Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[sting in the rafters]

Also suppose Russia conducts a full-fledged invasion. What's their plan a month from now when tens of thousands are dead, there's no end in sight to a Ukrainian insurgency, inflation increases as it always does with war, and there's thousands of people protesting outside the Kremlin?

1) They will use lots of artillery and bombs against any insurgency. If there is resistance in a city, they will bombard it until resistance stops. It won't be like American counter-insurgency efforts where they give fairly high priority to avoiding civilian casualties.

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1496614730064183298
2) There won't be people protesting outside the Kremlin because anyone who tries will get immediately arrested before they can even start.



Moscow police arrest lone anti-war protesters within minutes as Russia's propaganda machine ramps up

Muted protests in stark contrast to the Russian public response when the Kremlin annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014

Russian police have arrested several people who dared to publicly protest Moscow’s military escalation in Ukraine, bundling demonstrators in vans for holding up signs reading “No to War”.

While there is little or no public enthusiasm in Russia for active conflict with its neighbour, protests against a potential war have been muted after years of Kremlin crackdown on dissent. 

Wouldn't most (or at least a significant amount) Ukrainians choose death over Russian rule?
Urban warfare means high Russian casualties. Ukraine doesn't need to "win", they just need to up the body count to where enough Russian moms/wives get sick of seeing their boys come home in caskets.

 Read the subtext in the article you linked. There isn't the same fervor when they took Crimea in 2014. Young people are already lukewarm on the administration, fighting for the fantasies of septuagenarian elites looking to relive the USSR glory days they weren't alive for can't help much on that front. The Kremlin can't disappear them all. Mark my words, a botched invasion is one of the very few things which can jeopardize Putin's grip on power.

[sting in the rafters]

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1497066084154937345?s=20&t=d19RDI...


First trying to set up a summit when it was clear negotiations weren't going anywhere and now this comes out. What indication did Macron have that he should trust a word of what Putin says? Dude got duped.

[sting in the rafters]

What is with this idealism from everyone here that a military agreement with the Russian Federation not related to nuclear arms control is worth the paper it's signed on? How delusional do you have to be to think they'd honor any sort of ceasefire/treaty?

[sting in the rafters]

What is with this idealism from everyone here that a military agreement with the Russian Federation not related to nuclear arms control is worth the paper it's signed on? How delusional do you have to be to think they'd honor any sort of ceasefire/treaty?

Then war continues.

Russians are going to go until either Zelensky surrenders or they have removed Zelensky from power forcefully.

Yeah my point is that'll happen regardless of whatever talks occur. The die's been cast. We're at the point where anything less than capturing the Maidan is a failure for the Kremlin.

[sting in the rafters]

What is with this idealism from everyone here that a military agreement with the Russian Federation not related to nuclear arms control is worth the paper it's signed on? How delusional do you have to be to think they'd honor any sort of ceasefire/treaty?

Then war continues.

Russians are going to go until either Zelensky surrenders or they have removed Zelensky from power forcefully.

Yeah my point is that'll happen regardless of whatever talks occur. The die's been cast. We're at the point where anything less than capturing the Maidan is a failure for the Kremlin.

The Russians are showing some restraint here. It's been commented on by military types they're not using their artillery much at all when Russian military strategy historically has relied on artillery a good amount, and there's still plenty of soldiers on the borders that have not invaded yet. So they're not trying to kill everyone a la say Grozny, but if told "f#ck you, we're going to die to the last man", the artillery is being held in reserve and could come in. That could be the threat to force Ukraine to the table.

We'll see what happens at Minsk. Russian ground forces are in Kiev and we have a day and a half until the American military intelligence prediction of when it would fall.

Right but if Ukraine comes to the table and signs an armistice I don't see what/who is stopping the Russians from simply waiting a bit and trying again to take the whole country.

[sting in the rafters]

What is with this idealism from everyone here that a military agreement with the Russian Federation not related to nuclear arms control is worth the paper it's signed on? How delusional do you have to be to think they'd honor any sort of ceasefire/treaty?

Then war continues.

Russians are going to go until either Zelensky surrenders or they have removed Zelensky from power forcefully.

Yeah my point is that'll happen regardless of whatever talks occur. The die's been cast. We're at the point where anything less than capturing the Maidan is a failure for the Kremlin.

The Russians are showing some restraint here. It's been commented on by military types they're not using their artillery much at all when Russian military strategy historically has relied on artillery a good amount, and there's still plenty of soldiers on the borders that have not invaded yet. So they're not trying to kill everyone a la say Grozny, but if told "f#ck you, we're going to die to the last man", the artillery is being held in reserve and could come in. That could be the threat to force Ukraine to the table.

We'll see what happens at Minsk. Russian ground forces are in Kiev and we have a day and a half until the American military intelligence prediction of when it would fall.

Right but if Ukraine comes to the table and signs an armistice I don't see what/who is stopping the Russians from simply waiting a bit and trying again to take the whole country.

The Russians were always able to launch a similar operation against Ukraine.
What matters is does Moscow think it will gain from such an operation.
Putin won't invade just because he can. He invades if he thinks the situation demands it (which is not at all an easy threshold to reach).
From his public statements he clearly doesn't think this war is anything but defensive for the country he leads anyway. A good place to dig in and fight, with odds that are most in his favor.

Frankly I don't care for what Moscow says, I pay attention to what it does. A nation doesn't commit 2 field armies, 4 air divisions, and 40ish warships to an invasion, deploy half 36 hours in, and launch an assault on another nation's capital without a goal of regime change.

[sting in the rafters]

Putin trying to nuke America is absolutely non-believable until proven otherwise.
But if he's losing his mind, then it's quite likely parts of his brain will fancy it.
In any case though, we don't have any evidence whatsoever he's considering it and it should not be treated as plausible.

We were talking about a hypothetical in which NATO troops are engaged in direct combat with Russian forces.

I mean, there was Korea and Vietnam.

Stalin and Brezhnev (and Mao given the PRC presence in both of those wars) respectively might be more mentally stable than Putin is right now, as hard as it is to believe. Obviously it's always difficult to tell what is/isn't true regarding the modalities of the Kremlin but it sounds like even his inner circle is starting to become afraid of how unhinged he's been.

Given the stakes and the Kremlin's willingness to cross lines that most Western observers once regarded as unrealistic, this isn't a situation to assume that this is merely a case of madman theory gone awry.

I'm surprised you guys haven't mentioned the Battle of Khasham yet.

Were those Russian regulars?

[sting in the rafters]

Putin trying to nuke America is absolutely non-believable until proven otherwise.
But if he's losing his mind, then it's quite likely parts of his brain will fancy it.
In any case though, we don't have any evidence whatsoever he's considering it and it should not be treated as plausible.

We were talking about a hypothetical in which NATO troops are engaged in direct combat with Russian forces.

I mean, there was Korea and Vietnam.

Stalin and Brezhnev (and Mao given the PRC presence in both of those wars) respectively might be more mentally stable than Putin is right now, as hard as it is to believe. Obviously it's always difficult to tell what is/isn't true regarding the modalities of the Kremlin but it sounds like even his inner circle is starting to become afraid of how unhinged he's been.

Given the stakes and the Kremlin's willingness to cross lines that most Western observers once regarded as unrealistic, this isn't a situation to assume that this is merely a case of madman theory gone awry.

You can’t let people bully you just because they are disabled.

A repelled invasion of Ukraine bolstered by NATO combat troops may just be the national embarrassment necessary for Putin to lose favor with the power base he's cultivated. I'd rather not find out how the bully responds when they possess enough atomic weapons to baptize the world in fire 10x over and would rather die than lose their position as the 3rd most powerful person on the planet.

[sting in the rafters]

In addition to the questions of "will BDS actions cripple the Russian war machine's ability to fight before Ukraine succumbs?", we must ask:

1. Is a 1-2% chance of hundreds of millions dead in nuclear war should NATO directly intervene via institution of a no-fly zone worth preventing an >80% chance of the Russian military murdering tens of thousands of innocent Ukrainians in cold blood?

2. If yes to #1, do we want to place faith in the Russian General Staff to refuse relaying any launch signals to their submarines should Putin throw a hissy fit and goes full I Am Legend?

I can admit I am too much of a coward to answer those questions. I can only hope our leaders are up to the task.

[sting in the rafters]

Lindsey Graham calls for Assassination of Putin

WTF... Don't even know where to start on this.

Apparently he doesn't understand the concept of WWW III and what calling for killing leaders of other countries actually means?

Well, one of the absolute best outcomes of this conflict would be the death of Putin, so Graham is not wrong here. In many ways, our sanctions are meant to influence the Russian elite to take him out.

A sitting US Senator directly calling for Putin's assassination only plays into the hands of Kremlin propaganda. It also undermines the Biden administration's official line that they're not trying to oust the current regime. If any Russkies decide to take one for the team, it's not gonna be because Lindsey Graham convinced them to. It needs to happen organically.

[sting in the rafters]

Apologies if someone already posted but some interesting results from the Russian poll published in WaPo last week:

"DO YOU SUPPORT OR DO NOT SUPPORT THE MILITARY OPERATION OF RUSSIA ON THE TERRITORY OF UKRAINE?"
(age w/net support/oppose:)
18-24:29/39
25-30:37/30
31-35:45/24
36-40:52/29
41-55:63/22
56-65:71/14
66+:75/16

(locality)
city >1+M:48/31
city 500k-1M:56/31
city 100k-500k:56/24
city 50k-100k:63/23
city <50k/rural:65/16

(career stage)
studying:36/31
working:56/24
neither studying nor working:49/28
retired:69/17

(if working, for a federal, municipal, or private enterprise)
federal:61/19
municipal/local:77/12
private employee:49/29
private owner: 64/20

(financial situation in past year)
worsened:47/32
stayed the same:62/20
improved:67/15

[sting in the rafters]

The thing about war crimes is that sometimes they're hard to define exactly and there are grey areas and complications and technicalities... and sometimes they're incredibly clear-cut. Bombing a theatre sheltering maybe thousands of people would be an example of the latter. Anyway, the grim and ghastly thing is that none of this is necessarily contradictory with the suggestion that Putin is looking for a way out of this mess. Not remotely.

True but committing more war crimes makes it harder for Ukrainians to accept a ceasefire deal. Some of the more hardline Ukrainian paramilitary groups are already decrying the leaked deal in FT and they're not alone.

What is the "leaked deal" and its provenance? I missed that. Thanks.

https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1504115012851413000

Would Ukraine still be able to join the EU?

Uncertain, though due to EU's criteria and inner politics more than any military situation. Turkey's beef over Cyprus is keeping them out and Spain might be afraid Catalonia will declare independence if Ukraine's allowed in with territorial disputes. The Ukrainian government still needs to meet standards regarding public official/law enforcement corruption.

Moreover, the Kremlin is calling for no foreign troops not only in Ukraine, but for all foreign troops to leave the former Warsaw Pact/USSR nations which have since joined NATO/EU. That should signal what the Kremlin's ambitions are.

[sting in the rafters]

Suppose Russia conducts a full-fledged invasion. What's their plan a month from now when tens of thousands are dead, there's no end in sight to a Ukrainian insurgency, inflation increases as it always does with war, and there's thousands of people protesting outside the Kremlin? Urban warfare means high Russian casualties. Ukraine doesn't need to "win", they just need to up the body count to where enough Russian moms/wives get sick of seeing their boys come home in caskets.

There isn't the same fervor when they took Crimea in 2014. Young people are already lukewarm on the administration, fighting for the fantasies of septuagenarian elites looking to relive the USSR glory days they weren't alive for can't help much on that front. The Kremlin can't disappear them all. Mark my words, a botched invasion is one of the very few things which can jeopardize Putin's grip on power.

Nearly 4 weeks in and how the f--- did a glorified excel monkey stoner see problems a former KGB spy in command of seasoned military staff and elite intelligence agency didn't?

[sting in the rafters]

Statement by NATO Heads of State and Government

We, the Heads of State and Government of the 30 NATO Allies, have met today to address Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, the gravest threat to Euro-Atlantic security in decades.  Russia’s war against Ukraine has shattered peace in Europe and is causing enormous human suffering and destruction.

We condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in the strongest possible terms. We call on President Putin to immediately stop this war and withdraw military forces from Ukraine, and call on Belarus to end its complicity, in line with the Aggression Against Ukraine Resolution adopted at the UN General Assembly of 2 March 2022.  Russia should comply with the 16 March ruling by the UN International Court of Justice and immediately suspend military operations.  Russia’s attack on Ukraine threatens global security. Its assault on international norms makes the world less safe. President Putin’s escalatory rhetoric is irresponsible and destabilizing.

Ukrainians have inspired the world with heroic resistance to Russia’s brutal war of conquest.  We strongly condemn Russia’s devastating attacks on civilians, including women, children, and persons in vulnerable situations. We will work with the rest of the international community to hold accountable those responsible for violations of humanitarian and international law, including war crimes. We are deeply concerned about the increased risk of sexual violence and human trafficking. We urge Russia to allow rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access and safe passage for civilians, and to allow for humanitarian aid to be delivered to Mariupol and other besieged cities. We also condemn attacks against civilian infrastructure, including those endangering nuclear power plants. We will continue to counter Russia’s lies about its attack on Ukraine and expose fabricated narratives or manufactured “false flag” operations to prepare the ground for further escalation, including against the civilian population of Ukraine.  Any use by Russia of a chemical or biological weapon would be unacceptable and result in severe consequences.

Russia needs to show it is serious about negotiations by immediately implementing a ceasefire. We call on Russia to engage constructively in credible negotiations with Ukraine to achieve concrete results, starting with a sustainable ceasefire and moving towards a complete withdrawal of its troops from Ukrainian territory.  Russia’s continuing aggression while discussions are taking place is deplorable.  We support Ukraine’s efforts to achieve peace, and those undertaken diplomatically by Allies to weigh in on Russia to end the war and relieve human suffering. 

We stand in full solidarity with President Zelenskyy, the government of Ukraine, and with the brave Ukrainian citizens who are defending their homeland.  We honour all those killed, injured, and displaced by Russia’s aggression, as well as their families. We reaffirm our unwavering support for the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders extending to its territorial waters.

Ukraine has a fundamental right to self-defence under the United Nations Charter.   Since 2014, we have provided extensive support to Ukraine’s ability to exercise that right.  We have trained Ukraine’s armed forces, strengthening their military capabilities and capacities and enhancing their resilience.  NATO Allies have stepped up their support and will continue to provide further political and practical support to Ukraine as it continues to defend itself.  NATO Allies will also continue to provide assistance in such areas as cybersecurity and protection against threats of a chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear nature.  NATO Allies also provide extensive humanitarian support and are hosting millions of refugees.  Foreign Ministers will discuss further our support to Ukraine when they meet in April.

We are united in our resolve to counter Russia’s attempts to destroy the foundations of international security and stability. We are holding Russia and Belarus to account.  Massive sanctions and heavy political costs have been imposed on Russia in order to bring an end to this war. We remain determined to maintain coordinated international pressure on Russia. We will continue to coordinate closely with relevant stakeholders and other international organizations, including the European Union. Transatlantic coordination remains crucial for an effective response to the current crisis.

We call on all states, including the People’s Republic of China (PRC), to uphold the international order including the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, as enshrined in the UN Charter, to abstain from supporting Russia’s war effort in any way, and to refrain from any action that helps Russia circumvent sanctions. We are concerned by recent public comments by PRC officials and call on China to cease amplifying the Kremlin’s false narratives, in particular on the war and on NATO, and to promote a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

We remain committed to the foundational principles underpinning European and global security, including that each nation has the right to choose its own security arrangements free from outside interference. We reaffirm our commitment to NATO’s Open Door Policy under Article 10 of the Washington Treaty. 

We are providing tailored support to partners affected by Russian threats and interference and will step up our assistance to help them resist Russian malign influence and strengthen their resilience, based on our partners’ requests and our long-standing partnership programmes. In April, Foreign Ministers will consider concrete proposals for enhancing our support to these partners.

We will continue to take all necessary steps to protect and defend the security of our Allied populations and every inch of Allied territory. Our commitment to Article 5 of the Washington Treaty is iron-clad.

In response to Russia’s actions, we have activated NATO’s defence plans, deployed elements of the NATO Response Force, and placed 40,000 troops on our eastern flank, along with significant air and naval assets, under direct NATO command supported by Allies’ national deployments. We are also establishing four additional multinational battlegroups in Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia. We are taking all measures and decisions to ensure the security and defence of all Allies across all domains and with a 360-degree approach.  Our measures remain preventive, proportionate, and non-escalatory. We will now accelerate NATO’s transformation for a more dangerous strategic reality, including through the adoption of the next Strategic Concept in Madrid. In light of the gravest threat to Euro-Atlantic security in decades, we will also significantly strengthen our longer term deterrence and defence posture and will further develop the full range of ready forces and capabilities necessary to maintain credible deterrence and defence. These steps will be supported by enhanced exercises with an increased focus on collective defence and interoperability.

We are increasing the resilience of our societies and our infrastructure to counter Russia’s malign influence. We are enhancing our cyber capabilities and defences, providing support to each other in the event of cyber-attacks. We are ready to impose costs on those who harm us in cyberspace, and are increasing information exchange and situational awareness, enhancing civil preparedness, and strengthening our ability to respond to disinformation. We will also enhance our preparedness and readiness for chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats. We will take further decisions when we meet in Madrid. 

The steps we are taking to ensure the security of our Alliance and of the Euro-Atlantic area will require adequate resourcing.  Allies are substantially increasing their defence expenditures. Today, we have decided to accelerate our efforts to fulfil our commitment to the Defence Investment Pledge in its entirety. In line with our commitment in Article 3 of the Washington Treaty, we will further strengthen our individual and collective capacity to resist all forms of attack. At our meeting in Madrid, we will submit additional plans on how to meet the Pledge.

Russia’s unprovoked war against Ukraine represents a fundamental challenge to the values and norms that have brought security and prosperity to all on the European continent. President Putin’s choice to attack Ukraine is a strategic mistake, with grave consequences also for Russia and the Russian people. We remain united and resolute in our determination to oppose Russia’s aggression, aid the government and the people of Ukraine, and defend the security of all Allies.

[sting in the rafters]

1.What assurances are there any referendum would be free/fair, let alone allow accommodations for the new Ukrainian diaspora to participate?
2. Has Moscow withdrawn its demand for all foreign NATO combat forces to exit the former Eastern Bloc nations which have since joined the Alliance?

[sting in the rafters]

That's a good comparison.
The problem for Ukraine is if Putin can turn that into getting the public more mobilized in his favor (turning their support from passive to active).
Ukraine would be well-advised to generally stay on Ukrainian soil, imo.

Afghan rebels did raids on Soviet supply lines in the 80s. South Korea counter-invaded the DPRK in the 6/25 war. AIUI, retaliation after repelling an illegal invasion is internationally accepted as fair game.

[sting in the rafters]

In addition to the questions of "will BDS actions cripple the Russian war machine's ability to fight before Ukraine succumbs?", we must ask:

1. Is a 1-2% chance of hundreds of millions dead in nuclear war should NATO directly intervene via institution of a no-fly zone worth preventing an >80% chance of the Russian military murdering tens of thousands of innocent Ukrainians in cold blood?

2. If yes to #1, do we want to place faith in the Russian General Staff, a group hand-picked by and sworn personal loyalty to Putin to refuse relaying any launch signals to their submarines should Putin throw a hissy fit and goes full I Am Legend?

I can admit I am too much of a coward to answer those questions. I can only hope our leaders are up to the task.

Reiterating. The facts on the ground have changed in the past month, the basic questions haven't. Personally unlike most of Atlas I quite enjoy being alive. Thus, an >80% of genocide is preferable to the 1-2% chance of a mass extinction event.

[sting in the rafters]

Reiterating. The facts on the ground have changed in the past month, the basic questions haven't. Personally unlike most of Atlas I quite enjoy being alive. Thus, an >80% of genocide is preferable to the 1-2% chance of a mass extinction event.

I enjoy being alive too, but I still disagree. Having to accept the right of nuclear powers to commit genocide if they want to in order to stay alive is "no way to live" to quote a prolific yellow poster. We need to call Putin's nuclear bluff.

1. How is sending missiles, food, tanks, etc. tantamount to "accepting the right of nuclear powers to commit genocide"?
2. North Korea's an actual genocidal state but nobody wants to do anything about it because they have nukes and the refugee crisis it would cause. Using your logic why don't we go and liberate Pyongyang?
3. What obligations does the US, or any NATO member for that matter, have to guarantee the sovereignty of Ukraine (and don't say Budapest. Budapest was an agreement with Russia and as we know, agreements signed with Russia are worth the paper they are printed on)?
4. Why are we so willing to drop a fat stack on some flat country 5,000 miles away when we got Inflation at 8%, over 35 million facing food insecurity, the national debt is 1/1 with GDP, and half a million going bankrupt from medical bills? Haven't we nation-built enough?


And if you're referring to whom I think you're referring to, a utilitarian like Dule is not the person you want to ask if they find genocide preferable to omnicide.

[sting in the rafters]

Yeah, there are valid arguments against direct military involvement, but this is just plain disgusting. Frankly, any person who thinks like this is unworthy of living in a free society.

Who's saying the Western response should be nothing? Sending weapons, food, and humanitarian aid is nothing? Sure, send them missiles. Get them planes, tanks. There's plenty we can do w/o directly getting involved.

For the record, I've never claimed to be a morally upstanding person.  I'm just wondering didn't we do s--- ab Rwanda then? or Darfur? Or Syria? Or Pyongyang? Why does this money-pit demand direct intervention when the last several great atrocities of the 21st century didnt?

snip

 
Good luck to you and your family broski. Right now you're drowning in the shark-filled waters. We'll give you the life raft and the harpoon gun, but there ain't nobody who wants to jump in there with you.

[sting in the rafters]

Did most Hungarians forget whom their chopper club sponsor is? Guy needs to stop talking rah rah and stop being such a freeloader. Never thought I'd see the day where I'd want them outta NATO before Turkey, at least Erdogan's giving them drones!

[sting in the rafters]

Q    What are you going to do about it, sir?  Are you going to do more sanctions on Russia?
THE PRESIDENT:  I’m seeking more sanctions, yes.  I’ll have time to announce that to you.
Q    What kind of sanctions, Mr. President?  What are you thinking?
THE PRESIDENT:  I’ll let you know.

Jake Sullivan, the US national security adviser, told reporters: “The information from Bucha appears to show further evidence of war crimes. And as the president said, we will work with the world to ensure there is full accountability for these crimes. We are also working intensively with our European allies on further sanctions to raise the pressure and raise the cost on Putin and on Russia.”

Asked why Biden declined to use the term genocide, Sullivan said: “We have seen atrocities, we have seen war crimes. We have not seen a level of systemic depravation of life” that constitutes genocide.

They're staying steely. Biden's learned from Syria not to make any statements the US can't make good on. Some thoughts though: if this isn't an act of genocide, what is? And what's the point of having a tribunal when most Ukrainians are already justifiably out to smoke a Russian on sight?

[sting in the rafters]

[sting in the rafters]

https://twitter.com/3yearletterman/status/1569503603773292545?s=21&t=jAtTDKB...