Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[Kyriakos]

Given the disconnect between western announced aid and actual delivery dates and thinks like the need to mass shells something the NATO is now exposed ant being relatively not having a lot on had... I can't agree with you conclusion. Maybe Ukraine was rash in asserting an early date. But the West was pretty slow at actually delivering on promises from say january.



No honest battle pre battle prep does not admit that.

That's just your projection, I'm afraid. Most commentators view it as an implicit wish to postpone the offensive. But he did in a way which is ruinous, imo.

[conon394]

That's just your projection, I'm afraid. Most commentators view it as an implicit wish to postpone the offensive. But he did in a way which is ruinous, imo.

Most you have a poll? How ruinous?

[Kyriakos]

Imagine being a soldier and hearing at the last moment that you'll likely die, but it's ok, go on now.
Z could have postponed the offensive explicitly. Such statements don't even secure it will be postponed, while obviously damaging further its potential due to loss of morale.

[conon394]

I'm not implying that, I'm saying it outright. I'm also not certain I get how what you say disputes it. If Ukraine expected more equipment or support to have arrived than it did, how does that make them confident? If anything it could be a reason for their lack of confidence.

What I say is we have big gaps in are knowledge about how equipment and spare parts and things like sells and ammo were delivered. BY the looks of there was a significant gap be announcements at the say the end of las year and January and the actual pace of deliveries on the ground. Its not unreasonable that Ukraine made optimistic statements in the early part of this year only to realize that Spring had a been well over optimistic.

[conon394]

Imagine being a soldier and hearing at the last moment that you'll likely die, but it's ok, go on now.

Again its generally considers something real generals say in real battle speeches as long as they have been a thing - under selling the difficulty of the the task is not a good ideal. Re Russia it will be over three days don't pack your winter kit but do take your dress.

Compare say Phormio in Thucydides 2.89. He neither denies that are hard against a wall. That his men are afraid. That if he makes a mistake they will all die or fail and it will hurt Athens. In other words he gives no bull crap Hollywood we are going to kick a-- and take names speech.

[Alastor]

What I say is we have big gaps in are knowledge about how equipment and spare parts and things like sells and ammo were delivered. BY the looks of there was a significant gap be announcements at the say the end of las year and January and the actual pace of deliveries on the ground. Its not unreasonable that Ukraine made optimistic statements in the early part of this year only to realize that Spring had a been well over optimistic.

Which would make them not very confident.

But you know, I find it somewhat amusing that we can admit having big knowledge gaps when it comes to Ukraine's equipment deliveries and their readiness, even though we are the ones supplying them, yet we can be so confident and certain about Russia's situation, their (lack of) reserves and overall battle (un)readiness. Especially when touting how much worse off than Ukraine they are. It does feel like a fairly big double standard.

[Ludicus]

Petraeus said the Ukrainian offensive could be "very impressive". Most likely, if it happens, it will result in a bloodbath for both sides. To say more than that is pure speculation.

Why Biden is ambiguous on Ukraine's Crimea question | The Hill

experts say the strategy of ambiguity is a way for the United States to hedge its bets on a contested piece of land that may help bring Russia to the negotiating table to end the war.

---
The issue at stake here for Americans is…What a Victory for Ukraine Should Look Like - TIME

… whether this war should end in a peace that would leave Russia in de facto (if not de jure) possession of Crimea and the eastern Donbas (territory it seized in 2014) while returning (if Ukraine can recapture them) the land seized since the invasion began a year ago; or if America should give massive help to Ukraine indefinitely with a view to recapturing all the lost Ukrainian lands.
Given the risks of nuclear escalation, what would be the motives for U.S. support for the capture of Crimea? Firstly, the naval base of Sevastopol in Crimea is Russia’s only deep-water port on the Black Sea. This would be greatly welcomed by many U.S. strategists.

In other words, "a US/NATO naval base in Sebastopol would be greatly welcomed".

To cut straight to the point- I quote

For the U.S. to aim at the crippling of a nuclear-armed state would be the most dangerous enterprise ever embarked on by a U.S. administration…Is this a risk that Americans should take, when this is not an existential issue for America?

The Politico writes "Whatever their politics, Germany’s policymakers have always had to take Jürgen Habermas seriously”.

Habermas, Germany’s public intellectual n.1, in his “A Plea for Negotiations” (see also my previous post) published in the SZ, on 14 February 2023, addresses what he sees as the fundamental dilemma facing the West: should the West commit to ensuring that Ukraine wins the war, or should it merely prevent Russia from winning? He states, "The West has good reasons for supplying weapons to Ukraine: But this entails shared responsibility for the further course of the war.”
Pistorius says Ukraine must win war to curb Russian aggression. German defence minister says Ukraine must win war

If that is Germany’s goal, Habermas argues, “it will be sleepwalking towards the abyss, threatening an ever widening and intensifying conflict in which Germany itself could become a combatant”.
Habermas warned Germans not to allow anger at Russia and admiration for Ukraine to displace their country's hard-won focus on dialogue and peace. For Habermas dialogue is the core feature of democracy.
On one hand, Ukraine has the right of self-defense against the Russian invasion, he says. On the other hand, Habermas also refers the German/European politicians’ falling prey to Kiev’s "moral blackmail."

We have arrived at the core of the conflict between those who have rushed emphatically to make their own the perspective of a nation fighting for its freedom, liberty and life – and those who have learned a different lesson from the experiences of the Cold War and have developed a different mentality. The one group can only view war through the lens of victory or defeat, while the others know that a war against a nuclear power cannot be “won” in the traditional sense of the word.

Indeed. Well, in the never-ending debate between realism versus idealism, these philosophical questions are very interesting and worthwhile, but let's face it, they would have made Truman yawn with boredom. (A big part of his motivation to launch the bomb was that he was sending a message to the URSS that if the Soviets interfered with American plans in Europe or in Asia then this was the fate they were going to get). Although Ukraine has the right to attack Russia, how long will Russia let itself be attacked, is a current debate going on right now. After a long period of attempts to draw the Western countries into a world war, Zelensky now says, “Not because we don't want to, because it's impossible.”
Zelensky says NATO membership 'impossible' before end of war.

We are reasonable people, and we understand that we are not going to drag a single NATO country into a war. Therefore, we understand that we will not be members of NATO while this war is going on. Not because we don't want to, but because it's impossible

In fact, if Ukraine were to join NATO during the war, it would drag the world into a conflict with potentially catastrophic consequences. However, this does not bother the Ukrainian leadership. It doesn’t go unnoticed the rhetoric of Andriy Zagorodnyuk, former Minister of Defense of Ukraine, more direct than Zelensky Let Ukraine Join NATO—Right Now - Foreign Affairs

not sooner or later, but now

Last February Kuleba wrote an article entitled” Why is Ukraine still not in NATO?”, published in the Atlantic Council, and, to convince skeptics, he turns to science

In neuroscientific terms, Russia has always stimulated the limbic emotional system of NATO allies, while Ukraine has appealed to their frontal rational lobes. The limbic system is important, but it is the frontal lobes that move mankind forward

Kuleba's frontal rational lobes are certain that there is no danger.Regarding the ridiculous tirade about the irrelevance of emotions in decision-making, the man doesn’t know what he is talking about, since he boldly claims to speak in neuroscientific terms. He sees activity in the amygdala of the Ukrainian allies since this is where the brain processes fear. If he had ever read Damasio, he would know that the amygdala and prefrontal cortex are also two structures that participate in the complex neural processing responsible for what we consider rational thinking. To be fair, it’s not entirely his fault. The West has also its share of like-minded dangerous lunatics.
---
---
South Africa will host the BRICS summit in August 2013.According to the news, "The opportunity has morphed into an international challenge because Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, who has been indicted by the International Criminal Court, has indicated that he will attend”.
Could the war in Ukraine spoil US-South Africa ties?

The battle over how to approach the war in Ukraine is far from the first touchy topic in U.S.-South Africa relations. Many in the ANC, which first took power under President Nelson Mandela in 1994, view the U.S. as a key facilitator of the former apartheid regime.
“There has always been an inherent tension in the sense that South Africa has viewed the U.S. as having been on the wrong side of history when it came to the liberation movement,” said Philani Mthembu of the Pretoria-based Institute for Global Dialogue.
This perception only grew as the U.S. “War on Terror” became a globe-spanning crusade. When South African officials told (1)their U.S. counterparts in 2003 that they had conclusive evidence that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction, Washington ignored their warnings and went forward with the invasion anyway.
South Africa’s position on the war in Ukraine is unlikely to shift in ways the United States would approve of…South Africa tends to be very reactive when it feels that an external power is imposing a position on the country or forcing South Africa to make choices”.

President Ramaphosa said the continent was often dragged into conflicts far beyond its borders,

That is why I will say it again today. South Africa has not been and will not be drawn into a contest between global powers. We will maintain our position on the peaceful resolution of conflict wherever those conflicts occur, we will continue to resist calls to abandon our independent and non-aligned foreign policy.

So, it’s not a surprise, South Africa grants Putin and Brics leaders diplomatic for summit
(1) Blair and Bush went to war in Iraq despite South Africa's WMD assurances
---
Erdogan was re-elected President of Turkey for another five years. Europe and the West now anticipate five more years of disagreements with Turkey. They see, and rightly so, Erdogan's Turkey creating obstacles to Sweden's accession to NATO, maintaining a position of neutrality in relation to the war in Ukraine or wanting to mediate a peace process (which, for the West, is equivalent to being pro-Putin-( Pro-Putin Turkey to skip NATO meet despite U.S. pressure ), maintaining its own relations with China, while at the same time moving further and further away from Europe and what they call the values ​​of liberal democratic societies, and, like Russia, revealing an imperial nostalgia that already rises to the level of regional power. All true, all predictable.
What happened to Turkey happened to Russia in the US-dominated unipolar world that followed the Cold War. The West turned a potential ally, which Russia had become, into an enemy. China is already almost officially an enemy, and Turkey is going down the same path. And either I am very wrong, or others will follow- India, South Africa, perhaps even Brazil. In Russia, Turkey, China and elsewhere, the West believed that it could dictate its rules of universal conduct without taking into account the history of each one, its ethnic divisions and social and religious differences.
This is what happens when old habits of thought, sclerosed in the same universities, the same gurus and the same old press, persist in seeing the world according to their immutable standards of analysis and ethics, which they deem exportable and eternally applicable to a world who stopped wanting to understand.

[conon394]

Which would make them not very confident.

But you know, I find it somewhat amusing that we can admit having big knowledge gaps when it comes to Ukraine's equipment deliveries and their readiness, even though we are the ones supplying them, yet we can be so confident and certain about Russia's situation, their (lack of) reserves and overall battle (un)readiness. Especially when touting how much worse off than Ukraine they are. It does feel like a fairly big double standard.

I never declared I had any certainty at anything. What I can say about Ukraine is public information that many donations and transfers of equipment were announced but delivery was not instantaneous - the nice thing about open societies.

their (lack of) reserves and overall battle (un)readiness

That seems obvious. Russia was not able to generate no significant counter offensive after special mobilization and the Ukrainian advances. It Airforce reamians AWOL. IT missle attacks have never achieved sustained persistent economic or military early operational damaged. Its use of fires has tailed off. It demonstrably cannot replace it top tier equipment with replacements or repaired units and is falling back on increasing obsolete gear.

It had capable reserves Wagner finally taking its objective should then have seen some kind advance with fresh units rather than Ukraine actually being able to mount localized advances (yes small) with the same exchaused forces that had been hold ing Bakhmut for 8 months.

[Alastor]

That seems obvious.

You seem quite certain here.

[conon394]

(A big part of his motivation to launch the bomb was that he was sending a message to the URSS that if the Soviets interfered with American plans in Europe or in Asia then this was the fate they were going to get)

No it was not at all that is rubbish.

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

South Africa will host the BRICS summit ...

OH no The BRICS I am just scared about profound nothing will come of it.

[conon394]

You seem quite certain here.

Let's see did Russia do anything over the winter to alter the strategic or operational contours of the war. Last I checked nope. A thrust out of its buddy Belarus tosay toward Lviv to disrupt the NATO weapon gravy train? Nope. And amphibious attack on Odessa - Nope. A coordinated and sustained air and missile compagnie to seize air superiority over Ukraine. Missed that. No we got On decently effective withdrawal . A bunch of isolated sporadic localized offensives which outside of BAkmut and its minal achievements were blood baths for Russia. And over that time Russia is increasing pulling older and older equipment out of storage to toss into the front. SO yes at best Russia seems to me to have regenerated itself as a static force that can maybe bleed Ukraine from its fortifications and maybe not but its clearly less of what it was back before the special operation commenced.

edit:

One other factor that may be in play.

A couple articles indicate the Russian now more or less over gone all on defense seem to have finally decided to go hard with GPS (et all) jamming to the max even if it is somewhat detrimental to themselves. Thus it lowers the effectiveness of HIMARS and other NATO guided rounds and requires a sort of constant back and forth of adjustment. This was not the case earlier when seemingly Ukraine was able to use guided stuff with impunity as a force multiplier. Russia no doubt has been saving ammunition for it artillery in anticipation which means Ukraine really needs all top line NATO stuff to work

[Kyriakos]

At the very least, Conon, you'd need to accept that the russian army isn't collapsing, if so many ukro-soldiers are good to be reminded by their leader that they are about to die.

[Cyclops]

Bit rough to criticise a leader for honesty, Zelenskyy's a responsible democratically elected official, he will answer for his actions at the ballot box.

Its one thing to lie about start dates for operations, but to say "Yeah nah, Russians will die like bad guys in an Arnie movie and we will take like 1, 2% losses tops" would be idiocy.

Ukraine playing a very strong game in this war against enormous odds. Russia has a massive materiel advantage (although it looks like it's mostly Soviet era stuff doing the heavy lifting). Plus Putin can murder subordinates and lie like a US Congressman with little personal cost.

This is why I say Russia has been smashed in this war, they should have won in a week like last time.

Very real chance Ukraine takes land back, a massive loss for Putin.

[Alastor]

Zelenskyy's a responsible democratically elected official, he will answer for his actions at the ballot box.

I suppose that could be the tagline for his hagiography.

And that's not even that much a joke anymore, it wouldn't exactly shock me if he gets canonized next...

[Coughdrop addict]

In other words, "a US/NATO naval base in Sebastopol would be greatly welcomed".

Russia will have to get used to the idea. Once Crimea is back in Ukrainian hands where it belongs and Ukraine is in NATO there will be no reason not to build a naval base in Sevastopol besides the shrill cries of "It's not fair!" from Russia and it's apologists.

A naval base in Sevastopol will also be a great resource to send military aid to any of Russia's colonial possession as they fight for independence as Russia is decolonized.

[Vanoi]

At the very least, Conon, you'd need to accept that the russian army isn't collapsing, if so many ukro-soldiers are good to be reminded by their leader that they are about to die.

It took the Russian Army and Wagner forces 15 months to take one town. It's resorted to using T-72 Urals. The very first variants of the T-72. It's so old that even the T-62Ms Russia brought out are better.

It's not collapsing but the Russian Army is not great shape whatsoever.

EDIT:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=1eaa2fa36efc

Great article about Russia's increasing tank losses

[conon394]

At the very least, Conon, you'd need to accept that the russian army isn't collapsing, if so many ukro-soldiers are good to be reminded by their leader that they are about to die.

I never said it was collapsing. What I was trying to indicate that Russia clearly failed in its initial attack and suffered pretty much unreplaced losses to it existed army (in the short term in terms of equipment and trained contract and experienced personal).

It than executed a large ~300K special call up in tandem with it regular conscription cycle and a large bonus driven contract attempt and Wagner led prisoner recruitment drive. All this produce more warm bodies. But after Ukraine had exhausted the counter attacks that it could muster - Russia clearly produced no new combat power outside of static defense. Excepting the one place Wagner was willing to pay the butcher bill for a 25 km advance and a destroyed city.

Russia demonstrably has not been able to produce new top tier equipment and is now dusting on very old USSR kit it drag out of storage - it is in fact retrograding it potential combat performance even if can find bodies.

More importantly while one can fault Russia for not following the the US Gulf War play book and running a SEAD/DEAD campaign because thought it was implementing a 3 day war and Ukraine would collapse like a wet taco at least that was kind of a plan... there is however no reason it should not have done so last winter when it was clearly now locked in a long war and Air superiority before US/NATO fixes and AA defense could arrive would have made say its attacks on power infrastructure far more devastating. It did not ergo It cannot.


So no collapse. But at best grimmily holding what it has with a much poorer army than it started with. But seeing as it is on the defensive I see no reason for Ukrines leadership to lie and say this will be a cake walk. Particularly because western concerns means they be ability to hook around through RUssia. But having said they more amusing thing would be it Ukraine invades both Belarus (and attackers the Russian Forces there) and Transnistria that would of course keep thier promises not to attack Russia.

[Alastor]

It appears there is increased activity across the Donetsk frontline, with Ukrainians being on the offensive. Ukraine has not formally acknowledged these activities as parts of their much anticipated spring major offensive, but even if not underway it could be about to start.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...etsk-frontline

[Vanoi]

https://www.politico.com/newsletters...security-daily

The Ukrainians claim no offensive is underway. The Americans however believe that at the very least this is the opening start to the offensive.

In other words, wait a couple days. We'll know by then if the offensive has started or not.

[conon394]

It appears there is increased activity across the Donetsk frontline, with Ukrainians being on the offensive. Ukraine has not formally acknowledged these activities as parts of their much anticipated spring major offensive, but even if not underway it could be about to start.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...etsk-frontline

My guess is for now along with letting the russian nut jobs run loose this is is just poking Russia all along the line even at cost. I am assuming Ukraine has access to better satellite intel than Russia does so might be a means to see what is moving about behind the lines.