while Lukashenko is in power. - Moldova has every reason to be worried after the recent invasion of its neighbor, but unfortunately it has a separatist region backed by Russia, Transnistria, and therefore can’t enter the alliance before this dispute is over. - Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia and Kosovo in order to join NATO would have to settle territorial dispute and be accepted by their former Yugoslavia Republic neighbors, all of them with veto power. Even if this were to be achieved with a lot of diplomacy, the US would still block it like 10 years ago, because of the The Moscow - Belgrade - Banja Luka - Sarajevo transversal (a very clever way Russia envisioned to infiltrate NATO and interfere with its military decisions). - Georgia is a step too far for Russia as it showed in 2008. Azerbaijan and Armenia are in similar situation, being too close and strategically significant to Russia. Besides, countries with current territorial disputes can’t join NATO. - Which brings us to Cyprus, an EU country with almost half of its territory disputed by a NATO member (Turkey). Its situation is so complex that it’s the only EU country that is not a member of either NATO or its Partnership for Peace Program. Edit: I left out small states of Andorra, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino and, of course, the Vatican.
Assuming that Ukraine wins the war in the long run, I don't see a reason why it wouldn't join NATO when the dust settles. It's not like Russia will have any negotiating power at that point.
@@McFrax as much as I want Ukraine to win, I don’t think it can pull it off. The more likely scenario is a prolonged stalemate or a crawling Russian encroachment. Either scenario will keep devastating both countries demographically and, unless Ukraine manages to keep a 3:1 kill ratio, it will run out of men before the Russians do. As much as it pains me to say this, Ukraine should start negotiating an end to the conflict and cede Crimea and Donbas (a region that even the Germans had a lot of trouble to capture in WWII, even with superior power). The Zaporizhzhia region might be recovered, depending on how well the Spring Offensive goes, but Russia sure wants to keep that land bridge to Crimea. If these territories remain disputed, NATO won’t be able to accepted Ukraine. I doubt that Zelensky will accept a divided Ukraine unless the West threatens to pull out its support. Ukraine staying neutral would probably be the most feasible solution, but just like happened with the Minsk Agreement in the 90s, the Russians won’t keep their part of the agreement: everyone knows they will try to invade again a few years later. I agree that a total Ukrainian victory is the best aftermath for stability in the region, but this seems the least likely scenario. Even if the Russian army were to collapse, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Russia would use small tactical nukes to stop the UAF advancement in Crimea. Once you realized how vital the Sevastopol port is to Russia (their only year-round frost free comercial port), you’ll realize that yes, they would go that far to protect the peninsula. I don’t see a world where Crimea will become part of Ukraine again.
@@McFrax Win or lose, Ukraine will still be reeling and facing political crises, because it's not just about the actual war, the aftermath is a different story.
@@VincitOmniaVeritas7 Yeah, I can read it. I guess you are right that simple victory of Ukraine is not very likely. OTOH, Russian army is struggling with supplies, while Ukraine has support of strong western economy. Though in the end I guess we have to hope for political change withing Russia itself.
"NATO expanding is a threat to Russian society!" Member states have to apply to join. Why would former soviet states want to join NATO and not the Russian security alliance?
Because they still believe that America is the golden land of opportunity rather than the degenerate rotted out corpse its become. 40 trillion in debt soon.
@@upstairs1307 Are their governments toppled over refusing? AKA The euromaidan in the Ukraine - We have people like Victora Nuland admitting to it. Don't ever forget that BS.
Russian Foreign Politics in a Nutshell: 1. Complain about countries joining NATO 2. Attack or Puppet random neighbour that isn't in NATO 3. Convince other neighours too seek safety in NATO 4. go back to 1.
It's rich for the Russians to accuse others of genocide when they committed a genocide of the Circassians and major nationalities in their modern history.
Circassians? Who are these people. Never heard of them before. Also, pretty much every major power like the US, China, the UK, Russia, and others have committed mass genocide, so anyone of them accusing the other of genocide is like that Spider-Man meme.
Play Call of War for FREE on PC, iOS or Android:
💥callofwar.onelink.me/q5L6/x8chqdun
Receive a Unique Starter Pack, available only for the next 30 days!
Armchair Historian Video Game: store.steampowered.com/app/1679290/Fire__Maneuver/
Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/armchairhistorian
Sign up for Armchair History TV today! armchairhistory.tv/
Promo code: ARMCHAIRHISTORY for 50% OFF
Merchandise available at store.armchairhistory.tv/
Check out the new Armchair History TV Mobile App too!
apps.apple.com/us/app/armchair-history-tv/id1514643375
play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tv.uscreen.armchairhistorytv
Discord: discord.gg/thearmchairhistorian
Twitter: twitter.com/ArmchairHist
call of war ok lol
who are we calling?
@@MFPofficer1983 the war lol
The best NATO salesman of this year: putin 🤡🤡🤡
I was chat banned for saying noob so no
Small correction. NATO stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organization and not North Atlantic Trade Organization
North Atlantic Terrorist Organization :smirk:
@@manofarmageddon true, terrorism agaisnt the dictators, poor dictators :(
@@manofarmageddon but youre not far off
@@pedronabais1456 which dictators? I would rather dictators over ISIS
ALSO serbia wasnt a dictatorship.
North Atlantic Tooting Organization
Really love these more modern topic videos not to mention they are taking risks with stuff like demonetization I can respect that!
Helo Falcon!
@@Azuwu101 hello friend
Thank you sir! 👏👏👏
Demonetized for what? He's not saying anything controversial, just regular western perspective on the conflict. If anything he might get support from official sources.
@@dragoscostache4 nah you don't know about TH-cam, they literally demonetized everything these days
Russia: Don't join NATO. I will protect you.
Former Warsaw pact: Protect me from what?
Russia: From what I'll do if you join NATO
Azerbaijan attacking Armenia: say what now?
Otherwise known as extortion.
Russia "protected" Belarus from free and fair elections
@@anonymousunknown4811 Russia invading Georgia, Ukraine, Chechnya, genociding people of Syria with biological weapons. Say what now?
It's always been interesting to me that Russia has never seemed to understand how repulsive they are to former Warsaw Pact countries.
Like as an American, I understand why Central and South Americans hate being on the receiving end of US foreign policy.
“Lessons from history” would be an awesome 2nd channel. I would love this format discussing current issues in the context of similar events that occurred in different periods from our history.
I was quite satisfied when I saw a Zastava M70 with three ventilation holes, just like in real life. Quite accurate! It was at 6:04
Lol. He gets the correct number of ventilation holes but doesn’t know what NATO stands for.
@@ethank5059 probably a mistake on his part
@@ethank5059 I listen to him while gaming and didn't even notice the mistake...
Funland joining NATO has changed the balance from "How could NATO defend the Baltics?" to "How would a NATO counter offensive into Russia take place?"
fun-land :D
Indeed, Funland is a very powerful country
Cope.
@McBoyLeo What Finland does is make such an invasion way easier. Like "defeating isolated Iraqi infantry with B-52s" kind of easy.
NATO has always had those plans on the books. As we're seeing, NATO always knew it would roll over the Russian military.
Loving this new content. Absolutely brilliant. Even though this is a history channel, we are living in a time where history is being made. Keep it up Armchair Historian team 👍
thanks
History is always being made
@@jamiecullum5567 Yeah, people only focus on the dramatic moments, but the seeds of tomorrow's conflicts are being sown now.
@@konstantinmedvedev-zj7qy There were casualties between the Americans and Canadians, but not remotely close to half. It wasn't even 1%.
That Russian math of yours.🤣
@@recoil53 still 103 dead and about 230 injured mostly bu friendly fire - thats ridiculous. But still it was 80 years ago anyway
My highest respect on trying to display an unbiased, historical perspective on what happened after the USSR around 1989. (and for the use of the 'wilhelms scream')
In times like these that is sadly quite rare.
It's not unbiased
@@bartosz8723 they said "trying"
@@bartosz8723 would you expand on your statement? what part of it did not unite with reality in your mind?
2 more targets for sarmat 😂
@@bartosz8723 How is it unbiased. You can't just accuse someone of being biased and then not show any proof.
I learned a lot from this one, thank you!
Also, your editor(s) were on point with the memes lol
😮 Strat what are you doing here?!
@@Tate_THG lol I know I should be working, but I needed something to watch while eating :) I'm a huge of this channel for several years now
Cool to see you here, big fan.
@@Batstard556 Thanks! I've been watching Armchair for a couple years now and love his work :D
@@Strat-Guidesu watch this while you eat to?!
Your presentation continues to get better and better, great work team
I love your contemporary history content
A refreshingly unbiased and objective review. Good work as always!
*Less biased than most western media
@@bradsanders407 yep, it's still the most unbiased piece of content i saw about Ukraine. He forgot to mention how ukrainians were bombing civilians in Donbas since 2014 tho
@@ligmagaming6939 they were bombing separatists that were funded by russia
One thing you missed is that the naval base of Sevastopol was legally being use by russia following the [Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet] (until 2014), and you could have also explained the situation on Transnistria and Moldova.
Still, great video as always.
You can't put every detail in a short video like this. Including every important point in this whole conflict would require a complete documentary of at least an hour or two long.
It was leased, not owned. That did not give them the rights to illegally annex Crimea.
Yet more evidence that Russia has never wanted a 'neutral buffer state' Ukraine. But a Belarus 2.0.
sevastopol naval port was founded in 1783 where was ukraine back then..??russia can never ever give crimea back to kraine ever again
@@Frixworks well our family is pretty happy about it. Prices did go up but so did their pensions. And best of all, No conflict.
Russia: Don't join NATO or we'll be mad and do something bad.
Europe: We'll just join NATO even harder!
But can't afford it lol
"State-gopnik".
@@Copium-f4d you're a state copenik
NATO is literally nothing without big brother america having to carry everyone else lol.
This is one of the most simplistic takes ive seen
Leave it to the Armchair historian to give us a video that is both informative but also relatively balanced about a modern/current day topic.
i was surprised. i was expecting a much greater bias toward the western narrative, but while it was still there, it was fairly light. The madon coup needed more attention though. it was a major catalyst.
@@ericaugust1501 when your about to be puppet state gets couped 😢😢😢😢😢😢
@@ericaugust1501 hey look a vatnik
@@flerkan2802 nah. some of us just like REAL history instead of propaganda of the most powerful bullies on the planet.
@@flerkan2802i don't think hers a Vatnik, he just said the phrase "western narrative". He could just mean "from a western point of view"
11:35 - To be fair, Russia almost certainly would've won the annexation referendum anyway even if it _had_ been completely free and fair.
Why did they rigg it then?
@@jacegmn3309 Because Putin was greedy and wanted the classic 99% landslide.
@@jacegmn3309 They didn't, they didn't need to rig it lol, just because BBC/CNN says anything that goes well for Russia is rigged and what doesn't was a fair vote, doesn't mean it's true lmao
Seeing this channel make videos on currently ongoing wars really makes you realize that today will be history tomorrow
Goodness gracious this episode was amazing!! It had me on the edge of my seat the whole time, amazing work!!
The Cold War really never ended back in the 1990s, more like a ceasefire than anything
The wars slowed down after Vietnam. The next 2 wars in the 70’s were decisive US victories, in South Zaire and Afghanistan, the next time the US and the Soviets faced off was in Grenada, where the defenders lost in 4 days.
@@titanlord9267 are you one of those who think US won in Afghanistan?
@SilentWolf 655. Facts be known, the Russians won the Cold War. TH-cam: Yuri Bezmenov - now deceased KGB defector.
@@stranger6797 he meams the mujahadeen the US backed precursor to taliban and to some degree alqueda and isis won against the soviets.
@@stranger6797 No Russia got its ass kicked in Afghanistan.
Another great video from Griffin! However, they’re are some errors:
At 0:20, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, instead of North Atlantic Trade Organization. Also, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Warsaw Pact didn’t only fight over Europe, but for the whole world.
The Collective Security Treaty Organization was created to counter the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as they were still enemies.
We live in a time were new generation of historian can picturized the story easily with computer, and also at the point were we can report the future significan historical event in real time.
"Great empires never ends calmly and fast." Soviet Union is still in minds of some people...
An embarrassingly high percentage of Americans polled believe Russia is still communist, so yes you're right that soviets are still living in Americans minds. The effects of the red scares are palpable here.
Ironically this applies to westerners who claim to be socialist and following the example of soviet russia.
It didn't end calmly and fast, it was dissolved against the will of the people, there were numerous massive demonstrations and protests and even after it was dissolved the last remnant of popular will was destroyed by Yeltsin in 1993 with military force, cheered on by the West
The USSR collapsed not because of the desire of the citizens of the union, but because of some incomprehensible few people whose desires to break up the union were not supported at the All-Union referendum on the existence of the Soviet Union. So why would people suddenly forget about what was taken away from them?
@@polikys9335Nobody liked the union except the russians. Nobody wanted to be in this shitty club
small correction Finland is part of north europe not eastern.
Nice video. And you hit 2 millions subscribers- good job!
It's North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, not "trade organisation". It's not about trade.
Of course it’s about trade. Think about it.
He is wrong north Atlantic terrorist organisation
@@КонстантинКругляков-г1у ayo bro it's North Alantic Treaty Organization their's no terroists too far!
7:10 Ironic since Russia never had a legitimate claim or even rule when it forcibly occupied these countries during WW2
That would make us hypocrites - with the Philippines and Hawaii.
@@Shyhalu Rape of Berlin moment (both sides did it)
@@Shyhalu nobody said you weren’t.
@@what_have_you_done There are plenty of people in the comments implying just that. Even calling it ironic is implying we're not being hypocrites.
@@Shyhalu The Philippines and Hawaii where controlled by the US before WW2.
Ik it’s late but congrats for 2M subs!
I love these modern history videos it gives a perspective that I didn’t see before and helps understand what’s going on in the world
I think we can use a similar video about the new Cold War between the US and China. About how Mao established a new destiny for China, Nixon’s visit to the country, the aggression towards Taiwan, the South China Sea disputes with China’s neighbors, the Belt and Road initiative, and the development of Chinese intelligence gathering in the West.
Need to learn more about belt and road
Would LOVE this.
Your comment is already biased so hopefully his video "if he makes it" also mentions the strategic island chains around China, us military personnel designed in the 1950s. Both sides are partly at fault.
@@akidnamedryan4758 I don't really know too much about it so yeah
@@akidnamedryan4758 True. I’d like to understand both sides like this video did.
Russia: Invades Ukraine to halt NATO expansion
Finland (and soon Sweden): Joins NATO
Russia: Pikachu face
Finland will take a front row seat to a nuke on there head.
@SlavicUnionGaming just because someone doesn't want to be your friend doesn't mean you need to threaten them, as long as you don't understand that more countries will apply to join
You're grossly over-valuing the significance of Finland. They pose essentially no threat to Russia's interests, the same could never be said for Ukraine.
@@chico9805 No you just undervalue Finland.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
- Sun Tzu
Clearly Putin needs to work on his knowledge of certain classic literature works, since he was totally unaware of how Europe views him and his Russia and seriously miscalculated the military capabilities of both Russia and Ukraine. Anyway, those extra study sessions shouldn't be too hard: he has a Chinese friend to help him out. He might lure him in with a bit of honey ;)
14:49 "Bereft of its network of buffer states, the Russian Federation sought to manage the admission of former Soviet republics to NATO, lest top be surrounded by potentially hostile neighbors in service to its rival."
Simple, clean, and unbiased. So much it even fits both side's narratives! Bravo, Historian. Bravo.
I hope that people will understand that there is no good and evil, that everything that happens is the fault of both blocks. I hope that people will stay human and everything will be fine soon. Greetings from Russia.
@@Cosmo-re9jyi agree with that, although you gotta remember that there are always lighter shades of grey than others. It's an important balancing act to keep in mind: no country is completely morally good, but some are clearly better than others.
@@Cosmo-re9jy Well there is good and evil. Murdering, raping, and oblitarating cities is certainly evil - and thats what russian army does in Ukraine right now. If you want this war to be over soon just pull out your troops from Ukraine - just "be humans" and stop the war. There was peace and cooperation before Russia started her war in 2014 - Ukraine was one of the most pro-Russian countries in the world.
That's why the NATO was essential for survival of Eastern Europan countries - without NATO Estonia, Latvia, Poland - alone could not be able to defend themselves from Russian threat. NATO guaranteed peace in those lands - unfortunately Ukraine was not lucky enough to join NATO early enough - and now houndreds of thousands pay the horrible price of this mistake.
@@Cosmo-re9jy Nah, russia didn't learn anything, they are mad that their former slaves have freedom and have better living condition than their fascist hell hole. ;)
@@Cosmo-re9jy you are wrong you invaded our country, ruSSias facist regime is pure evil.
I love how there is no bias in this, just factual historical + modern events, keep up the great work 👍
no bias? Lol he's pro west
He's extremely bias and just parroted the Western rhetoric........
He cherry picked events and missed others to form a false narrative.
For example, he missed the months long diplo ref NATO expansion between Baker & Gorbie when there's documents like "Not one inch eastwards" and "Nyet means Nyet" instead says "nothing about nato expansion", direct lies, missed the 2014 Ukraine coup backed by the US, Minsk agreements, he's insanely bias wake tf lol
@@taratino4730aren’t most people
Loved this video, you inspired me to make animated history like these too.
My last video was about the Greatest Scandals of Ancient Rome!
Oooooh that’s sounds good
Incredibly fair coverage. Good job.
I've heard and read from multiple places that the referendum in Crimea only had two choices. Option A was to break away from Ukraine and be an autonomous region within Russia or option B was to break away from Ukraine and formally join Russia fully.
I'm curious on the sources that say there was an option on the ballot to stay part of Ukraine
Go look at patrick lancasters coverage. He was on the ground there, and he is on the ground in dontesk
@@GhostScout42 Lmao Lancaster is a Russian disinformation artist. Wouldn't go to him for an unbiased view.
@@GhostScout42 Lancaster is paid by the Kremlin. If you want unbiased reports, read the UN stuff, and from other neutral entities. Even then things are not so clear.
@@GhostScout42 Oh, why stop there, just go to Russija 1 already 💁
It was a forced referendum. Russia stationed troops near voting places. Intimidation by Russia makes the referendum illegitimate.
Excellent work, with the background information starting from the former Yugoslavia's breakup that sows the seeds of mistrust between Nato and Russia until today.
I can feel the after dark edits coming😂😂
💀
HERE THEY COME!
Coming inside me
@@dwightd.eisenhower2031 omg
@@dwightd.eisenhower2031 If the great president himself said it, we gotta believe it
Minor thing, I believe that the Crimean Referendum was NOT able to vote to rejoin Ukraine. It was either be Independent or join Russia, if I recall correctly
Great video on the history of NATO and Russia! Are you planning to make a video based on the history of Persia or Iran in the future?
0:19 *North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Would love to see this type of Video with USA vs China in the pacific, amazing job nonetheless!
Imagine if China had a military alliance with Cuba, with bases installed all over the island - and that's still only a potential to blockade US shipping from the eastern coast. They'd still have the western coast left.
This is the modern situation of China - US has bases across the whole Pacific island chain, giving them the potential to blockade Chinese shipping any time they wanted.
It's also why the US freaked out so much when Cuba allied itself with the USSR.
@@GTAVictor9128 Hope the U.S tightens the grip even further. Though strangling a snake is hard to do.
@@GTAVictor9128 The US isn't claiming Cuba's territorial waters and threatening to invade. Stop with the false equivalencies.
The real new cold war with the actual threat. Not the declawed, naked bear that thinks it's still an empire.
@@badluck5647 Hey, how do you define territorial waters? Also, didn't USA threaten to invade Mexico like a month ago?
There was NO official agreement between Baker and Gorbachev, let alone their conversation wasn't talking about Eastern Europe. Gorbachev literally admitted this.
There was also no ballot option to remain in Ukraine in the Crimean Referendum.
There was. It was the “remain as an autonomous part of Ukraine” option.
@@tetraxis3011 And the 1992 constitution option is extremely vague and practically makes Crimea independent, not really part of Ukraine at all other than symbolically. My point still stands, there was no status quo option.
@@MarshalofFrance It literally says “remain as an autonomous PART OF Ukraine”. Seems pretty straightforward to me.
@@tetraxis3011 Read again what I said.
Trade Organization? We're 15 seconds in...
Reverse this situation
Imagine USA's response if Mexico or Canada became a close Russian ally and Russia had military bases in these nations
Sto your stupid whataboutism. War in Ukraine was never about Nato. It was always about Putin's ego and his sick idea to annex Ukraine. Putin says Ukraine is not a real country ad Ukrainians are "little Russians". Russia does the same thing over and over again. Russia keeps invading and annexing its smaller neighbours to annex them just because it can and everytime it can. NATO IS BS EXCUSE for Putin. Nato is not annexing. Countries ask to join Nato and Nato never invaded Russia. If Russia was a good neighbour, many former Warsaw pact countries would have no need to join Nato. USA did not annex Mexico and Canada. They are partners while Russia treats other countries like its slaves. Russia thinks it is entitled to own Eastern Europe. Cold War era is over. Eastern Europens decide on their own and Russia is not their master. Russia has nothing to say. Putin hates Nato because he can invade and annex non Nato neighbours only. He blames his past and current victims for calling the police.
@@Blanka1100 Putin ego is are mirage of your widest imagination, sonny. Try to seek an common photo with Putin and former ukrainian president Kuchma at 2009 in Crimea. Just two people are standing in each other's arms and smiling. An theese time Putin's russia sold cheapest gas to Ukraine. And no one challenged Ukraine and Crimea. Also get to see an famous Putin's Munich speech '07. Putin had saying nothing new from that time and not doing any unexpected and insidious. Perhaps your thoughts about russian desires are wrong in common.
@@yurikropotov3135 Putin says Ukraine is not a country. What else do you need? Kuchma was Lukasenko 2.0. When was the last time Russia was invaded by its neighbour? When was the last tme Russia invaded its smaller neighbour? Oh wait...
What should the US do to make Mexico and Canada want Russian military bases on their territory? You are asking the wrong question.
@@БогданБеркут ukraine has no nukes, ukraine is not NATO member. Putin wants Ukraine and nato is bs excuse only. Usa is a super power. Russia is not.
Love that you also cover modern topics!
0:00: 🌍 The conflict between Russia and NATO stems from the aftermath of World War II and the promises made during German reunification.
4:11: 🌍 The post-Soviet world witnessed Russia's struggle to transition to democracy and its opposition to NATO expansion.
8:24: 🌍 The rise of New Nationalism led to conflicts between NATO and Russia, with Kosovo declaring independence and Russia annexing Crimea.
12:42: 🌍 Tensions between NATO and Russia continue to escalate, with Russia invading Ukraine and NATO expanding its presence in the region.
Recap by Tammy AI
Can you make a video on Reconstruction? I feel like your style of presentation would work well with the time period
You hit 2m 🎉🎉🎉🎉
My older brother has always said that a second cold war is happening now
It's much warmer than the actual cold war, In my opinion
Chalk it up to global warming, I guess.
...I'll show myself out.
The idea of a new "cold war" is largely Russian propaganda meant to add legitimacy to the conflict they are causing. The cold war was based on ideology, whereas this is an imperialist invasion from a former empire that saw its influence over it's former territories slowly eroding and jumped at the last opportunity it had to remedy that
@@50shekels Your comment reads like propaganda to me.
@@upstairs1307 perhaps you dont possess the mental faculties to discern what is what
“North Atlantic Trade Organization”
I mean I guess they were trading weapons.
Always man
Please Do a video(or more) about the ANZAC divisions, and their whole campaigns.
The same cold war, it never ended, it was just a extended period of detante while russia put it self back together
Thats my opinion at least
Actually China took the roll of the Soviet Union.
Ukraine is the tail end of the collapse of Russia's soviet empire
@@dr.vonslifeinvesting6485 thats true, but this idea that the hostility ever truely end between russia and the west is ridiculous in my opinion
@@LogieT2K There was much hope in the west that relations with Russia would improve post-cold-war era. START II, The Kremlin Accords, the joint Space Shuttle missions, International Space Station, G8, Winter Olympics, World Cup, Nordstream, etc, etc.
But alas, Putin happened.
@@AbdulGoodLooks Pretty sure it's probably more than just "Putin", It's probably messier than just because of one world leader. But either way we're in Cold War 2.0, History did not in fact ended as one infamous quote once said. It will continue on as long we all are around I guess.
Great video of historia :D
Russia: **Threatens former Soviet and Warsaw Pact States**
Former Soviet and Warsaw Pact States: **Joins NATO for protection from Russia**
Russia: How could NATO be so perfidious and betray us like that?!?
I think this was more about russia stepping in on behalf to the dpr and lpr to end the civil war that started in 2014. Yes, nato has been aggresivley expanding, but it was the shelling of east ukraine that brought russia into the ukraine
@@GhostScout42 Bacause Russia starts arming them in 2014...
No one would let that happened. We knew how Russia react about this situation in Chenchen.
Seem odd that all those seperatist starts appearing as soon as Russia ready to intervene.
Which was triggered by more NATO expansion when not one more inch east was promised?
@@DOSFS yep thats how state interests work. Quit looking for a boogeyman
@@charmyzardcountrys are joinning NATO because of Russia
Congrats on your 2,000,000th subscriber!
Baker never said that there wouldn't be any NATO expansion. All he said was that in his personal opinion it would likely not be necessary to put NATO troops into East Germany. Even that doesn't make sense because a unified Germany would be part of NATO
Well, nonetheless this, that NATO Troops wouldn't be stationed in Eastern Germany (the former GDR), became part of 2+4 agreement.
And even to this day, although it doesn't really matter anymore, since NATO Troops get stationed a lot closer to Russia in Polan and the Baltic States, this treaty is honoured, NATO troops are not being stationed in Eastern Germany.
Imho, as a German, the 2+4 agreement should be revised, these limitations to our armed forces and the stationing of NATO troops should go, since Russia very obviously hurt the spirit of this agreement, ending the (I dare to say 1st) Cold War and uniting Europe in Peace and Friendship.
Exactly, Baker never said that.
Also because....where would NATO expand? all the other countries were part of the Soviet Union, it doesn't make sense for Baker or Gorbachev to even think about that, no one though the Soviet Union would collapse
Gorbatsjov has confirmed in an interview that no such guarantee was provided. If it would, USSR would have insisted that it would be included in a treaty, such as the 1993 Budapest treaty. This video is a great example of the false 'both sides are bad' argument, which is one of the messages being spread by Russian trolls
@@nelsongoncalves8565 There were Eastern European nations not part of the Soviet Union but under their influence that could've been seen as future NATO members even back then. Even if the impending Soviet collapse was unpredictable, the Iron Curtain was already falling, and indeed some of them have joined NATO by now.
Didn't Gorbachov himself say that were was no talk about NATO expansion during any of the talks?
А кто такой этот Горбачев? Думаете сильный советский лидер? Очень жалкая марионетка, не более.
yes
He lied, Minutes of the talk declassified recently revealed a statement that could be mistaken for a promise of no expansion.
Greetings from Poland for everyone❤
Very cool animations overall one of the best videos I've seen from you.
You messed up! NATO does not mean "North Atlantic trade organization". It stands for "North Atlantic TREATY organization"
who cares , he's infinitely smarter than you and it was a small mistake
Most of these "talking head" TH-cam channels are just an actor reading a script written by a team, and the harder they're forced to work, the more basic errors like this show up.
With the way they do sanctions it might turn to trade
@@leoa1893 T for treaty don’t spread misinformation vatnik
@@Ohmygodstfu2045 You have to admit it a pretty bad error though, same for not mentioning the right options at the Crimean referendum.
"NATO expansion" is a russian talking point. Countries applied to be accepted, so maybe we can talk about "NATO enlargement". Cause all eastern Europe countries know who the russians are. Who can blame them for wanting some peace and quiet?
I think it's a bit of a subject of semantics, "enlargement" or "expansion", either way NATO has grown and Putin didn't like that, that fact remains regardless of how we describe it. It was a voluntary growth, that is something that is absolutely worth highlighting, but it is important to recognize, that this exact fact is what makes Putin and other Russian politicians feel insecure, because their grip on these countries has slipped away and they find themselves increasingly without the means to exert control over their neighbors.
A superpower that can't extert controll outside it's border, is not a superpower
Russia should have learn a thing or two from america
@@NiiRubra While I completely agree with you, I must add that the word "expansion" has a slight negative implication to it - usually used in context of conquest and imperialism.
This is why Russian officials like to use that word so heavily to frame NATO as aggressive in their propaganda
@@NiiRubra Russia has no soft power to keep these countries under their political control. Their economy is a joke compared to the EU. Neither is their military willing to help other countries. They have nothing to offer to ex-Warsaw pact countries.
Obvisouly they were coarced by the US
There was never a promise, neither formal nor informal, by any NATO official to any Russian official, that NATO would "not expand eastward". In fact it wasn't even talked about. There's absolutely no record of this happening.
Minutes of the talks were declassified in 2017 or so, you can find them with Google. There is a statement that at least can be mistaken for a promise when read in the context of today. But at the time the USSR and Warsaw Pact still existed, and the talks were about German reunification. Some say it only meant that NATO would have no bases in the territory of East Germany, and this promise has in fact been held until today.
So I tend to agree with you, and I certainly do not agree with the video on this point. But I have to say this is quite subtle.
But really, how much sense does it make that "no eastward expansion" of NATO into Eastern Europe was a condition for German reunification? Why should the USSR have been able to block German reunification? (If they had blocked it, then certainly reunification would anyway have happened after the collapse of the USSR.)
Moreover, later written agreements between Russia and NATO, such as the Budapest memorandum have a lot more of a clear record as to their existence, yet were not mentioned.
@@imperatormaximus8952 Very good point. If Ukraine staying out of NATO was so important for Russia, they should have included this in the Budapest Memorandum.
(I don't think NATO was a party to the Budapest memorandum, but that is beside the point. NATO was not a party to the 2+4 treaty either. Although it is an interesting question whether a treaty state, e.g. the US as NATO member, can legally bind itself towards a third state, e.g. Russia, to block certain NATO decisions, e.g. admission of Poland. I would think treaty partners should ensure they can deal with each other in good faith in the future. I don't know if there is such a concept in international law though. If the US (and France and the UK) could not have in good faith have agreed to vetoing any future proposal to admit former Warsaw pact countries into NATO, then that would be a very strong indication that they did in fact not agree to this.)
12:08 "2014 Russian backed Coup" ... wow really snuck that one in there under the radar
Its true
In Donetsk and Luhansk, which is 100% true.
NATO should award Putin a "NATO Recruitment" Medal for how many countries have joined since he became "Pres-itator For Life"
@@0xPloits A Nazistic NATO-Ukraine is 10x the threat Finland is.
@@hyhhy no Finland is in a very strategic spot
@@drew3758 Bro, I am Finnish and live in Finland and know all about Finland's location.
@@hyhhy well then you know how good of a location it's in for a war against Russia
@@drew3758 I know that Finland can potentially threaten some areas of Russia, although about 10x less than Ukraine, as I said. Also, hopefully, the NATO warmongers will not manage to start a war between Finland and Russia.
Imperialist russia is just having a hissy fit over its lost territories.
Nothing imperialistic about now wanting the current world superpower that is openly hostile and wants to destroy you, to keep a fair distance away from ~ In fact, that's defense, just morally wrong when measures are taken at the expense of other nations, welcome tog eopoliics.
Nato probably pushed it a little to far but Russia countered it a little to hard
Nato never pushed countries asked to
@@popal_prerogative 🤣🤣🤣
France IS one of the allies.
France also left Nato for 10 years before joining again. All the others applied for membership.
Stop spreading lies kid 😘
@@popal_prerogative und immernoch konnte Frankreich die Nato verlassen 😅.
Tja kindchen, Tatsachen lassen sich nicht leugnen.
Ist mir egal wie die Amis reagieren würden. Fakt ist die Ukrsine wollte Schutz vor Russland und sobald der Krieg vorbei ist wird sie denn auch bekommen.
Russland ist am Ende. Und gut so. Dieses korrupte Pack unter einem Diktator braucht keiner.
@@popal_prerogative Hm. I seem to recall the choices back then were amicable US, or Stalin. Who would you choose?
@@sH-ed5yf The US openly has stated it is directly involved in coup's, government overthrows, propaganda and influence funding through NGO's and historically has done so. So yes, countries are pushed and influenced by the US, have you never studied history? The US literally backed a far right/ neo nazi coup in Ukraine to overthrow the democratically elected government. Like they did sponsoring Islamises and Islamic terrorist organisations in Afghanistan and Syria. Wake tf up ~
we shall celebrate his 2M subscriber
I love these modern videos, keep up the good work guys
I don't think we are really in history by now. we are making one.
Russia is the best salesman for NATO. Shooting itself in the foot must be their national pastime (both figuratively and literally as young men try to avoid being drafted).
if NATO isn't pushing on Russia it'll be reformatted to push on China, Iran, and any other belligerent states. NATO is a tool for American imperialism.
Only 1 country joined nato and swedan is already trying save there ass by joining nato tell me a entire organisation vs a single country alredy west is a hypocrite poking around in Africa UN is fking useless like u r people who are saying this we call it proclaim
you really deserve 2 million subscribers
It's so nice when a good history channel covers this stuff, because it feels like it has very little bias in it. While Anything you see on TV (at least of what I've watched here in the US) feels like a subtle nod to join the US military at best, to being more or less an ad for the military and such a big fat pat on the back to themselves
Its biased and takes a very realist approach to the narrative. This is in favor of Russia and is one of the Kremlin pretexts for their imperialisme.
No. Russia has neither the economy nor the technology to match NATO.
THAT is a very grim assessment.
has nukes to end NATO
Каких технологий, например?
@@glebmakarov5 semiconductors. And anything that involves precision manufacturing.
@@briant5685 so did the Soviet Union, yet it still lost the Cold War
NATO didn’t expanded Eastwards, The former Warsaw pact and former Soviet countries flee to join NATO westwards.
You don't even know the correct sides of the world. Go back to school
Näin on. Helvetin hyvä, että me ollaan osa NATOa nyt! 🇫🇮🇺🇲🇵🇱🇺🇦
I think you mixed up the two. NATO didn't expand eastwards but the Warsaw pact wanted to go Westwards.
out of their owm will, im sure
Ruzzia did not say that Finland is free to join. They literally stated 2 months before the war that Finland is part of Ruzzian influence and shouldn't be allowed to make alliences.
dear Tezpri, many Thankz for pointing out the Izzue
@@karantikoo9302 zz is there to avoid comment from being shadow removed since youtube doesn't like the original word and in some context bans comments with it included. Seems like your IQ wasn't high enough to understand it and instead you tried to mock something which ironically hit on your own back.
Nobody cares what Russia wants. Russia has no right to decide about other country's pact choices.
Underztandable
I take it that neither of you understands youtube algorithm thus make fun out of someone avoiding comment being removed by using Z over S.
Funny how uneducated both of you are.
No one ever honestly tells this story and modern people are too lazy to really dig for the truth. Thank you for portraying these events accurately.
I think its more that no one wants to cover an ongoing topic which might be considered very controversial due to that fact, which if you look throught the replies on the comments here is sadly proven right
@@kostakatsoulis2922 Oh, you said something that doesn't clearly support My SideTM on the Internet? Then your clearly Pro-Their SideTM. Your BIASED!
@@randomka-52alligatorthatis34 This is what I get anytime I explain to people why Putin invaded. I get accused of being a "Putin apologist" for simply pointing out that the invasion didn't come out of nowhere. I don't believe it was justified but Putin warned he would if NATO kept doing what they were doing but NATO didn't listen.
@@slayermill8621 It didn't come out of nowhere, it came out of Putin's imperialist dreams to expand Ruzzian empire.
"I don't believe it was justified but Putin warned he would if NATO kept doing what they were doing but NATO didn't listen."
NATO literally did nothing and Okraine has nothing to do with NATO.
@@Tespri This proves my point that you, like many others, haven't taken the time to evaluate the events over the past 20 years to see this didn't happen randomly. Conversations alone about Ukraine joining NATO is something Putin warned against yet NATO continued. Most of the reason Ukraine wasn't admitted into NATO is because they couldn't satisfy even the minimum requirements about corruption within their government. Had it not been for that Ukraine may already be a member and we'd have WW3 on our hands. This doesn't end good for anybody.
I just want to say I love your channel and your neutral approach (most of the topic covered at least) to those sentitive geopolitical thingy. I'm glad I'm not watching another "The Kremlin and Beijing are the bad guys and NATO and friends are heroes and destined to save the world" video. You actually told us why Russia had to take actions (ofc they are highly controversial) rather than "it's February 24th 2022, Putin woke up from his sleep and decided to invade Ukraine".
And yet you get people accusing him of regurgitating russian propaganda from time to time.
If Russia wasn’t the shadiest country in all of European history maybe all their neighbors and former satellite states wouldn’t have begged to join NATO.
Germany left the chat
Turkey left the chat.
i do not know how i am not subscribed to you yet but i have been watching your content for maybe a year now.. it never came to my for me to sub... but now i subed!
Love your animation style
I really like your video! 😊
Привет из России, с любовью! Большое спасибо за ролик! Очень интересно смотреть рассуждение, занимая нейтральную сторону.
I play paintball too!
я играю в пейнтбол
@@soccerguy2433 wha
@0:24 you say, "North Atlantic Trade Organization"....Treaty
Probably got mixed up with the World Trade Organization or the Trade Federation.
I really love your videos. You and your team work so hard. Wether it's old history or current. You bring all facts. Thank you for all your hard work. Every one involved.
Очень интересно читать комментарии западные пользователей, чего тут только нету. Нато оборонительный союз... Советский союз подавал заявки в НАТО, но его не принимали. От чего же оборонялось нато? Вам ссут в уши.
This is ridiculous, the US didn’t expand NATO, the candidate country needs to pass a thorough application process. The countries that joined did it democratically, according to their strategic interests and most were protecting their national sovereignty in doing so. Russian propaganda is insidious and very easy to propagate through the media, who somehow just repeat these talking points without any serious reflection about the geopolitical implications.
I suspect it was a crumb thrown to his Russian audience
I wonder what the United States would have done if, say, missiles were located in Mexico? A living example of this is Cuba.
@@Дэвид-т7й The only foreign military bases on Ukrainian territory up until 2014 were Russian. And yet NATO managed to not start annexing large parts of Ukraine. Russia is ruled by criminal degenerates.
Incredibly put 👏
Lacking context for a lot of aspects. As example, "russian interest" (in fact right to colonise Ukraine) is stated as something acceptable. Ukrainian people and their desire not recognised as separate force, ignored as part of "bigger game". Which is weird as Ukraine is not much smaller state comparable to Russia when we compare as example population.
Also it's pretty funny that Putin once per month saying that he didn't recognise Ukrainians as nation and their right to have own state, Russian army making ethnical genocide on occupied territories, russian state services moving Ukrainian kids to Russian families to change their identity. But some folks still talking about "Nato provoked Russia".
Yeah.
And even if NATO provoked Russia the military aggression is not the justified response. That is a clear escalation beyond reason.
When you only hear Pro NATO news
Ukraine broke the Minsk agreements and bombed civilian in Donbas for 8 years, Azov battalion destroyed businesses belonging to Russian-Ukrainians Etc. No side is innocent.
@@tetraxis3011 8 years ago Donetsk was occupied by Russia. A lot of my friends who lived their happy life there have been moved from there: to not be killed by will of drunk jerks like "hero of Russia" "Motorola". Check video's with him :)
@@VictorSchepanovsky Yea no. That’s not what happened. Russian separatists occupied Donetsk. Then Russian military personnel moved in to train the Donetsk people’s army. Then Ukraine started bombing the crap out of the place.
@@tetraxis3011 nope. Russian army occupied Crimea, then Girkin with other Russian citizens (covered by Russian Security services, how otherwise you will pass border with equipment) occupied Slovyansk. Then Russian Army come to area and occupy it on eastern Ukraine. Without Russian aggression there would be no conflict.
It's sad seeing countries selected for future battlefields. Its citizen chosen to be future soldiers, due to the will and actions of leaders outside of their own countries
Ukraine's domestic leaders and elites have a lot of responsibility for the fate of the country and its people.
There were not only Donetsk and Luhansk, but also separatists were active in Odessa, Kharkiv and Dnipro. Yet, only in Donetsk and Luhansk russian military and FSB were deployed.
I know the US is far from perfect but really Russia brought almost all of this on themselves.
Did they?
imo most of the stuff that russia did was to defend itself? sounds dumb but its becoming weak and it knows it and also it knows it got lied to by NATO during the soviet union days
@@viktorvolf2414 Yes.
@@viktorvolf2414 Absolutely. NATO didn't force Russia to attack Georgia, Crimea, Moldova or Ukraine. They did that of their own volition.
@@AbdulGoodLooks The truth is somewhere in between these stances. I dont think this is so black and white.
- in case you're interested mearsheimer had a good presentation on the topic.
Good day otherwise ^^
There is literally video of Gorbachev saying there was never any such back room agreement that there won’t be any NATO expansion. There is also video of a signing of actual documents that Russia will respect Ukrainian sovereignty and territory for them giving up their nukes.
These were Moskaus Nukes they had to give them over either way 😅
@@Silver-eb7zm They actually didn't. They could've kept hold onto them - but it would have antagonized the US, France, and Russia, who all wanted to limit proliferation. That paired with "Moskau" basically looting Ukraine and leaving it with an economy that could not sustain itself, not to mention an army that it couldn't hope to maintain, meant that nuclear weapons would have been an extremely steep price to pay to maintain.
Ultimately Ukraine was coerced into that decision, sure, but they could've hypothetically given the nukes to another country easily.
Either way, Russia reneged on its treaty several times and has demonstrated that it doesn't care about written or spoken deals.
US also signed to respect Ukraine's sovereignty, which they did by spending 5 billion$ in the 2014 revolution
@@Silver-eb7zm wtf is “moskaus”? Lol they never had to give them up it was the third largest nuclear arsenal at the time. Ukraine never had independent control over them but could still have refused to give them away and decommission all their launch silos.
@@hzmt12 5 billion?? 🤣 kremlin propaganda really got you with that. Even if that was true how do you even compare sending some money to a country vs sending your army to invade and occupy territory.
imagine ur nato application is delayed because some guy decided to burn other religion holy book
North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Not trade organization
If Sweden’s membership happens this year, I believe this will be NATO’s final size in Europe:
- Ireland, Switzerland and Austria don’t need the alliance, since they have no hostile neighbors and there are many buffer NATO countries between them and Russia. Austria’s constitution forbids joining any defensive alliance anyway. These three will probably remain NATO partners but not members.
- Ukraine was always out of the question for Russia, as recent events have shown. Belarus is another red line for Kremlin, but its NATO membership won’t even be a consideration while Lukashenko is in power.
- Moldova has every reason to be worried after the recent invasion of its neighbor, but unfortunately it has a separatist region backed by Russia, Transnistria, and therefore can’t enter the alliance before this dispute is over.
- Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia and Kosovo in order to join NATO would have to settle territorial dispute and be accepted by their former Yugoslavia Republic neighbors, all of them with veto power. Even if this were to be achieved with a lot of diplomacy, the US would still block it like 10 years ago, because of the The Moscow - Belgrade - Banja Luka - Sarajevo transversal (a very clever way Russia envisioned to infiltrate NATO and interfere with its military decisions).
- Georgia is a step too far for Russia as it showed in 2008. Azerbaijan and Armenia are in similar situation, being too close and strategically significant to Russia. Besides, countries with current territorial disputes can’t join NATO.
- Which brings us to Cyprus, an EU country with almost half of its territory disputed by a NATO member (Turkey). Its situation is so complex that it’s the only EU country that is not a member of either NATO or its Partnership for Peace Program.
Edit: I left out small states of Andorra, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino and, of course, the Vatican.
Assuming that Ukraine wins the war in the long run, I don't see a reason why it wouldn't join NATO when the dust settles. It's not like Russia will have any negotiating power at that point.
@@McFrax as much as I want Ukraine to win, I don’t think it can pull it off. The more likely scenario is a prolonged stalemate or a crawling Russian encroachment. Either scenario will keep devastating both countries demographically and, unless Ukraine manages to keep a 3:1 kill ratio, it will run out of men before the Russians do.
As much as it pains me to say this, Ukraine should start negotiating an end to the conflict and cede Crimea and Donbas (a region that even the Germans had a lot of trouble to capture in WWII, even with superior power). The Zaporizhzhia region might be recovered, depending on how well the Spring Offensive goes, but Russia sure wants to keep that land bridge to Crimea.
If these territories remain disputed, NATO won’t be able to accepted Ukraine. I doubt that Zelensky will accept a divided Ukraine unless the West threatens to pull out its support. Ukraine staying neutral would probably be the most feasible solution, but just like happened with the Minsk Agreement in the 90s, the Russians won’t keep their part of the agreement: everyone knows they will try to invade again a few years later.
I agree that a total Ukrainian victory is the best aftermath for stability in the region, but this seems the least likely scenario. Even if the Russian army were to collapse, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Russia would use small tactical nukes to stop the UAF advancement in Crimea. Once you realized how vital the Sevastopol port is to Russia (their only year-round frost free comercial port), you’ll realize that yes, they would go that far to protect the peninsula. I don’t see a world where Crimea will become part of Ukraine again.
@@McFrax could you do me a favor? Tell me if you can read my reply to you above. Our overlords here like to hide discussion about “polemic topics”.
@@McFrax Win or lose, Ukraine will still be reeling and facing political crises, because it's not just about the actual war, the aftermath is a different story.
@@VincitOmniaVeritas7 Yeah, I can read it.
I guess you are right that simple victory of Ukraine is not very likely. OTOH, Russian army is struggling with supplies, while Ukraine has support of strong western economy. Though in the end I guess we have to hope for political change withing Russia itself.
"NATO expanding is a threat to Russian society!"
Member states have to apply to join. Why would former soviet states want to join NATO and not the Russian security alliance?
Because they still believe that America is the golden land of opportunity rather than the degenerate rotted out corpse its become. 40 trillion in debt soon.
Are they invited before they apply.
That’s a rhetorical question there, Mr. Eat Dirt.
@@upstairs1307 Are their governments toppled over refusing? AKA The euromaidan in the Ukraine - We have people like Victora Nuland admitting to it.
Don't ever forget that BS.
Russian Foreign Politics in a Nutshell:
1. Complain about countries joining NATO
2. Attack or Puppet random neighbour that isn't in NATO
3. Convince other neighours too seek safety in NATO
4. go back to 1.
Yay Who hoo 2million subscribers!!
It's rich for the Russians to accuse others of genocide when they committed a genocide of the Circassians and major nationalities in their modern history.
Circassians? Who are these people. Never heard of them before.
Also, pretty much every major power like the US, China, the UK, Russia, and others have committed mass genocide, so anyone of them accusing the other of genocide is like that Spider-Man meme.