Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[NOVA Green]

I don’t get why out of all South America countries that Brazil seems to harbor the most pro-Russia sentiment. Between Lula ducking Zelensky at G7 and Amorim pushing conspiracy theories about Bucha being staged, they have certainly gone out of their way to make any view they could be a neutral arbitrator obsolete

Lula has accepted to meet with Zelenskyy this Sunday, like Modi did on Saturday.

I think you’re confusing opening for independence with “Pro-Russia sentiment”. There aren’t other countries in South America, or even Latin America, that have the opportunity that Brazil has to act on their self-interests in the middle of this. It’s both the size + the existing circumstances that allow us to be the only place in the region with the possibility of a global leadership even if by default.

Mexico, the #2 of Latin America, has a more open economy and one that is inherently way too tied with the one from the USA because of geographic proximity. Argentina (#3) is drawn on deep internal economic problems of their own to have any global leadership on those matters; Colombia (#4) still is very US dependent; Chile (#5) is very limited by a very small population, besides lack of regional representation and Peru (#6) is the biggest example of political chaos and lack of national sovereignty.

Which makes Brazil the big regional power practically by accident since there’s no other place in the region that can fulfill or compete with this role in a truly independent way. Whenever Brazil lacks leadership, Latin America basically becomes a full wasteland and completely disconnected with the world.

As a long time anti-imperialist Leftist American going way back to the late 1980s and early 1990s, I am definitely sympathetic to the Global South, in particular how the USA effectively attempted to create their own colonies during the late 1800s and early 1900s.

It is also patently clear that Capitalism, especially of the Neo-Liberal Capitalist style, effectively helped maintain hegemony over Latin America during the Cold War.

I will not go into all of the dirty business of the USA when it comes to supporting Military Dictatorships and Fascist leaders from El Salvador to Chile, let alone the support the CIA and the US provided to the Brazilian Military Dictatorship in the '60s.

Obviously this is another topic for another thread.

Reality is that regardless of the sins of the "Colossus of the North", effectively the US GVT has been really low key when it comes to meddling in Latin American politics for many decades.

I fail to see why even a Leftist Brazilian should consider US support for Ukraine to somehow be an attempt to quash democracy in Brazil, let alone Chile, Argentina, Columbia, etc... where Leftist Presidents have been elected to power.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I don’t get why out of all South America countries that Brazil seems to harbor the most pro-Russia sentiment. Between Lula ducking Zelensky at G7 and Amorim pushing conspiracy theories about Bucha being staged, they have certainly gone out of their way to make any view they could be a neutral arbitrator obsolete

Lula has accepted to meet with Zelenskyy this Sunday, like Modi did on Saturday.

I think you’re confusing opening for independence with “Pro-Russia sentiment”. There aren’t other countries in South America, or even Latin America, that have the opportunity that Brazil has to act on their self-interests in the middle of this. It’s both the size + the existing circumstances that allow us to be the only place in the region with the possibility of a global leadership even if by default.

Mexico, the #2 of Latin America, has a more open economy and one that is inherently way too tied with the one from the USA because of geographic proximity. Argentina (#3) is drawn on deep internal economic problems of their own to have any global leadership on those matters; Colombia (#4) still is very US dependent; Chile (#5) is very limited by a very small population, besides lack of regional representation and Peru (#6) is the biggest example of political chaos and lack of national sovereignty.

Which makes Brazil the big regional power practically by accident since there’s no other place in the region that can fulfill or compete with this role in a truly independent way. Whenever Brazil lacks leadership, Latin America basically becomes a full wasteland and completely disconnected with the world.

I stand corrected on Lula because the last I read he hadn’t agreed to meet with Zelensky and Macron even brought that up but again you keep ducking the substance of the grips people have with Lula and his administration’s statements concerning the war. Like in what world does “independence” mean one of your top foreign policy diplomats coming out and claiming a well documented war crime Russia committed was staged?

[Red Velvet]

I don’t get why out of all South America countries that Brazil seems to harbor the most pro-Russia sentiment. Between Lula ducking Zelensky at G7 and Amorim pushing conspiracy theories about Bucha being staged, they have certainly gone out of their way to make any view they could be a neutral arbitrator obsolete

Lula has accepted to meet with Zelenskyy this Sunday, like Modi did on Saturday.

I think you’re confusing opening for independence with “Pro-Russia sentiment”. There aren’t other countries in South America, or even Latin America, that have the opportunity that Brazil has to act on their self-interests in the middle of this. It’s both the size + the existing circumstances that allow us to be the only place in the region with the possibility of a global leadership even if by default.

Mexico, the #2 of Latin America, has a more open economy and one that is inherently way too tied with the one from the USA because of geographic proximity. Argentina (#3) is drawn on deep internal economic problems of their own to have any global leadership on those matters; Colombia (#4) still is very US dependent; Chile (#5) is very limited by a very small population, besides lack of regional representation and Peru (#6) is the biggest example of political chaos and lack of national sovereignty.

Which makes Brazil the big regional power practically by accident since there’s no other place in the region that can fulfill or compete with this role in a truly independent way. Whenever Brazil lacks leadership, Latin America basically becomes a full wasteland and completely disconnected with the world.

As a long time anti-imperialist Leftist American going way back to the late 1980s and early 1990s, I am definitely sympathetic to the Global South, in particular how the USA effectively attempted to create their own colonies during the late 1800s and early 1900s.

It is also patently clear that Capitalism, especially of the Neo-Liberal Capitalist style, effectively helped maintain hegemony over Latin America during the Cold War.

I will not go into all of the dirty business of the USA when it comes to supporting Military Dictatorships and Fascist leaders from El Salvador to Chile, let alone the support the CIA and the US provided to the Brazilian Military Dictatorship in the '60s.

Obviously this is another topic for another thread.

Reality is that regardless of the sins of the "Colossus of the North", effectively the US GVT has been really low key when it comes to meddling in Latin American politics for many decades.

I fail to see why even a Leftist Brazilian should consider US support for Ukraine to somehow be an attempt to quash democracy in Brazil, let alone Chile, Argentina, Columbia, etc... where Leftist Presidents have been elected to power.

I think this notion is very telling because it evidences your own perception of Latin America as a place that simply wants non-interference from US, as if the region needs was defined by this only.

That isn’t true for LatAm and much much less Brazil which has grown to have much bigger ambitions than just regional ones. Brazil wants to be a global player and it also sees balancing between opposing powers as best way to get good opportunities from both sides, something smaller powers have also been playing with to lesser extent.

Failure to understand this and to still define the region needs through a past century US-centered lens will only make it more evident that Americans are incapable of understanding the logic of cooperative multilateralism and see literally everything that isn’t automatic alignment through a misunderstood “Anti-US” lens.

Most people don’t want to increasingly distance themselves from US because of past resentments or anything, but because US itself isn’t as interested in investing in the global south as much as China is. Or maybe they just don’t have as much to offer like they did in the past, idk your logic for increased economic nationalism and protectionism. But that is something that naturally reflects in other places.

It’s not like the US (or even Europe) didn’t have opportunity to sign cooperative free trade deals with the third world. EU still finds excuses to bring new random conditions for the Mercosur deal as an excuse to not sign it, hiding behind their protectionism. And they will still be shocked when GASP, Mercosur countries choose to get closer to China after EUROPE was the one who refused to sign a deal with South America.

It’s not that the global south is getting more distant from the West, it’s that the West was never close to the global south to begin with. What cannot happen is for the global south to be isolated just because the West doesn’t find it interesting to make deals with global south countries, so if China is the only option making good offers then so be it. I have nothing against them at all.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Again this is what I mean by you ducking the substance of the arguments in question. Why does China investing in “the Global South” have to = Lula saying Ukraine is equally responsible for the war or his foreign policy adviser being a Bucha massacre truther?

[Red Velvet]

Again this is what I mean by you ducking the substance of the arguments in question. Why does China investing in “the Global South” have to = Lula saying Ukraine is equally responsible for the war or his foreign policy adviser being a Bucha massacre truther?

Like it or not, economic relations drive political ones. Eventually you will have to accept this as power distributions get less concentrated on few places.

But regarding what you say more specifically, Lula saying both sides have responsibility is correct because neither are pushing to actually stop the war. No one is and that is the president main concern. Every conversation seems to be about stimulating more war instead.

Regarding Amorim, he didn’t deny anything neither said that the pictures were fake, but that he couldn’t draw conclusions from it. Which is very different from what you’re describing.

[The Mikado]

https://twitter.com/officejjsmart/status/1659911694724870144

Would it go through Iran at that point, or continue through Turkmenistan and over the Caspian?

[Hindsight was 2020]

Again this is what I mean by you ducking the substance of the arguments in question. Why does China investing in “the Global South” have to = Lula saying Ukraine is equally responsible for the war or his foreign policy adviser being a Bucha massacre truther?

Like it or not, economic relations drive political ones. Eventually you will have to accept this as power distributions get less concentrated on few places.

But regarding what you say more specifically, Lula saying both sides have responsibility is correct because neither are pushing to actually stop the war. No one is and that is the president main concern. Every conversation seems to be about stimulating more war instead.

Regarding Amorim, he didn’t deny anything neither said that the pictures were fake, but that he couldn’t draw conclusions from it. Which is very different from what you’re describing.

Ukraine has! Ukraine has set out clear and reasonable peace terms but Russia won’t agree to them because they’re imperialist bad faith actors who won’t return the land they stole unless they loss it and to say because Ukraine won’t back down from their rightful demand’s of territorial integrity being respected that they bare equal responsibility in a war that was forced on them by Russia is bull. Also why is Amorim even saying “the photos of the Bucha massacre don’t prove anything” if the implications are to deny the event

[The Mikado]

https://twitter.com/officejjsmart/status/1659911694724870144

Would it go through Iran at that point, or continue through Turkmenistan and over the Caspian?

Apparently it does go through Iran.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

The PRC will definitely benefit from the cumulative subsidence of the economies of the West and the former USSR. This will allow the PRC to dictate its terms to the West and finally subjugate the Commonwealth of Independent States. And in the long run to bargain for the takeover of Taiwan.

Cui prodest in full height.

PRC gains economically mostly by having its industrial competitors in the EU saddled with higher energy costs and it also can penetrate the Russian market much more easily.  I guess PRC makes minor geopolitical gains.  Geopolitically the big winner clearly is India.

So far, I see that India has egg on its face, since it has always depended on Russian weapons, and now the reputation of these weapons is lost, and the reputation of India itself will be lost if these purchases continue.

We can see one of the things China won right in the photo above, but what do you think India wins?

Now everyone, the PRC-Russia super bloc, and the collective West, now wants India on their side and be their friend.  A great geopolitical coup for India.

This is a very interesting interpretation. Thus you can choose any country. For example, instead of India, you can say Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel, or Singapore, and your statement will not only still make sense, but become even less controversial.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Now everyone, the PRC-Russia super bloc, and the collective West, now wants India on their side and be their friend.  A great geopolitical coup for India.

No, the PRC would rather go to war with India over some uninhabited barren ice caps in a place where no one can even breathe than have India on its side. India for its part now has one hostile neighbor to the north and another humiliated ally to the north, forcing it to become a vassal to the West. China is isolated and has no real allies except.... Russia. Russia is humiliated and is currently celebrating the "liberation" of a bunch of charred out ruins no one had ever heard of a year ago. Ukraine joins Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria in the dubious "my country was destroyed in the 21st century" hall of fame. Europe suffered an energy crisis and has lost a major trading partner. As far as I can see, everyone is a loser.

The only real winner here is the U.S. For the cost of a relative pittance in military aid and no U.S. troops, it is achieving a major strategic victory over Russia. If you look at the U.S. economy in recent years, and it's continual generation of new innovations like SpaceX, ChatGPT, and so on, it's clear it's pulling further away from the rest of the world. In the future, political, economic and military power will increasingly be concentrated here; unipolarity is rising.

I very much agree with the first part of your post and disagree with the second. Despite my love for American civilization, I have to admit that the USA is like an iPhone — insanely expensive, super-stylish, but archaic and not very common. Whereas Russia and China, despite their eternal inability to fight on the battlefield and sliding into isolationism, as well as the Asian phones they find cheap solutions with a higher level of progressiveness and functionality.

Take, for example, the aspect of information confrontation — even this little-known forum has been flooded with wumaos. Whereas for Russian-speakers, the US point of view is represented only by a couple of small Voice of America studios in Prague and Washington with a few provincial journalists. And 99.99% of modern Russian-speakers, having forgotten the Soviet times when the Voice of America was very popular, just do not know about the existence of such media.

[Woody]

Didn't want to post about it, I didn't believe the rumors at first. But now I genuinely believe this is true. Zaluzhny coincidentally has not been seen or posted any activity after May 8th, and he's second to Zelensky in appearances on TV. He's not been participating in any of the military conferences, online or in-person. His wife spent four hours in the hospital (presumably to check on him)

“As a media personality, Zaluzhny was constantly in the lenses of the Ukrainian and Western media. He is second only to Zelenskyy in the intensity of his TV appearances”.

“However, since May 8 no one has seen Zaluzhny. General Naev is present at all the events which require the personal participation of the Commander-in-Chief”.

“According to our source in the AFU leadership, General Zaluzhny is alive but is in critical condition at the main military clinical hospital, where the fight for his life continues, including the participation of foreign specialists”.

“On May 8, Zaluzhny was seriously wounded while at one of the control points of the Eastern grouping of the AFU in the Dnipropetrovsk region when he was checking the readiness of formations and units for a counterattack”.

“Information about Zaluzhny’s wounding was indirectly confirmed by the fact that on May 10 his wife, Olena, was seen driving from Novogospitalna Street to a Kyiv military hospital, where she spent more than four hours”.

https://euroweeklynews.com/2023/05/20/commander-in-chief-of-ukrainian-armed-forces-said-to-be-in-critical-condition-after-being-wounded/

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

https://twitter.com/officejjsmart/status/1659911694724870144

Would it go through Iran at that point, or continue through Turkmenistan and over the Caspian?

Apparently it does go through Iran.

This map is a joke about circumventing sanctions. Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan are Putin's puppet states. Iran and Erdogan's Türkiye have very close contacts with Russia. Serbia is flooded with Russian companies and pro-Russian skinheads. In Russian there is a word "хитрожопый", and it gives the most accurate description of this maneuver of the PRC, how not to fall under anti-Kremlin sanctions and at the same time continue to intensively feed the Kremlin.

[Woody]

Zelensky confirmed the loss of Bakhmut. The bloodiest battle of the 21st Century (so far) has been won by Russia.

https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1660173275022999552?cxt=HHwWgIC-tYazj4ou...

[GoTfan]

Zelensky confirmed the loss of Bakhmut. The bloodiest battle of the 21st Century (so far) has been won by Russia.

https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1660173275022999552?cxt=HHwWgIC-tYazj4ou...

Yet again, you ignore the story for the headline. It is rather common with Putin Bros.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65662563

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

Atlas Nation / Hive please explain to me why delivery of F-16's to Ukraine will be helpful within the context of a short-term perspective (Ukrainian Offense of Spring > Fall of '23).

1.) These jets require extremely long and smooth airfields, of which I believe Ukraine only has one which would currently allow F-16s for take-off and landing.

2.) These jets require "uber clean" storage and maintenance as opposed to the various MiGs currently available to the Ukrainian Air Force.

3.) Evidence of any construction of runways to house F-16 fighter jets within Ukraine would be easily spotted by Russian and commercial satellite imagery, making them an inviting target for the various waves of drones and missiles which Russia has at it's disposal.

Arguably, would not Ukraine be better off if for example F-16s from current NATO allies, to be swapped out for MiGs from Central and Eastern European fleets?

If Sweden would substitute all of their Gripen's in exchange for F-16s, it actually might make better military sense in that the Gripens perform much better on shorter airfields when it comes to take-off and landings, and plus can go toe-to-toe with the latest Russian fighter jets.

I get the logic that NATO doubling down with provisioning Ukraine with F-16s sends a clear message to Russia that regardless of the outcome of the anticipated and much vaunted Ukrainian counter-offensive, effectively says that the coalition will help ensure that Ukraine has some degree of air parity against a much more numerically powerful, and generally non-degraded Russian Air Force.

I'm still struggling with the idea of how F-16s will help Ukraine in the short term (Current offensive season), even if they were to be delivered to Ukraine Tomorrow.

Thoughts Atlas Hive?

Perhaps it was precisely for the reasons you listed that Ukraine's allies were waiting for Ukrainian air defense to be able stably to shoot down 90% or more of Russian missiles in order to provide Ukraine with these aircraft.

[Woody]

Zelensky confirmed the loss of Bakhmut. The bloodiest battle of the 21st Century (so far) has been won by Russia.

https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1660173275022999552?cxt=HHwWgIC-tYazj4ouAAAA

Yet again, you ignore the story for the headline. It is rather common with Putin Bros.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65662563

smh, delusional. You think I care what his office has to say?

https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1660180890578829313

[Woody]

Either it doesn't really matter what Ze has to say. It's confirmed that the city is under Russian hands. The AFU always like to wait a few days to acknowledge they have lost a city, same thing happened with Lysychansk and Severodonetsk.

Just acknowledge reality and accept that Bakhmut is gone.

[jaichind]

Zelensky confirmed the loss of Bakhmut. The bloodiest battle of the 21st Century (so far) has been won by Russia.

https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1660173275022999552?cxt=HHwWgIC-tYazj4ouAAAA

Yet again, you ignore the story for the headline. It is rather common with Putin Bros.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65662563

smh, delusional. You think I care what his office has to say?

https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1660180890578829313

To be fair

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65662563

"Bakhmut: Zelensky says city is destroyed as Russia claims victory"

Asked on Sunday whether his forces had control of the eastern Ukrainian city, Mr Zelensky said: "It's a pity, it's a tragedy, but for today Bakhmut is only in our hearts."

His office later clarified that he had not said that the city had fallen.

Look, the way Zelensky is going to spin it is not to confirm that Ukraine still has control any part of the city but also deny that Russia has 100% control of the city either and at the same time say that the city is destroyed so it really does not matter anymore and just hope the issue goes away from here and sweeping the issue of who controls what % of the city under the rug.

[Oleg 🇰🇿🤝🇺🇦]

The Russians razed this city a long time ago. They do this all the time and then fight over the ruins for months.

[jaichind]

https://euroweeklynews.com/2023/05/20/commander-in-chief-of-ukrainian-armed-forces-said-to-be-in-critical-condition-after-being-wounded/

"Commander-in-chief of Ukrainian Armed Forces said to be in critical condition after being wounded"

Zaluzhny has not been heard from in a while.  This story might explain why.

[CumbrianLefty]

But equally, that would confirm early Russian claims of his death were incorrect.

[jaichind]

https://ohfnews.com/2023/05/21/incompatibilidade-de-agendas-frustra-encontro-entre-lula-e-zelensky-no-g7/

Lula offers incompatible schedule in order to avoid meeting Zelensky at G7

[GoTfan]

Zelensky confirmed the loss of Bakhmut. The bloodiest battle of the 21st Century (so far) has been won by Russia.

https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1660173275022999552?cxt=HHwWgIC-tYazj4ouAAAA

Yet again, you ignore the story for the headline. It is rather common with Putin Bros.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65662563

smh, delusional. You think I care what his office has to say?

https://twitter.com/clashreport/status/1660180890578829313

Yes, yes, yes. Woody, we all know you're extremely disappointed Russia has not yet overrun all of Europe.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Zaluzhny did a big sit down interview a week ago and had a conference call with Milley a few days ago. Both of which run contrary to the reported timeline let alone the fact that the article just quoting a Russian reporter on telegram who’s proof is just Zaluzhny’s wife visiting the hospital in Kiev for a few hours

[Red Velvet]

https://ohfnews.com/2023/05/21/incompatibilidade-de-agendas-frustra-encontro-entre-lula-e-zelensky-no-g7/

Lula offers incompatible schedule in order to avoid meeting Zelensky at G7

It would be a loss of time tbh if everyone repeated the same talking points they have until now. Ukraine has to change its opening for dialogue and understand that for a compromise that leads to a ceasefire to happen, it just won’t have everything it wants.

The Crimea claim (which goes back to 2014, not 2022 when the war started) is completely unreasonable for example. It’s not a matter of what is fair or not, but what is actually possible instead of idealistic talk. If Ukraine is on a trend of very slowly losing territory until now with all the help from the West, they are unlikely to recover already occupied territory, just imagine 2014 ones.

Even if you somehow tire the Russians, what is most likely to happen is for a ceasefire to happen and the conflict to “stop” with the borders that you see today. Russia has way more people than Ukraine. If going by a warhawk path, Ukraine needed actual manpower from the West alongside harsher technology and that will not happen because it’s on the interest if some for this to be a long-term war. So by a peaceful path, you need to make some compromises.