Invasive Thinking

Those of us who said that there would not be a Russian invasion of Ukraine must have been right. We were told that in the event of such an invasion, then we would go to war with Russia. We are not at war with Russia, so there cannot have been any invasion.

Both Ukraine's and Russia's largest trading partner is China, which has been keeping out. But it seems to be shifting towards the probability of a Russian victory. In that case, then there is probably going to be one. Of sorts, anyway. Resistance in the west would continue forever.

We are going to have to deal with whoever had won. We cannot take sides, and it is not as if either of them is any more appealing than the other. And what if the likes of Svoboda, Pravy Sektor and the Azov Battalion did win, or at least win a couple of big enough battles to move them to press on? Seeing themselves as the true heirs of the Kievan Rus', and seeing the other side as stock Tartarised to the point of Untermensch, then where, when and why would they ever stop?

Russian victory would mean that just as Belarus had never become independent in any meaningful sense, so Ukraine's attempt at any more independence than that had lasted only one generation. What is now the extremely hawkish SNP would argue that that had been because Ukraine had "given up its nuclear weapons".

In reality, the nuclear weapons in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan had all been Soviet, with the launch codes in Moscow, where no one would ever have handed them over to anyone else, any more than anyone in London would ever do so. Keeping them outside Russia would have rendered them useless. Still, watch out for "They're Scotland's Nukes", on the grounds that, "We don't want to end up like Ukraine." It would be rubbish, but look at the SNP's currency and pensions policies. The SNP is very good at rubbish.