• norske@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Trying to make sure I understood the root of your question here.

    Is it that the war in Ukraine can’t be a proxy war because NATO isn’t rooting for it?

    • freehugs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In my understanding, calling the Ukraine war a NATO proxy war suggests that NATO is seen as an agressor/enabler in this conflict, effectively exploiting Ukraine to further NATO’s agenda. I’m not sure if that’s what the other commenter was implying (cause if so I would disagree with them), but that’s why I’m asking :)

      • Deuces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I just looked up the definition and you’re absolutely right. I’m not the OP but I would have used it the same way. I always thought a proxy war was any war between two great powers where at least one didn’t get involved, I never realized it required an absent power to be the aggressor.

    • LostCause@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Probably the main goal is defense of Ukraine and not hurting Russia like in cold war proxy wars. So it feels a bit inappropriate to use that term as if they were just a puppet being used to fight Russia for some vague NATO aims beyond their own survival and maybe future trade, when they are mainly fighting as to not get genocided.