Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[nicholas.slaydon]

So, what do people think might be the endgame here? Ultimately it feels like, if the combatants remain only Russia (plus Belarus) and Ukraine, Russia is likely to win the conventional war eventually, even if it takes them months to occupy the whole country. On the other hand, in the last few days, the European powers (and the US, operating behind the scenes) seem to have committed themselves quite far towards a position where Russia cannot be allowed to win the conventional war. Right now, that doesn't mean direct intervention because the Russians aren't about to win, and clearly there are high hopes on the European side that the Ukrainians can ultimately repel the Russian forces without direct military intervention by the rest of Europe. But what happens if, as is more likely, the Ukrainians eventually start to crumble under the pressure? Given the implicit commitments by the UK, France, etc. to preventing Russia from winning, not to mention the strong pressure from Poland, Romania, the Baltics, etc. and popular sentiment in all of the above countries, it feels like a European intervention would have to happen at some point. I think we all hope it doesn't come to that, but isn't that starting to feel inevitable? Not now, and maybe not until May or so, but at some point?

No. Everybody who sits in the government of a NATO or EU country knows perfectly well what a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation would mean and could result in. Western sanctions are also not designed to necessarily prevent a Russian win in Ukraine, since everybody in these governments already assumes that a Russian victory will sooner or later be likely. The purpose of the sanctions is punishment as well as deterrence against future Russian trangressions against other European countries, maybe coupled with the hope that the sanctions might create enough pressure in and on Russia to make them withdraw from Ukraine. But everybody knows that that last part is a gamble that could go either way.

Or simply that the power elites and oligarchs, whose assets tank badly, at some point make an attempt to remove Putin from his throne. I think a lasting solution to this conflict can only happen without Putin. There won't be any kind of normalized relations with the West either as long as he's in the Kremlin. He basically burned down all bridges and lost all remaining credibility.

Even if the oligarchs did overthrow Putin, there is no guarantee that whoever replaced him won't be far worse, so I'm not really sure that's what we should be hoping for. When strongman dictators are removed from power there is always going to be a power vacuum to replace them, and situations like that can lead to some pretty unsavory people taking advantage of that vacuum.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Ukraine calls for Russia to be booted off the internet

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov sent a letter to the president of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Monday.

He asked ICANN to revoke — either permanently or temporarily — the domains .ru and .su.

Russia will have no internet soon.

Don't count your chickens too soon.  I will be very very surprised if ICANN agrees to this action.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Ukraine calls for Russia to be booted off the internet

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov sent a letter to the president of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Monday.

He asked ICANN to revoke — either permanently or temporarily — the domains .ru and .su.

Russia will have no internet soon.

Don't count your chickens too soon.  I will be very very surprised if ICANN agrees to this action.

Wouldn't that be bad, actually?

We want Russians to have access to the Internet - maybe the only source to uncensored information about the war in that country.

[President Johnson]

So, what do people think might be the endgame here? Ultimately it feels like, if the combatants remain only Russia (plus Belarus) and Ukraine, Russia is likely to win the conventional war eventually, even if it takes them months to occupy the whole country. On the other hand, in the last few days, the European powers (and the US, operating behind the scenes) seem to have committed themselves quite far towards a position where Russia cannot be allowed to win the conventional war. Right now, that doesn't mean direct intervention because the Russians aren't about to win, and clearly there are high hopes on the European side that the Ukrainians can ultimately repel the Russian forces without direct military intervention by the rest of Europe. But what happens if, as is more likely, the Ukrainians eventually start to crumble under the pressure? Given the implicit commitments by the UK, France, etc. to preventing Russia from winning, not to mention the strong pressure from Poland, Romania, the Baltics, etc. and popular sentiment in all of the above countries, it feels like a European intervention would have to happen at some point. I think we all hope it doesn't come to that, but isn't that starting to feel inevitable? Not now, and maybe not until May or so, but at some point?

No. Everybody who sits in the government of a NATO or EU country knows perfectly well what a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation would mean and could result in. Western sanctions are also not designed to necessarily prevent a Russian win in Ukraine, since everybody in these governments already assumes that a Russian victory will sooner or later be likely. The purpose of the sanctions is punishment as well as deterrence against future Russian trangressions against other European countries, maybe coupled with the hope that the sanctions might create enough pressure in and on Russia to make them withdraw from Ukraine. But everybody knows that that last part is a gamble that could go either way.

Or simply that the power elites and oligarchs, whose assets tank badly, at some point make an attempt to remove Putin from his throne. I think a lasting solution to this conflict can only happen without Putin. There won't be any kind of normalized relations with the West either as long as he's in the Kremlin. He basically burned down all bridges and lost all remaining credibility.

Even if the oligarchs did overthrow Putin, there is no guarantee that whoever replaced him won't be far worse, so I'm not really sure that's what we should be hoping for. When strongman dictators are removed from power there is always going to be a power vacuum to replace them, and situations like that can lead to some pretty unsavory people taking advantage of that vacuum.

Any successor would most likely operate from a much weaker position though. Russia's economy will be in shambles and they need at least some goodwill from Western countries and from China to rebuild it, and neither will be "for free". So there wouldn't be much room for any adventures in Ukraine and elsewhere and a new Russian government would have to focus on making sure their own economy is at least stabilized to a certain degree.

[AndyHogan14]

While I deeply hope China is able to bring peace and end this war, the text that I chose to bold interests me. The choice of words is not unique to China and I have seen others say that, but given that China considers Taiwan to be part of its territory I cannot help but see this as the CCP preparing their talking points for a coming invasion.

I wouldn't be as pessimistic. The situation of 'two Chinas' is distinctly unique. While China claims Taiwan, strictly speaking constitutionally, Taiwan claims China. If anything Russia's stumbling into Crimea in the first instance and now Ukraine, with the international repercussions will have made PRC rethink whatever long term or short term plans it had for Taiwan.

And as someone has mentioned, with Europe under the guise of the EU beefing up it's defences and adjusting it's diplomacy in response to Russia, it gives the US a greater ability to look towards the Pacific and no doubt may hasten Japan into a degree of militarisation if the post-war and post-cold war order of certain countries remaining neutral (eg Finland) is disrupted.

     That is a good point, given how badly the invasion has gone for Russia. It hadn't occurred to me that China might genuinely be rethinking a belligerent stance since Ukraine didn't just immediately fold like it seemed it might.

Also, it is a hell of a lot more difficult to invade an island than it is to invade a country that you border on three sides.

[NOVA Green]

Ukraine calls for Russia to be booted off the internet

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov sent a letter to the president of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Monday.

He asked ICANN to revoke — either permanently or temporarily — the domains .ru and .su.

Russia will have no internet soon.

Don't count your chickens too soon.  I will be very very surprised if ICANN agrees to this action.

Wondering how that would even work (Let alone if that would be a good precedent)?

Anybody want to provide greater perspectives on the process, logistics, technology, etc....?

[nicholas.slaydon]

So, what do people think might be the endgame here? Ultimately it feels like, if the combatants remain only Russia (plus Belarus) and Ukraine, Russia is likely to win the conventional war eventually, even if it takes them months to occupy the whole country. On the other hand, in the last few days, the European powers (and the US, operating behind the scenes) seem to have committed themselves quite far towards a position where Russia cannot be allowed to win the conventional war. Right now, that doesn't mean direct intervention because the Russians aren't about to win, and clearly there are high hopes on the European side that the Ukrainians can ultimately repel the Russian forces without direct military intervention by the rest of Europe. But what happens if, as is more likely, the Ukrainians eventually start to crumble under the pressure? Given the implicit commitments by the UK, France, etc. to preventing Russia from winning, not to mention the strong pressure from Poland, Romania, the Baltics, etc. and popular sentiment in all of the above countries, it feels like a European intervention would have to happen at some point. I think we all hope it doesn't come to that, but isn't that starting to feel inevitable? Not now, and maybe not until May or so, but at some point?

No. Everybody who sits in the government of a NATO or EU country knows perfectly well what a direct NATO-Russia military confrontation would mean and could result in. Western sanctions are also not designed to necessarily prevent a Russian win in Ukraine, since everybody in these governments already assumes that a Russian victory will sooner or later be likely. The purpose of the sanctions is punishment as well as deterrence against future Russian trangressions against other European countries, maybe coupled with the hope that the sanctions might create enough pressure in and on Russia to make them withdraw from Ukraine. But everybody knows that that last part is a gamble that could go either way.

Or simply that the power elites and oligarchs, whose assets tank badly, at some point make an attempt to remove Putin from his throne. I think a lasting solution to this conflict can only happen without Putin. There won't be any kind of normalized relations with the West either as long as he's in the Kremlin. He basically burned down all bridges and lost all remaining credibility.

Even if the oligarchs did overthrow Putin, there is no guarantee that whoever replaced him won't be far worse, so I'm not really sure that's what we should be hoping for. When strongman dictators are removed from power there is always going to be a power vacuum to replace them, and situations like that can lead to some pretty unsavory people taking advantage of that vacuum.

Any successor would most likely operate from a much weaker position though. Russia's economy will be in shambles and they need at least some goodwill from Western countries and from China to rebuild it, and neither will be "for free". So there wouldn't be much room for any adventures in Ukraine and elsewhere and a new Russian government would have to focus on making sure their own economy is at least stabilized to a certain degree.

Maybe you would be right, but extraordinary times, and terrible circumstances can often lead to nasty leaders taking charge of countries in shambles, and I'm so sure I would want to risk someone even worse than Putin seizing hold of Russia.

[It’s so Joever]

The biggest problem with the Western doves is that they truly have no red line. To them, anything to prevent something that would slightly raise the risk of a nuclear exchange is something which ought to be strived for at any cost. I am firmly convinced Putin could start sending Ukrainians to literal death camps (this is not excessive hyperbole for several posters have said there is no red line) and would not be stopped from doing it out of Western fear.

There are obviously risks inherent with escalation, but a lot of people seem to have the immediate assumption that any direct involvement=apocalypse. As if those on the Russian side want to do Moscow turned into oblivion and their children dead. Yes we have real stakes in the game, but so do they. That’s why they will fold when pressure gets too high, and the only reason they are doing this now is because they truly want to test the boundaries. The problem is, the West doesn’t have boundaries. In our post-Cold War society, we became accustomed to the idea of no inherent risk of nuclear exchange at all, and now seem attached to that idea at a horrifying cost.

Make no mistake, a world in which Russia invaded Ukraine is not one which will ever resemble a world in which they didn’t, even if we sing the songs of appeasement out of fear.

[Storebought]

Mexico won't sanction Russia in order to maintain good relations

exico will not join the U.S. and several European countries that are imposing economic sanctions on the Russian government in response to the ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said Tuesday that his country will not place sanctions on Russia due to his desire to maintain "good relations with all governments in the world," according to Reuters.

The Mexican president also criticized what he considered to be censorship of Russian state-owned media, as Facebook, Twitter, Google, Reddit and YouTube have all taken steps in recent days to combat misinformation or propaganda regarding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, including halting advertising revenue from being distributed to several Russian state-owned outlets.

"We're not going to take any kind of economic reprisal because we want to have good relations with all the governments in the world, and we want to be able to talk with the parties in conflict," López Obrador said when asked about his stance on the sanctions from other countries.

"We do not consider that it corresponds to us, and we think that the best thing is to promote dialogue to achieve peace," he was quoted by CNN.

[Omega21]

Ukraine calls for Russia to be booted off the internet

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov sent a letter to the president of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Monday.

He asked ICANN to revoke — either permanently or temporarily — the domains .ru and .su.

Russia will have no internet soon.

Don't count your chickens too soon.  I will be very very surprised if ICANN agrees to this action.

Wondering how that would even work (Let alone if that would be a good precedent)?

Anybody want to provide greater perspectives on the process, logistics, technology, etc....?

This is not about "shutting down the internet" in Russia, that is simply technically impossible. Stay vigilant and don't fall for clickbait titles.

This is about revoking the .ru domain, meaning no one in Russia, including the Govt., could use domains like gov.ru. This goes for businesses as well, so sites like "putiniscool.ru" would need to switch to other, non-country-specific domains such as .com, .net, etc.

The chances of this happening, however, are near 0 anyway but guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Adam Griffin]

Ukraine calls for Russia to be booted off the internet

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov sent a letter to the president of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Monday.

He asked ICANN to revoke — either permanently or temporarily — the domains .ru and .su.

Russia will have no internet soon.

Don't count your chickens too soon.  I will be very very surprised if ICANN agrees to this action.

Wondering how that would even work (Let alone if that would be a good precedent)?

Anybody want to provide greater perspectives on the process, logistics, technology, etc....?

Basically, there are two large data-centers on either side of the US (I believe) with 7 cryptographic keys stored in each them. Each one belongs to and can only be accessed by 1 of ICANN's 14 "keyholders" inside the premises after passing through multiple layers of security (there are also 7 "back-up keys & keyholders" outside of the US who take charge if/when something happens to a primary keyholder). At the center of each facility is hardware where the keys can be inserted/injected and root changes to the DNS system can be made. As far as I know, all primary keys must be used to make any DNS changes. It's very sci-fi in nature.

https://www.icann.org/en/blogs/details/the-problem-with-the-seven-keys-13-2-2017-en
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/28/seven-people-keys-worldwide-internet-security-web

The east and west coast ceremonies each have seven keyholders, with a further seven people around the world who could access a last-resort measure to reconstruct the system if something calamitous were to happen. Each of the 14 primary keyholders owns a traditional metal key to a safety deposit box, which in turn contains a smartcard, which in turn activates a machine that creates a new master key. The backup keyholders have something a bit different: smartcards that contain a fragment of code needed to build a replacement key-generating machine. Once a year, these shadow holders send the organisation that runs the system – the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) – a photograph of themselves with that day's newspaper and their key, to verify that all is well.

[Not Me, Us]

The biggest problem with the Western doves is that they truly have no red line. To them, anything to prevent something that would slightly raise the risk of a nuclear exchange is something which ought to be strived for at any cost. I am firmly convinced Putin could start sending Ukrainians to literal death camps (this is not excessive hyperbole for several posters have said there is no red line) and would not be stopped from doing it out of Western fear.

There are obviously risks inherent with escalation, but a lot of people seem to have the immediate assumption that any direct involvement=apocalypse. As if those on the Russian side want to do Moscow turned into oblivion and their children dead. Yes we have real stakes in the game, but so do they. That’s why they will fold when pressure gets too high, and the only reason they are doing this now is because they truly want to test the boundaries. The problem is, the West doesn’t have boundaries. In our post-Cold War society, we became accustomed to the idea of no inherent risk of nuclear exchange at all, and now seem attached to that idea at a horrifying cost.

Make no mistake, a world in which Russia invaded Ukraine is not one which will ever resemble a world in which they didn’t, even if we sing the songs of appeasement out of fear.

You’re an insane warmonger, and nobody should take anything you say seriously. The amount of death and destruction a conventional war between NATO and Russia would cause would be catastrophic. And yes, anything that slightly increases the risk of nuclear hellfire raining from the sky, killing all advanced life on Earth, should be avoided at all costs. The West has done plenty to support Ukraine and will hopefully do more in the future, but war with Russia is untenable. And stop with the hyperbole, get a hobby or something.

[Person Man]

Also, it's clear that China got it right when it decided to ring-fence its internet, bar Western internet and social media companies that wouldn't meet its requirements, which turned out to be all of them, and develop domestic alternatives. Facebook and Twitter are turning out to be huge national security nightmares for Russia as they are clearly intervening on behalf of the Ukrainians and banning them now could cause backlash as there may not be an alternative (maybe Telegram?) and Russians are used to using them. China would not face this issue at all. Yes it's annoying to use the internet in China particularly to browse foreign websites but national security is more important than my convenience.

You are a pathetic excuse of a human who is desirous of oppression, we know this.

Preferring authoritarianism to libertarianism is a valid position to take.

No, actually.

Well, it’s valid. It’s just wrong.

[WMS]

The biggest problem with the Western doves is that they truly have no red line. To them, anything to prevent something that would slightly raise the risk of a nuclear exchange is something which ought to be strived for at any cost. I am firmly convinced Putin could start sending Ukrainians to literal death camps (this is not excessive hyperbole for several posters have said there is no red line) and would not be stopped from doing it out of Western fear.

There are obviously risks inherent with escalation, but a lot of people seem to have the immediate assumption that any direct involvement=apocalypse. As if those on the Russian side want to do Moscow turned into oblivion and their children dead. Yes we have real stakes in the game, but so do they. That’s why they will fold when pressure gets too high, and the only reason they are doing this now is because they truly want to test the boundaries. The problem is, the West doesn’t have boundaries. In our post-Cold War society, we became accustomed to the idea of no inherent risk of nuclear exchange at all, and now seem attached to that idea at a horrifying cost.

Make no mistake, a world in which Russia invaded Ukraine is not one which will ever resemble a world in which they didn’t, even if we sing the songs of appeasement out of fear.

You’re an insane warmonger, and nobody should take anything you say seriously. The amount of death and destruction a conventional war between NATO and Russia would cause would be catastrophic. And yes, anything that slightly increases the risk of nuclear hellfire raining from the sky, killing all advanced life on Earth, should be avoided at all costs. The West has done plenty to support Ukraine and will hopefully do more in the future, but war with Russia is untenable. And stop with the hyperbole, get a hobby or something.

You’re also being hyperbolic.

Stripping away everything else, there is a legitimate question to ask:

Is there anything Putin does or might do that would justify direct action against him?

Curious what people have to say.

[Person Man]

The biggest problem with the Western doves is that they truly have no red line. To them, anything to prevent something that would slightly raise the risk of a nuclear exchange is something which ought to be strived for at any cost. I am firmly convinced Putin could start sending Ukrainians to literal death camps (this is not excessive hyperbole for several posters have said there is no red line) and would not be stopped from doing it out of Western fear.

There are obviously risks inherent with escalation, but a lot of people seem to have the immediate assumption that any direct involvement=apocalypse. As if those on the Russian side want to do Moscow turned into oblivion and their children dead. Yes we have real stakes in the game, but so do they. That’s why they will fold when pressure gets too high, and the only reason they are doing this now is because they truly want to test the boundaries. The problem is, the West doesn’t have boundaries. In our post-Cold War society, we became accustomed to the idea of no inherent risk of nuclear exchange at all, and now seem attached to that idea at a horrifying cost.

Make no mistake, a world in which Russia invaded Ukraine is not one which will ever resemble a world in which they didn’t, even if we sing the songs of appeasement out of fear.

You’re an insane warmonger, and nobody should take anything you say seriously. The amount of death and destruction a conventional war between NATO and Russia would cause would be catastrophic. And yes, anything that slightly increases the risk of nuclear hellfire raining from the sky, killing all advanced life on Earth, should be avoided at all costs. The West has done plenty to support Ukraine and will hopefully do more in the future, but war with Russia is untenable. And stop with the hyperbole, get a hobby or something.

You’re also being hyperbolic.

Stripping away everything else, there is a legitimate question to ask:

Is there anything Putin does or might do that would justify direct action against him?

Curious what people have to say.

We need a red line.

[AndyHogan14]

The biggest problem with the Western doves is that they truly have no red line. To them, anything to prevent something that would slightly raise the risk of a nuclear exchange is something which ought to be strived for at any cost. I am firmly convinced Putin could start sending Ukrainians to literal death camps (this is not excessive hyperbole for several posters have said there is no red line) and would not be stopped from doing it out of Western fear.

There are obviously risks inherent with escalation, but a lot of people seem to have the immediate assumption that any direct involvement=apocalypse. As if those on the Russian side want to do Moscow turned into oblivion and their children dead. Yes we have real stakes in the game, but so do they. That’s why they will fold when pressure gets too high, and the only reason they are doing this now is because they truly want to test the boundaries. The problem is, the West doesn’t have boundaries. In our post-Cold War society, we became accustomed to the idea of no inherent risk of nuclear exchange at all, and now seem attached to that idea at a horrifying cost.

Make no mistake, a world in which Russia invaded Ukraine is not one which will ever resemble a world in which they didn’t, even if we sing the songs of appeasement out of fear.

You’re an insane warmonger, and nobody should take anything you say seriously. The amount of death and destruction a conventional war between NATO and Russia would cause would be catastrophic. And yes, anything that slightly increases the risk of nuclear hellfire raining from the sky, killing all advanced life on Earth, should be avoided at all costs. The West has done plenty to support Ukraine and will hopefully do more in the future, but war with Russia is untenable. And stop with the hyperbole, get a hobby or something.

You’re also being hyperbolic.

Stripping away everything else, there is a legitimate question to ask:

Is there anything Putin does or might do that would justify direct action against him?

Curious what people have to say.

If he does start committing genocide against the Ukrainian people (it's unlikely, but not out of the realm of possibility, which is scary), that would be my red line. I think US/NATO troops should have entered Ukraine before the invasion to head off any sort of Russian action (thus, actually being peacekeepers) but alas, that ship has sailed.

Edit: Also, utilizing nuclear weapons would be a red line. Anything else, I am not so sure.

[NOVA Green]

Looks like Russia's oil industry will take a massive hit regardless of any official Allied actions to target Russian Oil exports per Wall Street Journal article a little bit ago...

(Excerpt only from very long article--- you'll need to buy your own subscription or get a free trial to view in full).

"Russia Scrambles to Maintain Oil Sales, Lifeblood of Economy

Refiners balk at buying Russia’s oil and banks refuse to finance shipments of Russian commodities, fearing the impact of financial sanctions

By Joe Wallace , Benoit Faucon  and Anna Hirtenstein

Updated March 1, 2022 4:42 pm ET

In their broadside of sanctions on Russia, the U.S. and its allies are going out of their way to spare energy shipments and keep economies humming and voters warm.

The oil market went on strike anyway. Acting as if energy were in the crosshairs of Western sanctions officials, refiners balked at buying Russian oil and banks are refusing to finance shipments of Russian commodities, according to traders, oil executives and bankers.

The self-imposed embargo threatens to drive up energy prices globally by removing a gusher of oil from a market that was tight even before President Vladimir Putin attacked Ukraine. Russia, waging war and in need of revenue with its financial system in turmoil, is taking extreme steps to convince companies to buy its most precious commodity.

Before refiners and banks are certain they won’t fall afoul of complex restrictions in different jurisdictions, they won’t do business with Russian oil, traders and others involved in the market say. Market players also fear that measures that target oil exports directly could land as fighting in Ukraine intensifies.

“This is going to make it very complex to trade with Russia,” Sarah Hunt, a partner at law firm HFW who works with commodities traders, said of the sanctions laid out as of Monday. “These sanctions against Russia will have an incredible effect on global trade and on trade finance.”

...

Traders are offering Urals at massive discounts—as much as $18 a barrel below the price of Brent—and even then not finding buyers. A drop in the price of Espo, a grade of Russian crude popular in Asia, suggests refiners in Japan and South Korea are hitting pause on purchases alongside those in Europe and the U.S.

...

“The market is starting to fail,” said a person at a major commodities trading house.

Companies including Vitol and Trafigura Group Pte. Ltd.—among the world’s biggest independent oil traders—hold Russian oil bought under long-term deals. They were unable to sell Tuesday, people familiar with their operations say.

...."


https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-scrambles-to-maintain-oil-sales-life-blood-of-economy-11646156655?st=gm817y99ij3amxd&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

[pppolitics]

So, what do people think might be the endgame here? Ultimately it feels like, if the combatants remain only Russia (plus Belarus) and Ukraine, Russia is likely to win the conventional war eventually, even if it takes them months to occupy the whole country. On the other hand, in the last few days, the European powers (and the US, operating behind the scenes) seem to have committed themselves quite far towards a position where Russia cannot be allowed to win the conventional war. Right now, that doesn't mean direct intervention because the Russians aren't about to win, and clearly there are high hopes on the European side that the Ukrainians can ultimately repel the Russian forces without direct military intervention by the rest of Europe. But what happens if, as is more likely, the Ukrainians eventually start to crumble under the pressure? Given the implicit commitments by the UK, France, etc. to preventing Russia from winning, not to mention the strong pressure from Poland, Romania, the Baltics, etc. and popular sentiment in all of the above countries, it feels like a European intervention would have to happen at some point. I think we all hope it doesn't come to that, but isn't that starting to feel inevitable? Not now, and maybe not until May or so, but at some point?

Afghanistan

[WMS]

Mexico won't sanction Russia in order to maintain good relations

exico will not join the U.S. and several European countries that are imposing economic sanctions on the Russian government in response to the ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said Tuesday that his country will not place sanctions on Russia due to his desire to maintain "good relations with all governments in the world," according to Reuters.

The Mexican president also criticized what he considered to be censorship of Russian state-owned media, as Facebook, Twitter, Google, Reddit and YouTube have all taken steps in recent days to combat misinformation or propaganda regarding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, including halting advertising revenue from being distributed to several Russian state-owned outlets.

"We're not going to take any kind of economic reprisal because we want to have good relations with all the governments in the world, and we want to be able to talk with the parties in conflict," López Obrador said when asked about his stance on the sanctions from other countries.

"We do not consider that it corresponds to us, and we think that the best thing is to promote dialogue to achieve peace," he was quoted by CNN.

The announcement from López Obrador came just a day after he and the Mexican tourism minister said that Mexico would not follow the EU in blocking Russian airlines from landing at airports in the country, according to Mexico News Daily. Over the weekend, Tourism Minister Miguel Torruco also posted a widely criticized series of tweets showcasing various statistics about Russian tourism in Mexico and the money that has come into the country related to tourism from Russia.

A bit more to that story.

Also not an opinion unanimous across Mexico.

[It’s so Joever]

The biggest problem with the Western doves is that they truly have no red line. To them, anything to prevent something that would slightly raise the risk of a nuclear exchange is something which ought to be strived for at any cost. I am firmly convinced Putin could start sending Ukrainians to literal death camps (this is not excessive hyperbole for several posters have said there is no red line) and would not be stopped from doing it out of Western fear.

There are obviously risks inherent with escalation, but a lot of people seem to have the immediate assumption that any direct involvement=apocalypse. As if those on the Russian side want to do Moscow turned into oblivion and their children dead. Yes we have real stakes in the game, but so do they. That’s why they will fold when pressure gets too high, and the only reason they are doing this now is because they truly want to test the boundaries. The problem is, the West doesn’t have boundaries. In our post-Cold War society, we became accustomed to the idea of no inherent risk of nuclear exchange at all, and now seem attached to that idea at a horrifying cost.

Make no mistake, a world in which Russia invaded Ukraine is not one which will ever resemble a world in which they didn’t, even if we sing the songs of appeasement out of fear.

You’re an insane warmonger, and nobody should take anything you say seriously. The amount of death and destruction a conventional war between NATO and Russia would cause would be catastrophic. And yes, anything that slightly increases the risk of nuclear hellfire raining from the sky, killing all advanced life on Earth, should be avoided at all costs. The West has done plenty to support Ukraine and will hopefully do more in the future, but war with Russia is untenable. And stop with the hyperbole, get a hobby or something.

And you’re a fool for falling for the Russian scare tactics that are literally being used to push this narrative. You seem to literally ignore all my points on Russia, and assume that this idea that a war between NATO and Russia would be devastating is something that only you know. Literally everyone in Russia in a position of power in the military is well aware of what would happen in such a conflict, and they themselves have no desire for it. As I clearly stated (which your feeble eyes seemed to have ignored) Russian leadership also dies in a nuclear war. Their children their city, they all evaporate as well.
Why do you think Putin was warning the West more than even justifying his own actions in his speech that preceded the invasion? Because he can’t nor would fight a war with the West at all, and therefore has to resort to scare tactics to keep us from engaging.

Here is what would happen if we actually sent troops to the Western cities of Ukraine, the world would panic, and the scare tactics that Russia has been so successfully using against us would flip. Putin himself would see that he underestimated the West’s resolve, and begin a negotiation process. And if he tried to push further, tried to touch our troops (who wouldn’t be attacking FYI, Russia would have to be the one to pull the trigger) his inner circle will turn completely.

And by the way, when you say we should do literally anything to prevent even a slightly increased risk of nuclear exchange, that includes permitting literal death camps. No Russia isn’t going to do that for a variety of reasons, but the point is that you and the doves here would absolutely allow such to happen even if the actual risk of nuclear exchange due to intervention is near minuscule. There is no hyperbole when you yourself say it.



 

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Looks like Russia's oil industry will take a massive hit regardless of any official Allied actions to target Russian Oil exports per Wall Street Journal article a little bit ago...

(Excerpt only from very long article--- you'll need to buy your own subscription or get a free trial to view in full).

"Russia Scrambles to Maintain Oil Sales, Lifeblood of Economy

Refiners balk at buying Russia’s oil and banks refuse to finance shipments of Russian commodities, fearing the impact of financial sanctions

By Joe Wallace , Benoit Faucon  and Anna Hirtenstein

Updated March 1, 2022 4:42 pm ET

In their broadside of sanctions on Russia, the U.S. and its allies are going out of their way to spare energy shipments and keep economies humming and voters warm.

The oil market went on strike anyway. Acting as if energy were in the crosshairs of Western sanctions officials, refiners balked at buying Russian oil and banks are refusing to finance shipments of Russian commodities, according to traders, oil executives and bankers.

The self-imposed embargo threatens to drive up energy prices globally by removing a gusher of oil from a market that was tight even before President Vladimir Putin attacked Ukraine. Russia, waging war and in need of revenue with its financial system in turmoil, is taking extreme steps to convince companies to buy its most precious commodity.

Before refiners and banks are certain they won’t fall afoul of complex restrictions in different jurisdictions, they won’t do business with Russian oil, traders and others involved in the market say. Market players also fear that measures that target oil exports directly could land as fighting in Ukraine intensifies.

“This is going to make it very complex to trade with Russia,” Sarah Hunt, a partner at law firm HFW who works with commodities traders, said of the sanctions laid out as of Monday. “These sanctions against Russia will have an incredible effect on global trade and on trade finance.”

...

Traders are offering Urals at massive discounts—as much as $18 a barrel below the price of Brent—and even then not finding buyers. A drop in the price of Espo, a grade of Russian crude popular in Asia, suggests refiners in Japan and South Korea are hitting pause on purchases alongside those in Europe and the U.S.

...

“The market is starting to fail,” said a person at a major commodities trading house.

Companies including Vitol and Trafigura Group Pte. Ltd.—among the world’s biggest independent oil traders—hold Russian oil bought under long-term deals. They were unable to sell Tuesday, people familiar with their operations say.

...."


https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-scrambles-to-maintain-oil-sales-life-blood-of-economy-11646156655?st=gm817y99ij3amxd&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Jesus just go full embargo already

[Torie]

If Putin decides to blow Ukrainian cities to bits from missiles, because his troops have no stomach for carrying out his mad designs, killing tens of thousands of civilians, that is a red line. At that point it is no fly zone time. If Putin can kill from the air in that way, then it is time to close such air from being an arterial for the commission of such unspeakable acts.

And in tandem, I would hope and trust that considerable thought  is being given to the state of Putin's health.

Easy to say from a back bencher I understand. Biden is earning his pay these days. This is where the rubber meets the road. The rest relatively speaking is noise. I hope and trust this is the focus of his SOTU.

[NOVA Green]

Looks like Russia's oil industry will take a massive hit regardless of any official Allied actions to target Russian Oil exports per Wall Street Journal article a little bit ago...

(Excerpt only from very long article--- you'll need to buy your own subscription or get a free trial to view in full).

"Russia Scrambles to Maintain Oil Sales, Lifeblood of Economy

Refiners balk at buying Russia’s oil and banks refuse to finance shipments of Russian commodities, fearing the impact of financial sanctions

By Joe Wallace , Benoit Faucon  and Anna Hirtenstein

Updated March 1, 2022 4:42 pm ET

In their broadside of sanctions on Russia, the U.S. and its allies are going out of their way to spare energy shipments and keep economies humming and voters warm.

The oil market went on strike anyway. Acting as if energy were in the crosshairs of Western sanctions officials, refiners balked at buying Russian oil and banks are refusing to finance shipments of Russian commodities, according to traders, oil executives and bankers.

The self-imposed embargo threatens to drive up energy prices globally by removing a gusher of oil from a market that was tight even before President Vladimir Putin attacked Ukraine. Russia, waging war and in need of revenue with its financial system in turmoil, is taking extreme steps to convince companies to buy its most precious commodity.

Before refiners and banks are certain they won’t fall afoul of complex restrictions in different jurisdictions, they won’t do business with Russian oil, traders and others involved in the market say. Market players also fear that measures that target oil exports directly could land as fighting in Ukraine intensifies.

“This is going to make it very complex to trade with Russia,” Sarah Hunt, a partner at law firm HFW who works with commodities traders, said of the sanctions laid out as of Monday. “These sanctions against Russia will have an incredible effect on global trade and on trade finance.”

...

Traders are offering Urals at massive discounts—as much as $18 a barrel below the price of Brent—and even then not finding buyers. A drop in the price of Espo, a grade of Russian crude popular in Asia, suggests refiners in Japan and South Korea are hitting pause on purchases alongside those in Europe and the U.S.

...

“The market is starting to fail,” said a person at a major commodities trading house.

Companies including Vitol and Trafigura Group Pte. Ltd.—among the world’s biggest independent oil traders—hold Russian oil bought under long-term deals. They were unable to sell Tuesday, people familiar with their operations say.

...."


https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-scrambles-to-maintain-oil-sales-life-blood-of-economy-11646156655?st=gm817y99ij3amxd&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Jesus just go full embargo already

It gets even worse for Russia if you read the full article, including lack of demand or additional guarantees from China & India who bought some Russian futures last week for bottom dollars.

Even Rosneft, a Russian State aligned oil giant is having a hard time even with their "CFR" basis.

"Under this model, Rosneft would use vessels from government-owned Sovcomflot’s fleet and deliver oil to the buyer’s door in return for cash, which means the buyer doesn’t have to worry about transportation, trade finance or insurance. Buyers are rejecting the proposal, an oil-industry executive and a Middle East oil trader said."

Really good article and part of the reason why at times like this it's nice to still have my WSJ subscription, which I was thinking about cancelling only 3-4 weeks back since I hadn't used it very much over the previous couple months prior.

[certified hummus supporter 🇵🇸🤝🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦]

I am curious with all this business with the Muslim Chechen soldiers

Asking AverageFoodEnthusiast, what do you believe is the Islamic theological perspective on this war and Muslims who fight for Putin?

Sorry for responding a bit late, I was occupied with the bane of my existence. Calculus.

The Islamic theological perspective on the ongoing war is similar to what the Pope had said.

"I urge Russia and Ukraine to refer to the voice of reason... Wars will only bring destruction and hatred to our world and that conflicts can only be settled by dialogue."

- Grand Imam Ahmed el-Tayyeb of Al Azhar

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/egypts-al-azhar-urges-dialogue-to-solve-russia-ukraine-conflict/2516849

Personally, I am not sure what the ulema's jurisprudence is for those Muslims who do fight for Putin. I think Xahar might be able to help me out here. Understandably, the Tatars in Crimea support the Ukrainians given their ongoing and historical persecution by the Russians. As for the Chechens? While the general population may be sympathetic for the Ukrainians given their experience of facing the Russians during the Chechen Wars, they are forced into submission by the tyrannical Kremlin stooge, Kadyrov.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Ukraine calls for Russia to be booted off the internet

Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Digital Transformation Mykhailo Fedorov sent a letter to the president of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on Monday.

He asked ICANN to revoke — either permanently or temporarily — the domains .ru and .su.

Russia will have no internet soon.

Don't count your chickens too soon.  I will be very very surprised if ICANN agrees to this action.

Wouldn't that be bad, actually?

We want Russians to have access to the Internet - maybe the only source to uncensored information about the war in that country.

Google could hurt the Russians more.

By shutting down search, that would limit their internet adversely.

Facebook has been essentially shut down, but in that case, I would not term that a hindrance to any society.