Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Caspian Report posted this just an hour ago.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Choice quotes from the comment section:

The US's attempts to punish nations who trade with sanctioned countries reminds me of Napoleon Bonaparte's "continental system."  Eventually, Napoleon went to war to enforce his own "sanctions" against the UK.  I pray that our leaders here in the US don't foolishly follow suit.

both countries have benefits in befriending india. also, india needs both the countries for countering china.

now, India asked for stealth fighters, USA didnt even let india close to their flagship jet, and russia whole heartedly offered su57, even proposed a joint development. never hesitated helping india in R&D, bolstering defences and technology. russia is an ally in truest sense. USA is just a country with which india's future interests align. Nothing more.

Anyone who follows defense related news know that Indian-Russian partnership is a strategic one of important nature and I don't see US willing to come forward and replace that. Any expectation to have India break that relationship is rooted in delusion. You put sanctions on India and US can say goodbye to their Quad dreams for indo-pacific and setting the current relationship decades back. India has clearly refused US threats and induction of S400 is going to happen, now if US put sanctions, it loses a partner in indo-pacific at the time when China is rising. Reliability of US is also a question among India. US is also in a precarious position regarding its stand on India. On the one hand they are telling India to be on the right side of history (whatever that is) and reiterating India as major Indo-pacific partners. You dont really threaten your major partners. Perhaps US should make its mind, India seems to made its mind by proceeding with S400 and I expect India to also go the same path on S500/550 or further military tech cooperation with Russia.

As an Indian this was pretty non biased and correct imo .
Also we are not a permanent member of the unsc so Russia has supported us multiple times while usa has always been against us .

India should take the chance and integrate to the West, look at Japan, it integrated Chinese system during Tang Dynasty, then integrated the Western system again during 19th Century, both with great success, Japan is still Japan, I think most people took globalization wrongly.

As a Japanese, I would like our QUAD ally to become closer to us than Russia. Everything Russia give to India, veto in UNSC, military industrial complex, or oil, United States could give them without having to support Authoritarian government. Not to mention US have slew of allies that can help India like EU with its consumer market or Japan with its high grade electronics or Taiwan with its monopoly of semiconductors. Why stick with Russia if US could give you more in spades? After all, there are no permanent allies, only permanent interests.

India is not playing both sides, rather it is trying to avoid both.

India is doing something China should be doing instead of absolutely favoring Russia and pretending to being neutral.

India is playing a smart game as this is what America would do if we were in their shoes, actually we did do this between the UK and France.

The statement that India did not condemn Russia is untrue. It is just that India abstained from voting. India has been asking Russia to stop the warfare, and did so multiple times, while trying to maintain diplomatic ties. Also remember, with such deep diplomatic ties, India can play an important role in stopping the warfare.

Russia's poor performance in Ukraine has got to be a weight for India to shift more towards the west. Those Russian-made weapons simply don't compare to western equipment. Ukraine has already shown you can hold off a superpower with Javelins and Drones at a much better cost to kill ratio.

As an American, I actually admire India’s stance and diplomatic skills. It’s becoming its own world power, keep it up guys. 🇮🇳

In parallel universe -
Russia- Here, take this S 500
India- no need , we already deployed Ukrainian tractors on border

Saw your vid and I am here. America is our partner in trade, democracy and culture. We have trust issues with the American government which untill recently was viewed as a threat. And we are not Ukraine to fight America's proxy war and destroy our nation. Zelinsky brave or otherwise foolishly destroyed his nation without any security guarantees.

Comments selected mainly because they distilled the position of the Indian government well, were funny memes, or reflected viewpoints not seen in this thread much at all.

I like the quote Shirvan finished the video with:
"When all is said and done, governments were designed to seek power, yet sometimes, their actual condition makes them a servant to the powers of others."

[Cassius]

To be fair, I think the Continental System is actually a reasonably apposite comparison.

[CumbrianLefty]

So much disinfo and wishcasting. It's okay to condemn Russia but let's be honest about this situation.

90% of this thread is misinformation as it is gathered from total misinformation from Twitter.......followed by 10% wishcasting. Interesting choice of word, but it fits well.

You are spot on.

I would not suggest reporting on any war has ever been any different.

Quick reminder, again, that some people said the very same in late February about 24-48 hours after the invasion began when tweets around here were posted that indicated that the Russian offensive was in trouble and wouldn't be able to take Kyiv immediately. Turns out those early tweets that depicted the Russians to be in trouble were entirely correct, especially considering that Zelennskyy is still president after all that time. Your concerns have been proven wrong by the practical experience of the past four weeks.

/snip

It honestly feels like folks are still in denial that Russia could screw up this invasion as badly as they have. Let alone the fact that we're entering the 5th week of the 3 day invasion & not only has Kiev not fallen, but Ukraine is now in a position to possibly encircle Russian troops & reclaim lost territory.

Yes, just ask yourself where Russia expected to be a month after invading.

Not where they currently are, that at least is pretty certain. And tbh puts the previous complaint that this thread is just uncritical pro-Ukrainian propaganda into some sort of perspective.

[Torie]

Interesting article about how publishers are removing paywall content to certain countries as direct result of the UKR-RUS conflict.

Too bad Atlas didn't get the memo....

https://digiday.com/media/how-publishers-are-working-to-make-their-russia-ukraine-coverage-available-to-readers-in-those-countries/

Thanks for finding the story, and good for the publications, but paywalls and copyright infringement are not the same thing. If Atlas adopts a paywall, what price do you suggest it charge?

[Logical]

Look who's back. It's Shoygu.
https://twitter.com/Kremlinpool_RIA/status/1506957527174598663

[CumbrianLefty]

Earlier on in this conflict, certain people were fond of making comparisons with the 2003 Iraq invasion to claim that "Russia is doing great, really". Those takes have gone quiet lately, for some reason - maybe that by the time 28 days elapsed then, the US had taken every significant urban centre.

[Storr]

https://twitter.com/MarQs__/status/1506877559056838664?s=20&t=6xkUIV-DmYrppv...
Multiple reports of large explosions around the port of Berdyansk, which last I heard was under full Russian occupation and even being used to resupply Russian ships. Suppose something as simple as poor-handling of war materials could cause this; but explosions are never usually a good thing.

Bruh moment.

https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1506967779555090432?s=20&t=tRlaGlGZHoC...

https://twitter.com/NotWoofers/status/1506970104910815233?s=20&t=tRlaGlGZHoC...

[compucomp]

To be fair, I think the Continental System is actually a reasonably apposite comparison.

I think the Continental System would be a better comparison if countries tried to cut off China or the USA; the UK at that time dominated the seas and was the world leader in industrial manufacturing capacity. Russia's main economic contribution to the world is in one sector, granted it is critical (energy), but since it is just one the Western world will probably find ways to adapt, like how European industrial powers adapted to the loss of Confederate "King Cotton" during the American Civil War.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

This may well go nowhere, but it is at least being discussed:

https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1506967225122631687
How long would it take for Ukrainian forces to train with a new type of anti-ship weapon (including maintenance etc.)? If they can’t do that, the only ground/ship-based ones NATO and the EU can give them are ex-Soviet P-15s and maybe older P-5s (from Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and perhaps the USA).

They could give them some jet munitions with anti-ship capabilities, but the Ukrainian Air Force is only getting smaller and probably has higher priorities.

[Stranger in a strange land]

This may well go nowhere, but it is at least being discussed:

https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1506967225122631687
How long would it take for Ukrainian forces to train with a new type of anti-ship weapon (including maintenance etc.)? If they can’t do that, the only ground/ship-based ones NATO and the EU can give them are ex-Soviet P-15s and maybe older P-5s (from Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and perhaps the USA).

They could give them some jet munitions with anti-ship capabilities, but the Ukrainian Air Force is only getting smaller and probably has higher priorities.

So I checked wiki to see if the Harpoon can be launched from land, and indeed it can be. Looks like Norway's new Naval Strike Missile can be as well. Looks like the US Navy's missile technician school is only five weeks, so training the Ukrainians to use them might even be doable within the timeframe of the current war.

[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.

[Torie]

This may well go nowhere, but it is at least being discussed:

https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1506967225122631687
How long would it take for Ukrainian forces to train with a new type of anti-ship weapon (including maintenance etc.)? If they can’t do that, the only ground/ship-based ones NATO and the EU can give them are ex-Soviet P-15s and maybe older P-5s (from Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and perhaps the USA).

They could give them some jet munitions with anti-ship capabilities, but the Ukrainian Air Force is only getting smaller and probably has higher priorities.

So I checked wiki to see if the Harpoon can be launched from land, and indeed it can be. Looks like Norway's new Naval Strike Missile can be as well. Looks like the US Navy's missile technician school is only five weeks, so training the Ukrainians to use them might even be doable within the timeframe of the current war.

Can't someone trained to use those missiles who is now a stock broker or something be retained to go to Ukraine to help get those puppies up into the sky pending graduation day?

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

This may well go nowhere, but it is at least being discussed:

https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1506967225122631687
How long would it take for Ukrainian forces to train with a new type of anti-ship weapon (including maintenance etc.)? If they can’t do that, the only ground/ship-based ones NATO and the EU can give them are ex-Soviet P-15s and maybe older P-5s (from Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and perhaps the USA).

They could give them some jet munitions with anti-ship capabilities, but the Ukrainian Air Force is only getting smaller and probably has higher priorities.

So I checked wiki to see if the Harpoon can be launched from land, and indeed it can be. Looks like Norway's new Naval Strike Missile can be as well. Looks like the US Navy's missile technician school is only five weeks, so training the Ukrainians to use them might even be doable within the timeframe of the current war.

Can't someone trained to use those missiles who is now a stock broker or something be retained to go to Ukraine to help get those puppies up into the sky pending graduation day?

Using "little green men" of the West would be a much more dangerous escalation than any the West has made so far. I would expect to see transfer of "offensive weapons", among other things, happen before black ops that could trigger a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

It's possible there's a limited number of volunteers in Ukraine who can already use anti-ship missiles, but it's not clear whether such people exist in large numbers (for a specific type of anti-ship missile, that is).

A five-week training time could be short enough. Ukraine could be supplied with the limited Western stocks of missiles it knows how to handle in the interim. This is what is happening with Starstreak - simpler MANPADS are being deployed ASAP while Ukrainian operators (apparently) are training to use Starstreak outside Ukraine.

In any case, we're speculating on "talks" about supplying anti-ship missiles; there's no guarantee anything will come of it. Almost nothing's come of the plan to give Ukraine medium/long-range surface-to-air missiles yet, despite the public pressure and high military priority.

[Torie]

This may well go nowhere, but it is at least being discussed:

https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1506967225122631687
How long would it take for Ukrainian forces to train with a new type of anti-ship weapon (including maintenance etc.)? If they can’t do that, the only ground/ship-based ones NATO and the EU can give them are ex-Soviet P-15s and maybe older P-5s (from Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and perhaps the USA).

They could give them some jet munitions with anti-ship capabilities, but the Ukrainian Air Force is only getting smaller and probably has higher priorities.

So I checked wiki to see if the Harpoon can be launched from land, and indeed it can be. Looks like Norway's new Naval Strike Missile can be as well. Looks like the US Navy's missile technician school is only five weeks, so training the Ukrainians to use them might even be doable within the timeframe of the current war.

Can't someone trained to use those missiles who is now a stock broker or something be retained to go to Ukraine to help get those puppies up into the sky pending graduation day?

Using "little green men" of the West would be a much more dangerous escalation than any the West has made so far. I would expect to see transfer of "offensive weapons", among other things, happen before black ops that could trigger a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

It's possible there's a limited number of volunteers in Ukraine who can already use anti-ship missiles, but it's not clear whether such people exist in large numbers (for a specific type of anti-ship missile, that is).

A five-week training time could be short enough. Ukraine could be supplied with the limited Western stocks of missiles it knows how to handle in the interim. This is what is happening with Starstreak - simpler MANPADS are being deployed ASAP while Ukrainian operators (apparently) are training to use Starstreak outside Ukraine.

In any case, we're speculating on "talks" about supplying anti-ship missiles; there's no guarantee anything will come of it. Almost nothing's come of the plan to give Ukraine medium/long-range surface-to-air missiles yet, despite the public pressure and high military priority.

I get it, but Ukraine is already taking in little green men (aka mercenaries in Russian), and Russia has not launched nukes yet. So I don't see why a few more can't join the fray. I at least won't tell Putin.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

This may well go nowhere, but it is at least being discussed:

https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1506967225122631687
How long would it take for Ukrainian forces to train with a new type of anti-ship weapon (including maintenance etc.)? If they can’t do that, the only ground/ship-based ones NATO and the EU can give them are ex-Soviet P-15s and maybe older P-5s (from Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and perhaps the USA).

They could give them some jet munitions with anti-ship capabilities, but the Ukrainian Air Force is only getting smaller and probably has higher priorities.

So I checked wiki to see if the Harpoon can be launched from land, and indeed it can be. Looks like Norway's new Naval Strike Missile can be as well. Looks like the US Navy's missile technician school is only five weeks, so training the Ukrainians to use them might even be doable within the timeframe of the current war.

Can't someone trained to use those missiles who is now a stock broker or something be retained to go to Ukraine to help get those puppies up into the sky pending graduation day?

Using "little green men" of the West would be a much more dangerous escalation than any the West has made so far. I would expect to see transfer of "offensive weapons", among other things, happen before black ops that could trigger a conventional conflict between NATO and Russia.

It's possible there's a limited number of volunteers in Ukraine who can already use anti-ship missiles, but it's not clear whether such people exist in large numbers (for a specific type of anti-ship missile, that is).

A five-week training time could be short enough. Ukraine could be supplied with the limited Western stocks of missiles it knows how to handle in the interim. This is what is happening with Starstreak - simpler MANPADS are being deployed ASAP while Ukrainian operators (apparently) are training to use Starstreak outside Ukraine.

In any case, we're speculating on "talks" about supplying anti-ship missiles; there's no guarantee anything will come of it. Almost nothing's come of the plan to give Ukraine medium/long-range surface-to-air missiles yet, despite the public pressure and high military priority.

I get it, but Ukraine is already taking in little green men (aka mercenaries in Russian), and Russia has not launched nukes yet. So I don't see why a few more can't join the fray. I at least won't tell Putin.

Ukraine is taking in volunteers and most likely not any “volunteers”. You can tell because they are no better equipped than ordinary Ukrainian troops and have had their fair share of public dramas and problems already. I’m not sure about other countries, but the UK publicly announced that any of its soldiers fighting in Ukraine were AWOL.

They are not really proper mercenaries, and certainly not ones employed by the West. Their contracts seem to be quite poor deals, there’s no clear presence of Blackwater types (in fact, the US government vetoed Erik Prince’s plan to grift off the invasion) and Russia hasn’t made much of a fuss about them yet.

Russia’s little green men in Crimea were a lot better coordinated and equipped; they also had air support. The guys volunteering for Ukraine are more akin to the Afghan mujahideen or the foreigners joining the Syrian rebels to fight IS.

[Sir Mohamed]

https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1507018148494471170

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Russia has only three of these ships total: https://tpyxa.net/2022/03/24/ukrainian-forces-have-heavily-damaged-but-most-likely-destroyed-a-russian-alligator-class-landing-ship-in-berdyansk

[Badger]

So much disinfo and wishcasting. It's okay to condemn Russia but let's be honest about this situation.

90% of this thread is misinformation as it is gathered from total misinformation from Twitter.......followed by 10% wishcasting. Interesting choice of word, but it fits well.

You are spot on.

I would not suggest reporting on any war has ever been any different.

 You say this in a tone that implies you have have specialized knowledge as to "what's supposedly REALLY going on".  Pray, do educate us.

[Badger]

If they can't show how any specific bit of information is wrong, and they aren't posting any information of their own, then they can go suck eggs.

[compucomp]

If they can't show how any specific bit of information is wrong, and they aren't posting any information of their own, then they can go suck eggs.

This is nonsense. Reports about a war from belligerents are always questionable due to the clear bias and interests of the reporting party. They are expected to produce reports exaggerating their wins and downplaying their losses. Any thinking person should automatically question their reliability. The burden of proof is on the Ukrainians (or the Russians) to prove that they are telling the truth, not on us to refute them.

[Person Man]

Earlier on in this conflict, certain people were fond of making comparisons with the 2003 Iraq invasion to claim that "Russia is doing great, really". Those takes have gone quiet lately, for some reason - maybe that by the time 28 days elapsed then, the US had taken every significant urban centre.

Not to mention hundreds, not tens of thousands of casualties.

[lfromnj]

There is this problem:

https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1506869254326566913

The Ukrainians are doing so much killing that they are running out of weapons and ammunition, esp. antitank and antiaircraft missiles.

We need to do better than this at supplying them weapons.

They are literally fighting the war for us, for our values.

Cringe, They are fighting for their own nation, you literally just posted Russian propaganda in how Ukraine is puppeted by the West .

[Badger]

There is this problem:

https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1506869254326566913

The Ukrainians are doing so much killing that they are running out of weapons and ammunition, esp. antitank and antiaircraft missiles.

We need to do better than this at supplying them weapons.

They are literally fighting the war for us, for our values.

Cringe, They are fighting for their own nation, you literally just posted Russian propaganda in how Ukraine is puppeted by the West .

 Poland fought for its own nation as well as our values in 1939. The 2 are not mutually exclusive.

[Torie]

Regarding NATO's statement, what exactly does the technospeak term "360 degree approach" really mean?

The well written but rather dry statement did drop the diplomatic mask when it lashed out at Russia as false and "malign."

"We are concerned by recent public comments by PRC officials and call on China to cease amplifying the Kremlin’s false narratives. … We are increasing the resilience of our societies and our infrastructure to counter Russia’s malign influence."