Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[PSOL]

If there is an invasion, they won’t advance too far off from Donetsk and Luhansk and will stop a fair distance from Kiev.

[GoTfan]

We're barrelling headlong into World War 3 and potential nuclear war here and it's astonishing no one realises that.

[afleitch]

Once Russian oligarchs can't travel and move money about with impunity and if the West impose the most extreme economic sanctions, then it will be a short war.

[CumbrianLefty]

Yet again, do we need loads of threads on basically the same topic?

[CumbrianLefty]

We're barrelling headlong into World War 3 and potential nuclear war here and it's astonishing no one realises that.

Nobody "realises" it because it isn't true.

[afleitch]

The fact that Putin is ramping up a Ukraine incursion to me is a sign that he's in some serious trouble, either immediate, or in the short term domestically. There's some weakness here.

[Zinneke]

The fact that Putin is ramping up a Ukraine incursion to me is a sign that he's in some serious trouble, either immediate, or in the short term domestically. There's some weakness here.

That's my initial sentiment too, but you have to remember that this is the result of a prolonged escalation designed to help both Zelensky and Putin internally, that has now become very serious  and real given how valuable it is to both. The kabuki dance has in itself become real.

And that Putin has basically bunkered himself down and refuses to see anyone but concubines and the circle of mandarins because he seems paranoid about Covid. And it seems being a powerful billionaire doesn't immunise you from Covid derangement syndrome, much like Covid itself. He is probably overthinking so much and getting so tied into a different level of dimensional chess that he could well invade.

[PSOL]

Ukraine should form an International Legion like Finland did in the 1930s.

Dear god please, it would lead to a decimation of the far right all over again. The pain of ISIS was just momentary to the grand collapse of Wahhabism and Qutbism.

[Hnv1]

Ukraine should form an International Legion like Finland did in the 1930s.

Neo Nazis from all over Europe to travel unprepared and die in actual battle? Yeah I’m all for

[StateBoiler]

Once Russian oligarchs can't travel and move money about with impunity...

So are the Brits planning to nationalize the soccer teams they own? How many Russian oligarchs live in London? Throw on top of it EU and Eurozone member Cyprus has always been a Russian money backdoor and do you think the ECB are placing sanctions on Cyprus?

[StateBoiler]

The fact that Putin is ramping up a Ukraine incursion to me is a sign that he's in some serious trouble, either immediate, or in the short term domestically. There's some weakness here.

This is the argument the Obama foreign policy people and their NATO allies tried to push with Syria. Years and a couple presidents removed from then, we can safely say they were full of sh*t and Russia won that exchange through their interaction.

I've read nothing of American foreign policy people in the press saying they understand the Russians' motivations behind pushing this. If there was an internal domestic weakness for Putin in Russia, I'm sure it would be perceived by the government via our spies and signal intelligence that would then leak that info to our press who would then repeat it. I've not read any of that. All I've read is "we do not understand why Putin is doing this", which if taken at face value is a roundabout way of saying "our Moscow intelligence has nothing".

[😥]

https://twitter.com/worldonalert/status/1483518227049328646?t=hUPTjvCovHo-5EZhCK...

[😥]

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1483493509642530816?t=GsCgo2dyzAoShuvJ...

[Crumpets]

https://twitter.com/Liveuamap/status/1483427285298520069

[Hnv1]

Why would Russia attack Kiev directly? They definitely don’t have the manpower to take this large metro. If this is somehow true I suspect it is only meant to stretch Ukrainian forces thin

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Why would Russia attack Kiev directly? They definitely don’t have the manpower to take this large metro. If this is somehow true I suspect it is only meant to stretch Ukrainian forces thin

The idea is probably to encircle and cut off Kyiv from the rest of the country, then dictate terms.

[Velasco]

Once Russian oligarchs can't travel and move money about with impunity and if the West impose the most extreme economic sanctions, then it will be a short war.

Do you think Europe can afford the imposition of "extreme sanctions", given the ongoing energy crisis and the dependency of countries like Germany on the Russian gas?

[CumbrianLefty]

Why would Russia attack Kiev directly? They definitely don’t have the manpower to take this large metro. If this is somehow true I suspect it is only meant to stretch Ukrainian forces thin

Yeah they may "want" to do it, but that's not the same as saying they actually will.

[Hnv1]

Why would Russia attack Kiev directly? They definitely don’t have the manpower to take this large metro. If this is somehow true I suspect it is only meant to stretch Ukrainian forces thin

The idea is probably to encircle and cut off Kyiv from the rest of the country, then dictate terms.

That's a massive 3mil plus metro area full of hostile denizens and surrounded by hostiles. To encircle Kiev effectively would require manpower in proportions we hadn't seen in decades, a field army at least. The logistics would be a headache and I really don't think the Russian army is capable of this right now.

most likely its a move to draw Ukrainian forces west and scare the EU a bit

[StateBoiler]

Why would Russia attack Kiev directly? They definitely don’t have the manpower to take this large metro. If this is somehow true I suspect it is only meant to stretch Ukrainian forces thin

The idea is probably to encircle and cut off Kyiv from the rest of the country, then dictate terms.

Strikes me as a bluff. They didn't even go to Tbilisi in Georgia which is a far easier invasion than Ukraine would be. They may go to to the edges of Kiev and then start dictating terms.

[StateBoiler]

Politico's National Security Daily newsletter:

You don’t have to be a D.C. insider to realize just how worried the Biden administration is about Russia invading Ukraine again. On Tuesday, three top U.S. officials just came out and said it.

“We’re now at a stage where Russia could at any point launch an attack in Ukraine,” White House press secretary JEN PSAKI said during her daily news briefing. Moscow’s recent military moves “signal to us that Russia is looking at Ukraine in an aggressive way,” LINDA THOMAS-GREENFIELD, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told The Washington Post’s JONATHAN CAPEHART in an interview this morning. And chief Pentagon spokesperson JOHN KIRBY added in his own presser that there’s “no sign, no indication the Russians are willing to deescalate.”

Those comments worried a senior House Republican staffer: “We’re staring down an Afghanistan-in-Europe type of event with thousands dead, refugee floodgates opened, and U.S.-credibility gutted. It’s going to be horrible to watch," the aide texted NatSec Daily.

The openly alarmist rhetoric from the administration comes after talks between Russia, the United States and its allies last week failed to stop the momentum toward war. “We can now say that we are staying on different tracks, on totally different tracks, and this is not good, and this is disturbing," Kremlin spokesperson DMITRY PESKOV told CNN’s FAREED ZAKARIA on Sunday.

It also follows intelligence released by the Biden administration Friday that a renewed incursion could start between mid-January and mid-February. We at NatSec Daily are no calendar experts, but we’re pretty confident in stating Jan. 18 falls within that timeframe.

It’s still unclear if Russian President VLADIMIR PUTIN has made the decision to send his 100,000 troops stationed outside Ukraine over the border, but there are signs that he might be preparing to do that. The Kremlin has already thinned out its embassy in Ukraine, per The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal noted Friday how Russia is moving its weapons stationed in the Far East westward.

Now, Secretary of State ANTONY BLINKEN is on his way to Ukraine and Germany to once again reiterate that America’s preference is for the standoff to end diplomatically. After those visits, Blinken will meet with Russian Foreign Minister SERGEY LAVROV in Geneva. We’re hearing there’s a good chance the secretary will deliver a speech during his European trip, though details are sparse. In the meantime, the U.S. is considering sending even more weaponry to Ukraine to bolster Kyiv’s defenses.

Whether Blinken can pull off a diplomatic masterstroke or not is the big question, analysts say.
“Russia’s given every indication that there’s no plan to deescalate in any meaningful way, especially given their public statements regarding the talks last week being a failure. It seems like experts and policymakers are now preparing for a range of escalatory measures,” said RACHEL RIZZO, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

Interesting to me that Blinken is going to Ukraine and Germany to say it's the U.S. preference to end this diplomatically.

[StateBoiler]

U.S. retired military generals now think tankers analysis I read says the absolute worst-case scenario is Russia stops at the Dnieper River but they doubt they go that far because they question whether Russia has the personnel to do the occupation of all that territory.

What they say is likely:

Russia owns the air and sea.

Cut off Ukraine's army, most of which are based in eastern Donbass, Russia could flank them from the north or rapidly move armed units entering the country to their west, leaving most of Ukraine's ground troops trapped

Blockade Ukraine's ports, even a Ukrainian military expert says Ukraine can do nothing in the Black Sea, this foresees:
-blockade of southeast port cities of Berdyansk and Mariupol, restricting movement of Ukraine-bound vessels in the shipping channel
-west of Crimea, blockade Odessa, Mykolaiv, and Kherso
-seizure of Snake Island (Zmiyiniy Ostriv), tiny island in the Black Sea that allows Ukraine to claim extra territorial waters helping to safeguard shipping lanes to Ukraine's Black Sea ports

-secure control of a canal going to Crimea that Ukraine shut down post-2014, allowing Russians to resolve a chronic water supply problem for Crimea
-forge a land bridge between Crimea and mainland Ukraine

-enter Russian forces through Donbass in already Russian-friendly territory, although this would be seen as largely symbolic instead of strategic

Some experts think Russia will do small enough moves that would be allowed to be palatable to enough NATO countries to fracture NATO cohesion condemning Russian maneuvers.

"The most likely military scenario in my view is going to be a series of rolling operations that they can stop at any point along the way based on how the West reacts," said Ben Hodges, a retired lieutenant general who was commander of U.S. Army Europe from 2014 to 2017.

Seizing a smaller area or strategic location, such as Snake Island in the Black Sea, the water canal to Crimea or areas near separatist-held territory, and then pausing would lower the risk of casualties and make it "more difficult for the West to respond," said Hodges, who is now at the Center for European Policy Analysis.

Moscow could try to gamble that limited action would fracture NATO's unity, as some European governments might be reluctant to impose severe penalties in that case, Hodges said. Without a sharp response, Russia might then press ahead with more operations.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Strikes me as a bluff. They didn't even go to Tbilisi in Georgia which is a far easier invasion than Ukraine would be. They may go to to the edges of Kiev and then start dictating terms.

Not much further: in 2008 they advanced 120km into Georgia; to reach Kyiv from the Belarusian border would be about 150 km. Not to mention the Russian army has undergone significant modernisation in the past decade plus and has far superior logistical capability now. Besides what is the bluff anyway? The Russian army hasn't announced any plans.

In any case, Russia needs the political acquiescence of Ukraine to make the results of military action stick. And for that they have to secure the capital. If they chop off territory in the Donbass or elsewhere with the government in Kyiv implacably hostile then it's simply not worth the effort. The Ukrainian government would be even more likely to join NATO and roll Russia back with western military aid 5, 10, 20 years down the line.

[StateBoiler]

Strikes me as a bluff. They didn't even go to Tbilisi in Georgia which is a far easier invasion than Ukraine would be. They may go to to the edges of Kiev and then start dictating terms.

Not much further: in 2008 they advanced 120km into Georgia; to reach Kyiv from the Belarusian border would be about 150 km. Not to mention the Russian army has undergone significant modernisation in the past decade plus and has far superior logistical capability now. Besides what is the bluff anyway? The Russian army hasn't announced any plans.

True on the modernization. Post-Georgia, a very capable bureaucrat was put in charge of military reform by Putin and got rid of a bunch of old do-nothing generals. I'm just looking at Ukraine from a size of territory perspective compared to Georgia. Georgia is small and narrow in comparison and has much less needs for troops in terms of number required to effectively occupy.

In any case, Russia needs the political acquiescence of Ukraine to make the results of military action stick. And for that they have to secure the capital.

Why though? Yeah, the ultimate coup d'grace is Zelenskiy is at a table and is forced to sign something, but once it's over and he's out of the room I expect diplomats and him to make the "agreements made under duress have no standing", which okay there buddy. But Ukraine never acquiesced to Russian control of Crimea and for all practical intents and purposes, it's Russian now. I don't care about de jure borders when part of the responsibility of being a sovereign state is you control and administrate all land inside your borders. If anyone wants to passionately argue that Crimea is Ukrainian, great, go visit Sevastopol and start a war to take it back.

Look at all of the post-Soviet conflicts, none of them have operated under the Westphalian sense of statehood, all of them have been about "whoever has control on the ground is the country in control, internationally recognized borders be damned". Meanwhile the West are pontificating meaninglessly on the sanctity of states like their opinion matters, be it in the post-Soviet sphere or Syria where the state has split in 4. If you want to help Ukraine keep their state sovereignty, actually commit stuff of material value to them like equipment and troops. I see the U.S. and UK have done this, although I read the UK were required to not use Dutch and German aerospace in their delivery.

It's incredibly maddening there's all this talk of "if states choose to join NATO, they can", yet in the event of an invasion of Ukraine we would be obligated to come to their aid if they were in NATO, and yet no one will commit troops to be deployed for Ukraine when such aid is voluntary. It belies that Ukraine will never be allowed in by at least some states in the NATO membership.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Why though? Yeah, the ultimate coup d'grace is Zelenskiy is at a table and is forced to sign something, but once it's over and he's out of the room I expect diplomats and him to make the "agreements made under duress have no standing", which okay there buddy.

They'd either remove him and install another President, or make it clear that Zelensky would be removed if he goes back on agreements.

The rest of your reply is a non sequitur to what we were discussing. I'm not talking about "Westphalian statehood" or whatever, just Russia's interests. 2014 showed that lopping off Ukranian territory piecemeal solves none of Russia's strategic issues: it merely pushed the greater part of Ukraine into seeking NATO membership and into developing drones and ballistic missiles targeted at the heart of Russia. The only way Russia can solve that militarily is by coercing a change of the political situation in Kyiv. And that requires decapitation.