Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[jaichind]

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/30030

"Security Service of Ukraine Target of Ballistic Attack on Kyiv – SBU Confirms"



It seems Russian missiles are targeting Ukrainian intelligence

[Open Source Intelligence]

It appears Ukraine is not listening to the Biden administration's idiotic request that it stop targeting Russian refineries:

"Ukraine successfully strikes another Russian oil refinery, the Kuybyshev NPZ [in Samara], overnight. It’s nearly 600 miles from the border."

https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1771411360200769837?s=20

2nd country that uses our arms that's ignoring what we tell them.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1772283109083374037?s=12
😗

[CumbrianLefty]

2nd country that uses our arms that's ignoring what we tell them.

To a certain degree, that is to be expected.

[Storr]

"Reuters calculations show that shutdowns forced by Ukrainian drone attacks in 2024 have cost Russia roughly 7 percent of its oil refining capacity — about 4.6 million tons (370,500 barrels per day)."

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1772428027583938722?s=20

[Good Habit]

Pretty crappy strategy seeing as the rest of Europe is going into war economics mode …

Nope – Europe (the EU – that is) going in to “war economics” is the emptiest of empty talk..

A real war economy is completely incompatible with everything that is sacrosanct to the EU’s very existence, particularly all the neo-liberal dogmas, like fiscal stability, open markets with only modest government regulations, economic freedom – and – particularly – high corporate profits.

Further, you need an efficient and fast way of decision-making, which is one of the EU’s real weaknesses – so, to get there, you would need institutional reform first… (And you can’t get voluntary institutional reform as long as the institutions are as they are – so you would have to start a institutional revolution.. (As in a few core countries declaring that they joined in to a “more perfect union” – with new rules – and bulling everyone else to follow suit or quit (“take it or leave it..”) – some most likely would leave…

But even then, a successful war economy requires not only a lot of military spending – if you just spend a lot of money on new arms (ignoring all the rules about deficit spending), this will, in a market economy, not necessarily result in a fast increase of production – war arms manufacturers only produce for a limited set of customers (usually governments) – and the present situation is one of “high end products” sold for very high prices, but in low numbers.

So, just spending more only means that manufacturers might markup their prices (surcharge for priority delivery) and only if and when they have a high number of orders at exorbitant prices they might actually start to invest in increased capacity – and this would still – if left to the market – most likely take years to show significant results.

Thus, a war economy would mean a total reversal of market principles – fast increase in output quantity at minimal prices – so there would be a urgent need at direct government involvement, ordering (by law or decree) the exponential growth of capacities – delivering sufficient investment capital and infrastructure – and direct involvement in management.

And the strong resource allocation to armament – including running a large budget deficit – would tend to displace other businesses and trigger inflation – so the economic management would have to be expanded to basic consumer goods (food, medicine, clothing), to keep them affordable for the masses of the population – and to avoid shortages due to broken supply chains, you would have to strongly restrict free trade (products need to be home-sourced – they can only be exported if we have a surplus) and put a strong cap on profits, and this would further require restrictions on the movement of capital, and higher taxes, particularly for the wealthiest segment of the population. And yes, to make those things affordable, you would also have to suspend intellectual property rights – “we cant afford to pay large amounts to patent holders when we urgently need to increase supply” and curb free speech.. (critics of our necessary policy are just “aiding the enemy”.

So, many might actually argue that this kind of war economy actually is “communism”. And while not perfect, this comparison is not that far off the mark. Vladimir Lenin did mention the German War Economy management in World War I (Luddendorf) as a good example of state monopolist capitalism – according to him, you would just have to replace the people holding the reigns of management with the communist party, and you would have Communism. And of course, that was the model the USSR tried to build their economy on…

OTOH, a “war economy V2” with minimal government involvement in the economy would fail – if you just raise spending for armament without changing the rules, including trying to avoid an excessive budget deficit but also not raise taxes (on the rich) or limiting free trade or movement of capital – what would happen?

To (halfway) balance the budget, you would have to cut spending for infrastructure, healthcare, education and pensions (or at least NOT adjust them for still growing inflation). And – if you don’t want to tax the rich, you probably would have to rise consumer taxes (like VAT) or invent other forms of tax hikes that mostly hurt the lower classes. This – impoverishing the middle class – would not be wildly popular – so you would risk unrest and political radicalization, thus destabilizing the system.

So, while the big corporations could still make a lot of money due to high prices for armament and the possibility to export both capital and goods due to lack of domestic demand, it would achieve little to fight a conventional war against peer enemies (slow procurement at exorbitant prices). This “war economy” would mostly be a war against your own middle and lower classes, impoverishing and partially enslaving them. (And yes, for this you would have to throw out the semblance of democracy – to “stabilize” the system, this would require the end of most freedoms (free speech, strikes, movement of people). Such a regime would be outright fascism, although one were the enemy is only claimed to be external, while in reality, you will only fight domestic enemies…

And no, Putin has not yet gone to full war economy – Russia is still far off from full mobilization.

And neither has Ukraine – they still rely mostly on western aid, a large part of the work force has left the country, and the local economy is not really mobilized – this would both hurt interests of the oligarchs and it’s western sponsors…

So, to summarize, it’s more likely that the moon will crash on earth than that the EU goes to an efficient war economy – proclaiming something different is just fake news, deliberately distributed to disguise the own impotence…

What might happen is that some attempts to have a war on the own people (“war economy V2”) will be tried, and this will blow up the Union due to to much resistance… OR – if Putin finally manages to wipe Ukraine from the map – the fallout from “who is to blame” – will blow the EU up – with some countries really going for war economy..

[jaichind]

https://www.politico.eu/article/give-us-the-damn-patriots-ukraine-needs-air-defenses-now-minister-says

"‘Give us the damn Patriots’ — Ukraine needs air defenses now, minister says"

“If we had enough air defense systems, namely Patriots, we would be able to protect not only the lives of our people, but also our economy from destruction,” he added.

 

I get where he is coming from but he should really control his language.  Beggers cannot be choosers.

[Antonio the Sixth]

2nd country that uses our arms that's ignoring what we tell them.

To a certain degree, that is to be expected.

Idiotic, self-destructive US demands for Ukraine to fight with one hand tied behind its back should be ignored. Especially right now when the US isn't even holding up its end of the bargain.

[jaichind]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-security-council-secretary-dismissed-says-presidential-decree-2024-03-26/

"Ukraine replaces security council secretary as war drags on"

Zelensky fires Danilov

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-security-council-secretary-dismissed-says-presidential-decree-2024-03-26/

"Ukraine replaces security council secretary as war drags on"

Zelensky fires Danilov

I wonder what sparked this.

[jaichind]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-security-council-secretary-dismissed-says-presidential-decree-2024-03-26/

"Ukraine replaces security council secretary as war drags on"

Zelensky fires Danilov

I wonder what sparked this.

Many online theories point to

https://www.globalvillagespace.com/zelenskys-security-chief-insults-senior-chinese-diplomat/

"Zelensky’s security chief insults senior Chinese diplomat"

I am sure that was a factor but most likely there are other deeper things going on which I have no clue about

[jaichind]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/mar/26/for-medics-on-front-line-in-ukraine-biggest-shortf/

"For medics on the front line in Ukraine, the biggest shortfall is people"

Like Ukraine’s combat units, the medics here deal with equipment and supply shortages in the face of a larger, better equipped enemy. But Johnson says the most glaring shortfall isn’t material.

Daily Russian shelling is far from the most pressing concern for the team here, he says. When asked what he and his team need the most, be it medicine, vehicles for evacuation or medical equipment, the anesthesiologist doesn’t skip a beat: “People.”

[Open Source Intelligence]

Pretty crappy strategy seeing as the rest of Europe is going into war economics mode …

Nope – Europe (the EU – that is) going in to “war economics” is the emptiest of empty talk..

A real war economy is completely incompatible with everything that is sacrosanct to the EU’s very existence, particularly all the neo-liberal dogmas, like fiscal stability, open markets with only modest government regulations, economic freedom – and – particularly – high corporate profits.

Further, you need an efficient and fast way of decision-making, which is one of the EU’s real weaknesses – so, to get there, you would need institutional reform first… (And you can’t get voluntary institutional reform as long as the institutions are as they are – so you would have to start a institutional revolution.. (As in a few core countries declaring that they joined in to a “more perfect union” – with new rules – and bulling everyone else to follow suit or quit (“take it or leave it..”) – some most likely would leave…

But even then, a successful war economy requires not only a lot of military spending – if you just spend a lot of money on new arms (ignoring all the rules about deficit spending), this will, in a market economy, not necessarily result in a fast increase of production – war arms manufacturers only produce for a limited set of customers (usually governments) – and the present situation is one of “high end products” sold for very high prices, but in low numbers.

So, just spending more only means that manufacturers might markup their prices (surcharge for priority delivery) and only if and when they have a high number of orders at exorbitant prices they might actually start to invest in increased capacity – and this would still – if left to the market – most likely take years to show significant results.

Thus, a war economy would mean a total reversal of market principles – fast increase in output quantity at minimal prices – so there would be a urgent need at direct government involvement, ordering (by law or decree) the exponential growth of capacities – delivering sufficient investment capital and infrastructure – and direct involvement in management.

And the strong resource allocation to armament – including running a large budget deficit – would tend to displace other businesses and trigger inflation – so the economic management would have to be expanded to basic consumer goods (food, medicine, clothing), to keep them affordable for the masses of the population – and to avoid shortages due to broken supply chains, you would have to strongly restrict free trade (products need to be home-sourced – they can only be exported if we have a surplus) and put a strong cap on profits, and this would further require restrictions on the movement of capital, and higher taxes, particularly for the wealthiest segment of the population. And yes, to make those things affordable, you would also have to suspend intellectual property rights – “we cant afford to pay large amounts to patent holders when we urgently need to increase supply” and curb free speech.. (critics of our necessary policy are just “aiding the enemy”.

So, many might actually argue that this kind of war economy actually is “communism”. And while not perfect, this comparison is not that far off the mark. Vladimir Lenin did mention the German War Economy management in World War I (Luddendorf) as a good example of state monopolist capitalism – according to him, you would just have to replace the people holding the reigns of management with the communist party, and you would have Communism. And of course, that was the model the USSR tried to build their economy on…

OTOH, a “war economy V2” with minimal government involvement in the economy would fail – if you just raise spending for armament without changing the rules, including trying to avoid an excessive budget deficit but also not raise taxes (on the rich) or limiting free trade or movement of capital – what would happen?

To (halfway) balance the budget, you would have to cut spending for infrastructure, healthcare, education and pensions (or at least NOT adjust them for still growing inflation). And – if you don’t want to tax the rich, you probably would have to rise consumer taxes (like VAT) or invent other forms of tax hikes that mostly hurt the lower classes. This – impoverishing the middle class – would not be wildly popular – so you would risk unrest and political radicalization, thus destabilizing the system.

So, while the big corporations could still make a lot of money due to high prices for armament and the possibility to export both capital and goods due to lack of domestic demand, it would achieve little to fight a conventional war against peer enemies (slow procurement at exorbitant prices). This “war economy” would mostly be a war against your own middle and lower classes, impoverishing and partially enslaving them. (And yes, for this you would have to throw out the semblance of democracy – to “stabilize” the system, this would require the end of most freedoms (free speech, strikes, movement of people). Such a regime would be outright fascism, although one were the enemy is only claimed to be external, while in reality, you will only fight domestic enemies…

And no, Putin has not yet gone to full war economy – Russia is still far off from full mobilization.

And neither has Ukraine – they still rely mostly on western aid, a large part of the work force has left the country, and the local economy is not really mobilized – this would both hurt interests of the oligarchs and it’s western sponsors…

So, to summarize, it’s more likely that the moon will crash on earth than that the EU goes to an efficient war economy – proclaiming something different is just fake news, deliberately distributed to disguise the own impotence…

What might happen is that some attempts to have a war on the own people (“war economy V2”) will be tried, and this will blow up the Union due to to much resistance… OR – if Putin finally manages to wipe Ukraine from the map – the fallout from “who is to blame” – will blow the EU up – with some countries really going for war economy..

This is war economics mode:

-Defense spending is #1 priority. It gets priority when it comes to material, labor, time, and decision-making over anything non-defense.
-No one is allowed to leave the room until decisions get made. EU should've had a common material-building strategy agreed to a year ago. This was not done even though they were talking about it then. It's ultimately a structural problem with a federalist multi-state institution. (Imagine 50 governors around a table agreeing on American defense spending priorities. I'm for our state is too centralized but the EU in this sense is too decentralized to be effective.)
-Codify all decisions from above into law to remove any judicial concerns hamstringing you. Defense companies would need to be setup like pharmaceuticals companies were during Covid.
-Civilian spending and goods are rationed as necessary. People take this to mean a shortage of steak in a grocery, but if you have a lack of CNC machines to build artillery shells for example, that means no business in civilian world not supporting war effort gets a CNC machine. If your CNC machine breaks, you don't get a spare part unless you can make it yourself or the software fix unless there's extra capacity to support. If there's a shortage of rare metals no one can use rare metals unless it's going toward war effort.
-All non-Ukrainian foreign aid is canceled until conflict ends as all aid is necessary to support Ukraine.
-Take your current spending and from this war economy perspective divide it into "needs" and "wants". If push comes to shove determine the wants you want the least that you could carry on not having.
-I would not call it a draft but underemployed people become state workers to some extent to support the war effort as necessary from a bureaucratic and logistical perspective.

Who in Europe is doing this?

[Hindsight was 2020]

Czech alone found 1.5 million artillery shells for Ukraine to send with so the idea that the entire EU can’t collectively through simply increased defense spending and better internal cooperation can’t match Russia output when Russian output is near its current output max of almost 2 mill shells a year is silly. The EU don’t have to go full blown WW2 economics to help Ukraine and any suggestions that what it will take comes from the same overestimating of Russia’s abilities that embarrassed a lot of “experts” initially back in 22

[Open Source Intelligence]

...the idea that the entire EU can’t collectively through simply increased defense spending and better internal cooperation can’t match Russia output when Russian output is near its current output max of almost 2 mill shells a year is silly.

It's not a question of can they, it's a question of do they want to with the costs it will entail (more costs than just financial). NATO right now is full of Rumsfeldians that believe you can achieve war aims and it costs you next to nothing, it's a philosophy based on conducting half-ass war.

[Hindsight was 2020]

...the idea that the entire EU can’t collectively through simply increased defense spending and better internal cooperation can’t match Russia output when Russian output is near its current output max of almost 2 mill shells a year is silly.

It's not a question of can they, it's a question of do they want to with the costs it will entail (more costs than just financial). NATO right now is full of Rumsfeldians that believe you can achieve war aims and it costs you next to nothing.

All there actions recently say yes which was my point. Also your bolded part isn’t true now they are all ramping up spending/productions and letting domestic arm manufacturers set up shop in Ukraine so the idea that the EU still thinks that helping Ukraine takes no effort isn’t true. The fact that France and Poland are openly even flirting with the idea to send troops into Ukraine shows the alarm bells are going off

[Open Source Intelligence]

...the idea that the entire EU can’t collectively through simply increased defense spending and better internal cooperation can’t match Russia output when Russian output is near its current output max of almost 2 mill shells a year is silly.

It's not a question of can they, it's a question of do they want to with the costs it will entail (more costs than just financial). NATO right now is full of Rumsfeldians that believe you can achieve war aims and it costs you next to nothing.

All there actions recently say yes which was my point. Also your bolded part isn’t true now they are all ramping up spending/productions and letting domestic arm manufacturers set up shop in Ukraine so the idea that the EU still thinks that helping Ukraine takes no effort isn’t true. The fact that France and Poland are openly even flirting with the idea to send troops into Ukraine shows the alarm bells are going off

Macron's full of sh**t and everyone important not on message boards knows it.

[Hindsight was 2020]

...the idea that the entire EU can’t collectively through simply increased defense spending and better internal cooperation can’t match Russia output when Russian output is near its current output max of almost 2 mill shells a year is silly.

It's not a question of can they, it's a question of do they want to with the costs it will entail (more costs than just financial). NATO right now is full of Rumsfeldians that believe you can achieve war aims and it costs you next to nothing.

All there actions recently say yes which was my point. Also your bolded part isn’t true now they are all ramping up spending/productions and letting domestic arm manufacturers set up shop in Ukraine so the idea that the EU still thinks that helping Ukraine takes no effort isn’t true. The fact that France and Poland are openly even flirting with the idea to send troops into Ukraine shows the alarm bells are going off

Macron's full of sh**t and everyone important not on message boards knows it.

Even if he was all the big EU countries are increasing production and will match Russian production if not outpace it by the end of 25. I don’t get why you keep downplaying this and acting like Russia is some type of unstoppable force that only through the entire EU rationing their domestic products entirely into the military ala WW2 is the only way they can help Ukraine

[CumbrianLefty]

I remain sceptical any regular troops from Western Europe countries will end up fighting in Ukraine.

I also think that is not incompatible with them ramping up assistance in other ways - which is clearly now happening. It would indeed be nice if the GOP's recent betrayal - so that Trump's mate Putin can get what he wants - ultimately proved to be for naught.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://twitter.com/delfoo/status/1773019812223991864?s=20
The drones airstikes work lol

[jaichind]

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://twitter.com/delfoo/status/1773019812223991864?s=20
The drones airstikes work lol

Indeed they do.
Ukraine shouldn't stop.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Australian Politician Adrian McRae flies to Russia to congratulate Vladimir Putin on his election win.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-28/call-for-port-hedland-councillor-adrian-mcrae-to-resign-russia/103645378

"Port Hedland's former shire president says a local councillor who travelled to Russia and endorsed president Vladimir Putin's election win should step down.

Councillor Adrian McRae travelled to Moscow at the invitation of the Russian government as an "independent" election observer."

Australian's are not happy.

[Woody]

Russia may be preparing major offensive in summer – The Economist

With the onset of summer, the threat of a new large-scale offensive by Russian occupation forces along the entire line of contact is growing, writes the UK edition of the Economist.

"Yet Ukraine cannot simply blame its allies. It is guilty of mistakes too. One has been its failure on manpower...."

The authors also point out that the delay in providing the necessary military assistance from the United States and Europe poses risks since Russia may "break through Ukraine’s inadequate defensive lines."  

The authors also write that Ukraine is "very late in reinforcing its own defensive positions," and "the government still dreams of a new counter-offensive, and dreads the idea that the current front line may harden into something very like a border."

"The idea that this line might become the basis for a future peace negotiation is exactly what Mr Zelenskyy has wanted to avoid. But the dangers are now so great that it is the least bad option," writes The Economist.

Source: https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/03/28/7448562/

[Woody]

https://twitter.com/GeromanAT/status/1773411847955194118