Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Blair]

Once it's accepted that the US is not going to put ground troops into Ukraine than a military solution is basically off the table from the NATO side; even the whole of the EU would not be able to muster an Army that would make a difference and frankly I think we're saving that actual panic for when one of the NATO Article 5 allies gets invaded and we actually need to put on a show.

[Lord Halifax]

Once it's accepted that the US is not going to put ground troops into Ukraine than a military solution is basically off the table from the NATO side; even the whole of the EU would not be able to muster an Army that would make a difference and frankly I think we're saving that actual panic for when one of the NATO Article 5 allies gets invaded and we actually need to put on a show.

Russia having to fight a "small, but significant" force of e.g. 50k French, Polish and Romanian soldiers would make a difference. Russia is not interested in a military conflict with EU countries even if they could easily win it, they know it would jeopardize their long term economic interests and fighting a nuclear power like France would be inherently risky. It's not a matter of defeating Russia on the battle field, but showing we mean business and that it'll have actual consequence (as in dead soldiers, confiscated oligarch assets, loss of trade and investment etc.) if they do it.

[jaichind]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/23/europe/german-navy-chief-resignation-intl/index.html

"German navy chief resigns after suggesting Putin 'deserved respect'"

[Velasco]

The British government says it’s intelligence indicates that Russia will attempt a regime change in Ukraine

https://apnews.com/article/d6425c531f277b9dfb099511999822f4

This would disgrace the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians that rallied for and won their self governance eight years ago. Biden and Boris better toughen up immediately.

The last thing Biden needs at this juncture is to appear as weak and feckless as President Carter was during the Iran hostage crisis.  Especially in the wake of our less-than-ideal withdrawal from Afghanistan last summer.  For heaven's sake, he tried to present himself during the campaign as the Democratic equivalent of President George H. W. Bush with his supposedly vast foreign policy experience as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  I would like to see him prove it.  

The "less-than-ideal" withdrawal from Afghanistan is a limestone that marks a presidency. The repercussions will be more serious than those of the Iran hostage crisis, which led to the  electoral efeat of Jimmy Carter but didn't have consequences for the role of the USA as a global superpower. The withdrawal from Afghanistan reveals weakness and impotence, as well it can be seen as a sign of decline. I have no doubt Putin was taking note, for he was a KGB member by the time of the withdrawal that anticipated the demise of the USSR (Afghanistan, 1989). Of course the USA won't collapse like the Soviet Union did in 1991, but they are are weaker now under Biden than they were in 1979 under Carter. Putin lacks the resources for a large scale invasion, but he has cards to play exploiting the present weaknesses of the US and Europe. Any evolution of this conflict involving deployment of force and sanctions will be damaging for the global economy and impact the declining hegemony of the West.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What happens when Russia goes after the Baltics, countries under Article 5 protections?

You've answered your own question.

[nicholas.slaydon]

So apart from actually starting WW3, what are our options?

Tough sounding rhetoric is all well and good, but apart from the real danger of things escalating out of control it doesn't take into account the immense war weariness throughout the democratic world.

(why else was Afghanistan abandoned?)

If the United States and NATO made it clear beyond any doubt that they will defend the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine to the hilt, and began to station combat ready troops in Ukraine, Putin would undoubtedly stand down. Putin can win a war against Ukraine alone, but with the United States and the whole of NATO committed to defending Ukraine, Russia wouldn't even stand the shadow of a chance, and wouldn't risk the dangers of attacking NATO troops.

[Storr]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/23/europe/german-navy-chief-resignation-intl/index.html

"German navy chief resigns after suggesting Putin 'deserved respect'"

Particularly aggravating for the Ukrainian government was his comment that Crimea would "never come back" to Ukraine. Which, while true, as Russia has heavily fortified Crimea since 2014, making it a western outpost of Russian military might. Akin to the NATO surrounded exclave of Kaliningrad Oblast, which is one of the most militarized places on the planet. That's simply one of those things you're not supposed to say publicly as a senior official in a major NATO government.

Interestingly, further underlying Germany's overall hesitancy to support Ukraine or even criticize Russia, he said this: "Russia is an old country. Russia is an important country. Even we, India, Germany, we need Russia, because we need Russia against China."

[LabourJersey]

The British government says it’s intelligence indicates that Russia will attempt a regime change in Ukraine

https://apnews.com/article/d6425c531f277b9dfb099511999822f4

This would disgrace the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians that rallied for and won their self governance eight years ago. Biden and Boris better toughen up immediately.

The last thing Biden needs at this juncture is to appear as weak and feckless as President Carter was during the Iran hostage crisis.  Especially in the wake of our less-than-ideal withdrawal from Afghanistan last summer.  For heaven's sake, he tried to present himself during the campaign as the Democratic equivalent of President George H. W. Bush with his supposedly vast foreign policy experience as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  I would like to see him prove it. 

Prove it how?

All the suggestions that people have for Biden "acting tough" are essentially suggesting that he escalate the situation. I can understand why people think that might be the necessary thing, but I don't see that being a politically successful thing.

The problem with comparing 2022 to 1979 is that the American public are now much less supportive of military intervention of any kind.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

If this is anywhere near true it would mean the entire Russian military is being mobilised.  

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1485109839550423041https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1485112615382757379

[GALeftist]

I just wrote a big long post about this in USGD but suffice to say I do think that this could be worth going to war over. Appeasement has historically had disastrous consequences and I am altogether unconvinced that Ukraine is the extent of Russian territorial ambitions.

[GoTfan]

I just wrote a big long post about this in USGD but suffice to say I do think that this could be worth going to war over. Appeasement has historically had disastrous consequences and I am altogether unconvinced that Ukraine is the extent of Russian territorial ambitions.

So start a nuclear war, basically.

It amazes me how few people on here realise that we're barrelling towards Armageddon here. Or they realise it and just don't really care. Don't you understand that this is not the 1930s anymore?  Humanity could be wiped out with the push of a button.

[Frodo]

The British government says it’s intelligence indicates that Russia will attempt a regime change in Ukraine

https://apnews.com/article/d6425c531f277b9dfb099511999822f4

This would disgrace the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians that rallied for and won their self governance eight years ago. Biden and Boris better toughen up immediately.

The last thing Biden needs at this juncture is to appear as weak and feckless as President Carter was during the Iran hostage crisis.  Especially in the wake of our less-than-ideal withdrawal from Afghanistan last summer.  For heaven's sake, he tried to present himself during the campaign as the Democratic equivalent of President George H. W. Bush with his supposedly vast foreign policy experience as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  I would like to see him prove it.  

Prove it how?

All the suggestions that people have for Biden "acting tough" are essentially suggesting that he escalate the situation. I can understand why people think that might be the necessary thing, but I don't see that being a politically successful thing.

The problem with comparing 2022 to 1979 is that the American public are now much less supportive of military intervention of any kind.

When Russians smell weakness or hesitation, they jump for the jugular.  Hadn't President John F. Kennedy's supposed inexperience precipitate the Cuban Missile Crisis? Appeasing Putin is just as likely to whet his appetite for further adventures at our expense, thereby further 'escalating the situation'.  So I am glad that President Biden is at least considering sending American troops (I would rather he had done so already and announced the fact afterwards) to our NATO allies at the periphery to ward off any thoughts by Putin of attacking Poland or the Baltic states.  And to further deter Putin, I would support moving our bases in Germany and Italy to Poland and Romania.  Then Putin would be faced with the question on whether he can risk 'escalating the situation'.  

[GoTfan]

So apart from actually starting WW3, what are our options?

Tough sounding rhetoric is all well and good, but apart from the real danger of things escalating out of control it doesn't take into account the immense war weariness throughout the democratic world.

(why else was Afghanistan abandoned?)

If the United States and NATO made it clear beyond any doubt that they will defend the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine to the hilt, and began to station combat ready troops in Ukraine, Putin would undoubtedly stand down. Putin can win a war against Ukraine alone, but with the United States and the whole of NATO committed to defending Ukraine, Russia wouldn't even stand the shadow of a chance, and wouldn't risk the dangers of attacking NATO troops.

More likely he'll just throw more troops in.

I'm really disturbed that this entire forum seems to be cheering for WW3.

[nicholas.slaydon]

So apart from actually starting WW3, what are our options?

Tough sounding rhetoric is all well and good, but apart from the real danger of things escalating out of control it doesn't take into account the immense war weariness throughout the democratic world.

(why else was Afghanistan abandoned?)

If the United States and NATO made it clear beyond any doubt that they will defend the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine to the hilt, and began to station combat ready troops in Ukraine, Putin would undoubtedly stand down. Putin can win a war against Ukraine alone, but with the United States and the whole of NATO committed to defending Ukraine, Russia wouldn't even stand the shadow of a chance, and wouldn't risk the dangers of attacking NATO troops.

More likely he'll just throw more troops in.

I'm really disturbed that this entire forum seems to be cheering for WW3.

Mutually Assured Destruction is enough of a deterrent for nuclear war. Worldwide nuclear war is a thing for Sci-fi, and doesn't represent a very prominent threat in real world terms. I don't think Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin have any desire whatsoever to destroy human life on earth in a global nuclear war, and anyone who thinks they realistically have that capacity is simply fear mongering.

[new_patomic]

If the Russians thought we were prepared or were preparing to actually forward deploy troops into Ukraine, or arm the Ukrainians to the point of leveling the playing field, they would intervene immediately on the basis of preempting any of that from becoming reality.

[Mr. Illini]

So apart from actually starting WW3, what are our options?

Tough sounding rhetoric is all well and good, but apart from the real danger of things escalating out of control it doesn't take into account the immense war weariness throughout the democratic world.

(why else was Afghanistan abandoned?)

If the United States and NATO made it clear beyond any doubt that they will defend the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine to the hilt, and began to station combat ready troops in Ukraine, Putin would undoubtedly stand down. Putin can win a war against Ukraine alone, but with the United States and the whole of NATO committed to defending Ukraine, Russia wouldn't even stand the shadow of a chance, and wouldn't risk the dangers of attacking NATO troops.

More likely he'll just throw more troops in.

I'm really disturbed that this entire forum seems to be cheering for WW3.

Just to be clear

1) There will be no WWIII because the United States is not going to engage Russia in a hot war

and

2) Assuming Russia attacks Ukraine, any negative fallout is the responsibility of Russia, who is attacking a sovereign country; not the countries that come to Ukraine’s defense.

[GoTfan]

So apart from actually starting WW3, what are our options?

Tough sounding rhetoric is all well and good, but apart from the real danger of things escalating out of control it doesn't take into account the immense war weariness throughout the democratic world.

(why else was Afghanistan abandoned?)

If the United States and NATO made it clear beyond any doubt that they will defend the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine to the hilt, and began to station combat ready troops in Ukraine, Putin would undoubtedly stand down. Putin can win a war against Ukraine alone, but with the United States and the whole of NATO committed to defending Ukraine, Russia wouldn't even stand the shadow of a chance, and wouldn't risk the dangers of attacking NATO troops.

More likely he'll just throw more troops in.

I'm really disturbed that this entire forum seems to be cheering for WW3.

Mutually Assured Destruction is enough of a deterrent for nuclear war. Worldwide nuclear war is a thing for Sci-fi, and doesn't represent a very prominent threat in real world terms. I don't think Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin have any desire whatsoever to destroy human life on earth in a global nuclear war, and anyone who thinks they realistically have that capacity is simply fear mongering.

Yeah, I know MAD.

Anyone who believes it is a genuine deterrent really is quite MAD.

[jojoju1998]

I would be the last person to support a War, and I hope the diplomats can figure out a solution.

That being said, The only person asking for a War is Putin. Not Biden. Not anyone else. But putin.

[StateBoiler]

So apart from actually starting WW3, what are our options?

At Ukrainian invitation, deploy NATO-allied troops inside Ukraine who integrate inside Ukrainian forces. That would force Russia to not only attack Ukraine but to attack other countries as well, raising their risk level.

Soviets blockade Berlin to remove West Berlin from the map. We respond with the Berlin Airlift, and the blockade ends eventually.
Soviets place nuclear missiles in Cuba. We respond with a blockade, and the Soviets withdraw the nuclear missiles eventually.

Georgia, there was never a response. Crimea, there was never a response. Syria, there was never a response.

You have to respond with something. Sanctions are not a response, and a response does not mean guns shooting either.

Tough sounding rhetoric is all well and good, but apart from the real danger of things escalating out of control it doesn't take into account the immense war weariness throughout the democratic world.

(why else was Afghanistan abandoned?)

Do you think the French and Brits were not war weary in the late 1930s? Governments don't get to pick the wars their opposition starts unless they want to be either pushovers or useless non-entities with no engagement in world affairs.

Doing nothing here will probably lead to the breakdown of NATO and EU military structures in some form, one or either. (If the large EU countries push for no action and a Russian invasion of Ukraine occurs that is a success for the Russians, Macron can kiss his EU Army becoming a thing good bye, the eastern Europeans will know the EU will be worthless.) The Germans and French recently have started to say there is no sign the Russians will invade, which what information do they have that is not public?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60099924

German navy chief resigns over Ukraine comments

The head of the German navy has resigned over controversial comments he made over Ukraine.

Kay-Achim Schönbach said the idea that Russia wanted to invade Ukraine was nonsense. He added that all President Vladimir Putin wanted was respect.

A number of countries have supplied weapons to Ukraine, including the US and UK. But Germany has refused Ukraine's request for ammunition.

Russia has denied claims that it is planning to invade Ukraine.

But President Putin has issued demands to the West which he says concern Russia's security, including that Ukraine be stopped from joining the military defence alliance Nato.

He also wants Nato to abandon military exercises and stop sending weapons to eastern Europe, seeing this as a direct threat to Russia's security.

Meanwhile, the UK has accused Mr Putin of plotting to install a pro-Moscow figure to lead Ukraine's government.

Olaf Scholz denies 'refusing' to meet with Joe Biden to discuss Ukraine crisis

The alleged refusal comes as top US and Russia diplomats in crunch meeting to avert Ukraine invasion

By
Roland Oliphant, SENIOR FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT ;
Justin Huggler BERLIN and
Henry Samuel PARIS
21 January 2022 • 6:37pm

Russia’s foreign minister on Friday also said it wanted all foreign Nato forces to leave Romania and Bulgaria, which joined the alliance in 2014.

Both countries have Black Sea coastlines that will make them critical to any Nato effort to deter a Russian operation against Ukraine's south.

The US, UK, and European governments have rejected those demands as non-starters, and threatened “severe” economic sanctions, though not direct military action, if an attack goes ahead.
But the on-going diplomatic crisis has laid bare divisions within Nato over how far to go in facing down such an attack.

Germany has refused requests from Ukraine for military assistance and resisted pressure from the United States, UK, and Ukraine to consider cancelling its Nord Stream II pipeline, which will pump gas from Russia, in the event of war.

Ukraine accused it last month of also blocking arms supplies via Nato.

It has meanwhile pushed back on proposals to include suspending Russian from the Swift international payments system in any sanctions package.

Mr Scholz, who faces pressure from a left-wing faction in his Social Democratic Party that is traditionally sympathetic to Russia, reportedly told Mr Biden he had other commitments when the White House invited him to discuss the crisis.

The White House instead sent Mr Blinken to Berlin on Thursday to tell Mr Scholz that he must back serious sanctions if he continues to block arms deliveries to Ukraine, according to Der Spiegel.

Earlier William Burns, the director of the CIA, had flown to Berlin to show Mr Scholz intelligence about the Russian military build up.

Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, was this week accused of blind-siding allies and sabotaging efforts to contain the crisis when he told the European parliament that the EU should launch its own security dialogue with Russia.

Le Monde cited French government sources on Friday saying Paris and Berlin were "perplexed" about the "alarmist" tone coming from Washington and London about troop deployments.

"We can see the same number of trucks, tanks, personnel. We have observed the same movements but we cannot deduce from all this that invasion is imminent," a source told Le Monde, asking whether "perhaps the British and Americans have intelligence" permitting them to come to this conclusion.

The source said France is willing to help but "we don't know what the Americans want to do militarily or otherwise" in the event of war.

Mr Biden admitted on Wednesday that Western countries could be divided over how to respond if Vladimir Putin launches a "minor incursion" rather than a full invasion.

Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, hit back at the remarks, saying there were “no minor incursions” into a sovereign country.

Britain began airlifting anti-tank weapons to Ukraine earlier this week.

The Czech Republic and the Baltic States have said they will supply weapons to Ukraine including artillery rounds.

Wokpe Hoekstra, the Dutch foreign minister, said on Friday that his government would “look sympathetically” at any new Ukrainian requests from weapons via Nato.

The Netherlands previously joined Germany in blocking a request in December. Mr Hoekstra said the context had changed since then.

[StateBoiler]

What happens when Russia goes after the Baltics, countries under Article 5 protections?

You've answered your own question.

There are some countries in NATO I see finding every trick in the book they can offer to get out of going to war over Lithuania. Now that Russian military conflict is more plausible than just a theoretical, I don't think certain states in NATO would even let the Baltic states in now if they had the vote today. (Ditto the EU, the likes of Ireland and Malta should be going to war if needed to defend Lithuania's territorial integrity.)

[StateBoiler]

The problem with comparing 2022 to 1979 is that the American public are now much less supportive of military intervention of any kind.

Allright then, Putin wins.

Look, if we're going to withdraw from the world like a lot of people want to do, more conflict is inevitable because you've changed the power structure and states that were dependent on other states no longer have that support beneath them to help prop them up. Shining example: AFGHANISTAN. So we're going to see a return to a pre-World War II multipolar world where regional powerful states flex their power.

Hey, and for all the talk about how Trump was bought off by the Russians, can we start looking at the financing of all these Western left groups saying don't you dare warmonger...over Russia saying they could invade a European country?

https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/stop-the-war-statement-on-tensions-around-ukraine/

British politicians are playing with fire stoking up the tension around Ukraine. As the danger grows of a conflict breaking out between Russia and Ukraine following an apparent lack of progress in negotiations with the USA, Tories and Labour are outbidding each other in pointless bellicosity.

The government has sold fresh weaponry to Ukraine and Foreign Secretary Liz Truss has made a sabre-rattling speech in Australia. Shadow ministers David Lammy and John Healey have flown to Kiev to support Ukrainian resistance to Russia.

Britain should be advancing serious diplomatic proposals to defuse the tension and seek a solution to the crisis rather than ratcheting it up. This involves taking both Ukraine’s integrity and Russian security concerns seriously.

Stop the War demands an end to the relentless expansion of NATO, which has only added to international tension, particularly as NATO has played a more aggressive role internationally in the Balkans, the Middle East and South Asia. We oppose the deployment of British forces to the borders of Russia as a pointless provocation.

We urge the reduction in nuclear weapons in Europe and the agreement of new arms control measures, including the withdrawal of all such weapons to the territory of the state that controls them.

We believe there needs to be a new all-inclusive security architecture in Europe, not under the hegemony of any one state. We demand that the British government and the Labour Party distance themselves from the policies and priorities of the USA and develop an independent foreign policy.

21 Jan 2022

[CumbrianLefty]

"Stop The War" has long been a joke group tbf.

[rc18]

"Stop The War" has long been a joke group tbf.

The last Labour leader was its chairman...

[CumbrianLefty]

I know, indeed it was a key reason some of us didn't vote for him in 2015.

"Victory To The Other Side Coalition" would of course be a more accurate descriptor.

[Hnv1]

"Stop The War" has long been a joke group tbf.

The last Labour leader was its chairman...

Well he was considered by large segments of his own party as an utter joke