Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Abdülmecid I]

This thread is about the Russian invasion in Ukraine, not about your interlocutors' motives or employees. So, please avoid any insults, personal references and psychological profiling and stay focused on the actual topic.

[fkizz]

I could be wrong, but I don't really see this distinction being made all that much. I mean people cancelled Tchaikovsky concerts, where is the connection with Putin?

Then you didn't pay much attention to sentiment around Putin's public image in the 2010s-2014s, mainly among those born in the 80s and 90s. Annexation of Ukraine resulted in Nyash Myash going viral, was seen as an almost bloodless chess move, even had its nyash myash histeria favoring annexation, Obama aproval ratings were all time low, even plenty Americans who were asked said that Putin was a stronger and more competent leader than Obama.
Despite Annexation of Crimea, Putin was seen at an all time high, and in terms of public image Russia benefited from being associated with Putin. He was trending. Now sure, this is all public image games and maskirovka, rather than the real thing, but point was that Putin's public image projection back then compared to now almost makes him seem different personas which feels uncanny.

So Putin and Russia being different entities is not only used to talk worse of Putin, formerly it was used to make Putin seem some sort of despite brutish, enlightened despot. Of course not in Mass Media, but in more organic organs of communication. Compare that to now. Too many russians living in Ukraine killed, too many male russians treated as cannon fodder, his public opinion is at the lowest I can imagine, parachuters seen as martyrs even by the enemy, political situation the most fragile I've seen.
Describing this more from a shift in public perception perspective rather than what was really going on in the back doors.

But compare early 2010s to now. The person involved in Nyash Myash spike formally does not support this invasion of Ukraine, the trending feminine is pro-Ukraine tomboy nationalism, age of the tomboy, Ukranians are seen as resilient David in a David vs Goliath fight, references to Russian armor sooner or later bring up the cope cages at best, at worse "is the tank obsolute?" discussions.
The Maskirovka effect now is very different from the 2010s.

In terms of public perception, it's clear who lost the advantage in this case.

I mean I was reading an article that was discussing the possibility of Kadyrov replacing Putin. Sheer fantasy I'd say, but imagine that for a second.

He's been promoted to Colonel-General. Being as Chechen as possible in public image, a takeover of Kadyrov of Putin's place would mean the 2nd Chechen war in long term was also a defeat for Kremlin. But he's probably happy with his new position, why bother replacing whoever when he rises in rank either way.
Albeit there is also a lot of deception at play here, so we never fully know the personalities of the characters involved. I wouldn't think that would mean much, Kadyrov's part of inner circle and already gets blank cheque to do whatever he wants. Changes would mostly be of public perception.

osedly it's Putin that is declaring war on the west.
Either way, I am saying he is a rational actor that sticks to the letter of the law based on observable facts. Why would he even bother going trough this whole charade of formally annexing territory so he can justify escalations, as a defense to the motherland, if he didn't care to at least seem like he's following the law. He would simply do as he pleased and the law be damned. He wouldn't even bother with justifications. That in a way makes Putin more predictable than a potentially more unhinged replacement would be.

Sure he's still smart enough to do the needed formalities and to play via the RF legislation. But despite that there is still a change in the quality of the Putin.

And war has its own honours. One of it being accepting the risk of political field getting shaky if war doesn't go as expected. Putin isn't accepting this completly recurrent cliche of wartime, and talks about nukes because he isn't winning. Talking about nukes will make this millenia years old war cliche go away? Doesn't seem so.

[Heathen Hammer]

Kadyrov simply understands the realities of where political trends are going, and the fact that people that oppose Russian nationalism and irredentism don't have much future in Eastern/Central Europe.

[conon394]

So if Elon Musk is to be believed Ludicus should be happy apparently Putin is willing to negotiate as long as Ukraine is permanently neutral and agrees to all annexations he announced. So not sure what there is to negotiate about maybe just what amount reparations Putin wants from Ukraine for making him start a war?

-----------------

and the fact that people that oppose Russian nationalism and irredentism don't have much future in Eastern/Central Europe.

Considering how poorly Russian irredentism is working out not sure Eastern Europe is sweating it.

[Sar1n]

and the fact that people that oppose Russian nationalism and irredentism don't have much future in Eastern/Central Europe.

Take it from me, a local. Russian irredentism and nationalism have no future beyond internationally recognized Russian borders. If you got different impression from the media, then they're lying to you.

[Coughdrop addict]

Another Putin lackey says the quiet part out loud.

https://www.newsweek.com/activist-pr...-sides-1750839

A new video shows a Russian activist threatening to kill Ukrainians who don't join his nation's cause.
Julia Davis, a journalist and creator of the watchdog group Russian Media Monitor, tweeted the video of Pavel Gubarev as recorded in the Donetsk People's Republic—one of four territories annexed by Russia and recently recognized by the country as its own after voter referendums believed by Ukraine and Western allies to be illegitimate.
"We aren't coming to kill you, but to convince you," Gubarev said. "But if you don't want to be convinced, we'll kill you. We'll kill as many as we have to: 1 million, 5 million, or exterminate all of you."
Gubarev, a Ukrainian, is a pro-Russian activist and self-proclaimed "people's governor" of the Donetsk.

[fkizz]

Kadyrov simply understands the realities of where political trends are going, and the fact that people that oppose Russian nationalism and irredentism don't have much future in Eastern/Central Europe.

There's a huge amount of nationalism/redentism to be done but as inner work inside RF borders, even being generous assuming Russia annexed quickly Ukraine, its problems would continue, and even Putin still wouldn't solve his boomer late midlife crisis. As long as it's outside action, he would need his next expansion to temporarily feel fufilled.

[Mithradates]

One of the four victims who died in the Kerch bridge explosion was Sergey Vladimirovich Maslov, a judge of the Moscow Arbitration Court.

A top Russian judge described as “unusually independent-minded and incorruptible” involved in high-profile cases
...
The judge, who had investigated family members of Putin’s cronies as well as energy company Gazprom, which has close links to the oligarch - died in Saturday’s blast on the £3.3 billion bridge, reports newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets (MK).
...
Already there had been suggestions that the explosion may have been a Russian operation to justify a huge missile attack on Ukraine, which has now taken place to please Putin’s hardliner backers.

Would you look at that, what a coincidence

Cheka-OGPU Telegram channel said Maslov “was driving a huge and heavy Cadillac, which was at the epicentre of the explosion”.

The media outlet speculated that explosives may have been in the vehicle, rather than the truck.

The judge had “considered high-profile cases [involving] gigantic sums”, it said.

“The last case that fell into the judge's proceedings was where Ramzan Kadyrov's daughter acted as the defendant”.

What a coincidence...

[Septentrionalis]

Would you look at that, what a coincidence

If we ignore the sad fact that someone courageous like that is now murdered and ditched somewhere, that is quite hilarious. Like out of control banana republic level comedy. Apparently Russia doesn't care one bit about its credibility.

[Alastor]

What a coincidence...

Yeah right. Putin blew up his bridge, humiliating himself and Russia in the process, damaging his supply routes and joepardising his hold on the Crimea. All the Ukrainian celebrations, the huge boost in their morale? Nah, nothing to see there. Just like Putin blew up his own pipelines, Putin ordered Dugina's assassination, Putin secretly sunk the Moskva and Putin personally executed every Russian that has died since the beginning of this invasion using the same side-arm no less. The Ukrainians have done nothing, just watched.

We have long passed the point where anti-Putin propaganda has turned into a farce. I mean sure pro-Russian propaganda is generally no better, but at least (almost) nobody believes that. When it comes to anti-Russian propaganda what happened? A mass lobotomy? A shared delusion? I wonder.

[Cyclops]

Yeah right. Putin blew up his bridge, humiliating himself and Russia in the process, damaging his supply routes and joepardising his hold on the Crimea. All the Ukrainian celebrations, the huge boost in their morale? Nah, nothing to see there. Just like Putin blew up his own pipelines, Putin ordered Dugina's assassination, Putin secretly sunk the Moskva and Putin personally executed every Russian that has died since the beginning of this invasion using the same side-arm no less. The Ukrainians have done nothing, just watched.

We have long passed the point where anti-Putin propaganda has turned into a farce. I mean sure pro-Russian propaganda is generally no better, but at least (almost) nobody believes that. When it comes to anti-Russian propaganda what happened? A mass lobotomy? A shared delusion? I wonder.

I think the play is he figuratively throws his political enemy's corpse onto the fire, announcing "it was there" when really the judge was murdered by Putin's allies?

Putin is a low dog, its quite possible. He's a poisoner and a radiator, corpse tampering is not beyond him.

[Alastor]

I think the play is he figuratively throws his political enemy's corpse onto the fire, announcing "it was there" when really the judge was murdered by Putin's allies?

That I could believe. That he blew up his own bridge as insinuated no way.

[Ludicus]

In Kyiv, U.S. midterms, and need for aid, cast shadow on on battlefield gains - The Washington Post

Uncertainty about future American support is intensifying as pollsters predict that Republicans will retake control of the House of Representatives.

If that happens, blame Russia? US warns about foreign efforts to sway American voters
---
My two cents.The way I see this conflict.

Economic power is the power on which all other powers are based, including political power. The economic context is always present. What is at stake is the struggle for spaces of influence. The U.S. is the global actor that is currently vying for hegemony in the Eastern European space. For the US, the end state of this campaign is not related to the situation in Ukraine itself: it is the breakup of the Russian Federation. This cannot be achieved with a short military campaign; it has to be a long military campaign. That is why the military equipment that arrives in Ukraine arrives in sufficient quantities to prolong the war as much as possible.

Biden's objective is what they call the "decolonization of Russia", to fragment Russia into several states. The goal is to do to Russia what happened to the Soviet Union. It is worth reading Hillary Clinton's statements at the beginning of the conflict in which she compared the situation in Ukraine to the situation in Afghanistan. This goal is not attainable in the short term, it is a long-term objective, it requires a long war.

It sounds a bit like a paranoid idea, but it is being publicly and brazenly put forth today by senators and members of the House of Representatives. Then, who knows, maybe a new Gorbachev will appear to give a helping hand. To receive a briefing on decolonizing Russia. | Congress.gov

As I said before, economic power is the power on which all other powers are based, including political power. When we hear about the millions that the US "gives" to Ukraine, those millions do not go to Ukraine, they go to the arms industry. The vast majority of this stuff is not given away, it follows the "lend and lease" methodology used in WWII, and must be paid back later.
S.3522 - Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022

Condition. --Any loan or lease of defense articles to the Government of Ukraine under paragraph (1) shall be subject to all applicable laws concerning the return of and reimbursement and repayment for defense articles loan or leased to foreign governments.

---
The US is the global actor that is currently vying for hegemony in the Eastern European space. For the US, the end state of this campaign is not related to the situation in Ukraine itself: it is the disintegration of the Russian Federation. This cannot be achieved with a short military campaign. In the week Russia invaded Ukraine, Hillary Clinton called 1980s Afghanistan “the model” for Western approaches to the war.
According to the renowned strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski (the bestselling author of The "Great Chessboard") Ukraine is an “important space on the Eurasian chessboard”, the control of which is supposed to make a domination over the world possible^.. It is for the US "the critical state” among "key Eurasian geopolitical pivots” .

He adds, "Short of a deliberate or unintentional American abdication, the only real alternative to American global leadership in the foreseeable future is international anarchy. In that respect, it is correct to assert that America has become, as President Clinton put it, the world's "indispensable nation."

“Après moi, le déluge”, Louis XV.
-----
What we hear most often are are victory songs, and the speech of the brave: Russia is almost defeated and about to fall apart. I have read many times that the way to negotiations is an unrealistic miss universe type speech. This is the way to ridicule those who understand that this war cannot end well.
The defining concept of Russian foreign and defense policies for over two decades is embodied in Primakov's doctrine, established a few years after the breakup of the Soviet Union. It’s based on five principles.
-View of Russia as an indispensable actor with an independent foreign policy
-Vision of a multipolar world managed by a concert of major powers
-Insistence on Russia’s primacy in the post-Soviet space and the pursuit of Eurasian integration
-Opposition to NATO expansion
-Partnership with China

These are Russia's five guidelines that Russia has defined as a set of red lines.
----
In Russia's strategic concept, a local conflict such as the one we have now in Ukraine, is managed by conventional means of warfare.
In a total war- if the conflict moves to the regional level, to Europe, to NATO- then, since the Russians have the notion that they are in absolute inferiority to the West, the idea is to escalate to de-escalate. That is, they will employ tactical nuclear weapons.

If the conflict escalates, it could move to a strategic level of mutually assured destruction. That is why we see a great concern on the part of the Americans not to let the conflict go beyond the Ukrainian borders, and not to give the Ukrainians weapons that would allow them to reach inside Russian territory. But it’s a dangerous game.

Last week, Raphael Cohen and G. Gentile from Rand Corporation announced that the US and its allies should continue to support Ukraine until its final victory. The Rand follows and dictates US geostrategy since the end of World War II. Total victory means the destruction of Russia.

This is also the view shared by a significant majority of my countrymen and many Europeans, even though most Germans favor the path of negotiations.

So, there is a clear majority that believes that you should not talk to Putin, that there is no dialogue with tyrants and that we must support Ukraine until total victory. They are the same ones who believe that such a victory is possible and that we are on the right path to achieve it.

We are witnessing an escalating war that will be long and painful for everyone. A country is being decimated and we are unyielding on matters of principle: seeking total victory for Ukraine means wanting total defeat for Russia. Many calls Putin irresponsible or even crazy, but they are the same ones who believe in his code of ethics: they say he will not dare use nuclear weapons. But who believes Russia will accept defeat?


I've Studied 13 Days of the Cuban Missile Crisis. This Is What I See N.Y.Times.

The most dangerous phase of the Cuban missile crisis lasted just 13 days; we are already in the eighth month of the war in Ukraine, with no end in sight. The longer it drags on, the greater the threat of some terrible miscalculation.

In my opinion, while our ally, the US, is reaping the benefits of the continuing conflict and giving instructions, Europe has condemned itself to all its weaknesses: energy and military dependence, vulnerability in the face of rising prices, and all the setbacks of the retreat from the peaceful Euro-Asian axis that was being designed with Germany.

In any case, there is no non-suicidal alternative to the implementation of negotiations. The war takes place in Ukraine, which is the chessboard of the conflict between the US and Russia. We dance to the music we are told to dance to. Irresponsibly and cheerfully, waiting for the total defeat of Russia, which will not happen without a nuclear war.It is very unlikely that a new Gorbachev will come along to break up Russia. History does not usually repeat itself twice.

[AqD]

One of the four victims who died in the Kerch bridge explosion was Sergey Vladimirovich Maslov, a judge of the Moscow Arbitration Court.

If they did blow up their own bridge, which is entirely reasonable, why not blame US? why blame Ukraine? Ukraine can't be the reason for Putin to offer ceasefire - it'd make him look weak.

[conon394]

it has to be a long military campaign. That is why the military equipment that arrives in Ukraine arrives in sufficient quantities to prolong the war as much as possible.

Or you know perhaps Ukraine has to learn how to use new weapons and supply chains for repair/resupply have to be set up (great you gave Ukraine the M777 - what's the barrel life on that in rounds in what is high intensity artillery war on both sides?). The US needs to reassure itself Ukraine can use the aid provided effectively. The US/NATO also are clearly trying not to over escalate the situation. The West Europe more the US but including the US are not sitting on some vast brake glass in case of emergency (high intensity war in Europe) supply chain. Outside of the US most European states don't have large massive stockpiles of stuff. Even the US has limited amounts. Take the M113 sure its a battle take at best but it still a functional part of the US military . Its replacement is the APMV which is just now being produced at a rate of 12 or so a month and can maybe surged to twice that. Same for the M1128 Mobile Gun System which the US is just about to retire for the Light take which also just now only just being produced (note this would a comparable speculative transfer). In both cases to deliver hardware means giving away real deployed stuff or it immediately available storage stuff with no particular waiting in the wings total replacement but only a slow replacement.

Same for air defense the simple fact is the US and NATO more or less are light on air defense outside of Ballistic missile orientated stuff because for decades they plan for SEAD/DEAD and have a ton of planes to do it. The US for example has no vast stockpile of say NASAMS to hand over nor some robust supply of production to just put on overtime. The US and NATO have clearly decided that modern aircraft are a red line they are not willing to cross (for now). The hand over of the Polish Migs makes that clear.

I can think of a lot reasons why the Ukraine has got aid its getting at the rate its getting vs a paranoid fantasy.

In my opinion, while our ally, the US, is reaping the benefits of the continuing conflict and giving instructions, Europe has condemned itself to all its weaknesses: energy and military dependence, vulnerability in the face of rising prices, and all the setbacks of the retreat from the peaceful Euro-Asian axis that was being designed with Germany.

Err "energy and military dependence"

Last I checked Europe had previously signed up for that energy dependence from Russia. Militarily umm kind of went with being NATO and not spending even 2% GDP on its military overall and never comming up with joint military under the EU.

In any case, there is no non-suicidal alternative to the implementation of negotiations

OK Ludicus please do name the starting point you want imposed on Ukraine by the west for these negotiations? You keep using the word even though Putin keeps making clear he is more or less determined to dissolve the Ukraine as a viable state.

[Mithradates]

Yeah right. Putin blew up his bridge, humiliating himself and Russia in the process, damaging his supply routes and joepardising his hold on the Crimea.

Oh no, not him... but besides him, there is a long list of Russians who would benefit from that attack.
Moderates would want the Army to "see reason faster" and withdraw so normalisation could begin, hardliners want to use the attack to escalate (like the recent missile attacks on Ukrainian civilian targets). Prigozhin/Kadyrov wants to make Shoigu and the Army look incompetent and weak etc.

If they did blow up their own bridge, which is entirely reasonable, why not blame US? why blame Ukraine? Ukraine can't be the reason for Putin to offer ceasefire - it'd make him look weak.

They blame Ukraine because despite the constant sabre-rattling and nuclear threats, the Kremlin is scared that the war may escalate and they may actually end up facing NATO for real.

[Alastor]

Prigozhin/Kadyrov wants to make Shoigu and the Army look incompetent and weak etc.

They don't need to do anything to achieve what's already the case.

[Septentrionalis]

That I could believe. That he blew up his own bridge as insinuated no way.

In the media space I am in, no one is insinuating that Putin blew up his own bridge. The very prospect of Putin doing it seems insane. Ukrainians are celebrating it. Everyone supporting Ukraine is celebrating it and speculating how that might complicate things for Russia.

What I am mostly surprised about is how the western media and commentators are convinced that Russia blew up their own gas pipelines to Germany. While they can just stop delivering gas at will. Especially given how the western powers had a motive to do that to stop Germany from fraternizing with Russia in hopes of gas. I guess the idea of western powers doing such a thing is just not palatable. Even though Biden said they would put an end to Nord Stream 2 regardless of what Germany wants.

[PointOfViewGun]

What I am mostly surprised about is how the western media and commentators are convinced that Russia blew up their own gas pipelines to Germany. While they can just stop delivering gas at will. Especially given how the western powers had a motive to do that to stop Germany from fraternizing with Russia in hopes of gas. I guess the idea of western powers doing such a thing is just not palatable. Even though Biden said they would put an end to Nord Stream 2 regardless of what Germany wants.

They already stopped delivering gas through Nord Stream 1 since September. These are the rationale for Russian culpableness.

Shock and Awe: Who Attacked the Nord Stream Pipelines?

The attack may, however, have signaling value. If so, that does change the strategic landscape in the energy war. If perpetrated by Russia, the signaling value toward the West—which would certainly know Russia is behind the explosions—may be a threat to the rest of the marine energy infrastructure. Back in 2021, Putin told a gathering of military leaders: " If our Western colleagues continue the obviously aggressive stance, we will take appropriate retaliatory military-technical measures and react harshly to unfriendly steps. I want to emphasize that we have every right to do so." Was the Nord Stream attack a hint that similar mishaps might happen to some or all of the seven major pipelines delivering Norwegian gas to the UK and continental Europe? The explosions coincided with the inauguration of the Baltic Pipe taking Norwegian gas to Poland, so this is hardly an academic hypothesis.

One irony of the attack is that Russia’s Gazprom potentially stands to benefit: it will no longer need to invent excuses not to supply Europe via Nord Stream 1. Now it can claim a force majeure, which will dramatically reduce the risk of compensation claims for non-delivered volumes. This logic, however, does not explain the damage caused to Nord Stream 2. On the other hand, the Nord Stream consortium companies and eventually Gazprom might even hope to collect some insurance for the damaged pipelines. Given that they already looked set to become a stranded asset, that would be far from the worst outcome for the giant company.

In theory, Russia still has the physical capacity to increase gas supplies to Europe. It could accomplish that by relying on another non-commissioned line of Nord Stream 2 that was spared the explosion (though there are reports that this last line might also have been damaged after all), or the Yamal-Europe pipeline. Together they have a capacity of 60 billion cubic meters per annum, or 40 percent of the pre-war supply volumes. However, with the Yamal-Europe pipeline controlled by Poland, a resolute ally of Ukraine, and Nord Stream 2 having yet to be launched, pulling any of this off would be a lot more difficult than simply switching back on the turbines on Nord Stream 1.

Gazprom lowers pressure in undamaged part of Nord Stream 2 pipe, Denmark says

STOCKHOLM, Oct 5 (Reuters) - Nord Stream 2 AG has informed the Danish Energy Agency that Gazprom Transgaz is currently lowering the pressure in the undamaged string of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, the agency said on Wednesday.
Russia's Gazprom <GAZP.MM> was, according to the pipeline operator, withdrawing gas from the pipe and redirecting it to the St. Petersburg area's gas network, the energy agency said.
"Controlled pressure reduction is therefore now seen," it said.
Gazprom on Monday said gas had stopped leaking from three ruptured Nord Stream gas lines under the Baltic Sea, and that it might be possible to resume pumping through the remaining single line if a decision were made to start deliveries.

It's interesting that one line, out of two, of the new pipeline, which was laid completely by the Russians, remains intact. To me, the idea that Russia wanted to give the West a message by blowing up an already shut down pipeline with no prospect to be opened back again, meanwhile maintaining the ability to keep on sending gas to Europe if things turn, seems to be quite logical.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Watching the left become the neoconservative warhawks of yesteryear has been entertaining.